From the piece that I published on the Daily Kos:
"So when all else fails for the GOP what do they do? They drop the "S" bomb. So and so is a socialist. Why does this happen? Because for older Americans who were adults during the cold war their was a very clearly defined enemy-the Soviets. Politicians know that for the average middle aged to mature every day Joe, who lacks a deep appreciation and understanding of economics, that the slightest any mention of the "S" word invokes a no questions asked emotional panic or fear reaction. But are these politicians accurate when they try to link Obama, Democrats, or far left liberals to socialists? If we look at some of the recent events which have unfolded for example it would seem as if these GOP politicians either have very short memories or maybe they just like contradicting themselves because Bush just enacted some several state interventionist-(read socialist policies) and his GOP colleagues barely blinked an eye. Yet when Obama talks about rolling back the Bush tax cuts to the same levels that they were at during the Clinton era he is a socialist. This is doubletalk. Mccain himself voted for the bailout and even suggested the government get deeper into the banking business by purchasing distressed mortgage notes.So to set the record straight we do not live in a capitalist system. We in America have what is referred to as a mixed economy-meaning that capital is created by businesses engaged in the pursuit of profit, while the government is able to exert certain protections and interventions to protect property owners and individuals. So institutions such as the SEC, Social Security Administrations, FDIC, FDA, FTC, and etc act as a cushion to offset the lack of protections offered in pure capitalism. If America were ranked on a scale measuring all of the worlds economies from most capitalist to most socialist-we would probably come in either right in the center or slightly left of it. But we will never go completely to the left-because our system is one that is designed to gravitate towards balance or equalibrium. Likewise, take a look at the most socialist countries in the world (those where individuals do not own property) many of these-such as China are becoming more capitalist. [In fact the worlds most capitalist system exists in Hong Kong.]So what has Obama said that would qualify as socialist? Absolutely nothing. If you ask the most extreme conservative they will say-spreading the wealth. But spreading the wealth and socialism are almost mutually exclusive. Pure socialism is a system in which there is no wealth because ownership in the pure socialist model is permitted by only the state. By this definition Obama has proposed nothing that is anymore socialist or interventionist than hat we already have in place. And frankly this is what happens in an economy that is suffering. We didnt become a mixed economy until Franklin Rooselvelts first and second terms-when he enacted the New Deal to help keep the economy from sinking even lower. Once things pick up again, things will again sway to the right and the country will again become more conservative. But today that is not the case. Today we live in an America that has become very fiscally liberal because of the economy. As such, whether it is Obama or Mccain that becomes the next president we will see more interventionist trade policies. To let things continue to spiral and wait for the invisible hand of the free market to repsond is just plain irresponsible. Don't believe the hype-America has already adopted socialist policies-medicare is one of them. The federal government buying into banks (which Bush enacted is another). Therefore to say that Obama would bring socialism to America is a phoney attempt to ignore where we are at this juncture and to scare Americans. Message to Mccain, its not working."
Another strong case for a 3rd Bush term from the McCain team. Another right wing extremist economist who advises McCain telling everyone that the economy is robust, despite what your lying eyes are telling you. According to right wing theorist (and haven't we had enough of them in the last eight years?) Donald Luskin, the "problem" is purely political and of course, it's Obama's fault. Uh huh. Whoopee for the Bush/McCain economy. If this McCain economic adviser thinks the US economy is so strong, why isn't McCain making this point on the campaign trail? You would think that a proud owner of this Bush/McCain economy would want to brag about the impressive numbers, no? Do tell, Mr Luskin, do tell.
I love this article. It is so well spoken and hits so many of the key points. In fact, the points made in this article dovetail very nicely with why I chose to vote democrat in the 2008 elections. This is why I will soon author my own piece discussing why I made the choice to support Senator Obama and why I became involved in his campaign. In it I will also try to detail what I have learned along the way...since I began getting involved with the campaign.
Stay tuned...
This is from Deepak Chopra:
"Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin's pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and exhorting people to obey their worst impulses . In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of "the other." For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don't want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.) I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin’s message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision. Look at what she stands for: --Small town values -- a denial of America's global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism. --Ignorance of world affairs -- a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad. --Family values -- a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be heeded. --Rigid stands on guns and abortion -- a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree. --Patriotism -- the usual fallback in a failed war. --"Reform" -- an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology. Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness. Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can't be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow -- we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise."
"Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin's pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and exhorting people to obey their worst impulses . In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of "the other." For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don't want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.) I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin’s message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision. Look at what she stands for: --Small town values -- a denial of America's global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism. --Ignorance of world affairs -- a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad. --Family values -- a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be heeded. --Rigid stands on guns and abortion -- a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree. --Patriotism -- the usual fallback in a failed war. --"Reform" -- an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology. Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness. Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can't be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow -- we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise."
From the Washington Independent:
"...Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has lied and dissembled about her past support for the “Bridge to Nowhere “earmark, as many journalists have reported.Now, the Obama campaign is circulating a photograph of Palin literally bragging about her support for the bridge, with a note titled “I supported the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ and All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt.”Obama is arguing, however, that the McCain campaign’s blatant lies, about issues small and large, reveal the GOP nominee’s approach to governance.It is indeed striking that McCain picked this fight, touting his running mate’s “reform” record not through spin, or selective biography, but by flatly lying about her recent actions..."
"...Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has lied and dissembled about her past support for the “Bridge to Nowhere “earmark, as many journalists have reported.
Now, the Obama campaign is circulating a photograph of Palin literally bragging about her support for the bridge, with a note titled “I supported the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ and All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt.”
Obama is arguing, however, that the McCain campaign’s blatant lies, about issues small and large, reveal the GOP nominee’s approach to governance.
It is indeed striking that McCain picked this fight, touting his running mate’s “reform” record not through spin, or selective biography, but by flatly lying about her recent actions..."
Source: Yahoo News via Associated Press
"The solution, at least in the short term, will be have top-tier female supporters vouch for Obama to largely female audiences and keep the candidate himself away.Sebelius started on Thursday, linking Palin to the unpopular President Bush."She mastered the words written by the Bush speechwriters and delivered them well. But what we didn't hear was what people talk to me about every day," Sebelius told reporters.Clinton, a one-time presidential front runner, was set to arrive Monday in Florida. Obama aides had long planned to have Clinton as a surrogate even before Palin was named.Clinton's camp says the message will be honed on her long-standing appeal to kitchen-table issues that helped her win 18 million votes, but not the nomination. There are no plans for Clinton to directly engage Palin, largely because the election is about the president, not vice president.Obama's senior advisers say they cannot allow Palin to paint herself as the come-from-nowhere insurgent — a role that once belonged to Obama."For someone who makes the point that she's not from Washington, she looked very much like she'd fit in very well there when you see how she brings these attacks, they all felt very familiar to Americans who are used to this kind of thing from Washington," Axelrod said.Obama himself dodged the question about how to treat Palin, only the second woman nominated as a major party's vice presidential pick and the GOP's first."I think she's got a compelling story, but I assume that she wants to be treated the same way that guys want to be treated, which means that their records are under scrutiny," Obama told reporters in York. "I've been through this for 19 months. She has been through it — what — four days so far?"
"The solution, at least in the short term, will be have top-tier female supporters vouch for Obama to largely female audiences and keep the candidate himself away.
Sebelius started on Thursday, linking Palin to the unpopular President Bush.
"She mastered the words written by the Bush speechwriters and delivered them well. But what we didn't hear was what people talk to me about every day," Sebelius told reporters.
Clinton, a one-time presidential front runner, was set to arrive Monday in Florida. Obama aides had long planned to have Clinton as a surrogate even before Palin was named.
Clinton's camp says the message will be honed on her long-standing appeal to kitchen-table issues that helped her win 18 million votes, but not the nomination. There are no plans for Clinton to directly engage Palin, largely because the election is about the president, not vice president.
Obama's senior advisers say they cannot allow Palin to paint herself as the come-from-nowhere insurgent — a role that once belonged to Obama.
"For someone who makes the point that she's not from Washington, she looked very much like she'd fit in very well there when you see how she brings these attacks, they all felt very familiar to Americans who are used to this kind of thing from Washington," Axelrod said.
Obama himself dodged the question about how to treat Palin, only the second woman nominated as a major party's vice presidential pick and the GOP's first.
"I think she's got a compelling story, but I assume that she wants to be treated the same way that guys want to be treated, which means that their records are under scrutiny," Obama told reporters in York. "I've been through this for 19 months. She has been through it — what — four days so far?"
From Oliver Willis:
As I pointed out, Sarah Palin’s partisan screed activated the Republican base, but while it probably turned off the middle and other independents, it also activated the Democratic base. I’m hearing that since Palin’s speech, Obama’s campaign has pulled in around $8 million — and growing.
Moral of the story, as we hear more from the RNC, let's keep fighting back with our checkbooks!
Hi all, have you seen this yet? I just wanted to say that we are looking decent, but this thing is still close. Let's keep up the registrations, calls, and canvasses.
I know we can do it because we're- Fired up & Ready to go!
Source: Daily Kos
Time/CNN polls swing states in the Midwest. The big prize first: Ohio, where Obama enjoys a very narrow lead. Obama (D) 47 McCain (R) 45 With third-party candidates: Obama (D) 45 McCain (R) 44 Nader (I) 5 Barr (L) 2 McKinney (G) 1 Let's slide over to Minnesota, where the convention is not helping the Elephants: Obama (D) 53 McCain (R) 41 Obama (D) 51 McCain (R) 37 Nader (I) 4 Barr (L) 2 McKinney (G) 1 The Third Partiers hurt McCain as much as Obama here. And that ol' convention or whatever they're holding in St. Paul, doesn't appear to be attracting too many Minnesotans to the GOP.Now on to the First Caucus State or Iowa, where Obama posts his best numbers yet: Obama (D) 55 McCain (R) 40 Obama (D) 51 McCain (R) 38 Nader (I) 4 Barr (L) 3 McKinney (G) 2 The news is slightly better for McCain in North Carolina; at least he's leading, if only by a bit. Per Democracy Corps / GQR: McCain (R) 47 Obama (D) 44 A lead is a lead, but quite frankly, McCain ought to be concerned about such a small margin in North Carolina. With a little luck, a good voter-registration drive, and a good ground game, Obama might be able to pick off the state and its 15 electoral votes...something even Bill Clinton could not do in two electoral-college landslides.Finally, good news for Obama from New Mexico, or at least one third of New Mexico. He's up big in the First District, where Kerry won 51-48: Obama (D) 55 McCain (R) 41 If Obama actually does win the First District with 55% (he ought to lose the Second District, but win the Third District with an even bigger margin), he will win New Mexico going away.
Time/CNN polls swing states in the Midwest. The big prize first: Ohio, where Obama enjoys a very narrow lead.
Obama (D) 47 McCain (R) 45
With third-party candidates:
Obama (D) 45 McCain (R) 44 Nader (I) 5 Barr (L) 2 McKinney (G) 1
Let's slide over to Minnesota, where the convention is not helping the Elephants:
Obama (D) 53 McCain (R) 41
Obama (D) 51 McCain (R) 37 Nader (I) 4 Barr (L) 2 McKinney (G) 1
The Third Partiers hurt McCain as much as Obama here. And that ol' convention or whatever they're holding in St. Paul, doesn't appear to be attracting too many Minnesotans to the GOP.
Now on to the First Caucus State or Iowa, where Obama posts his best numbers yet:
Obama (D) 55 McCain (R) 40
Obama (D) 51 McCain (R) 38 Nader (I) 4 Barr (L) 3 McKinney (G) 2
The news is slightly better for McCain in North Carolina; at least he's leading, if only by a bit. Per Democracy Corps / GQR:
McCain (R) 47 Obama (D) 44
A lead is a lead, but quite frankly, McCain ought to be concerned about such a small margin in North Carolina. With a little luck, a good voter-registration drive, and a good ground game, Obama might be able to pick off the state and its 15 electoral votes...something even Bill Clinton could not do in two electoral-college landslides.
Finally, good news for Obama from New Mexico, or at least one third of New Mexico. He's up big in the First District, where Kerry won 51-48:
Obama (D) 55 McCain (R) 41
If Obama actually does win the First District with 55% (he ought to lose the Second District, but win the Third District with an even bigger margin), he will win New Mexico going away.
From Daily Kos:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere." THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
Form Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain:
"Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain was formed to dispel the myth of 'Straight talkin', principled, maverick war hero' McCain. Through more than two decades of investigation of his behavior, through open-source documents, public statements of his colleagues, and personal conversations with other Vietnam POWs, we have come to the unavoidable conclusion that he is unfit by virtue of his temperament, character, dishonesty, and emotional instability to serve as President of the United States or in any other position of public trust."
As Americans, we dream of a President who is honest, personable, intelligent, and wise. We want a leader with courage and integrity who has known the struggles of an everyday American. A lot of people have stopped believing that may even be possible. I haven't stopped believing.
I support Barack Obama because he is that leader. Join me in supporting Barack by making a donation to my personal fundraising page:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/main/beninmwang
This campaign for the presidency is unparalleled in history. Our need for an honest, fresh-thinking leader could not be more urgent. Americans are hungry for change and Barack Obama will bring that change when he is elected. Please take a minute to check out my page and make a donation of any size:
Photo by Joshua Wanyama of African Path
General Conditions That Don't Favor Mccain
Mccain's Weaknesses
Obama's strengths
Notes:
1 Keating 5 scandal
2 Lobbyist scandal
3 Economic similarity with Bush
4 Democrats taking back congress in republican country
5 Evangelical vote up for grabs
6 With the general election season started contrasts are huge
Photo by wedgienet
This is yet another illustration of Mccain's inability to stop being a flip-flopper.
From the Political Carnival? "Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) are quietly working together on a good-government bill despite their campaign-trail battle over who is tougher against Washington’s special interests.McCain’s Senate office contacted Obama’s office Monday night asking to sign on to a bill opening federal government contracts to public scrutiny, according to three knowledgeable sources.Not that it's any of my business, but I heard that Obama made overtures to Tom Coburn first... shhh. Too late. John Sidney McThirdWheel's already jealous:Before the call, Obama had been working on the measure primarily with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), an ardent proponent of eliminating wasteful government spending and an early supporter and longtime Senate ally of McCain’s.After learning that Obama and Coburn were introducing the bill without his backing, McCain’s staffers immediately contacted Coburn to express concern and a desire to be named as an original co-sponsor of the update. They then called Obama’s office. Obama staffers were happy to comply with McCain’s request to sign on, an Obama adviser said, because they knew support from the two presumptive nominees could propel the legislation to passage in the final months of a packed legislative schedule. Obama made the first move. He's such a charmer:Gerry Bass, the executive director of OMBWatch, one of the 19 watchdog groups backing the measure, said it’s clear that Obama took the lead on the transparency bill this year but McCain should get credit for signing onto it.“It’s a tribute to both of them,” he said. “Obama walks the words he says on the campaign trail by doing things differently. He didn’t have to have on McCain as a co-sponsor. The same can be said about McCain. McCain deserves credit, even though he may not have been involved in the crafting of the bill, he deserves credit for jumping on board.”
From the Political Carnival?
"Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) are quietly working together on a good-government bill despite their campaign-trail battle over who is tougher against Washington’s special interests.McCain’s Senate office contacted Obama’s office Monday night asking to sign on to a bill opening federal government contracts to public scrutiny, according to three knowledgeable sources.
"Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) are quietly working together on a good-government bill despite their campaign-trail battle over who is tougher against Washington’s special interests.
Before the call, Obama had been working on the measure primarily with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), an ardent proponent of eliminating wasteful government spending and an early supporter and longtime Senate ally of McCain’s.After learning that Obama and Coburn were introducing the bill without his backing, McCain’s staffers immediately contacted Coburn to express concern and a desire to be named as an original co-sponsor of the update. They then called Obama’s office. Obama staffers were happy to comply with McCain’s request to sign on, an Obama adviser said, because they knew support from the two presumptive nominees could propel the legislation to passage in the final months of a packed legislative schedule.
After learning that Obama and Coburn were introducing the bill without his backing, McCain’s staffers immediately contacted Coburn to express concern and a desire to be named as an original co-sponsor of the update. They then called Obama’s office.
Obama staffers were happy to comply with McCain’s request to sign on, an Obama adviser said, because they knew support from the two presumptive nominees could propel the legislation to passage in the final months of a packed legislative schedule.
Obama made the first move. He's such a charmer:
Gerry Bass, the executive director of OMBWatch, one of the 19 watchdog groups backing the measure, said it’s clear that Obama took the lead on the transparency bill this year but McCain should get credit for signing onto it.“It’s a tribute to both of them,” he said. “Obama walks the words he says on the campaign trail by doing things differently. He didn’t have to have on McCain as a co-sponsor. The same can be said about McCain. McCain deserves credit, even though he may not have been involved in the crafting of the bill, he deserves credit for jumping on board.”
“It’s a tribute to both of them,” he said. “Obama walks the words he says on the campaign trail by doing things differently. He didn’t have to have on McCain as a co-sponsor. The same can be said about McCain. McCain deserves credit, even though he may not have been involved in the crafting of the bill, he deserves credit for jumping on board.”
From Huffington Post :
Obama did the right thing by praising Clinton following the Oregon and Kentucky vote, and working to reweave the fabric of Democratic unity. And I'm delighted that Clinton said, "No matter what happens, I will work as hard as I can to elect a Democratic president this fall." But then she insisted once again, that "we are winning the popular vote." This lie undermined every word she said about coming together.The superdelegates understand the real math, or they ought to. But given the "bitterness" of so many Clinton supporters toward reality that the woman they thought would be America's first female president will not be, the more they hear a story that suggests Obama's win is illegitimate, the more likely they are to bolt. If Clinton's voters embrace that story that "a man took it away from a woman," denied her a victory she rightly deserved, they're at risk of staying home come November, or holding back from the volunteering and the get out the vote efforts necessary for the Democrats to prevail.
Obama did the right thing by praising Clinton following the Oregon and Kentucky vote, and working to reweave the fabric of Democratic unity. And I'm delighted that Clinton said, "No matter what happens, I will work as hard as I can to elect a Democratic president this fall." But then she insisted once again, that "we are winning the popular vote." This lie undermined every word she said about coming together.
The superdelegates understand the real math, or they ought to. But given the "bitterness" of so many Clinton supporters toward reality that the woman they thought would be America's first female president will not be, the more they hear a story that suggests Obama's win is illegitimate, the more likely they are to bolt. If Clinton's voters embrace that story that "a man took it away from a woman," denied her a victory she rightly deserved, they're at risk of staying home come November, or holding back from the volunteering and the get out the vote efforts necessary for the Democrats to prevail.
Look at Clinton's math. She leads only if you give her 328,000 votes for the Soviet-style Michigan election, while giving Obama zero for not being on the ballot. And if you then ignore the caucuses of Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and my own state of Washington -- where a record quarter million people turned out to participate. Our votes don't count under Clinton's math. She disappears them down the memory hole of history in an argument that invents reality as much as Bush's claims of Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction or Clinton's earlier story about running the gauntlet of Bosnian sniper fire. If the media corrected this, it would be less of a problem, but they haven't, or at least not in the same stories where they repeat her claim. The AP story in my local Seattle newspaper reported Clinton's claim without question, saying only that it included contested Florida and Michigan votes and excluded the Iowa caucuses. The otherwise excellent New York Times story included not even the slightest corrections or caveats, although the Times has done other stories on the subject. Neither mentioned that polls actually have Obama doing marginally better in Michigan than Clinton, nor have they explored the impact of roughly 60,000 Democratic voters who crossed over in Michigan to vote Republican, many of whom were participating in a mirror image of Rush Limbaugh's "operation chaos" campaign.
Hillary and her donors are threatening to bring down the DCCC if Nancy Pelosi doesn’t hand her the nomination. Let’s show Hillary and her donors that they aren’t the only ones who have influence in this party. Give to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). The DCCC is the organization in charge of electing and re-electing Democrats to the House. Help congressional Democrats keep the House of Representatives, give to the DCCC and send Hillary a message that our party is bigger, and more important, than her.
Visit Act Blue and spread the word and the love!
It is no doubt that the past few weeks have been quite a ride for the Obama campaign. But throughout all of it what I have really come to admire about Senator Obama is his steadfastness to fairness, honesty, and to the message of hope. He could have easily mirrored Hillary in her kitchen sink strategy and I am sure that at times-you like me wished that maybe he did.
But Senator Obama did not stoop as low as Hillary by saying whatever he thought should be said to gain the nomination-even if it were false. Instead what he did is reaffirm his commitment to the major tenet of his campaign which is that America's voters are tired of taking a back seat to lobbyists and want someone with the courage to stand up to Washington. And little by little as Obama has publicly focused on the larger message of getting this country back on track we have seen a nation awaken from its slumber. I think that it could have been easy for Obama to do as we have seen every other politician do which is either backpeddle or pretend that nothing has happened- but Senator Obama did not do that. He took the far riskier path by taken something which was perceived to be a negative which was a 10 second snippet from his former pastor and turning it into one of the most positive events of his campaign trail through a landmark speech on the US Constitution and on racial reconciliation.
In doing this Senator, you have excercised bravery and good judgment-but most of all you have already begun to make this country an even better nation than it already is.
And Senator Obama, I have not wavered in my support for you. You will certainly have my vote in the upcoming general!
