Plan B Forum

Ashley Judd Will Have to Launch Charm Offensive to Overcome Liberal Past
In Judd-McConnell race, coal could take center stage
By Lauren Fox

March 8, 2013 RSS Feed Print
Actress Ashley Judd discussed the controversial practice of mountain top removal coal mining in the Appalachian Mountains of Kentucky and West Virginia at the National Press Club in Washington in 2010.
It's the most anticipated Senate race of 2014 and it doesn't even exist yet.

Ashley Judd has yet to declare if she is running against Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in 2014, but that hasn't stopped her opponents from readying for battle, attacking her record, and laying out the argument she's "way damn too liberal" for Kentucky.

[ALSO: How Ashley Judd Can Overcome Daily Caller's 'Sexist' Hollywood Stigma]

An acclaimed actress, Judd has a masters in public administration from Harvard. She has a long resume of public service working as an ambassador for YouthAIDS and campaigning on behalf of Democratic candidates, including President Barack Obama. She came out strongly against GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney's 47 percent comment and is strongly pro choice. But it's her protesting against coal that's attracted the most heat in Kentucky where the $4 billion industry supports nearly 20,000 jobs in the state.

In 2010, during a National Press Club luncheon, Judd declared that Kentucky's mountaintop coal mining was "federal government supported, coal industry operated, rape of Appalachia."

"The fact that the Appalachians are the Appalachians makes this environmental genocide possible and permissible," Judd said.

And those friendly to coal in the state have not forgotten her message.

"She is seen by most of us as a long shot," says Bill Bissett, president of the Kentucky Coal Association. "Her public statements seem out of step with Kentuckians and that makes her a dark horse candidate."

Bissett argues it's Judd's strong ties to Obama that make her the most vulnerable in a race in coal country. In 2012, Obama managed to win just 4 out of the state's 120 counties.

In Kentucky, many see Obama as enemy number one against the coal industry because of an uptick in federal regulations that have gone into effect on his watch.

"The president will be too heavy for her to carry," Bissett says.

[POLL: Hillary Clinton Leads 2016 Field]

But others say Judd's charm, name recognition and political savvy could help her overcome her liberal politics in a state with a more conservative Democratic coalition.

"Her comments related to mountaintop coal removing could present problems, but could present a rare opportunity to develop an economic platform that could transform the economy in Appalachia," says Kim Geveden, a Democratic strategist in the state.

Geveden says the coal industry is still powerful, but that the rise of natural gas has put the economy at risk, and Kentuckians might be ready to hear about a more comprehensive strategy for the future. Not to mention, Geveden says Judd's got a lot of other political tricks up her sleeve.

Judd, unlike other candidates who have raced against McConnell in the past, has the name recognition and rolodex to be a big fundraising success.

"McConnell historically is not a likeable guy in the state and he knows that. But he is a smart politician." Geveden says. "He survives by tearing down his opponent. With Ashley, the money game could change."

But experts warn Judd's going to have to launch an aggressive ground game, relocate to Kentucky from Tennessee, where she currently lives, and be ready for a knock-down drag out fight.

[PHOTOS: Obama Signs Violence Against Women Act]

The National Republican Senatorial Committee has already attacked Judd as a carpetbagger sending a letter to supporters this week criticizing her for living in Tennessee, but mulling a challenge in the bluegrass state. And Democratic observers acknowledge Judd will have to work overtime to convince voters she has not lost touch with her Kentucky roots.

"A path to victory does not include New York, Washington and Hollywood. It includes Lexington, Louisville, and Pikeville," says Dale Emmons, a Democratic strategist in Kentucky that has managed campaigns against McConnell before. "This is a place people expect to see you and talk to you."

More News:

•Brennan Confirmed as Top Spy

•Sanctions May Play Into North Korea Propaganda

•Obama Loses Credibility on Sequester

How does this have anything to do with Ashley Judd practicing 'neo communism'?

Anyone to the left of Ghengis Khan is a neo-communist, obviously.

Lib, this is one of those posts of yours (particularly when I include the subject line) that I find...

Uhh...well....

puzzling....

The logical connections between the "points" involved, are not immediately apparent to me....

Maybe I'm just a little slow...

Lord Jim wrote: Maybe I'm just a little slow...

Bowling pies there Jim....

Gob wrote:Anyone to the left of Ghengis Khan is a neo-communist, obviously.

Gob, her family are country music singers; need I say any more?

The way for the Republicans to counter her campaigns is to ridicule her family by hiring an actress to portray her as a corn cob smoking jug drinking hillbilly; no self respecting liberal would vote for anyone associated with country music.

Can she really win or is it just a cynical way for the Democrats to force the Republicans to spend money they could use else where?

I gotta tell ya Lib even with a degree in Geology (and certainly no dang commie) I am not a fan of strip mining.

It's not a job maker either, it actually would put a great many miners OUT of work, there is a considerable amount of automation to strip mining.

If that's all they have to hang their hat on it's no wonder they are staring uh starting (eta sorry Freudian slip, all those nude scenes) so early...

Gob, her family are country music singers; need I say any more?

And uhh....

That would make her a "neo-communist".... because...?

Again, not following the reasoning....

Lord Jim wrote:Lib, this is one of those posts of yours (particularly when I include the subject line) that I find...

Uhh...well....

puzzling....

The logical connections between the "points" involved, are not immediately apparent to me....

Maybe I'm just a little slow...

Jim don’t take it too serious its just attention getter intended stimulate neurons.

And, yes it is slow today. And, my best friend was laid off this week; Obama’s economic plan is working marvelously. I am starting to have buyer's remorse.

Lord Jim wrote:

Gob, her family are country music singers; need I say any more?

And uhh....

That would make her a "neo-communist".... because...?

Again, not following the reasoning....

Jim, I coined the word it can mean anything I want it to mean. Do you remember during Vietnam when liberals would call people they didn’t like fascist, it is used like that, just to shock; if it means anything it is “ bad”.

keld feldspar wrote:I gotta tell ya Lib even with a degree in Geology (and certainly no dang commie) I am not a fan of strip mining.

It's not a job maker either, it actually would put a great many miners OUT of work, there is a considerable amount of automation to strip mining.

If that's all they have to hang their hat on it's no wonder they are staring uh starting (eta sorry Freudian slip, all those nude scenes) so early...

Ok lets get serious: Coal is the dirtiest and most polluting form of energy , but our energy situation is serious. We have a lot of coal and strip mining is cheap. As Jim has pointed out cheap energy is essential to any modern economy. So let’s ask a couple questions. It there some way that strip mining can be make more desirable and is there a cleaner way to use coal?

Buy it from Australia.

Coal is Australia’s second top export and plays a major role in our nation’s economy, bringing in billions of dollars in tax and royalties.

Coal was the first commodity to be discovered and mined in Australia.

Now, we are the world’s largest coal exporter, with 78% of the coal we mine sent to over 30 countries. Coal is Australia’s second largest export after iron ore and Australia is the world's largest exporter of coal.

Gob wrote:Buy it from Australia.

Coal is Australia’s second top export and plays a major role in our nation’s economy, bringing in billions of dollars in tax and royalties.

Coal was the first commodity to be discovered and mined in Australia.

Now, we are the world’s largest coal exporter, with 78% of the coal we mine sent to over 30 countries. Coal is Australia’s second largest export after iron ore and Australia is the world's largest exporter of coal.

Why is that your environmentalists not doing their Job. Don’t you know that Australian coal is going to destroy the world. Has your national government done anything to restrict coal mining or cool fired power plants?

Gob wrote:Buy it from Australia.

Good idea. I can see the PR campaign now:

Econoline wrote:

Gob wrote:Buy it from Australia.

Good idea. I can see the PR campaign now:

RAPE AUSTRALIA FIRST!

But that is what they want at least until they have all the money.

liberty wrote: "....

Ok lets get serious: Coal is the dirtiest and most polluting form of energy , but our energy situation is serious. We have a lot of coal and strip mining is cheap. As Jim has pointed out cheap energy is essential to any modern economy. So let’s ask a couple questions. It there some way that strip mining can be make more desirable and is there a cleaner way to use coal?

First of all we do not and have not had an energy shortage now nor is one expected in the next 50 years. Trying to panic people by saying 'we have to do it' just does not work.

Strip mining is cheap for the coal companies but expensive for everyone else, and the expense is handed to all of our futures. When China burns coal it isn't 'cheap' it just transfers the costs to their own population and the rest of the world. In any case you're behind the times by years. The cheapest form of energy in the US now is natural gas although it came at the cost of removing environmental controls and we are just now discovering how much that decision by the Bush administration is going to cost us. But natural gas is so cheap they are saying that no new coal-fired plants will be built in generations.

And France, Sweden, Denmark, Germany have relatively expensive energy, and thrive, while Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola have cheap energy and suffer continuous decline. Norway even uses very high fuel taxes to increase energy costs*.

There are more examples of energy-rich countries living in poverty and squalor than the opposite. Russia, for example.

yrs,
rubato

Or one might say appropriately locate the costs with the user rather than allow them to externalize those costs onto everyone else.

liberty wrote:

Lord Jim wrote:

Gob, her family are country music singers; need I say any more?

And uhh....

That would make her a "neo-communist".... because...?

Again, not following the reasoning....

Jim, I coined the word it can mean anything I want it to mean. Do you remember during Vietnam when liberals would call people they didn’t like fascist, it is used like that, just to shock; if it means anything it is “ bad”.

I preferring (and wanting) clean air and water makes me a "neo-communist" then send me the hat with the red star. You'll have to send one to George H.W. Bush as well -- he who proposed and signed the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act which set the standards you're so troubled about.

I love it when he starts threads. They always wind up being quite unintentionally funny. Gob, can we give him his own forum?

[quote="liberty]

Jim, I coined the word it can mean anything I want it to mean. [/quote]


You didn't. You can't. Unless of course you are Humpliberty Dumpliberty?

The Neo-Communist Party of the Soviet Union (NCPSU, Russian: Неокоммунистическая партия Советского Союза, НКПСС) – a clandestine radical left group, which existed in the Soviet Union between September 1974 and January 1985. NCPSU is seen by modern researchers as one of the first organizations of the New Left in the USSR

Wiki

1. neo-Communist
A Neo-Communist per.se is pretty easy to define and hard at the same time.

Why this is so: As the word implies, it is a 'new' generation of Communist, albeit most are students (as where it learned from), few are more and less anti-Authitorian proletars (low class workers), and pledge alliance to Marx's theories, but defy Soviet and the like (China, perhaps Cuba) as inferior attempts on it, not genuine ones, and state-capitalistic enterprises with vague socialistic elements. They often share sympathies with workers, activists and anarchists. Most neo-Communist are so presumably because of a rebellish fad, or attitude, but most of them reject Totalitarianism, saying it was never a part of leftism. Transistionary states are a heated subject, and neo-Communists are often followed for their ideology, because they are placed in the same class of despot-supporters. Neo-Communists are often atheists or agnostics.

Most of these frequent RevLeft.com, and are born at most in the 70's or up.
Karl: I heard Joe is a Commie?
Jarl: That's not true, he is a Neo-Commie!
Karl: What's the difference?
Jarl: He doesn't believe in a dictatorship of the proletars, i.e. no vanguard party.

Urban dictionary

Some years ago I made a case for characterizing the progressive, liberal left, including the organizations that form the heart of the Democratic Party — the government unions, the Soros Shadow Party, the Center for American Progress, and the Netroots activists – as “neo-Communists.” I made the argument for calling them neo-Communists on the basis of the fact that there was no discernible difference between the view these political actors took of American capitalism – corporations are evil, capitalism is bad, America is the great imperialist Satan – and the view taken by the Communists of the Stalin era.

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horo ... he-closet/