Moonwhile

WHERE ARE THE LAWYERS OVERSEEING ALL THE VOTE FLIPPING MACHINES? WE NEED THEM NOW!

Moonwhile — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 13:59:55 EDT

There are reports of machine vote flipping all over the country. Where is the promised army of Obama and DNC lawyers?

More below:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7608000

VOTES ARE BEING STOLEN & SUPPRESSED--TAKE CARE WITH REGISTRATIONS

Moonwhile — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:14:42 EDT

BY RFK, Jr.
http://airamerica.com/ringoffire/blog/2008/sep/22/rfk-j...

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: There are about 30 scams the Republicans are deliberately using, particularly in the swing states to get Democratic voters off the rolls. These scams originate in the so-called Help America Vote Act, which was passed after the Florida debacle in the year 2000. It was originally suggested by Democrats and Republicans, but it was passed by a Republican Congress with a Republican senate and a Republican president. And instead of reforming what happened in Florida it basically institutionalized all the problems that happened in Florida. And institutionalized a series of impediments that make it very difficult for Democrats to register, for Democrats to vote and then for Democrats to have their votes counted.

One of these requirements under HAVA is called 'the perfect match,' and what that does is little known but it is devastating. A quarter of the voters in Colorado have just been removed from the rolls because of this--[and] just this one scam. And what it does is, they use a computer system to compare your registration application to all [your] other government records in the state. So they'll look at your Social Security records, your Motor Vehicle records, and any time you've had any interaction with the government, and if there is any information on your voter registration that is different than the information on another government record that they find, they remove you from the voting rolls.

For example, if I registered as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and yet my motor vehicle license said Robert Frances Kennedy Jr., I'd be removed from the rolls. If your initial is different, if you leave an initial out, if you leave a "Jr." out, if you leave a hyphen out in your name. And what they've done is a study in New York that said 80% of the errors are errors by state clerks taking down this information. And particularly [in] immigrant communities, [where] people tend to vote Democratic, people have names�spell Muhammad with an "o" instead of a "u"

In New Jersey, which is a swing state, 300,000 voters in New Jersey were just sent letters saying that they are now ineligible to vote. New Jersey is nice enough to actually notify them--most states will not even notify them. And New Jersey intends to send out 870,000 letters so that is three quarters of a million people off the voting rolls in a state that could decide this vote by 50,000 votes. And these are Democrats that are being pushed off the rolls.

Let me tell you about one of other scams people should know about. If you're a newly registered voter--and of course the Democrats have done these gigantic registration drives--12 million people on registration--if you're a new voter, you MUST include your license or some other state I.D. when you come to vote. What that means is that if you're a college kid--and college kids now, they're sending in absentee ballots, they're not going to the voting place, they do everything online or they do everything remotely. They don't dream of going to the precinct house voting on election day and waiting in a long line. So if they send in the absentee ballot, and they don't include a color copy of their [driver's] license, their vote is going to be thrown into a trash can. And none of these people know this, because you had to have to read the law in order to know it. There is no notification [of this requirement] when you fill out your registration form, so all of those 12 million people that the Democrats have registered--those ballots are going to be just thrown out.

Papantonio: I'm involved with this kind of thing every day--I didn't know that until you just told me. The media is not talking about it. How in the hell is somebody gonna find this out? It's just incredible.

RFK, Jr.: Hopefully--Obama is getting $66 million a month--hopefully somebody in the Democratic organization is going to pay some attention to this before Election Day.

more at:http://airamerica.com/ringoffire/blog/2008/sep/22/rfk-j...

MICHAEL MOORE'S NEW FILM, "SLACKER UPRISING," FREE ON WEB

Moonwhile — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:34:44 EDT

Michael Moore has decided to skip commercial release of his new film, “Slacker Uprising,” and make it available on the web for free downloads and streaming.

http://www.sefermpost.com/sefermpost/2008/09/michael-moore-p.html

One of the download sites:

http://slackeruprising.com/

Let’s download it, hold pizza parties and potlucks, then get more volunteers on the phones and canvassing. 11 states have already begun early voting. The time to act is now.

TAX FACTS FOR CONTACT WORK

Moonwhile — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 12:13:04 EDT

Today in America the wealthiest 1% owns more than everyone in the bottom 95% combined. Income inequality is at its greatest level since the 1920s - right before the great depression. Though the US has continued to make big gains in productivity over the last decade, nearly all of the benefit of those gains has gone to the wealthy, not the workers. American CEOs earned 411 times as much as average workers in 2005, up from 107 times in 1990. In the economic expansion of 2002-2006, the top 1% captured nearly three quarters of income growth. http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-USto pincomes-2006prel.pdfThese are the proposed tax plans for the two candidates. McCain intends to further reduce the tax burden of the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle and lower income families. Obama’s plan increases taxes on the wealthy, especially that top 1%, to the benefit of working americans - a first step in reversing the rich-get-richer trend and toward re-building a real middle class. In fact, Obama has offered to actually raise his own taxes for the benefit of the country as a whole. Where are you in this table? ……………… MCCAIN …………. OBAMA
Income ……. Avg tax bill ……. Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M …. -$269,364 (-4.4%)… +$701,885 (+11.5%)
$603K and up…. -$45,361 (-3.4%)… +$115,974 (+8.7%)
$227K-$603K…… -$7,871 (-3.1%)…….. +$12 (+0.0%)
$161K-$227K…… -$4,380 (-3.0%)….. -$2,789 (-1.9%)
$112K-$161K…… -$2,614 (-2.5%)….. -$2,204 (-2.1%)
$66K-$112K …… -$1,009 (-1.4%)….. -$1,290 (-1.8%)
$38K-$66K …….. -$319 (-0.7%)….. -$1,042 (-2.4%)
$19K-$38K …….. -$113 (-0.5%)……. -$892 (-3.6%)
Under $19K ……… -$19 (-0.2%)……. -$567 (-5.5%)http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/eco nomy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/?postve rsion=2008061113Drawn from Reuters. National Voter Registration Week is September 15-19 Is the registration of every person in your household up to date? Check it. GOP is extremelyt skilled at voter suppression techniques and challenges to voters. How about your friends? Co workers and neighbors? If every Obama supporter were to be responsible for one new voter for Obama who actually voted, he would win by a mile.

TAX FACTS FOR CONTACT WORK

Moonwhile — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:55:32 EDT

Today in America the wealthiest 1% owns more than everyone in the bottom 95% combined.

Income inequality is at its greatest level since the 1920s - right before the great depression. Though the US has continued to make big gains in productivity over the last decade, nearly all of the benefit of those gains has gone to the wealthy, not the workers.

American CEOs earned 411 times as much as average workers in 2005, up from 107 times in 1990.

In the economic expansion of 2002-2006, the top 1% captured nearly three quarters of income growth.

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-USto pincomes-2006prel.pdf

These are the proposed tax plans for the two candidates.

You can see that McCain intends to further reduce the tax burden of the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle and lower income families.

Obama’s plan increases taxes on the wealthy, especially that top 1%, to the benefit of working americans - a first step in reversing the rich-get-richer trend and toward re-building a real middle class. In fact, Obama has offered to actually raise his own taxes for the benefit of the country as a whole. Where are you in this table?

……………… MCCAIN …………. OBAMA
Income ……. Avg tax bill ……. Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M …. -$269,364 (-4.4%)… +$701,885 (+11.5%)
$603K and up…. -$45,361 (-3.4%)… +$115,974 (+8.7%)
$227K-$603K…… -$7,871 (-3.1%)…….. +$12 (+0.0%)
$161K-$227K…… -$4,380 (-3.0%)….. -$2,789 (-1.9%)
$112K-$161K…… -$2,614 (-2.5%)….. -$2,204 (-2.1%)
$66K-$112K …… -$1,009 (-1.4%)….. -$1,290 (-1.8%)
$38K-$66K …….. -$319 (-0.7%)….. -$1,042 (-2.4%)
$19K-$38K …….. -$113 (-0.5%)……. -$892 (-3.6%)
Under $19K ……… -$19 (-0.2%)……. -$567 (-5.5%)

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/eco nomy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/?postve rsion=2008061113

NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION WEEK IS September 15-19

Is the voter registration of every person in your house up to date? Does someone need to call the Registrar and be sure? Are all your friends, co-workers and neighbors registered?

If every Obama supporter were to get one new voter registered and that voter cast his or her vote for Obama, he would win by a mile

NATIONAL VOTERS' REGISTRATION WEEK - SEPTEMBER 15-19

Moonwhile — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:27:11 EDT

Let's not forget that next week is National Voter Registration week, so those of us who can should get out there and sit in front of stores, banks, etc.

I have a voter’s registration supply box, copies of the state rules, advice from central, etc.

Let me know. I've been working on registration for years and would be happy to help anyone not familiar with the current procedures.

Barbara

FIGHTING THE SCUMBAGGERS.....

Moonwhile — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:55:17 EDT

Well, the 19th century had its carpetbaggers, and now, we have our looking-back-to-the-20th-century scumbaggers.

They are flipping all the internal switches of fear, hate, jingoism, and selfishness to defeat the concept of the American people as a whole. They want to cut the people up and cut the people down so they may rule over them---not for them.

Enough!

Get your lingual tools together. Read the works of George Lakoff, learn how to frame your arguments in a progressive way that will meet this insidious subconscious attack that the Rovian scumbaggers have used with such great success for decades.

It's not enough to be "above all that." We too must flip unconscious switchs---those of courage, sincerity, patriotism, hard work, community, and justice.

Get ready! Let's hold some practice sessions where each of us takes the part of the naysayer and the "Yes, we can" sayer, and prepare to meet the challenge on the phones, on the doorsteps, and in the streets of America.

Act now!......Win Now!

ACT NOW! .... ATTACK NOW! ....... WIN NOW!

Moonwhile — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:19:17 EDT

Huffington Post has an article that covers 10 things that need to be done to change the direction and really focus this campaign on winning:

1. Don't practice political creationism.

2. Stop playing checkers when the other side is playing chess.

3. Don't confuse positive and negative messages with ethical and unethical ones.

4. Attack the character of the attacker if his attack is suggests bad character.

5. Make it about "us" if they make it about "them."

6. Tell three stories about your opponent.

7. Flesh out the message of change with two or three signature issues.

8. Remember that you have the most moving orator since Bill Clinton, and get competent debate coaches.

9. Fly into the eye of the storm, not away from it.

10. Apply the same nuance to your own political decision-making as you do to policy.

This is a great run down of what is ailing our campaign and what we can do to go back to where we were at the end of Denver convention. This campaign is not just suffering from post Republican Convention bounce--- it's suffering from neglect.

See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/drew-westen/what-obama-needs-to-do-in_b_125051.html

A TAX CUT TOOL FOR PHONE BANKERS

Moonwhile — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:24:00 EDT

Here's handy little rough estimator to which you can refer your contacts on taxes. Fill in a couple of blanks, get the Obama rough cut......and, the McCain one.

http://www.alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/

Over half of America thinks Obama is going to raise their taxes, so we really need to work on this one.

FOR THOSE WORKING NEVADA - VOTER REGISTRATION

Moonwhile — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:21:32 EDT

NEVADA VOTER REGISTRATION REGULATIONS:

Who can register to vote?
Nevada law provides that you must be 18 years of age or over, a U.S. Citizen, and a resident of Nevada for 30 days preceding any election. If you will be 18 years old or will have met the residency requirement at the time of the election, you are also eligible to register to vote. Any person who has been declared by a court to be mentally incompetent is not eligible to register and vote. Felons who have not been restored to their civil rights are not eligible to register and vote; however, recent legislation has provided for automatic restoration of the right to vote for those who have been honorably discharged from prison, probation or parole, with certain exceptions related to the seriousness of the crime committed. For more information, see the restoration of voting rights page.

Where Can I Register to Vote?
Residents of Nevada can register to vote at any NV Department of Motor Vehicles office, at their County Clerk/Registrar of Voters' office, various social service agencies and on college campuses.

Can I register to vote online?
Nevada law does not provide for online voter registration. However, you may obtain a copy of the federal voter registration application online at: http://www.eac.gov/files/voter/nvra-update-09-12-06.pdf.

When would I need to update my registration?
You will need to submit another voter registration indicating your current information if you have changed your physical address, your name, or your party affiliation.

What are the deadlines for registering to vote if I want to vote in the 2008 elections?
Primary Election: July 12, 2008, if you register to vote by mail. July 22, 2008, if you register to vote in person.

General Election: October 4, 2008, if you register to vote by mail.

October 14, 2008, if you register to vote in person.

More information see the 2008 Election & Voter Registration Dates page.

For more information:

http://sos.state.nv.us/elections/voter/registration.asp

TIME TO MOVE FROM "BRANDING" TO "WINNING"

Moonwhile — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 19:16:05 EDT

I am not happy that there has been little response to the outright lying, stealing and abuse of Obama, his ideals and changes he proposes. From here on out, it's going to be rough. And I feel left behind with nothing from the campaign that is, in fact, a compressed version of Obama's message.

Obama's speaking is more aggressive, but it needs to be tighter, and so does all of ours. We need to state a problem in a few words and move on to what is going to be done about it under Obama in a few sentences. Many times the distance between the problem statement and the answer is long---long enough to disconnect one from the other. Let's all work on this, because the other team is running, and running fast with ideas like "we are the changers" and we are the "reformers".

Just refuting this is not enough. One must do that and immediately put a new concept and cure in its place.

I'm all fired up and ready to go, but I am not sure campaign central is.

Palin's Hype and Heresy

Moonwhile — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:57:06 EDT

So community organizers aren't responsible, or caring, or doing anything important?

What a terrible insult to the greatest community organizer of all time---Jesus Christ.

THE TRUE DANGER OF PALIN & HOW TO FIGHT IT

Moonwhile — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:15:11 EDT

THE PALIN CHOICE AND THE REALITY OF THE POLITICAL MIND

by George Lakoff

This election matters because of realities -- the realities of global warming, the economy, the Middle East, nuclear proliferation, civil liberties, species extinction, poverty here and around the world, and on and on. Such realities are what make this election so very crucial, and how to deal with them is the substance of the Democratic platform (PDF).

Election campaigns matter because who gets elected can change reality. But election campaigns are primarily about the realities of voters' minds, which depend on how the candidate s and the external realities are cognitively framed. They can be framed honestly or deceptively, effectively or clumsily. And they are always framed from the perspective of a worldview.

The Obama campaign has learned this. The Republicans have long known it, and the choice of Sarah Palin as their vice presidential candidate reflects their expert understanding of the political mind and political marketing. Democrats who simply belittle the Palin choice are courting disaster. It must be taken with the utmost seriousness.The

Democratic responses so far reflect external realities: she is inexperienced, knowing little or nothing about foreign policy or national issues; she is really an anti-feminist, wanting the government to enter women's lives to block abortion, but not wanting th e government to guarantee equal pay for equal work, or provide adequate child health coverage, or child care, or early childhood education; she shills for the oil and gas industry on drilling; she denies the scientific truths of global warming and evolution; she misuses her political authority; she opposes sex education and her daughter is pregnant; and, rather than being a maverick, she is on the whole a radical right-wing ideologue.

All true, so far as we can tell.

The Obama campaign has done this very well so far. The convention events and speeches were orchestrated both to cast light on external realities, traditional political themes, and to focus on values at once classically American and progressive: empathy, responsibility both for oneself and others, and aspiration to m ake things better both for oneself and the world. Obama did all this masterfully in his nomination speech, while replying to, and undercutting, the main Republican attacks.

But the Palin nomination changes the game. The initial response has been to try to keep the focus on external realities, the "issues," and differences on the issues. But the Palin nomination is not basically about external realities and what Democrats call "issues," but about the symbolic mechanisms of the political mind -- the worldviews, frames, metaphors, cultural narratives, and stereotypes.

The Republicans can't win on realities. Her job is to speak the language of conservatism, activate the conservative view of the world, and use the advantages that conservatives have in dominating political discourse.

Our national political dialogue is fundamentally metaphorical, with family values at the center of our discourse. There is a reason why Obama and Biden spoke so much about the family, the nurturant family, with caring fathers and the family values that Obama put front and center in his Father's day speech: empathy, responsibility and aspiration. Obama's reference in the nomination speech to "The American Family" was hardly accidental, nor were the references to the Obama and Biden families as living and fulfilling the American Dream. Real nurturance requires strength and toughness, which Obama displayed in body language and voice in his responses to McCain. The strength of the Obama campaign has been the seamless marriage of reality and symbolic thought.

The Republican strength has been mostly symbolic. The McCain campaign is well aware of how Reagan and W won -- running on ch aracter: values, communication, (apparent) authenticity, trust, and identity -- not issues and policies. That is how campaigns work, and symbolism is central.

Conservative family values are strict and apply via metaphorical thought to the nation: good vs. evil, authority, the use of force, toughness and discipline, individual (versus social) responsibility, and tough love. Hence, social programs are immoral because they violate discipline and individual responsibility. Guns and the military show force and discipline. Man is above nature; hence no serious environmentalism. The market is the ultimate financial authority, requiring market discipline. In foreign policy, strength is use of the force. In fundamentalist religion, the Bible is the ultimate authority; hence no gay marriage. Such values are at the heart of radical conservatism. This is how John McCain was raised and how he plans to govern. And it is what he shares with Sarah Palin.

Palin is the mom in the strict father family, upholding conservative values. Palin is tough: she shoots, skins, and eats caribou. She is disciplined: raising five kids with a major career. She lives her values: she has a Downs-syndrome baby that she refused to abort. She has the image of the ideal conservative mom: pretty, perky, feminine, Bible-toting, and fitting into the ideal conservative family. And she fits the stereotype of America as small-town America . It is Reagan's morning-in-America image. Where Obama thought of capturing the West, she is running for Sweetheart of the West.

And Palin, a member of Feminism for Life, is at the heart of the conservative feminist movement, which Ronee Schreiber has written about in her recent book, Righting Feminism. It is a powerful and growing movement that Democrats have barely paid attention to.

At the same time, Palin is masterful at the Republican game of taking the Democrats' language and reframing it -- putting conservative frames to progressive words: Reform, prosperity, peace. She is also masterful at using the progressive narratives: she's from the working class, working her way up from hockey mom and the PTA to mayor, governor, and VP candidate. Her husband is a union member. She can say to the conservative populists that she is one of them -- all the things that Obama and Biden have been saying. Bottom-up, not top-down.

Yes, the McCain-Palin ticket is weak on the major realities. B ut it is strong on the symbolic dimension of politics that Republicans are so good at marketing. Just arguing the realities, the issues, the hard truths should be enough in times this bad, but the political mind and its response to symbolism cannot be ignored. The initial Democratic response to Palin -- the response based on realities alone -- indicates that many Democrats have not learned the lessons of the Reagan and Bush years.

They have not learned the nature of conservative populism. A great many working-class folks are what I call "bi-conceptual," that is, they are split between conservative and progressive modes of thought. Conservative on patriotism and certain social and family issues, which they have been led to see as "moral," progressive in loving the land, living in communities of care, and practical kitchen table issues like mortgages, health care, wages, retirem ent, and so on.

Conservative theorists won them over in two ways: inventing and promulgating the idea of "liberal elite" and focusing campaigns on social and family issues. They have been doing this for many years and have changed a lot of brains through repetition. Palin will appeal strongly to conservative populists, attacking Obama and Biden as pointy-headed, tax-and-spend, latte liberals. The tactic is to divert attention from difficult realities to powerful symbolism.

What Democrats have shied away from is a frontal attack on radical conservatism itself as an un-American and harmful ideology. I think Obama is right when he says that America is based on people caring about each other and working together for a better future -- empathy, responsibility (both personal and socia l), and aspiration. These lead to a concept of government based on protection (environmental, consumer, worker, health care, and retirement protection) and empowerment (through infrastructure, public education, the banking system, the stock market, and the courts). Nobody can achieve the American Dream or live an American lifestyle without protection and empowerment by the government. The alternative, as Obama said in his nomination speech, is being on your own, with no one caring for anybody else, with force as a first resort in foreign affairs, with threatened civil liberties and a right-wing government making your most important decisions for you. That is not what American democracy has ever been about.

What is at stake in this election are our ideals and our view of the future, as well as current realities. The Palin choice brings both front and center. Democrats, being De mocrats, will mostly talk about the realities nonstop without paying attention to the dimensions of values and symbolism. Democrats, in addition, need to call an extremist an extremist: to shine a light on the shared anti-democratic ideology of McCain and Palin, the same ideology shared by Bush and Cheney. They share values antithetical to our democracy. That needs to be said loud and clear, if not by the Obama campaign itself, then by the rest of us who share democratic American values.

Our job is to bring external realities together with the reality of the political mind. Don't ignore the cognitive dimension. It is through cultural narratives, metaphors, and frames that we understand and express our ideals.

George Lakoff is the author of The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 20th Century Politics With and 18th Century Brain, Moral Politics, Don't Think of an Elephant!, Whose Freedom?, and Thinking Points. Read him. He can also be found on the DVD “How Democats and Progressivies can Win..” available through http://www.winwithlanguage.com/ . It is a 25 min DVD which is great for playing at house parties and before phone banking. I am not associated in any way with Professor Lakoff or the producers of this tape, but feel it is so important to get these techniques to our phone banks pronto so we can win against this very serious assault

citation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/the-palin-choice-and-the_b_123012.html .

CHALLENGE THE SCUMBAGGERS!

Moonwhile — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:09 EDT

Well, the 19th century had its carpetbaggers, and now, we have our looking-back-to-the-20th-century scumbaggers.

It's not enough to be "above all that." We too must flip unconscious switchs---those of courage, sincerity, patriotism, hard work, community, and justice.

SONOMA MARIN FAIR NEEDS OBAMA MATERIALS

Moonwhile — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:39:10 EDT

Even if you cannot help with Voter Registration during the fair, you could contribute a lot if you could help us with Obama merchandise. We have almost nothing and it is difficult to obtain at the moment.. Buttons, bumper stickers, shirts hats, even rally signs are needed.

If you have some stuff and are willing to share it, please contact Laura Blatt laurahikes@yahoo.com and we'll make the necessary arrangements. Thanks so much. We look forward to meeting any of you who attend the fair. We will be to the right of the Main Gate.

JOIN SONOMA MARIN FAIR REGISTRATION DRIVE

Moonwhile — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:56:06 EDT

We are registering voters at the Sonoma-Marin Fair from June 19-June 22, from 12:00pm to 9:00pm daily and we could use your help!! This is a great opportunity to reach a bunch of folks that live in rural areas in northern CA, and I can (almost) guarantee that your 3 hour shift of registering voters will be both fun and exciting!

There are still a bunch of shifts open (2 persons per 2 hour shift) so email me your preference at rwt4change@gmail.com in addition to signing up on the Events Site, and I will get back to you as soon as I can.

You can also call me at 707-292-9225!

Stop by and get in touch with other Sonoma County South Obama supporters

KNOW OBAMA'S RECORD SO YOU CAN ANSWER THE EXPERIENCE QUESTION.

Moonwhile — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:11:18 EDT

Don't be a dummy. Know Obama's record.http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/10/10532/8283/610/533309
Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 09:33:06 AM PDT

My heart just sinks every time some well-meaning (but ignorant) Obama supporter calls into a radio show and gets heckled by Sean Hannity or whoever about Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments.

This happened just yesterday. Hannity offered an Obama supporter a steak dinner if he could name three pieces of legislation that had Obama's name on them. The caller clumsily changed the subject.

Sensing he had the caller on the ropes, Hannity lowered the bar to a single piece of legislation. And alas, the caller could not name the legislation.

Hannity smugly switched off the caller's volume and said directly to the audience, "Ladies and Gentlemen, checkmate." And Droogie exited his car, entered his house and ate tacos sadly.

Listen, I know how talk radio works. Even if he had been able to list three pieces of legislation, Hannity still would have badgered the caller about William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright.

Hannity is not the issue. The issue is that ordinary people are being told that Obama has a thin resume and has accomplished very little in his Senate career. I have a Republican co-worker who I spar back and forth with on this issue.

Even when I told him of one bill, he said, "Well, that's probably the only bill." It's never enough for some people, but that doesn't mean you should go into the world uninformed.

So here are just a few highlights from Barack Obama's career as a Senator: specific pieces of legislation, what they meant and how they were passed.

The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act
Introduced by Sen. John McCain in May 2005, and cosponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy. Barack Obama added three amendments to this bill.

While the bill was never voted on in the Senate, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Acts of 2006 and 2007, respectively, drew heavily upon the wording of this bill.

The Lugar-Obama Cooperative Threat Reduction.
Introduced by Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Dick Lugar and Sen. Tom Coburn.

First introduced in November 2005 and enacted in 2007, this bill expanded upon the successful Nunn-Lugar threat reduction, which helped secure weapons of mass destruction and related infrastructure in former Soviet Union states.

Lugar-Obama expanded this nonproliferation program to conventional weapons -- including shoulder-fired rockets and land mines. When the bill received $48 million in funding, Obama said, "This funding will further strengthen our ability to detect and intercept illegal shipments of weapons and materials of mass destruction, enhancing efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism."

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
This act of Congress, introduced by Senators Obama and Coburn, required the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds in FY2007.

Despite a "secret hold" on this bill by Senators Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd, the act passed into law and was signed by President Bush. The act had 43 cosponsors, including John McCain.

The act created this Web site, which provides citizens with valuable information about government-funded programs.

Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act

This law helped specify US policy toward the Congo, and states that the US should work with other donor nations to increase international contributions to the African nation.

The bill marked the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor. Following this legislation's passage, Obama toured Africa, traveling to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad. He spoke forcefully against ethnic rivalries and political corruption in Kenya.

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act
In the first month of the 110th Congress, Obama worked with Sen. Russ Feingold to pass this law, which amends and strengthens the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.

Specificially, the changes made by Obama and Feingold requires public disclosure of lobbying activity and funding, places more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress and their staff, and provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills.

The House passed the bill, 411-8, on July 31. The Senate approved it, 83-14, on Aug. 2. At the time, Obama called it "the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate."

Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act

Following the Republican-sponsored voter intimidation tactics seen in mostly black counties in Maryland during the 2006 midterm elections, Obama worked with Sen. Chuck Schumer to introduce this bill.

The bill has been referred to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Obama said of the bill, "This legislation would ensure that for the first time, these incidents are fully investigated and that those found guilty are punished."

The Obama-McCain Climate Change Reduction Bill

The Obama-McCain bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., would cut emissions by two-thirds by 2050.

Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007

Introduced by Obama, this binding act would stop the planned troop increase of 21,500 in Iraq, and would also begin a phased redeployment of troops from Iraq with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 31, 2008.

Explaining the bill, Obama said it reflects his view that the problems in Iraq do not have a military solution. "Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war," Obama said.

Amendments to the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill

Obama worked with Sen. Kit Bond to limit, through this bill, the Pentagon's use of personality disorder discharges in the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill.

This provision would add additional safeguards to discharge procedures and require a thorough review by the Government Accountability Office. This followed news reports that the Pentagon inappropriately used these procedures to discharge service members with service-connected psychological injuries.

"With thousands of American service members suffering day in and day out from the less visible wounds of war, reports that the Pentagon has improperly diagnosed and discharged service members with personality disorders are deeply disturbing," said Senator Obama. "This provision will add additional safeguards to the Department of Defense's use of this discharge and mandate a comprehensive review of these policies."

The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision

Working with Sen. Hagel and Rep. Adam Schiff, Obama authored this provision, which would require the president to develop a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose.

A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.

"It is imperative that we build and sustain a truly global effort under an aggressive timeline to secure, consolidate, and reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material to keep them out of the wrong hands. The comprehensive nuclear threat reduction plan required by this provision is an important step in that effort," Obama said of the provision.

These are just a selection of the bills that Obama has introduced and co-sponsored. You owe it to yourself to be able to cite a few of these off the top of your heads so you can give people the gist of them when they challenge the Senator's accomplishments.

At the end of the day, I will take Obama's good judgment over McCain's longevity in Washington any day of the week. It's more important for a politician to learn from his or her mistakes than it is for them to present the same old failed ideas over and over and expecting a better result.

It's true Obama is a relative newcomer on the politican scene, but he has already accomplished much in the areas of nuclear non-proliferation, government accountability, environmental responsibility and others.

So get out there and let some people know what our guy is capable of. Don't be caught unaware when someone asks you for your candidate's resume!

Bookmark this, follow the links, share with friends. Wash, rinse, repeat. Always repeat.

MSNBC MOUNTS VEEPSTAKES CONTEST. CAST YOUR VOTE!

Moonwhile — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:06:06 EDT

MSNBC Veepstakes contest. Once again, the MSM tries to drive the campaigns to pick someone they want. Join in at the URL below:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24764369/

HILLARY'S ILLUSIONS & DELUSIONS

Moonwhile — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 00:25:13 EDT

As long time advocate of women being allowed to achieve whatever they can and to try do even more to break new frontiers, I am horribly ashamed of Sen. clinton's perfomance tonight. She betrayed all the women who have supported her this far, even, supposedly warned Obama to not choose another woman for a running mate or else.

Her speech was ungracious, still highly divisive, and did nothing to mark this historic occasion. Instead she spent all her time with her personal valedictory and narcissism. I was appalled and truly depressed as a third generation feminist.

FIRST LOOK AT COVERAGE OF 2008 PRIMARY

Moonwhile — Sat, 31 May 2008 11:59:58 EDT

THE INVISIBLE PRIMARY—INVISIBLE NO LONGER

A First Look at Coverage of the 2008 Presidential CampaignOctober 29, 2007

A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy

This study from Harvard is interesting and covers a number of items including tone of coverage. what kind of coverage, the rise and fall of positives and negatives and much more. With some complaining inevitably coming up about fairness, etc. I urge all of you take at least a quick look at the charts and graphs.

http://www.journalism.org/node/8187

Goodman's SHARING DREAMS FROM HIS MOTHER

Moonwhile — Sat, 10 May 2008 15:03:04 EDT

Lolo Soetoro and Ann Dunham pose with daughter Maya Soetoro and son Barack Obama in an undated photo. (Family photo via Bloomberg News) Email|Print|Single Page| Text size – + By Ellen Goodman May 9, 2008

FROM time to time during this primary, I've wondered about Obama's mama. In a race that was so much about biography, about beliefs rooted in her son's "DNA," she's made only cameo appearances.

She was the "mother from Kansas" balanced alliteratively with the "father from Kenya." Or she was the white parent whose genes combined with the black parent. Or she was the woman dying of cancer "more worried about paying her medical bills than getting well." And on Tuesday night when her son all but sewed up the nomination, she appeared again as the "single parent who had to go on food stamps at one point."

I have been thinking of her not just because it's nearly Mother's Day but because Obama will soon have to reach out to Hillary Clinton's supporters, especially to women of a certain age who attached their hopes to having a woman in the White House. Obama has not yet had a "gender conversation" with those women.

What better link does he have than his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, the girl whose own father expected and wanted a boy child? Ann Dunham, a nonconformist, a woman of the world who traveled a trajectory of change so associated with Hillary's generation?

Last week, my eye lit on an odd correction in The New York Times. It read: "The assertion that Mr. Obama had 'never known' his Kenyan father should have been that he had 'barely known' him." Surely it was a distinction without a difference.

It's no surprise that Obama wrote an entire memoir dedicated to his "barely known" parent: "Dreams from My Father." It was only after his mother's death that he wrote in a new preface, "I think sometimes that had I known she would not survive her illness, I might have written a different book - less a meditation on the absent parent, more a celebration of the one who was the single constant in my life." He added that "she was the kindest, most generous spirit I have ever known, and that what is best in me I owe to her."

From all accounts, this daughter of a family that kept traveling west in restless pursuit of the American dream took no part in Eisenhower-era conformity. She was a teenager in Hawaii when she fell for the charismatic Kenyan in her Russian class and married him six months before her son was born. This was a time when interracial marriage was still illegal in parts of the country.

The rest of the story is known: a divorce, a marriage to an Indonesian, a second divorce. She was a mother who kept her children focused as well as fed. But what's less known is the woman in her own right, the one who became an anthropologist, the woman who spent years as the respected head of research for Women's World Banking, bringing micro-financing to poor people in Indonesia.

Nancy Barry, who was the head of Women's World Banking and knew Ann well, has been bewildered by the way she's been reduced to a stick figure. "She was stubborn, hard core, decisive, convincing, deep-thinking, rigorous in her analysis," says Barry. "When I hear Barack talking about how we are not red states, blue states, but the United States, I think he gets that from his mother. The other core capability he gets from her is the desire for healing."

Indeed, the Obama we see may be the offspring of "Dreams from My Mother."

If Ann were alive today she would be the age of Hillary Clinton's most devoted demographic. She would be among those women who have gone through enormous transitions, making and remaking the female script. Dreaming big.

I am not suggesting Obama drag out his mama as a prop. But he's staked his case for the presidency on his ability to bridge racial, cultural, party divides, to lead a post-partisan America. Now he's faced with another divide: women who identified their success with Hillary's and who are unsure they will vote for him.

What better way to begin reaching out, holding the 'gender conversation,' showing women he "gets it" than by sharing the dreams he inherited and the dreams he understands. The dreams from his mother. A girl named Stanley.

Ellen Goodman's e-mail address is ellengoodman@globe.com.

NOT THIS TIME..... NOT WITH MY CHANGE

Moonwhile — Sat, 10 May 2008 12:45:33 EDT

Paying off an opponent's debts may not be new in the world of old politics and big money, but it simply won't wash in the world of new politics and small money. I, like many tens of thousands of others who have pinched our purses to donate, simply will abandon giving money and being enthusiastic.

NOT THIS TIME....NOT WITH MY CHANGE!

HILLARY'S MINISTER PROBLEM: THE ELITIST RIGHT "PRAYER" GROUP

Moonwhile — Sat, 03 May 2008 03:26:20 EDT

From Atlantic Monthly:Hillary's Minister Problem

Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

Take two: Hillary's choice

November 2006

Joshua Green's landmark profile of Hillary Clinton reports on how prayer groups helped her become "a uniter, not a divider."

Barack Obama isn't the only candidate with ties to a controversial religious group.

Since Hillary Clinton has launched a frontal attack on her opponent's church and pastor, it's worth noting that she has some odd religious ties of her own. When I was profiling her two years ago, I learned about her involvement with a secretive Christian organization called The Fellowship that has operated in the Washington shadows since the 1930s. I found the story of Clinton and The Fellowship so bizarre that I made it the lede to my piece. In light of recent events, it's worth revisiting.

If you've never heard of The Fellowship (also known as The Family), it will sound like some shadowy organization in a John Grisham novel. (Indeed, as a Google search will demonstrate, critics consider it a cult.) The group was formed in the 1930s to minister to political and business leaders throughout the world, modeling itself as a kind of Christian Trilateral Commission. Several members of Congress are affiliated with the group, mostly Republicans, but some Democrats, too. To the extent The Fellowship is known beyond its members it is probably for founding the annual National Prayer Breakfast in Washington.

Like Jeremiah Wright's Trinity Baptist Church, The Fellowship is run by its own mysterious and controversial figure, Douglas Coe, although temperamentally Coe is Wright's opposite. He eschews the spotlight and has never made a controversial public utterance that I'm aware of -- mainly because he rarely speaks publicly at all. (You won't find him on YouTube.) But like Wright, Coe has ministered to a Democratic frontrunner. He personally leads a private Senate prayer group that Clinton has been a part of.

In my piece, I chose to focus on the Senate prayer group, but others have written extensively about the strangeness and secrecy of The Fellowship. As this Los Angeles Times story and this exquisitely reported Harper's piece make clear, there is something deeply strange about the group. They certainly do not like press coverage, so in that regard Clinton's attraction might make sense. Reporters hoping to look into the group might want to think again. A few years ago, The Fellowship’s archives, which are held at Wheaton College, the evangelical school in Illinos, were reclassified as “restricted” and placed under lock and key.

— Joshua GreenMail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

MOYER'S MONOLOGUE ON WRIGHT

Moonwhile — Sat, 03 May 2008 03:04:59 EDT

This week's Bill Moyer's Journal [May 2nd] openjed with a remarkable monologue about the Wright controversy. It covered the dispute relative to the other candidates in the race as well as the why and how of the excessive attention heaped on Obama's situation. This, from a devout man, once a practicing Baptist minister himself, and now, one of America's premier journalists and commentators. Here is the link to the transcript:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05022008/transcript.html

Also, on this program immediately after the monologue, the inimitable Kathryn Hall Jamieson of the Annenberg School discussing how one might deal with such a crisis as the events surrouding Reverend Wright. This too, is probably on pbs Bill Moyers site. Do take a look at these items. They are well worth the time.

AMERICA'S PROBLEMS.....WONKY TALK, OR REAL MANAGEMENT

Moonwhile — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:17:29 EDT

Since the ABC debate, the Clinton campaign has moved into high gear on jobs, jobs, jobs and other key economic issues. A lot of my friends have challenged my support of Obama over Clinton. They admire her endless program outlines, her tenacity, her unwillingness to quit.

Here's my reply:

True, Clinton is a whiz of a wonk, can reel off great-sounding programs 1,2,3.... yet she could not come up with the 30,000 jobs she promised to upstate New Yorkers during her first run for the Senate. This, she said, was because she didn't have a Democratic President to serve under. It wasn't her fault, you see. And so on.

One of the things that I point out about Hillary is the fact that she is no manager. Her campaign has lurched from one management disaster to the next, no plan B for going beyond Super Tuesday, 2 successive campaign managers with no experience in that role, the Penn Colomibia lobbying debacle; the mismanagement of her funds. It has largely been hit and miss beyond the original set up of the "inevitable nomination."

So how is she going to run the country? Manage the managers of Health, Interior, Defence, State and so on? It's wise to note that histoically the way candidates manage their campaigns is almost always a model of how they run their White Houses.

Obama on the other hand, has garnered the admiration of political managers on both sides of the aisle for his fundriasing skills, volunteer management, inclusive campaign, and calm, steady temperament at the head of his team. Those kind of quiet, solid management skills are fundamental to an effective White House.

Obama hasn't just talked about how he'll manage his administration, he's demonstrated it.

So, after all the rhetoric is over, after all the speeches are made, which of these two would you want manageing the programs and legislative contacts they'll need to do the job?

CNN TO GIVE CLINTON AN HOUR MONDAY NIGHT!

Moonwhile — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:59:05 EDT

Larry King has just announced that Hillary Clinton will be the guest Monday evening. Interestingly, this announcement has only started this weekend to build a quick audience, but also, I think, to avoid people questioning such an action. I hope some of you will agree that this is almost as disgraceful as the ABC debacle.

Candidates really should not be given solo long-form appearances later than the Thursday before a Tuesday election. That way, the opposition can reply and challenge any mistakes or misrepresentations. This kind of bald advocacy is truly shocking and unacceptable. "News" organizations should be told it completely undercuts their standing.

Here is where you can write to the general comments desk for CNN. http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html?39

A Larry King comment Link is available among the same pages http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv/

Please join me in writing from all over the country to suggest they hold to reasonable standards of fairness.

BRING BACK THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, PLEASE!

Moonwhile — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:12:55 EDT

Tabloid Television! Trash TV! Corporate Newsrooms that are nothing more than ego barns. Enough already!

There is a lot of chatter among those of us olde enough to remember the days when debates were carefully moderated by the League of Women Voters---the group that developed the model for fair debates and forums on the air.

See the Huffington Post entry about this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/where-is-the-league-of-wo_b_97130.html

As a third generation LWV member and one who works in voter services and media, we are still producing these fora throughout the US, although we are largely limited to local elections. Why? Because the two dominant parties took the moderating role away from the League and formed their own commission to control them. I say, return debates to the League. Return that role to the citizens and also make Networks and Cable News carry a certain amount of non-corporately produced debates. They are using our airwaves. We need to restore and enforce Public Service and Information obligations as prerequisites for continued licensing.

The Obama movement holds some promise in insuring such services are restored. The Net is great, but it is difficult to know who is fudging the truth and who is committed to facts, facts, facts. We need some central journalistic and data sources that we can refer to on a larger community basis. Let's make this something to do during the next four years before the next Presidential election.

This is a change we can make happen.

CHELSEA'S SILENCE ON BOSNIA

Moonwhile — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 19:12:09 EDT

Why didn't Chelsea refresh her mother's memory about the real Bosnia if her Mom was having a senior moment? Or, ....Why hasn't she given those on the college circuit her own version of the sniper tale?

NAFTA, GATT & OUTSOURCING, TOO....

Moonwhile — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:36:25 EDT

Hillary Clinton Lied About Outsourcing, Too By Paul Rockwell 2008-03-25

Job security is the foremost domestic issue for working people in Pennsylvania, where Sen. Hillary Clinton is expected to win the Democratic Party primary. For many months, as a candidate for president, Senator Clinton has cultivated a pro-labor image. She claims to be an opponent of NAFTA, and she often denounces the outsourcing of American jobs. Before a crowd of students in New Hampshire, she claimed that she hated “seeing U.S. telemarketing jobs done in remote locations, far, far from our shores.”

Newly released White House records demonstrate that Clinton lied about NAFTA. (See “Clinton Lie Kills Her Credibility on Trade Policy,” John Nichols, Common Dreams, March 22.) NAFTA, however, is but a single thread in a web of deception regarding globalization and free trade. Clinton is lying not only about NAFTA, but about outsourcing as well. And the evidence comes, not from Obama, but from official records, video tapes, quotations and recordings of Clinton speeches abroad.

Consider this. In 2005 Sen. Clinton visited New Delhi, India, (“far, far from our shores”), where she met wealthy business leaders, venture capitalists eager for U.S. investment. A few years prior to her visit, Enron gained a foothold in India’s economy. Enron uprooted local communities, fleeced the public coffers, then pulled out of India with the profits of unregulated greed.

In a speech promoting globalization and free trade, here is what Sen. Clinton said in New Delhi: “There is no way you can legislate against reality. Outsourcing will continue....We are not against all outsourcing, we are not in favor of putting up fences.”

The India Review, a publication of the embassy of India, commented April 1, 2005: “Senator Clinton allayed apprehension in India that there would be a ban on outsourcing.”

Siddharth Srivastava reported in Asia Times, March 1st, 2005: “Hillary Clinton made it apparent where she stood on outsourcing during her India visit...Hillary has been at the forefront in defending free trade and outsourcing. She faced considerable flak for defending Indian software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) for opening a center in Buffalo, New York.” (TCS provided hundreds of special visas for foreign employees to work in New York for substandard, non-union wages.) She praised Clinton’s “strict adherence to the principles of free trade and outsourcing that affect India directly.”

Outsourcing is inherent to global free trade, the attempt of corporate goliaths to move resources, jobs, money, capital in search of profits anywhere in the world without accountability.

If a video clip of Clinton’s outsourcing remarks in India were played on TV before the upcoming primaries in Indiana, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, she would lose the elections, despite current polls. Not only because working-class voters oppose outsourcing, but because the duplicity of Clinton would become obvious.

Clinton’s globalization speech in India would hardly be noteworthy today, except that, in her current campaign for the nomination, she is saying exactly the opposite of what she said in India. She was a globalizer in India. Now she’s a protectionist in Pennsylvania, and voters have a right to ask: Which is the real Hillary Clinton?

The U.S. media, however, is presently experiencing a bout of amnesia. Pundits forget that Bill Clinton, with Hillary at his side, made huge campaign promises to labor in 1992. Within months of their victory, the Clintons rammed two Republican-initiated free-trade bills—NAFTA and GATT—through a Democratic Congress. Outsourcing of jobs to sweatshops in Mexico and Indonesia actually accelerated under the Clinton globalization agenda. The Clintons increased subsidies for corporate mergers and relaxed regulations that protect the public from the abuse of corporate power.

The Clinton administration also passed the Financial Modernization Act of 1999, repealing the Glass-Steagal Act of 1933. That historic New Deal legislation made working-class home ownership possible and safe. The Jimmy Stewart film It’s a Wonderful Life idealized the New Deal arrangement. The savings-and-loan system—a system of small, often family-owned banks—was a bedrock of stability until the deregulation trends of the ’80s and ’90s transformed the U.S. economy into a high-risk casino. The Republican-sponsored, Clinton-backed Modernization Act deregulated the financial sector and encouraged the merger of business and commercial investment banks. Clinton’s “modernization” (he called it “reinventing government”) carved a path to the current sub-prime mortgage crisis. The current anarchy in housing and banking is, in part, a direct consequence of the Clinton deregulation legacy. As banks are failing, working people losing their homes, it takes a lot of gall for Hillary Clinton to take credit where blame is due for her White House experience. Shame on you, Hillary Clinton!

The Berkeley Daily Plannet

BIG MONEY LEANS ON PELOSI...SHE PUSHES BACK

Moonwhile — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:17:31 EDT

This is an example of how 2,000,000 smaller donors to the Obama campaign have already begun to reshape the nature of American politics.

The corporate concentration of power has largely been a matter of concentrating access to campaign money. Spreading the financial load over the populace allows our elected officials to represent the majority, use their best judgment, and do what they really believe would benefit the nation. Bravo, Speaker Pelosi!

Voters take note. Here is a case of really "big money" being denatured by "small money." Obama already has opened up how American politics are practiced, and we the people, should rush through that opening to take our country back.

HILLARY'S FAR RIGHT RELIGIOUS TIES...THE FAMILY: POWER & RELIGION

Moonwhile — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:38:58 EDT

Here's Barbara Ehrenreich's take on The Family and Hillary's involvement with it from Huff. Post:

HILLARY'S NASTY PASTORATE

There's a reason why Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.

You can find all about it in a widely under-read article in the September 2007 issue of Mother Jones, in which Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet reported that "through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as the "Fellowship," aka The Family. But it won't be a secret much longer. Jeff Sharlet's shocking exposé, The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power will be published in May.

Buzz up!on Yahoo!

Sean Hannity has called Obama's church a "cult," but that term applies far more aptly to Clinton's "Family," which is organized into "cells" -- their term -- and operates sex-segregated group homes for young people in northern Virginia. In 2002, writer Jeff Sharlet joined the Family's home for young men, foreswearing sex, drugs, and alcohol, and participating in endless discussions of Jesus and power. He wasn't undercover; he used his own name and admitted to being a writer. But he wasn't completely out of danger either. When he went outdoors one night to make a cell phone call, he was followed. He still gets calls from Family associates asking him to meet them in diners -- alone.

The Family's most visible activity is its blandly innocuous National Prayer Breakfast, held every February in Washington. But almost all its real work goes on behind the scenes -- knitting together international networks of rightwing leaders, most of them ostensibly Christian. In the 1940s, The Family reached out to former and not-so-former Nazis, and its fascination with that exemplary leader, Adolph Hitler, has continued, along with ties to a whole bestiary of murderous thugs. As Sharlet reported in Harper's in 2003:

During the 1960s the Family forged relationships between the U.S. government and some of the most anti-Communist (and dictatorial) elements within Africa's postcolonial leadership. The Brazilian dictator General Costa e Silva, with Family support, was overseeing regular fellowship groups for Latin American leaders, while, in Indonesia, General Suharto (whose tally of several hundred thousand "Communists" killed marks him as one of the century's most murderous dictators) was presiding over a group of fifty Indonesian legislators. During the Reagan Administration the Family helped build friendships between the U.S. government and men such as Salvadoran general Carlos Eugenios Vides Casanova, convicted by a Florida jury of the torture of thousands, and Honduran general Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, himself an evangelical minister, who was linked to both the CIA and death squads before his own demise.

At the heart of the Family's American branch is a collection of powerful rightwing politicos, who include, or have included, Sam Brownback, Ed Meese, John Ashcroft, James Inhofe, and Rick Santorum. They get to use the Family's spacious estate on the Potomac, the Cedars, which is maintained by young men in Family group homes and where meals are served by the Family's young women's group. And, at the Family's frequent prayer gatherings, they get powerful jolts of spiritual refreshment, tailored to the already-powerful.

Clinton fell in with the Family in 1993, when she joined a Bible study group composed of wives of conservative leaders like Jack Kemp and James Baker. When she ascended to the senate, she was promoted to what Sharlet calls the Family's "most elite cell," the weekly Senate Prayer Breakfast, which included, until his downfall, Virginia's notoriously racist Senator George Allen. This has not been a casual connection for Clinton. She has written of Doug Coe, the Family's publicity-averse leader, that he is "a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God."

Furthermore, the Family takes credit for some of Clinton's rightward legislative tendencies, including her support for a law guaranteeing "religious freedom" in the workplace, such as for pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control prescriptions and police officers who refuse to guard abortion clinics.

What drew Clinton into the sinister heart of the international right? Maybe it was just a phase in her tormented search for identity, marked by ever-changing hairstyles and names: Hillary Rodham, Mrs. Bill Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and now Hillary Clinton. She reached out to many potential spiritual mentors during her White House days, including new age guru Marianne Williamson and the liberal Rabbi Michael Lerner. But it was the Family association that stuck.

Sharlet generously attributes Clinton's involvement to the underappreciated depth of her religiosity, but he himself struggles to define the Family's theological underpinnings. The Family avoids the word Christian but worship Jesus, though not the Jesus who promised the earth to the "meek." They believe that, in mass societies, it's only the elites who matter, the political leaders who can build God's "dominion" on earth. Insofar as the Family has a consistent philosophy, it's all about power -- cultivating it, building it, and networking it together into ever-stronger units, or "cells." "We work with power where we can," Doug Coe has said, and "build new power where we can't."

Obama has given a beautiful speech on race and his affiliation with the Trinity Unity Church of Christ. Now it's up to Clinton to explain -- or, better yet, renounce -- her longstanding connection with the fascist-leaning Family.

HILLARY'S MINISTER PROBLEM: THE SECRET FAR RIGHT "PRAYER" GROUP

Moonwhile — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:30:26 EDT

From Atlantic Monthly:Hillary's Minister Problem

Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

Take two: Hillary's choice

November 2006

Joshua Green's landmark profile of Hillary Clinton reports on how prayer groups helped her become "a uniter, not a divider."

Barack Obama isn't the only candidate with ties to a controversial religious group.

— Joshua Green

LEADERSHIP....DIRECT AND TRUE

Moonwhile — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:15:22 EDT

There are two distinct forms of political leadership. One, practiced across several millennia and many empires, is the “bread and circuses” type. Today’s version---“let me take care of you” promises, programs and pork---appeal to our willingness to pass the buck and our willingness to think what happens to others is separate from what happens to us.

The other kind of leadership makes us look at ourselves, see the truth, and find courage where there was once fear, empathy where there was once hate. Obama, once again, displayed that kind of leadership in today’s speech.

The other major candidates are full of what this group or that group wants to hear at the moment---bits and pieces designed to appeal to today’s segment of the population. Programs are important, but alone they will not move the nation toward a more perfect union. To make one out of many, a leader must be able to bring focus on our national identity, direction to our efforts, and investment in one another. This, I believe, Obama will do, and the others cannot.

NO ONE WHO WORKS IN AMERICA SHOULD BE POOR.....

Moonwhile — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:27:25 EDT

Obama's words, "NO ONE WHO WORKS IN AMERICA SHOULD BE POOR" make a great starting point for discussing his economic programs. When people ask me about his proposed programs, that is my answer. From there, we go into specific programs of interest to that person.....wages, jobs, mortgage problems, health, education....and so on.

The people of the Ohio River Valley and Great Lakes areas feel as if they have been thrown back into the 1930s. Issues like a roof over one's head, a chicken in every pot, fuel to heat the house and run the car, are front and foremost.

"NO ONE WHO WORKS IN AMERICA SHOULD BE POOR" is a good way to let people know by what standards Obama will measure not only his current, but future, economic programs---where he's coming from and where he intends to go.

I have found it works very well on the phone because it's short, to the point and sets a memorable bottom line for all of Obama's economic programs. I thought I would pass this along for others to try as the campaign moves through America's hard hit manufacturing centers.

MATH vs. MOMENTUM:.... MIRAGE or MIRACLE?

Moonwhile — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:32:54 EDT

All those figures we love to add up are so true. Every one of those states we list--large or small--is important. But right now, the race is more about expectations and perceptions than truth. It may take a miracle for the Clintons to win it, but they have been nibbling away at the prize---always getting closer, stonger, tougher.

While we are talking math, the Clintons are claiming momentum and power. If we aren't careful, the old Washington machine will want to support Clinton whatever the numbers are, so watch out. The Clintons are master illusionists and awesome tacticians---always at their best when the going is toughest.

I write this after chancing upon Hillary on the TV. She pointed here and there about "solutions." I stopped and watched her a bit. Her tone was more upbeat and measured. Instead of squawking and bobbing, she projected energy and sass. She changed registers, smoothly. With a deft sweep of her arm, she said, "I know a lot of you are going to vote for Barack Obama. And I understand that...." And then, gently continued, " I just want you to know, I'm in favor of you....I will do this forYou..... I will do that for you.... We'll be here working for you." Her act is not yet refined and finished, but using new elements with the same old message, she has moved from being a nervous, pacing, defensive spaniel to a peppy little terrier who is sometimes sharp and protective, sometimes appealing. As a filmmaker, the imagery is not bad, much closer to the "fighter" image than her previous stump styles, and much more appealing than the cool, calm, expert she so often inhabits.

At this point halfway between Iowa and Pennsylvania, both these campaigns are going to change. Not too much, but in some way that builds on what has succeeded, fills in on what has been missing. I've memorized the old stump speech; a little different one would draw a lot of interest and press, I think. I like the recent moves to further distinguish Obama from McCain and Clinton, whom I call the "past track" candidates

Recently I sent in my money, called those on my list, and lobbied my family in Texas. Now, I look forward to seeing how Obama will frame this next phase in the campaign and finding out how I might help.

A CHANGE IN GENDER WILL NOT CHANGE THE COUNTRY

Moonwhile — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:18:27 EST

I am not clear why older folks like me think electing a female President---any female President---will lead to an enormous change in our country.

We oldsters need to use our vote to help create a country that is directed at a better future for our heirs, not just ourselves. Obama's candidacy holds the promise of not just substantive programs, but substantive change in approach, participation, transparency, and inclusion.

These qualities are absent in Clinton's campaign. She is just more of the same in pearls and a pantsuit. It will be no service to the human rights agenda of feminists to elect another corporate candidate I cannot understand why so many of my peers explain their blind support of Clinton with, "I want to see a woman President in my lifetime." So do I. But I am not willing to sacrifice the good of the country for my private dreams.

The eagerness of some women to vote for any female candidate speaks of desperation and the idea that a woman President should be regarded as unusual. A female President should not be treated like an endangered species.

America is a bit late getting around to having a woman President, but I think it will happen within the next 20 years. Fear not, there are many wonderful women coming up through Congress and state houses who will soon throw their hats in the ring.