Copied and Pasted from comments found on ABC's Political Punch blog to save for future use...
I understand that Obama needs to pick up the white women's vote. Perhaps the following will help them see the light:
IF you are a woman, and you are enjoying your right to vote, no matter how you vote, thank a Democrat. Specifically, President Woodrow Wilson and the 65th Democrat-controlled Congress. The 19th amendment to the Constitution was ratified on Aug. 26, 1920.
IF you are a woman, and you are enjoying equal, or at least comparable pay as that of a man (admittedly there is more work to be done in this area), thank a Democrat. Specifically, President John F. Kennedy and the 88th Democrat-controlled Congress. The Equal Pay Act was passed in 1963 and it prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of gender by compensating workers differently for jobs that require equal skill, effort and responsibility.
IF you are a woman, a person of color, or have a national origin other than the United States and got into a school or got a job anyway, thank a Democrat. Specifically, President Lyndon Johnson and the 88th Democrat-controlled Congress. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 and it was a landmark piece of legislation that outlawed racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment. Conceived to help African-Americans, the bill was amended prior to passage to protect women, and explicitly included white people for the first time. It also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
IF you are someone who has ever benefited from the Freedom of Information Act, either personally or through what media outlets and others have been able to gather on behalf of the public, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the 89th Democrat-controlled Congress and President Lyndon Johnson who signed it into law on July 4, 1966.
IF you are a woman and you value your right to choose, whatever that choice is, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the Democrat-controlled Supreme Court whose majority opinion on Roe vs. Wade was written by Justice Harry Blackman on January 22, 1973. He was a Republican conservative who voted with the majority Democrats and then later “drifted left”. Keep in mind, being pro-choice doesn’t mean you are pro-abortion. It means you simply appreciate having a choice.
IF you are now, ever have been, (since 1978) or intend to be a pregnant woman who wants to seek employment or continue working in your current job, for your right to do so, thank a Democrat. Specifically, President Jimmy Carter and the 95th Democrat-controlled Congress. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) was passed in 1978 and it prohibits discrimination against pregnant women in all areas of employment, including hiring, firing, seniority rights, job security, and receipt of fringe benefits. The most controversial features of the bill have been those requiring employers who offer health insurance and temporary disability plans to give coverage to women for pregnancy, childbirth, and related conditions.
IF you are a woman and you are now, or ever have been, (since 1994) a victim of violence and didn’t know where to turn, thank a Democrat. Specifically, Senator Joe Biden, President Bill Clinton, and the 103rd Democrat-controlled Congress. The Violence Against Women Act was introduced in Congress in January 1991 by Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, the same Joe Biden who is currently running for VP. The bill was made part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and was signed into law on September 13, 1994, by President Clinton. The act authorized $1.6 billion to be spent over 6 years on the creation of rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters and authorized additional local police, prosecutors, victim advocates, and a domestic violence hotline. Funds were also made available to provide special training for judges who hear domestic violence cases. Provisions of the act expanded rape shield laws, created offenses for interstate spousal abuse, and allowed victims of gender-based crimes to sue those responsible in Federal court.
IF you are a parent who has benefited from the Child Support Recovery Act of 1992, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the 102nd Democrat-controlled Congress and President Bill Clinton. The bill makes the willful failure to pay a past due support obligation with respect to a child residing in another state a federal offense. The intent of the statute was to prevent non-custodial parents from fleeing across state lines to avoid paying their child support obligations and to facilitate recovery of unpaid child support.
IF you are someone who had to take up to 12 weeks off from work to tend to a family medical emergency, and you were given your same job (or one of comparable pay and responsibility) when you returned, and had your same health benefits while you were gone, thank a Democrat. Specifically President Bill Clinton and the 103rd Democrat-controlled Congress. The Family & Medical Leave Bill was passed in Feb. of 1993. It assures that upon return from a family medical leave absence, an employee must be returned to the same position, or to an equivalent position with equivalent benefits, pay, status, and other terms and conditions of employment. Also, an employee who takes family leave is entitled to maintain health benefits coverage.
On the subject of the environment and wildlife:
IF you are someone who appreciates the effect of the Marine Protection and Sanctuaries Act (also known as the Ocean Dumping Act) of 1972, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the 92nd Democrat-controlled Congress. That, and the Clean Water Act were passed and together they set a global standard for managing environmental restoration and protection, for maintaining the environment within acceptable standards, for prohibiting the disposal of waste materials into the ocean, and for regulating the discharge of wastes through pipelines into the ocean.
IF you are someone who recognizes the significance of the very first Clean Air Act, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the 91st Democrat-controlled Congress, which enacted the law in 1970.
IF you are someone who was happy with the passage of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, thank a Democrat. Specifically, the 93rd Democrat-controlled Congress. It was enacted to replace/enhance the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969, also passed by a Democratically-controlled Congress (the 91st).
I imagine you have guessed by now where I’m going with this. Can you see the pattern? All I ask is that you think carefully before voting this November. When it comes down to individual rights of citizens, especially women, the environment, and a host of other issues, the Democrats have clearly done the right thing over many decades. With your vote in November, they can continue to do so.
While there are many more issues that need to be addressed in order to assure individual rights, especially if you are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, I can pretty much guarantee that those issues will NOT be advanced in a 3rd term Republican administration.
On Election day…
Vote responsibly, Drink moderately, then Pray like hell!!!!
Patty S. San Diego
820-427-152: Remember these numbers (From http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/09/820-427-152-remember-these-numbers/)
What the heck are these numbers? If you’ve not yet seen them, get to know them well. They are the numbers of laws and bills Barack Obama has sponsored or authored in his twelve years as a legislator - eight in the Illinois Senate, and now in his fourth in the U.S. Senate.
In eight years in Illinois, State Senator Obama sponsored 820 bills that became law. The Illinois Times, in a cover story, labeled Obama as “Head Of The Class” for his legislative abundance.
And in just four years as a U.S. Senator, Obama has sponsored 427 bills, and authored 152 bills. For a detailed list, follow the link.
So when you hear or read someone, such as former mayor of Wasilla, Alaska Sarah Palin stating that Obama has not authored “a single major law or even a reform”, send them this list:
Co-sponsored with Richard Lugar (R-IN) legislation funding the destruction or securing of “loose” nuclear weapons in other countries. This was a major piece of nonproliferation legislation.Co-sponsored, again with Lugar, the first federal bill dedicated to pandemic flu preparedness, including vaccine research and antiviral stockpiling, in addition to state and local planning and preparedness measures.Sponsored a bill regulating genetic testing, which directed the government to develop special proficiency tests for labs that do genetics work.Co-sponsored, with Hillary Clinton(!), legislation to help hospitals to develop programs for disclosure of medical errors They even co-wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine on the subject.Introduced his “health care for hybrids” bill, an energy security bill, various bills on relief for Hurricane Katrina (including aid for kids and a ban on no-bid contracts by FEMA)Introduced legislation, which passed, to create a public database of all federal spending and contractsIntroduced legislation trying to raise CAFE standards, i.e. mileage standards for US-produced vehiclesIntroduced veteran’s health care legislationIntroduced legislation making certain kinds of voter intimidation illegalIntroduced a lobbying reform billIntroduced legislation to revamps ethics oversight, replacing the present Congressional ethics committee with a bipartisan commission of retired judges and members of Congress, and allowing any citizen to report ethics violations.Introduced legislation to suspend and repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industryIntroduced a joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the AUMF Against Iraq, or any other resolution previously adoptedIntroduced a bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income veteransIntroduced a bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuel sold in the USIntroduced a bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to establish a Climate Change Education ProgramIntroduced a bill to required accountability for contractors and contract personnel (e.g. Blackwater) under federal contractsIntroduced a bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, and the elimination of extreme global poverty.
Co-sponsored with Richard Lugar (R-IN) legislation funding the destruction or securing of “loose” nuclear weapons in other countries. This was a major piece of nonproliferation legislation.
Co-sponsored, again with Lugar, the first federal bill dedicated to pandemic flu preparedness, including vaccine research and antiviral stockpiling, in addition to state and local planning and preparedness measures.
Sponsored a bill regulating genetic testing, which directed the government to develop special proficiency tests for labs that do genetics work.Co-sponsored, with Hillary Clinton(!), legislation to help hospitals to develop programs for disclosure of medical errors They even co-wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine on the subject.
Introduced his “health care for hybrids” bill, an energy security bill, various bills on relief for Hurricane Katrina (including aid for kids and a ban on no-bid contracts by FEMA)
Introduced legislation, which passed, to create a public database of all federal spending and contracts
Introduced legislation trying to raise CAFE standards, i.e. mileage standards for US-produced vehicles
Introduced veteran’s health care legislation
Introduced legislation making certain kinds of voter intimidation illegal
Introduced a lobbying reform bill
Introduced legislation to revamps ethics oversight, replacing the present Congressional ethics committee with a bipartisan commission of retired judges and members of Congress, and allowing any citizen to report ethics violations.
Introduced legislation to suspend and repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industry
Introduced a joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the AUMF Against Iraq, or any other resolution previously adopted
Introduced a bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income veterans
Introduced a bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuel sold in the US
Introduced a bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to establish a Climate Change Education Program
Introduced a bill to required accountability for contractors and contract personnel (e.g. Blackwater) under federal contracts
Introduced a bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, and the elimination of extreme global poverty.
Yes, a lot of these are wonky, and perhaps unexciting to the average voter, but look at them closely: they are all meaningful. And keep in mind that Senator Obama has only been in Washington for three and a half years.
Here’s another way of looking at Senator Obama’s record: Of the 15 bills he sponsored or co-sponsored in 2005-7 that became law,
*2 addressed foreign policy (promote relief, security, and democracy in the Congo; and develop democratic institutions in areas under Palestinian control)*3 addressed public health (improve mine safety; increased breast cancer research funding; reduce preterm delivery and complications, reduce infant mortality)*2 addressed openness and accountability in government (strengthening the Freedom Of Information Act; full disclosure of all entities receiving federal funds)*2 addressed national security (extend terrorist risk insurance; amend the Patriot Act)*1 addressed the needs of the Armed Forces (wave passport fees to visit graves, attend memorials/funerals of veterans abroad)
And of the hundreds of bills Senator Obama introduced during the 109th and 110th Congress:
*25 addressed energy efficiency and climate change*21 addressed health care*20 addressed public health*14 addressed consumer protection/labor*13 addressed the needs of veterans and of active duty personnel and their families*12 addressed congressional ethics and accountability*10 addressed foreign policy*9 addressed voting/election rights*7 addressed education*6 addressed relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina*5 addressed the environment*4 addressed discrimination*4 addressed homeland security
Truth is, Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored a number of pieces of really good legislation, many on topics not wildly sexy, but meaningful nonetheless. His bills tend to be good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems. They tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely crafting solutions everyone can get behind.
His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care enough about a particular issue to try and get policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle, but rather on getting things done.
So while Obama has not proposed his Cosmic Plan for World Peace, he has proposed a lot of good legislation on important though under-covered topics. He takes a patient, craftsman-like attitude towards legislation, caring just as much about the getting the parts right that no one will notice unless they go wrong as about the flashy parts.
Isn’t it time all of Washington worked in this manner?
Since this topic seems to come up on a fairly routine basis, this is a cut and paste to make finding the information a little bit easier.
If you do the WhoIs search for ObamaBayh.com you'll find that it's a random site buy through GoDaddy, something that a legitimate campaign site would never do. The same site buys were put in place for a variety of other combinations but most were never developed to any extent. Whether Bayh ends up being the VP or not, this site is completely unrelated to the Obama campaign. Here's the WhoIs data, pay close attention to the created on date:Registrant:Domains by Proxy, Inc.DomainsByProxy.com15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353Scottsdale, Arizona 85260United StatesRegistered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc.Domain Name: OBAMABAYH.COMCreated on: 06-Feb-05Expires on: 06-Feb-09Last Updated on: 18-Feb-08Administrative Contact:Private, Registration OBAMABAYH.COM@domainsbyproxy.c omDomains by Proxy, Inc.DomainsByProxy.com15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353Scottsdale, Arizona 85260United States(480) 624-2599Technical Contact:Private, Registration OBAMABAYH.COM@domainsbyproxy.c omDomains by Proxy, Inc.DomainsByProxy.com15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353Scottsdale, Arizona 85260United States(480) 624-2599Domain servers in listed order:NS1.COFFEYDESIGN.COMNS2.COFFEYDESIGN.COM
Newsweek Polls: A Tale of Two Countries by DHinMI
Interesting analysis of the variation between the numbers of the two most recent Newsweek polls from http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/12/124829/538/624/550584:
In one country, which Newsweek polled in June, the electorate is split R26/D38/I36. In the other country, which Newsweek polled a few weeks later, that country's electorate is split R32/D32/I36.In one country, polled in June, 84% of the electorate is white. In the other country, polled a few weeks later, 88% of the electorate is white.In one country, polled in June, 19% of the registered voters are under 40, 39% are between 40 and 59, and 42% are 60 or older. In the other country, polled a few weeks later, only 17% of the registered voters are under 40, 38% are between 40 and 59, and 45% are 60 or older.In the younger, slightly more racially diverse and much more Democratic country, Barack Obama was supposedly leading by 15 points. In the country that is somewhat older, is somewhat whiter, and is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, Barack Obama is supposedly leading McCain by only 3 points.According to Newsweek, comparing these results shows "what a difference a few weeks can make." A more valid conclusion is that it shows what a difference polling two very different countries can make. Looks like their most recent poll showing Obama up by 3 has some oddities to it, the demographics they sampled don't match those of the country by a longshot.
Both times they appear to have significantly oversampled the population with respects to the older members of our country. In the 2007 estimates, the population of those over 62 years of age was 20.2% of the voting age population, they sampled 42-45% in their two polls, more than twice the actual number. That leaves 79.8% of potential voters between 18-61 years old. They also sampled 17-19% for those between 18-40 years old and the current estimate is that 20-34 year olds make up about 27% of the population by themselves. They sampled white and hispanic at 84-88%, they comprise only 79% of the population. African American population wasn't broken out, but the population estimate is about 13.5% and those of Hispanic heritage (also not broken out in their polls) are about 15.1%. Seems slightly flawed to me even if they're trying to guess "likely voters" and nobody can guess what a likely voter will look like this year.
Original Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/the-week-that-should-have_b_111983.html
Posted July 10, 2008 | 04:39 PM (EST)
During this past week: McCain called the most important entitlement program in the U.S. a disgrace, his top economic adviser called the American people whiners, McCain released an economic plan that no one thought was serious, he flip flopped on Iraq, joked about the deaths of Iranian citizens, and denied making comments that he clearly made -- TWICE. All this and it is not even Friday! Yet watching and reading the mainstream press you would think McCain was having a pretty decent political week, I mean at least Jesse Jackson didn't say anything about him.
But let's unpack McCain's week in a little more detail.
2. McCain's top economic policy adviser calls Americans a bunch of "whiners" for being worried about the slumping economy. Words cannot fully explain how devastating this statement should be from Phil Gramm. You would think it would be enough to sink McCain's campaign. Of course McCain only thinks that the economic problems are psychological.
3. Iraqi leaders call for a timetable for U.S. withdrawal, McCain gets caught in a bizarre denial and flip flop. The Iraqis now want us to begin planning our withdrawal - McCain however wants to stay foooorrreeevvveerrrr. So what does McCain say - First, he refuses to accept Maliki's statement as being true. Then he concedes that it was an accurate statement, but was probably just a political ploy to curry favor with his own people and WOULD NOT influence his determination to keep US troops in Iraq indefinitely. Yet, McCain in 2004 at the Council on Foreign Relations said that if the Iraqis asked us to leave, we would have to go. No matter what. But that was apparently a younger and less experienced John McCain.
But let's just look at his comment that Maliki's statement is "just politics." If that is true, then it must also be true that the American military presence in Iraq is so unpopular with Iraqis that the government is forced to push for a timetable in order to survive at the ballot box. That's a reason to stay for 100 years.
4. McCain's economic plan to cut the deficit has no details and is simply not believable. There are so many things here. McCain pledges he would eliminate the deficit by the end of his first term (the campaign latter flip flop flipped about whether it was four years or eight years), but does not provide any details about how he would do it. Economists on both sides of the political aisle said that this was simply not believable, especially given McCain's other proposals to a) cut individual and corporate taxes even further, b) extend the Bush tax cuts and c) massively increase defense spending on manpower (200,000 more troops) and d) maintain a long-term sizable military presence in Iraq. 5. McCain's deficit plan includes bringing the troops home represents a major Iraq flip-flop. Speaking of the long-term military presence - a story that has gotten absolutely no attention is that McCain now believes the war will be over soon. The economic forecasts made by his crack team of economists predict that there will be significant savings during McCain's first term because we will have achieved "victory" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The savings from victory (ie the savings from not having our troops there) will then be used to pay down the deficit. The only way this could have any impact on the deficit in McCain's first time is if troop withdrawals start very soon. So McCain believes victory is in our grasps and we can begin withdraw troops from Iraq pretty much right away -- doesn't sound that different from Obama's plan does it. Someone should at least ask McCain HOW HE DEFINES VICTORY - and why he thinks we will achieve it in the next couple of years.
6. McCain campaign misled about economists support. In the major press release the McCain campaign issued to tout its Jobs for America economic plan that would balance the budget in 4 years, it included the signatures of more than 300 economists who the campaign claimed to support the plan. Only problem is that the economists were actually asked to sign up to SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. Um, hello?
7. McCain makes a joke about killing Iranians. Haha... that's just McCain being McCain. I am sure that is exactly how it is being reported in Tehran. This guy is running for President not to become a talk radio pundit. Yet according to the AP this was just a humanizing moment between candidate and spouse - I am not sure when joking about the deaths of civilians became humanizing.
8. McCain denies, flatly, that he ever said that he is not an expert in economics. Are you kidding?
9). McCain distorts his record on veterans benefits in response to a question from Vietnam Veteran, who then proceeds to call McCain out on it.
10.) McCain demonstrates he knows nothing about Afghanistan and Pakistan. McCain said "I think if there is some good news, I think that there is a glimmer of improving relationship between Karzai and the Pakistanis." Pat Barry notes how crazy this comment is..."Just what "glimmer" is McCain talking about?? Maybe he's referring to President Karzai's remarks last month, which threatened military action in Pakistan if cross-border attacks persisted? Or maybe McCain is talking about Afghanistan's allegations that Pakistan's ISI was involved in a recent assassination attempt on Karzai? Maybe in McCain's world you could call that a silver-lining, but in reality-land I'd call it something else."
Any one of these incidents and comments would dominate the news cycle if they came from the Obama campaign. Yet McCain barely gets a mention. The press like to see themselves as political referees - neutral observers that call them like they see em'. But they want this to be a horse race and so all the calls right now are going one way. How else can you explain the furor last week over the Obama "refine" comment - which represented zero change in Obama's position on Iraq - and the "swift boat" mania over Wesley Clark's uncontroversial comments (psss... by the way McCain exploits his POW experience in just about every ad - yet he says he doesn't like to talk about it).
From: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/gGxsZF/commentary#comments
I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.
This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility
The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.
The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- once I’m sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.
Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.
I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.
Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.
So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.
When someone doesn't end their html tags correctly in the HQ blogs, the entire blog/thread from there on-down is bold or italic (every so often, underlined). This is usually because the person ended their tag at the end of a link.
You'll know if this is where they messed up if you click in the link. If the html tag shows up at the end of the link, yep, that's what they did.
And thanks to this BarackStar-- http://my.barackobama.com/p... --we now know how to FIX the threads if/when this happens.
Here's what you do:
Reply to the offending post with this EXACT text:
www.barackobama.com<b>
reset bold</b>
Replace the b in the two tags with a u or an I depending on whether the person used bold, underline, or italics.
-----------
This only works, though, when the person closed their tag at the end of a url. But this is usually the case!
Enjoy!!
Copy/Paste for easy reference (From Freedom in San Pedro, CA)
This is one of my personal favorites when defending my Party loyalty and staunch support of Sen. Obama."A Day in the Life of Joe Republican"Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark) He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.
Just putting this here for easy cut-and-paste for the "disappointed" throngs that continue to visit us.
There was a fairly long discussion (among the many discussions of it on the 19th) in a previous thread. He never committed that he would enter the public funding, the original questionnaire had a yes/no answer to which he checked yes. But, he wrote in a stipulation that the yes answer was based on a deal being reached with the presumptive republican nominee to control the activities and messages of the 527's. Notice specifically the words "I will pursue an agreement", that means that the yes was not unconditional. Obama has done that on the Democratic side, McCain is either too weak, lacks the ethics, or just flat-out encourages the republican 527's.
<i>"In a November 2007 questionnaire, Obama answered "yes" when asked: "If you are nominated for president in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?" He added: "I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." - Excerpt from Associated Press</i>
Here's a couple of quotes that emphasize McCain's dis-interest in eliminating the 527 smears and Obama's willingness to do just the opposite. Many more can be found with a simple google search.
<i>Progressive Media USA, the group organized to be the main soft-money advertising vehicle for Democrats in the fall, will dramatically scale back its efforts in deference to the wishes of the party's presumptive nominee. From http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjE5ZmZiOTlhNGYwYzJkNzllNTg0OWYzNGI5YjA2MDc=
In addition to funding his general election campaign through private money sources, the McCain campaign also expects to benefit from the expenditures of 527 groups. Despite condemning 527 ads in 2004, McCain has made clear that he expects that 527s will attack Senator Obama and that he is not willing to referee them. “’I Can’t Be a Referee’: Drops 2004 crusade against ‘527’ attack ads.” Boston Herald (June 12, 2008). http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view/2008_06_12_John_McCain_on_impending_war_of_words/srvc=home&position=0</i>
I believe that I've seen you post this comment about being disappointed several times now over the last day. If you believe the media without researching the entire story, you're going to be disappointed many times this election season. Most of the media would rather create a story than report on facts since the true information typically won't sell as many stories. Hopefully this answers your concerns, if not post again and we'll see what else we can do to alleviate them.
Everyone in the MSM seems to be focusing on the percentage difference between Clinton and Obama in the West Virginia primary. While the margin is significant, the exit polls showed that 81% of the people that voted for Clinton (67% of the vote totals) cited race as a factor in their choice in the voting booth. If I were in the Clinton camp, I wouldn't brag too much about winning the racist vote, it's not very becoming of a candidate to say that you were endorsed by people making decisions based at least partly on skin color. Anyway, on to the main point of this blog, she won WV with 67% of the vote, this is impressive but pales compared to many other states. Here are the states that a candidate gathered more than 60% of the total vote.
BARACK OBAMA: 16 STATES + DC + VI * Virgin Islands (89.9%) * Idaho (79%) * Hawaii (76%) * Alaska (75%) * District of Columbia (75%) * Kansas (74%) * Washington (68%) * Nebraska (68%) * Minnesota (67%) * Colorado (67%) * Georgia (67%) * Illinois (65%) * Virginia (64%) * Maryland (62%) * North Dakota (61%) * Wyoming (61%) * Mississippi (61%) * Vermont (61%)HILLARY CLINTON:3 States * Arkansas (70%) * West Virginia (67%) * Kentucky (65%)
Seems like she might not want to brag too much about margins of victory. Heck, she only won her home state New York (although she always claims whatever state she's campaigning in to be her home state somehow) by about 17% while Obama won Illinois by 32%. Even in defeat in WV, Obama still received more total votes than John McCain (who running unopposed only managed to get 76% of the vote).
This is a cut and paste from Obamacrat:
Drunken Noodles (Serves 4-6): Make sure that all ingredients are prepped and the prepared noodles and the pesto mix are within easy reach once you start heating the wok, the actual cooking time goes by very quickly. It's been over a year since I made this one but it's always been a hit for big groups. Remember, grow your own vegetables and herbs if you can, it's a lot cheaper and they taste better.
Start by cooking spaghetti (or linguine) noodles until they are slightly firm, usually about 9-10 minutes in boiling, salted water. Drain the noodles and toss with 1/2 cup of chicken stock, then set aside.
To make the chili-pesto mix, add 24 cloves of garlic (yes, it's a lot), 1 cup of chopped Italian basil, and chili peppers to taste, about 8 or so if serrano are used (serrano or jalapeno work fine for this dish) to either a mortar and pestle or a food processor and crush/mince. Set this aside in a mixing bowl.
Heat a wok over high until it's very hot and add 3 tablespoons of peanut oil. Once the oil starts smoking, swirl the wok to evenly coat the sides. Add one pound of ground beef and stir fry for about 45 seconds, or until the meat turns brown. Add the chili-pesto mix and cook for about 45 seconds, then add the pasta/chicken stock mix and cook for another 45 seconds. Add about 1 cup of sliced tomatoes (plum work well), one small onion thinly sliced, and a few scallions cut bite-sized. Cook for about a minute and then add 3 tablespoons of oyster sauce and 3 tablespoons of fish sauce. Cook for another 30 seconds before adding 3 tablespoons of palm (or white) sugar, one 8 ounce can of tomato sauce, and about a tablespoon of ground white pepper. Stir-fry until the sugar is dissolved (about 1-2 minutes), transfer to serving dishes and garnish with chopped cilantro.
Tom Kha Gai: (Serves 6)
Galanga can sometimes be a little difficult to find unless you have a decent Asian market nearby, but regular ginger can be used as a substitute. Kaffir lime leaves also can be a challenge to find, but are available mail order (www.importfood.com) or lime zest can be used if necessary. The lemongrass, kaffir lime leaves, and galanga are for taste only and should not be eaten.
Put three cups of chicken stock, about 1/3 pound of galanga in large slices, and a stalk of lemongrass in large slices in a stock pot. Tear 10 kaffir lime leaves in half (or use zest from 1 small lime) and add to pot. Bring to a boil over medium heat and allow to continue boiling for about a minute. Add 28 ounces of canned coconut milk and let the soup return to a boil. Add one pound of chicken cut into bite-sized pieces and return to a boil again. Add 2 tablespoons of chili-tamarind paste (I buy it pre-made and it can be ordered from the same link as above), 1/4 cup of lemon juice, 2 tablespoons of palm sugar, 2 tablespoons of fish sauce and stir until all the ingredients are blended. Add 1/4 pound of sliced mushrooms if desired and allow to simmer for about 2 minutes. Add chili-peppers to taste (I use Thai birds-eye chilis but they are EXTREMELY hot) that have been stemmed and crushed and transfer to serving bowls.
Thai Basil with Pasta (Serves 2 - 4):
Thai basil plants can usually be purchased from either Home Depot or Lowes and the leaves are needed for this recipe to turn out properly. The plants usually do very well either in a windowsill or planted in a garden.
Begin by boiling water and adding about 1/2 pound of either fettucine or linguine, cooking until the pasta is al dente. Drain the pasta and set aside in serving bowls. Thinly slice 1/2 pound of beef (either round steak or flank steak) thinly against the grain and add to a very hot wok. After cooking the beef for approximately two minutes, add in two tablespoons of finely minced garlic and chili peppers to taste (I use Thai birds-eye chilis, but they are EXTREMELY hot). Cook this for 15-20 seconds and add one quart of beef stock, two tablespoons of fish sauce, two tablespoons of oyster sauce, one tablespoon of lime juice, and one teaspoon of palm sugar (or white sugar). Bring this back to a boil and reduce heat to medium. Add in two cups of cut vegetables, I usually use broccoli, green and red bell peppers, bean sprouts, onions, and/or green beans. Finally, add in about 25-30 leaves of Thai basil and allow to cook for approximately two minutes. Pour the soup mix over the noodles and allow to set for a few minutes prior to eating.
Serves two to four people. This one's a little more expensive with shrimp, but chicken can be substituted to bring the cost down. Serve with a bowl of Jasmine rice on the side.
Peel and de-vein about 1/4 to 1/3 pound of shrimp. Use the heads and shells of the shrimp to make a stock by quickly rinsing them and putting them in a pot of one quart of water with a large pinch of salt. Bring the water to a boil and then reduce the heat to simmer for no longer then 15-20 minutes. Pour the stock through a filter (even paper towels lining a colander will work in a pinch) and return the stock to the pan. Bring the stock back to a boil and add one tablespoon of fish sauce, and two cut-up stalks of lemongrass. Remember to bruise the lemongrass and leave it in 2-3 inch sections before adding, this can be done in a mortar and pestle or with the back of a knife. Add the shrimp into the pan and cook until they have just begun to change color. In a separate serving bowl, combine 3 tablespoons of lime juice, 1 tablespoon of fish sauce, 3 kaffir lime leaves (substitute in 1 tablespoon of lime zest if unavailable), chili peppers to taste (I use Thai birds-eye chilis but they are EXTREMELY hot), and 1/4 cup of coriander leaves. Pour the soup into the serving bowl to finish preparation. Do not eat the lemongrass or the kaffir lime leaves, they are there for flavoring only and don't taste good.
