Someone just sent me this article. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/us/politics/12nevada.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
Rapid response is required for letters to the editors.
Andy
Senator Obama is on the cover of GQ Magazine. Here is the link to the article which has a picture of him at the rally at Silverado High School in June (maybe you'll find your face in the crowd). http://men.style.com/gq
There's also an article on the 50 most influential people in D.C., they rank Obama as number 20.
The following is taken from a NY Times article on July 18, 2007, addressing a July 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on "The Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland." Some of the "key judgements" released by the White House concerning this report are:
We judge the U.S. homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years. The main threat comes from Islamic terrorist groups and cells, especially Al Qaeda, driven by their undiminshed intent to attack the homeland and a continued effort by these terrorist groups to adapt and improve their capabilities.
We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have cnstrainged the ability of Al Qaeda to attack the U.S. homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.
We are concerned, however, that this level of international cooperation may wane as 9/11 becomes a more distant memory and perceptions of the threat diverge.
Al Qaeda is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the homeland, as its central leadership continues to plan high-impact plots, while pushing others in extremist Sunni communities to mimic its efforts and to supplement it capabilities.
We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the Unites States with ties to Al Qaeda senior leadership since 9/11, we judge Al Qaeda will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.
This report supports Senator Obama's outline on how he would deal with terrorism, by re-focusing our efforts in Afghanistan to find and eliminate Al Qaeda.
But what about you?
Who do you like? Who is your favourite Democratic presidential candidate? During the month of August we're looking to hear from you. Tell us why you like Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama, or Bill Richardson.
All you have to do is register at My Silver State (if you have not already done so), log in and click "new diary" on the menu in the right sidebar. Writing a diary is relatively easy. All you have to do is type what you have to say, click preview and, if it looks okay, publish it. So even if you haven't done this before you shouldn't need to worry about that.
The rules are simple: you can remain anonymous or not, that is totally up to you, but we do limit this diary contest to Nevada residents. So please state in which city or county you live.
The best diaries will be promoted to the frontpage. Even though My Silver State only got started about three weeks ago, we already have a little less than 1,000 visitors per week with about 2,000 page loads. So at least several hundred visitors, if not more, will get to read what you have to say. You can write your diary in any way that you like. It's totally up to you. We just ask you to refrain from attacking other candidates. We want to hear what is good about your candidate, not what is bad about the others.
Get to work! Promote your candidate!
I have been reading some of my local blogs that Obama spoke about his speech to Planned Parenthood. Many are saying the democrats healthcare plan calls for "free" abortions. At the speech Obama talked bout his intentions to expand people's access to health insurance, which would include universal coverage for "reproductive-health services." An Obama spokesman clarified that this did indeed include abortion.
There was also chatter about Obama's proposing early sex-education beginning in kindergarten, with age-appropriate information. They said that this was a contradiction to when he ran for Senate and Keyes proposed this. Here is a link to the article that is provoking this chatter.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2007/07/19/ap_interview_obama_says_romney_distorts_his_record/
I found it on the HQ blog under healthcare blog.
Be on the look out for chatter in your communities and debunk the myth that Obama wants free universal health care. What he is proposing calls for lowering health care costs and ensuring AFFORDABLE, high quality health care for all. There is a difference between free and affordable. He wants to create a plan for those with no insurance to buy coverage, a plan where no American with a pre-existing condition will be turned away (and if you saw SICKO there are many people who are being denied coverage on this basis).
Obama talks about having access to health insurance. It's the insurance companies that are paying, where do you see that tax payers are paying for it. People purchase insurance to cover their health care costs. If the insurance companies cover the procedure then they pay for it, not the taxpayer.
Joe Wilson commented that Hillary "is the one candidate in my judgment who understands the need to get America out of harm's way," and into a "political process," and added that she best understands the need to "end the war but end it in a way that preserves some shred of our strategic position in the region." What he fails to say is she voted for the war in the first place. So don't think voters will be taken by what he says. Most of these endorsers are doing it out of personal friendship or they are looking for some post election reward. In this case Joe and his wife are probably eyeing a political appointment.
His stand on the war has always been to have a strategy based on a realistic assessment of the sobering facts on the ground and our interests in the region - something that has been missing since the conception of this war. He said that this war would harm, not help, our efforts to defeat al Qaeda and finish the job in Afghanistan.
He believes we need to withdraw some of our troops and re-deploy them to Afghanistan, where our lack of focus and commitment or resources has led to a deterioration of the situation there. By redeploying our troops we will answer NATO's call for more troops and provide a much need boost to this critical fight against terrorism.
An article in the Federal Times by Steven Katz says that:
Clinton, building on voter outrage aganist the war in Iraq and the large sole-source cotnractor workforce in place there, wants to focus on reducing the government's overall reliance on contractors. It was her husband's administration that cut hundreds of thousands of federal positions, triggering the contracting out of thousands of federal jobs.
Edwards would cut the workforce at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This agency helps the poor, by revitalizing communities (like those ravished by Katrina), and helps the homeless. Edwards would cut the number of workers who help the poor, and Poverty is one of his key focuses.
Just some information to show the inconsistencies of these candidates.
The article did not cite any reforms Obama would make.
If we may, we also recommend Kathleen Hennessey's AP story on Obama's visit to Las Vegas. It's also about Iraq.
This writer nailed it when he said How confident, how in command, how centered the candidate looks. This is what distinguishes Obama from the other candidates - he is the face and voice of calm and reason, not anger and fear.
This is a letter to the editor that was published in today's SUN. If you take offense with it send a letter to editor on Obama's stand on the war.
Today: July 15, 2007 at 2:30:15 PDT
Letter: U.S. strengthened by Bush's leadership
Wi th all the screaming and derisive comments being voiced by Democrats, President Bush remains right in his course of action in Iraq and other hot spots throughout the world. He refuses to allow the polls to govern his actions and remains steadfast in his leadership role as commander in chief. He fulfills his office with honor and strength in the face of those who would lie and demean his actions.
The rabid methods set forth by the left are not the formula to govern America , and not one of the Democratic presidential hopefuls is fit enough to replace President Bush or even to rival his accomplishments. If the constant "carpers" such as Sens. Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy had joined in and supported President Bush, Iraq would have been settled long ago.
They would have set an example for the representatives of Iraq, showing how to "pull" as a team in time of war. But they carp and complain and say the Iraqis have not done anything. Well, Sens. Reid, Clinton, Obama and Kennedy, maybe the Iraqis are copying your lead! Ever think of that?
Lee S. Gliddon Jr., North Las Vegas
I received this message from a member of my Rapid Response Group. We should all be on the lookout for trolls.
Hi all,
OELWEIN — At a campaign stop in Oelwein Saturday morning, presidential hopeful Barack Obama said the number of candidates in presidential debates should not be pared down.The Illinois senator’s comments come two days after Democratic rivals John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., were overhead discussing the possibility of limiting the number of participants in presidential forums.“My attitude is the more the merrier,” Obama said in an interview. “I don’t know how you’d draw the line to say some can participate and some can’t, particularly when you know historically, for example, Bill Clinton was at 2 percent in the polls in some of these early contests.”In an exchange captured on camera and open microphone by broadcasters after an NAACP forum in Detroit, Edwards approached Clinton onstage and whispered in her ear. “We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group,” he said.“Our guys should talk,” Clinton said, contending the format had “trivialized” the discussion.Obama also suggested dispensing with brief answers as a way to bring more substance to debates.“I’d love to see a change in format where there’s a (fuller) debate, instead of a succession of 60-second sound bites.”
In today's LV Sun, there was an article Jon Ralston says although Hillary Clinton is the front-runner, don't think that Barack Obama doesn't have a shot at winning here. The article says:
Liberal, female and ambitious - sound familiar? - Leslie's career has been filled with forays into progressive causes such as improving health care and helping the less fortunate. She was a natural to be the next in the cascade of Nevada elected officials to endorse the New York senator.
Instead, Leslie was one of two state lawmakers (the other was Sen. Steven Horsford) rolled out by the Barack Obama campaign as leaders of his Nevada effort. Leslie's alignment with Obama is emblematic of why the Illinois senator, despite his youth and relative inexperience, is considered such a threat to front-runner Clinton in the race here and nationally.
Leslie's explanation for her decision also surely echoes similar endorsements across the country. "I'm really excited to be part of his campaign," Leslie told me this week. "After meeting with him and seeing how he interacted with people, I really did get the sense that he could be the inspiring leader our country needs. It's time for a change, to bring our nation back to the place where we are all proud of ourselves again."
And, Leslie added, "His consistent position against the war was the tipping point for me." As opposed to Clinton, for whom sorry seems to be the hardest word to say to appease many of the faithful.
To Leslie and other Democrats, Obama generates excitement, provoking the kind of giddy rhetoric Leslie used. He is the bona fide change agent. And, of course, he was against the war before being against the war was popular.
Obama may not be able to match the icy efficiency of the Clinton campaign, which has racked up endorsements here and across the country in an attempt to create an aura of inevitability. It is a tactic that has worked well here, where anointments are the rule.
But Obama's ability to keep pace with Clinton in fundraising and his ability to tap into a primary electorate galvanized by Iraq have turned this anointment on its head.
In Nevada, Clinton has more high-profile Democratic names - ex-Gov. Bob Miller, Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, Treasurer Kate Marshall, Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani and ex-Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa. But it is the breathless rollout of these endorsements, as if each one is indicative of an unstoppable steamroller. Sometimes methinks the senator doth get endorsed too much.
The Clinton memomania also is illuminating. National strategist Mark Penn's July 9 missive and then a local campaign's epistle two days later (not coincidentally right before Obama's steering committee was announced) had the same message: "Look how great we are doing. We are doing great. Can you see how great we are doing?"
This is not to say that the Clinton campaign has not been effective here. She is much better organized, has shown an uncanny ability to garner free media and is much better connected (including with longtime Clinton family friend Brian Greenspun, whose family owns this newspaper) than the Obama organization. And a poll of likely caucus-goers released last month showed Clinton with 40 percent and Obama and ex-Sen. John Edwards at 16 percent.
These polls, though, are next to meaningless almost 200 days before the Jan. 19 caucus, and Clinton has nowhere to go but down. Obama's announcement of his steering committee surely added to the Clinton campaign's worries.
Even more interesting than Leslie and African-American leaders Horsford and lobbyist/consultant Rose McKinney-James is the inclusion on the committee of Billy Vassiliadis, widely seen as one of the state's best political strategists , who also was wooed by the Clinton campaign, and Elaine Wynn. I find it humorous that the first reference to her always is as Steve Wynn's wife; trust me, folks, she is a powerhouse in her own right with a political Rolodex thicker than her lesser half's and a resume of social and educational activism that is almost unrivaled in the casino industry.
It's too facile, however, to conclude that Obama picks up much immediate momentum from this announcement. Clinton is still the front-runner and Obama has little presence here, although the process is such that what happens in Iowa (don't count Edwards out there or here) will affect what happens in Nevada.
But if too many Sheila Leslies decide to go with Obama rather than Clinton - here and elsewhere - this entire dynamic could change come 2008.
Please write a letter to the Sun editor complimenting Jon's article and showing how strong and deept Sen Obama's grassroots is here in Nevada. This is the on-line link to the editor: letters@lasvegassun.com be sure to include your name, phone number, and address. The more people who write the better the chances of at least one letter making it into the paper.
I'm sure most of you have talked to people who say Obama doesn't have enough experience or that they can't find enough substance in his message. This is my response.
On experience, I say no President comes to office with all the requisite experiences that are required to deal with the national and international issues. What experience did Lincoln have to deal with the Civil War? What experience did FDR have to deal with the aftermath of the Depression and WWII? They had the innate ability to surround themselves with great advisors. Not only does Senator Obama have this innate ability but he has the most practical experience of all the candidates. Practical experience counts more than experience working an issue because it means you've been there, experienced it and have the insight needed to reallistically deal with an issue and to truly correct the underlying cause of the problem. He has lived in a foreign country and understands what it is like to live in a Muslim country; he knows as a community organizers the struggles of the common people, he knows what a struggle it is for single working mothers, he knows the need for a strong support system for families.
On substance, an article in the Washington Post's Fix by Chris Cilliza after the last debate said that Obama's message is about his vision for America, whereas Clinton focuses on her experience. I believe that Senator Obama is sharing his vision of a better America and if what Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. wrote in War and the American Presidency, is correct, then Senator Obama will be the greatest president of all time. What Schlesinger wrote was that 125 years ago, Henry Adams, one of our most brilliant historians proposed this test of a great president: The American president, resembles the commander of a ship at sea. He must have a helm to grasp, a course to steer a port to seek. The Constitution offers every president a helm, but the course and port constitute the first requirement for presidential greatness. Great presidents possess, or are possessed by, a vision of an ideal America. Their passion is to make sure the ship of state sails on the right course. If that course is indeed right, it is because they have an instinct for the dynamics of history." Charles de Gaulle observed that if a President "does not understand the character of his time, he will fail. Great presidents have a deep connection with the needs, anxieties, dreams of the the people."
Link you're looking for more reasons to tell people why we need a change from the current administration and why people should vote for Obama, read this article. Clinton would continue the secrecy that surrounds the current administration.
I received this from someone in my Rapid Response Group and wanted to share this with everyone. I think it's really good.
Why Obama not Clinton is the question I am asked the most. I spend 5hours each Saturday at my Obama booth at our local Farmer's Market andpeople actually stand 2, 3 or 4 deep to get a bumper sticker and ask mequestions. The answer I give to that question is from my heart. This ismy answer.We are very fortunate in this election to have such good candidatesrunning for our party. Both Senators Obama and Clinton are very smart,well educated, articulate individuals. They have both stated that theyare in agreement on almost every issue. That leaves us with otherdifferences to base our choice on. Some people site experience as adetermining issue.For me I see their personal life experiences as verydifferent and I think Senator Obama's life has uniquely equipped him todeal with all our American people and people around the world with anexperience that Senator Clinton does not have. The last issue I seethat clearly divides them as candidates is very personal for me. As youcan see I am a 64 year old white woman. I have waited a lifetime tovote for the first female President of the United States and now thattime is here. I listen to Senator Clinton, I watch her, and I hear andsee an angry woman. A woman who when she speaks sounds angry and looksangry what ever she is talking about. (At this point almost everyoneagrees with me and turning to each other they agree each other that sheis very angry.) I go on to explain that when I listen to Senator Obama,when I watch Senator Obama, I see an open face, listening, watching andsmiling. I hear a calm voice a reasonable voice an intelligent messagedelivered calmly. I must remind you that most of the world has a brownface not an angry white one and I can not help but believe that ourcountry would be much better represented for us and to the world withthe calm, intelligent smiling brown face of Barack Obama. We've had anangry white one for 8 years and I don't think it has helped us. I willhave to continue to wait to vote for a women this is not the women Iwas looking for.Pamela Warren,Group Administrator forBloomington/Monroe County IN Obama 2008Vote For Sen. Barack Obama for President of the United States
The Obama Rapid Response group got ABC to correct inconsistencies in an article on front runners who are refusing to disclose their tax returns. The comment below from the person who brought the article to the attention of the group, shows how important it is to keep members apprised of misleading information and to contact the media to get them to correct their articles.
AOL News Highlights a new ABCNews.com article on tax returns. The new story has pictures of the other five candidates who did not release their returns and a heading for the second paragraph that reads:
