True Colors

You can tell it's the end of October: the leaves are turning, the days are getting shorter, the frost is on the pumpkin...

... and Mike Rogers is going negative.

Coming soon: the argument that Mike has nothing to do with the recent slimefest mailers going out around the 8th CD, since the mailers were paid for by the (rather nervous!) MI Republican Party rather than the Rogers campaign.

But at the end of the day, long-time incumbents -- especially those with strong ties to the state party apparatus -- know exactly how things work. If Rogers was serious about keeping his campaign on the high road, you can bet he would have communicated this to the MI GOP.

This is just another example of how Mr. Rogers is happy to let others do his dirty work. Last week, we learned about the negative push polling from the "Victory Center" where Rogers' campaign is based; a month ago we were treated to the spectacle of questionably legal pro-Rogers signage in Genoa Township.

Way to demonstrate your ethics and leadership, Mr. Rogers!

Where's Mike?

With the election just around the corner, it's no surprise that Mike Rogers is in the news for his usual blend of evasion and ignoring the voters.

In the "Ignoring the Voters Category," Mr. Rogers broke new ground this week -- he didn't bother to show up at a well-attended candidate forum in Lansing last week.

"People need to hear what the candidates have to say, they need to ask the questions so that they know what the candidate's positions are and the things that personally concern them," Prosecutor Stuart Dunnings says.

[snip] there were also other questions the crowd had for candidates who didn't show up like Congressman Mike Rogers (emphasis added)

Moving right along to "Evasion Expertise," Livingston County radio station WHMI reports that Rogers challenger Bob Alexander is concerned about fake polling calls circulating in the district.

Democrat Bob Alexander of Lansing says voters have been receiving calls from various organizations that claim to be conducting polls. According to recipients, the poll asks questions to establish their party preference, but soon moves directly to a question which, he says, are false allegations. Alexander says the calls are calculated to be inflammatory and in some cases, factually inaccurate. He alleges a call to the Rogers’ campaign confirmed the polling calls are coming from the “Victory Center”, which houses Rogers’s re-election operations.

The classic response from Rogers' spokeswriter?

The Congressman’s spokeswoman Sylvia Warner tells WHMI that "Congressman Rogers' campaign does not discuss any polls the campaign may or may not be doing.”

Once again, someone else does Mike Rogers' dirty work. Then we're treated to the spectacle of Mr. Rogers being shocked, shocked to find that such dastardly things are going on. Somehow, though, he's never shocked enough to do more than grin, shrug and say that he didn't ask for it to be done.

Golly! This is just the kind of leadership we need to solve our nation's problems, isn't it?

The Thrill of the Drill

Guess what? Mike Rogers has an energy plan!

No, the other Mike Rogers (AL-03), who shares a name (and talking points) with Michigan Mike. Alabama Mike's campaign blog describes his energy plan thusly:

Known as the Furthering Renewable Energy and Exploration or FREE Act, the bill would immediately lift the ANWR drilling ban to help increase domestic supplies. [snip] Of course, we won’t drill our way to energy independence. That’s why Mike supports a comprehensive approach to energy - including increased domestic energy production, strong Federal support for American-made renewable fuels, increased use of nuclear energy, and strong support for clean renewable like solar, wind and hydrogen.

Being good Republicans, both Rogers' energy plans have happy words about American-made renewable fuels and research funding... without actually giving specifics on how this will be accomplished.

On the plus side, Alabama Mike's bill is roughly 3 pages long (as opposed to Our Mr. Rogers' 116 page extravaganza)... and it doesn't have a cartoon.

There's no question that The Mikes enjoy the thrill of the drill. It's an issue that they'll squeeze until Election Day, since it's way more fun to talk about than the kajillion-dollar Wall Street bailout.

Speaking of which, a piece in this morning's TheHill.com neatly analyzed the GOP's strategy of pushing the energy issue:

House Republicans have watched their winning issue of drilling take a back seat in the wake of the Bush administration’s $700 billion bailout plan, leaving GOP lawmakers to think of creative ways to highlight energy as they prepare to head back to the campaign trail. [snip]
Republicans have gotten a lot of traction criticizing Democrats on energy. They attracted widespread media attention for their energy protests on the House floor during the August recess, which played a role in forcing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to agree to a vote on a bill that called for offshore drilling.

It would be swell if a little of that media attention could focus on Republican votes that allowed the financial industry to create the mess we're in today. For example, the MSM could discuss Michigan Mike Rogers' "no" vote on last week's Commodity Markets Transparency and Accountability Act , which created tougher regulations for energy commodity markets and cracked down on energy speculation.

Heck, they could even point out the incongruity of Michigan Mike Rogers being shocked, shocked, to find Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae being bailed out on the taxpayers' dime... when he has received $22,750 in campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie, making him the top dollar guy in the Michigan Congressional delegation.

Seems to me that's something worth reporting.

Sign of the Times

If you really need another example of how Mike Rogers skates on the edge of ethics, look no further than the front page of today's Press & Argus.

In Political billboard stirs concerns, we learn that a few years back, a local attorney donated land to Genoa Township for use as a fire station. As part of his gift, he kept his access to the billboard (which normally shows an American flag), which sits on land between the fire station and the highway. Among the other caveats of his gift: the town has to give back the land if (1) he no longer has access to the sign, (2) if the station is no longer named after him, and (3) if it is no longer used as a fire station.

Not being a real estate lawyer, I can't comment on the details of these restrictions. Being a person with common sense, I can ask what on earth the township was thinking when it accepted this "gift."

The current Town Clerk has concerns about these restrictions, too, and she hit the nail on the head in this morning's article.

Polly Skolarus, Genoa Township clerk, said she's concerned about the appearance of a political sign on township property.

"I don't like the impression that Genoa is supporting Mike Rogers over somebody else," Skolarus said. "It's not that Mike Rogers is not a good person. I don't want it to look like we're supporting one candidate over another."

What does this have to do with Mike Rogers? After all, Rogers' spokeswriter press secretary Sylvia Warner says that Rogers didn't pay for the sign, nor did he request it.

"Based on what's been reported, the man owns the rights to the billboard and he's exercising his First Amendment rights," Warner said.

Hmmm. Well, there's this thing called leadership. There are a few other things called ethics and appearances, too.

It's hard to believe that FBI Guy Rogers is unaware of Michigan's campaign finance laws, which state that "a public body shall not use or authorize the use of property to make a contribution to political campaigns."

Why won't Rogers just pick up the phone and call the guy? He could say, "Gosh, I really appreciate your support, but it puts us all in kind of an awkward position. Would you mind putting the flag picture back up instead?" Heck, even Ms. Warner or Mr. Baltimore could make that call.

Q: Don't you think that Mr. Rogers & Co. would be concerned about these kinds of questions, especially during a competitive election year?

A: They don't really care what you think. Just like when Mr. Rogers took money from Jack Abramoff, gave thousands to Tom DeLay & Bob Ney, voted against the new GI Bill, or voted against children's health insurance

Mr. Rogers: Drill Sergeant?

It was a beautiful day in The Neighborhood for Mr. Rogers yesterday. In front of a very friendly crowd (and an unquestioning press), Livingston County's own Master of Maybe thrilled his audience with a rousing call to drill for oil EVERYWHERE, enhanced with anecdotes about scary foreign bad guys and plucky American oil companies:

He said Russia and Venezuela could be conducting joint naval exercises. He also said Venezuela is planning to purchase submarines, Russia has new missiles that can reach the U.S., and Saudi Arabia is spending $3 billion on new Islamic schools in Indonesia. (emphasis added)
[skip]
The most frustrating part, Rogers said, is some government regulations that prohibit the country from moving quicker. As an example, he said one company has spent $3 billion over 10 years trying to build a new refinery in Arizona. He said the country needs more refineries, and they would in turn help lower gasoline prices.

"Enough is enough," he said. "Give us everything."

If the U.S. could tap into all of its potential oil reserves, Rogers said, the country could by 2015 generate all of its own oil and not buy a barrel from foreign countries.

Oh, where to begin?

Let's start with the fact that Mr. Rogers has been a member of Congress since 2000. What, exactly, has he been doing about these unpleasant government regulations? Can he identify them? I'm only asking because in 2005, the President of the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association gave this testimony at a Congressional hearing:

We would like to say refiners have overcome hurdles to add capacity in the last several years. Despite some comments that have been made here, refiners added in the United States 2 million barrels of capacity between 1995 and 2005, despite considerable hurdles. One of the hurdles was the low return on investment in the industry. Basically, a return on investment in refining was basically running about 51⁄2 percent; when the S&P industrials were averaging about 12 1⁄2 percent.

See, this is what's called a bidness decision, Mr. Rogers. Ain't much profit in building new refineries, and tighter supply means higher prices and bigger profits for the oil companies.

Moving right along, here are a few facts from the U.S. Energy Information Administration:

* Canada remained the largest exporter of total petroleum in July, exporting 2.383 million barrels per day to the United States, which is an increase from last month (2.359 thousand barrels per day).

* The United States produces 10% of the world’s petroleum and consumes 24%.

And an EIA analysis of domestic offshore drilling found that

access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. (emphasis added)

Once again, Mr. Rogers' creative view of facts is only promoting his own agenda. Our country is in serious trouble, and a "representative" who wilfully ignores reality isn't what America needs.

Methinks the Elephant Doth Protest Too Much

Just when I thought the Livingston County Press & Argus was back to being a good, solid community paper, this morning's editorial reminded me that they are still marching in lockstep with Rep. Mike Rogers' orders.

Earlier this month, the P&A ran a story about opposition to Rogers' energy video from a national Arab-American group, which was concerned about its stereotypical images of swarthy, scary Arabs. It was pretty straightforward news piece, with comments from the group and responses from Rogers.

Since Arab-Americans make up less than 2% of the 8th District, this story didn't get much traction. Pro-Rogers voters automatically dismissed the complaints, and anti-Rogers voters weren't a bit surprised.

It was interesting, then, to see an editorial in today's P&A devoted entirely to defending Mike Rogers' energy video.

The scene in the video that is drawing the ire of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee depicts cartoon versions of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, former Russian leader Vladimir Lenin, and a man wearing an Arab headdress [skip]

Rogers said the particular clip is meant to highlight regimes that are using oil profits to purchase militaries and weapons or to fuel radicalization efforts. "It's to point out that people like Hugo (Chavez) and countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia have taken that money and have done things that aren't in our best interest," Rogers said.

Not to be nitpicky, but Lenin died in 1924. The Soviets had no petroleum industry at that time, and they sure as heck weren't exporting anything (other than revolutionary ideals). Why not show helpfully-labeled pictures of Putin and King Abdullah, if that's who you're trying to identify?

(Silly me! Iconic images of the Red Menace and anonymous Arabs come in handy when the goal is to manipulate emotions.)

It's disappointing that the largest paper in the county is spending its editorial column inches rehashing a story that's nearly two weeks old. The editorial ended with a bit of patronizing advice:

Groups like the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee serve a great and high purpose in our society; however, organizations can run the risk of trivializing real issues when they protest something minor without considering the message as a whole.

This group poses no threat to Mr. Rogers -- or his message -- at all. My guess is that Mr. Rogers is disappointed that his spiffy "Energy Independence Plan" has received zero attention... other than this ADC protest, the only response has been the chirping of crickets.

With the election less than three months away, Mr. Rogers is just itchin' for some press coverage. His buddies at the local paper are happy to oblige, and served up a hot, steaming plate of lo-cal outrage in this morning's paper.

Rules Are For Other People

Even though Mr. Rogers is undoubtedly packing his cargo shorts and sandals for a publicity-filled (and content-free) trip to DC next week, he apparently has taken a few minutes to work on his empire building re-election campaign.

Seems that Mr. Rogers sent an email to his constituent Legislative Update list asking if they'd like to receive his campaign emails. (Hat tip once again to Judy at Living Blue for spotting this.) Rules governing the use of constituency email lists vs. campaign emails lists are a little murky. There was some discussion this spring about updating franking privileges into the 21st century, but nothing conclusive.

Speaking of franked mail, I've been hearing about a Rogers franked mail piece that was sent after summer recess, arriving in the District just before the August 5th primary. If you have one, please do scan it and send it to The Neighborhood, along with the date you received it.

For those of our readers who are legal eagles, here's the official description of time frames for franked mail:

6)(A) It is the intent of Congress that a Member of, or Member-elect to, Congress may not mail any mass mailing as franked mail--

(i) if the mass mailing is postmarked fewer than 60 days (or, in the case of a Member of the House, fewer than 90 days) immediately before the date of any primary election or general election (whether regular, special, or runoff) in which the Member is a candidate for reelection (emphasis added)

It's pretty clear that Mr. Rogers is not too concerned with ethics 'n' stuff. We're talking about a politician who maxed out his campaign donations to disgraced (and convicted) former Congressman Bob Ney, as well as disgraced (and first-ever Congressional leader to be indicted) former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Rogers also took money from convicted felon and former uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Funny how a former FBI guy would be so casual about ethics and appearances...

Cappafrappahalfcaf Representation

After a few years of living in the 8th Congressional District, I'm used to having a Representative who doesn't show up when he should, and who also shows up where he's not needed, like here and here (oh, and here).

I'll admit I was curious, though, when I read that Rogers' henchman assistant Tony Baltimore will be representing Mr. Rogers at the grand opening of the newest Biggby Coffee in Bloomfield Hills.

This info comes from Bob Fish, CEO of Biggby Coffee and writer of the "Where is Bob?" blog. According to Bob, there will be quite a crowd:

the Lt Gov John D Cherry will be there AND Melanie Brown, Deputy Director of the Southeast Michigan Executive Office to Governor Jennifer Granholm AND Tony Baltimore from Congressman Mike Rogers Office will be attending, along with Bloomfield Hills Township officials and State Representatives, the Oakland County Sheriff Bouchard and so on....

Quite a crowd, indeed!

With times as tough as they are, opening the 100th store of a Michigan-based business is definitely something to celebrate.

It does raise a question, though: if it's important enough for Mr. Rogers to get an invite -- even though Joe Knollenberg, the Congressman who represents that district, doesn't seem to be on the guest list -- then shouldn't Mr. Rogers show up in person?

Money Can't Buy You Love

Judy over at LivingBlue has an interesting post...

Seems that Mr. Rogers was hanging around the Brighton Costco prior to the July 4th parade, trolling for people to march with him.

And he recently sent out a plea for some marching pals to accompany him in this Saturday's Howell Melon Fest Parade.

Astutely as usual, Judy observed:

This guy is a member of the Rogers family, which dominates Brighton-area politics. He is an incumbent member of Congress, well-known in the community, part of the Republican Party, which has thousands of supporters in the county.

And he is still looking for people to march with him in a parade less than 3 months before the election.

Too bad he can't dress up some of that hundreds of thousands of dollars he has raised and let the dollars march for him.

It's true that money can't buy you love. In this case, though, it looks like money can't even buy you a few buddies to walk next to you in public.

Toon Town

The recent flap over Mike Rogers' energy plan -- local and national Arab-American groups are upset with the video's animated portrayal of anonymous, threatening Arabs -- made me wonder why he would spend his money on such a poor-quality vid in the first place.

As expected, Mr. Rogers dismissed the groups as (gasp!) politically-motivated:

Rogers said he questions the motives of the letter's release to his office Tuesday, when primary elections were held. While he did not receive a copy of the letter until Tuesday, Arab-American leaders were speaking out against the video to media outlets as early as July 29.*

Not to brag, but here in The Neighborhood we picked up on the demeaning portrayal (a/w/a the cheesy production values) waaaaaaay back in May:

Moving along to Mr. Rogers' website, we find a perky,
content-free animated (!) version of The Plan, complete with marching barrels of foreign oil, a green tree snuggled up to an oil derrick, and scary foreign leaders (look out -- it's an Arab!).

Here's the funny thing: I found another Republican exercise in crappy drawing and crude stereotypes!

Thanks to the ever-alert and shiny-maned Princess Sparklepony, you too can peruse the comic book mailed out by incumbent Oklahoma County Comissioner Brent Rinehart.

Toga-wearing gays, political figures, trench coat-clad henchmen, concerned residents and Rinehart make up the rest of the comic's characters.

In one sequence, Satan says: "If I can get the kids to believe homosexuality is normal!"

The angel replies: "Hey Satan, not with Brent around you won't!"

WOW! How can ominous Arab bad guys compete with this kind of offensive stereotype?

Seriously, though, since Mr. Rogers has shared talking points in the past... could this be a harbinger of a tsunami of cheapo GOP election-season 'toons?

It's enough to make one long for the golden days of classic animation, like Johnny Quest and Speed Racer.
===================
*You have to wonder why the reporter didn't ask the logical follow-up:

Mr. Rogers, you were unopposed in the primary. The letter was delivered on the day of the primary -- not the day before. Please explain how this adds up to "politically motivated timing."

Oh, well -- probably just another exercise in Rogers' office putting out a written statement and the local paper printing it verbatim...