There have been a few voices suggesting California Lt. Governor John Garamendi abandon his bid to replace Liebermanesque Ellen Tauscher and instead run in California’s third congressional district against Dan Lungren. Unfortunately, Kos front-paged it. Since it is against Garamendi’s self-interest, it isn’t going to happen. And if you are a Democrat – especially a Progressive Democrat – that is good news. Strategically, such a move would be counterproductive for Democrats.

It Makes No Sense for California Democrats

The biggest problem in California is the Republican Veto. This means that Democrats may have a majority in the legislature, but not a functioning majority. With the artificial budget control by Republicans, it actually hurts Democrats if a legislator ascends to congress in a Special Election. With state Senator Mark DeSaulnier and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan both running for Tauscher's seat, in all likelihood a Democratic legislator will win unless Garamendi runs.

Last week's Virginia Governor Democratic Primary Cattle Call

With only 129 days until Virginia's June 9th Democratic gubernatorial primary, the race is in full swing. The good news for political junkies is that the race has been receiving a good deal of attention. For those looking for a fix, on Tuesday Public Policy Polling* will release head-to-head and favorability numbers for the Democratic Primary. Some people think that Tuesday's Sharon Bulova result will be important. But it is an all hands on deck for all the campaigns and the only candidate trying to up the ante is Terry McAuliffe in his attempt to smudge the fact he hasn't helped down ticket Commonwealth Democrats by glossing over with cash.

What's happened in the last week?

I'm proud to do some work against Prop 10; these are my own thoughts on today's scandal. Cross-Posted from Calitics

In California, Barack Obama is unbelievably popular and is going to win in a landslide. What isn't popular, is Proposition 10 which is a blank check handout to the Texas oilman funding the initiative. Which is why you see the strange coalition of damn near everyone in the state opposing the initiative. A coalition where the California Labor Federation has teamed up with the Chamber of Commerce to oppose Prop 10. A coalition where Calitics is on the same page as the San Diego Union-Tribune. A coalition where the California Green Party agrees with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. And every major environmental group is opposed, including the Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environment California, Alliance for Responsible Energy Policy and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

When San Francisco blogger Sasha McGee noticed that Gavin Newsom was being feted by PG&E and AT&T at the Denver convention, it wasn't much of a surprise to see a DLC candidate running for governor of the largest state. What was a surprise, was that Moveon was also listed as a sponsor.Moveon is Not Greenwashing Gavin Newsom's Corporate Party

I have little doubt that Senator Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic Nominee had it not been for her caving to right wing talking points and voting for the Iraq War. Being on the wrong side the the biggest foreign policy disaster in a generation is what advanced her career from inevitable nominee to junior senator. At the time, many of us in the netroots were flabbergasted, we knew it was a disastrous course of action and came to the conclusion that those who sided with George Bush and the neocons either had no grasp of the situation or were doing it for as a purely political calculation (and a poor one at that as Clinton discovered).

Iraq was the single biggest foreign policy decision, but when it comes to the global climate crisis, I'm getting a sense of déjà vu from the positioning and language used by San Francisco Mayor and 2010 California Gubernatorial hopeful Gavin Newsom as to why he's siding with PG&E against the Sierra Club on clean, renewable energy.

As many of you saw, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom gave a green speech introduction for Van Jones on Sunday at Netroots Nation. But immediately after his green speech, a local blogger asked a very important question:

I just asked Newsom if he would support the Clean Energy Act.  At first, he said yes -- absolutely.  Then he said, "oh are you talking about the one about PG&E?"  I said yes.  He said, "oh no it's horrible."  I asked him to elaborate, but he would not.  I then asked, "is that because your consultant [Eric Jaye] is working for PG&E?"  Newsom denied it, but really.  It was kinda pathetic.

Indeed. As we all know, Al Gore thinks the entire country needs to go 100% clean electrically by 2019 and Mayor Newsom won't try for his city to do the same by 2040?

Lots of news in California and it all seems to be good news for Barack Obama as Clinton's inevitability campaign in California is being called into question.

I'm proud to announce Director Robert Greenwald will be the very Special Guest at tonight's blograiser in San Francisco. And Digby is headlining our event in Santa Monica. Tonight will so be what comes before Part B.

In 2006, Lt. Cononel Charlie Brown (USAF, Ret.) ran a great campaign. Congressman John Doolittle is probably the most corrupt member of congress and this cycle Charlie Brown is challenging him again and getting an earlier start.

Usually, when Paul Hackett ends up in the paper, it is going to be worth a read. I remember what I considered his great framing by tying gay marriage to the second amendment (the government shouldn't care about what my neighbors do in the privacy of their own home any more than they care about what I keep in my gun safe).

But now it looks like Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters (who was plagued by scandal as GOP Treasurer) is looking to take on Hackett in a way that is clearly backfiring and turning Hackett into even more of a hero in Ohio's second district.

Those old school DKos users who know me realize that in the past I have given some too-public quotes that derided Congressman Emanuel. And I still know Rahm was wrong about running everywhere and way too late in making Iraq an issue -- but I think his ascendancy to Caucus Chair may ensure a true 50 state strategy in 2008.

If last week was defined by Katie Merrill catapulting a primary campaign against Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, this was the week that Tauscher tried in vain to distance herself from Joe Lieberman.

The following is how the week developed, you can sign up to get this delivered by email at the Ellen Tauscher Weekly.

Some say the feud between Nancy Pelosi and Ellen Tauscher has always existed. Some say that it that it is a Hatfield-McCoy story that goes back generations in east coast politics. But one thing is clear, it erupted in the press during the summer of 2001:

If Katie Merrill had the goal of preventing a primary campaign against Ellen Tauscher, it might not have been the best strategy to provoke the publisher of the most widely read political blog in the world into declaring, "So in CA-10, we will have a candidate, and there will be a primary."

But as Jane Hamsher noted, Tauscher has greater problems than netroots. Sure, California bloggers are going to cover this race closely (Calitics is averaging more than a post a day on Ellen Tauscher in December of all months and Markos lives in the east bay). And sure, if things get interesting the national blogs will have the ability to get the race nationwide attention. But all of that will be focused towards understanding and supporting what is actually going on in California's 10th congressional district.

As somebody who believes Impeachment will be the logical end to investigation of the Cheney Administration, and realizing the importance of the issue (thanks Kagro X), I went to the much hyped Impeachment protests today.

Living in San Francisco, I was expecting to see many others. I mean, just a month ago, a City-wide initiative calling for Impeachment passed in a landslide -- winning by almost 20% points.

But what I saw can only be described as a major setback for the effort.

Before anyone accuses me of calling out another poster by name, I just want to point out that I'm linking to an article. And maybe I agree with the Hotline's Daniel Glover when he writes about the blogosphere and says Steve Gilliard, does NOT "deserve to be heard".

Just because Gilliard was a popular Daily Kos front page poster, doesn't mean he deserves to be heard. Just because Gilliard (with help from Jen) has run a popular blog since August 2003, doesn't mean he deserves to be heard.

Just because you should read The News Blog doesn't mean Steve deserves to be heard. Why? Because a beltway type doesn't think Steve debates with "civility and dignity."

The California Democratic Party spent $3 million on GOTV this election cycle, but on Election Day wrote a $4 million check to state Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez.

If the check had been written a day later, it would have been illegal. And if it had been written a day earlier, it could have resulted in negative press that would make the Democratic Party look hypocritical for campaigning against the GOP Culture of Corruption. Hence the odd timing of the check that makes no sense.

To-date, most of the discussion about the money has focused upon whether it was proper. I would prefer to focus on whether the transaction was strategic. Below I offer various other scenarios laying out rough budgets for how the CDP could have invested the $4 million dollars.

Before reading this diary, please read my last one on Max Baucus -- who is the GOP's number one target to enable Dick Cheney to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate.

Simple question, have you ever read a quote that sums up so perfectly everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party?

As a former Baucus campaign coordinator said, "You can't have a thought until you've taken a poll."

To put that in context, check out what came before in the article: