Young Americans like YOU are&
Ready for Hope.
Ready for Change.
Ready to GO.
This is the official Facebook group for Generation Obama in the WASHINGTON, DC metropolitan area (GO-DC)....including MARYLAND (GO-MD) and VIRGINIA (GO-VA), where we have the endorsement of Governor Tim Kaine. Please join our group to hear about GO campaign news as well as social, fundraising, volunteer and community service events and activities.
Officially launched on August 25, 2007, Generation Obama is a nationwide program with chapters across the country designed to get young people involved in Barack Obama's UNPRECEDENTED presidential campaign, which has gained over 350,000 DONORS and MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS inspired by a MOVEMENT FOR CHANGE in Washington based on the AUDACITY OF HOPE for a better America.
This initiative to reach twenty and thirty somethings is especially important because Senator OBAMA IS LEADING in the national polls AMONG THE 18-29 DEMOGRAPHIC, as studies show the up and coming "Millenial" Generation is more progressive and hungry for a "New Kind of Politics" than any before. This voting population is also growing fast and will soon be larger than the baby boomers.
So, remember the formula for change&..
Gen X + Y = O
Join our Facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4552427959
So I finally have my website up and running...its been a long road, but I am finally done with the hard part. I am most proud of the Women in politics page. This page is dedicated to the women in politics...past and present. Right now there are some posts about both. Starting next week, there will be one interview per week that highlights a different woman that is involved in politics right now, and highlights there achievements, and struggles. If you would like to see a particular woman highlighted, feel free to go to the site and email me, or respond to me here.
There is also information about current political events, video blogs, and the 2010 races...as they are right now...more content will be coming as the days go on. Looking to make this a fun and interactive website...so stop by and tell me what you think...and make sure to check back often for the new content
Are you over-educated and unemployed? Please join my meetup.com group: http://www.meetup.com/Over-Educated-and-Unemployed
Let's embrace the President's message of cohesion, and be willing to share our collective knowledge and contacts to help one another avoid unemployment stress and apathy!Virtue is not left to stand alone. He who practices it will have neighbors.
-Confucius
Where does one begin the discussion?
I think the President has made bold moves in the following areas:
1. Capitalizing on his promise to assist the middle class, as demonstrated job creation initiatives in the FY 2009 budget
2. Reaching out to Iran. We can't afford enmity with this very influential nation. Acheiving some sort of stablization in both Iraq and Afghanistan requires Iranian participation in a constructive way. Iran can choose to be extremely destuctive by re-igniting Shiia and Sunni tensions in Iraq once our troops are redeployed.
3. Maintaining his composure despite inccessant Republican moves to delay the passage of the budget, constant attacks on his policy, and increasingly divisive (public) attacks on the President's policies.
4. Remaining patient in areas that he knows will cause exessive distraction from getting the US economy back on track
5. ENGAGING the American people and EXPLAINING the reasons behind many policy initiatives.
6. Managing a domestic and international financial collapse, two wars, increased extremism in Pakistan, and being able to maintain a 65% (+/- 3 points) approval rating.
Hey what do you guys think about the economic speech that he gave today? Do you think it adequately dispells the fears and anxities of the american public?
Please join my Human Rights Meetup.com group! We are called the "Washington Global Human Rights Meetup Group." As I mentioned in the description for this forum, this isn't going to be just a blog. In light of the desire for those who are interested to meet one another and truly garner exposure for human rights issues that have been all but ignored, I am officially connecting this blog to a meetup.com group!! Our first event will be participating a rally to stop genocide and will feature survivors from recent genocidal campaigns (4/19) . Kindly sign up by directing your browser to http://www.meetup.com/DC-Global-Human-Rights-Meetup-Group.
Many thanks! Hope you can make it to our first event.
This is a letter I wrote to President Obama in response to the Obama Administration's current attempts to expand the legal justification for the illegal warrantless spying program inherited from Bush (you know, the one Obama was supposed to disband rather than try and make new legal loop holes for).
I have a link to an article here, not the greatest news site, but they have links to the full text of the DOJ court filings to dismiss suits against the government, and severly limit people's ability to file future suits against the government to protect their Constitutional rights.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_Administration_quietly_expands_Bushs_legal_0407.html
---Begin Letter---
Dear President Obama,
In February of last year you said: "There is no reason why telephone companies should be given blanket immunity to cover violations of the rights of the American people - we must reaffirm that no one in this country is above the law."
In July you then instead voted to grant immunity to those very companies while they were in court for violating the rights of the American people. You insisted this was a necessary compromise, and gave us the following assurances:
You supported the FISA court as the exclusive means of legal domestic government wiretapping:
"The exclusivity provision [of the FISA Amendment Act] 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."
You acknowledged that blocking legal action in the courts weakens deterrents against and accountability for illegal wiretapping:
"[The FISA Amendment Act] 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."
And you pledged to reform the system to prevent future abuses and protect civil liberty:
"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, barely two months into office, your DOJ has done exactly the opposite. It has filed to dismiss suits against the government involving warrantless wiretapping, and further expanded the corrupt Bush interpretation of state secrets and sovereign immunity. The abuse of executive power you pledged to prevent in the future, your DOJ is now expanding. The warrantless wiretapping program created by Bush to circumvent the very FISA court you agreed was the exclusive legal means of wiretapping American citizens, is likewise now deemed to be legal by your DOJ. And since the previous immunity for telecoms didn't weaken deterrent or accountability for illegal spying enough, the grounds given for dismissing the cases against the government is that the government can't be sued, even for actions which are willfully and intentional in violation of existing law, unless the government willfully disclosed the information they illegally obtained.
Given this track record so far I guess we can expect your continued protection of Bush Administration officials against torture charges and investigations. We can expect you to keep hiding the Bush torture memos instead of releasing them to the public. We can expect you to merely relocate Guantanamo detainees in new places, closing the prison only in name. We can expect a trillion more dollars to be thrown at CEOs while we get laid off by them (Geithner and Summer's PPIP plan is just more privatized profits with socialized risks, and it stinks of corruption). We can expect more promises of European style services without admitting they will require European style taxes. We can expect future bailout programs to be crafted, like the current ones, behind closed doors and without the input of other ideas or people outside the Wall Street/Washington bubble your administration is quickly falling into. This isn't what we campaigned for, and it's certainly not what we voted for.
Hi all. After working with many of you who are my age (late 20's) and have the same passion for politics, I felt inspired to start a blog from our point of view and a group where we can all relate. The blog is at http://www.generationxydemocrat.blogspot.com/ and I have also stated a Facebook group where we can all sound off at http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/group.php?gid=57528568002&ref=nf. I will comment and post all OFA activites on here as well. Please join the group, and also visit the blog to read and comment often. Thank you!
- Ed
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
Thomas Jefferson (Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin, 1802).
Por fin ha llegado el gran día. La primera página de un nuevo libro llamado Historia. Desde Europa le mandamos nuestros mejores deseos de éxito y le recordamos estas dos citas de su muy apreciado Abraham Lincoln.
Del mismo modo que no sería un esclavo, tampoco sería un amo.Esto expresa mi idea de la democracia. Ningún hombre es lo bastante bueno para gobernar a otro sin su consentimiento.
Del mismo modo que no sería un esclavo, tampoco sería un amo.Esto expresa mi idea de la democracia.
Ningún hombre es lo bastante bueno para gobernar a otro sin su consentimiento.
See http://mixideias.blogspot.com
THE FORTY-FOURTH PRESIDENT will face a series of critical, complex, and interrelated challenges in the Middle East that will demand his immediate attention: an Iran apparently intent on approaching or crossing the nuclear threshold as quickly as possible; a fragile situation in Iraq that is straining the U.S. military; weak governments in Lebanon and Palestine under challenge from stronger Hezbollah and Hamas militant organizations; a faltering Israeli-Palestinian peace process; and American influence diluted by a severely damaged reputation. The president will need to initiate multiple policies to address all these challenges but will quickly discover that time is working against him.President Barack Obama will have to reprioritize and reorient U.S. policy toward the Middle East. For the past six years that policy has been dominated by Iraq. This need not, and should not, continue to be the case. The next president can gradually reduce the U.S. troop presence and combat role in Iraq, increasingly shifting responsibility to Iraqi forces. But because the situation is still fragile there, the drawdown should be done carefully and not so quickly or arbitrarily that it risks contributing to the undoing of progress achieved at great cost over the past two years. All this would be consistent with the accord governing U.S. troop presence being negotiated by U.S. and Iraqi officials.
Instability generated by a too rapid withdrawal could distract the next president from the other priority initiatives he will need to take and create opportunities in Iraq for Iran and al Qaeda to exploit. However, a too slow withdrawal would leave American forces tied down in Iraq and unavailable for other priority tasks, including backing his diplomacy visà-vis Iran in particular with the credible threat of force. He will need to strike a balance.In no way should this call for retrenchment in Iraq be interpreted as a recommendation for a more general American pullback from the region. The greater Middle East will remain vital to the United States for decades to come given its geostrategic location, its energy and financial resources, the U.S. commitment to Israel, and the possibility both for terrorism to emanate from the region and for nuclear materials and weapons to spread there. Reduced American involvement will jeopardize all these interests.
Instead, President Obama’s principal focus will need to be on Iran, because the clock is ticking on its nuclear program. He should offer direct official engagement with the Iranian government, without preconditions, along with other incentives to attempt to prevent Iran from developing a capacity to produce substantial amounts of nuclear weapons-grade fuel in a short amount of time. Simultaneously, he will need to concert an international effort to impose harsher sanctionson Iran if it rejects an outcome the United States and others can accept. The objective is simple to describe but will be difficult to achieve: to generate a suspension of Iran’s enrichment program before it builds the capacity to enrich enough uranium to provide it with this “breakout” capability.
Preventive military action, by either the United States or Israel, in the event that this diplomatic initiative fails, appears unattractive given its risks and costs. However, the option should be examined closely, both for what it could accomplish and given the dangers of living with a near or actual Iranian nuclear weapons capability. Because of Israel’s vulnerability to an Iranian nuclear first strike, its fuse will necessarily be shorter than America’s. And negotiations—as well as stepped-up sanctions— will inevitably take time to work. To increase Israel’s tolerance for a more drawn-out diplomatic engagement, President Obama should bolster Israel’s deterrent capabilities by providing a nuclear guarantee and an enhanced antiballistic missile defense capability.A second emphasis should be on promoting peace agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors, in particular Syria, which is currently allied with Iran and its Hezbollah and Hamas proxies. The Syrian government is in a position to fulfill a peace agreement, and the differences between the parties appear to be bridgeable. Moreover, the potential for a strategic realignmentwould benefit the effort to weaken Iran’s influence in the sensitive core of the region, reduce external support for both Hezbollah and Hamas, and improve prospects for stability in Lebanon. In other words, it would give President Obama strategic leverage on Iran at the same time as he would be offering its leaders a constructive way out of their security dilemma.
President Obama should also make a serious effort from the outset to promote progress between Israel and the Palestinians. Here, though, factors related to timing appear contradictory. There is an urgent need for a diplomatic effort to achieve a final peace agreementbased on a two-state solution while it is still feasible. Yet deep divisions within the Palestinian leadership (not to mention divisions within Israel’s body politic), and the Palestinian Authority’s questionable ability to control territory from which Israel would withdraw, sharply reduce prospects for a sustainable peace agreement no matter what the outside effort. This dilemmadoes not argue for neglect, which is sure to be malign, but it does call for a devoted effort to create the conditions on the ground for more ambitious diplomacy to succeed. What these Iranian and Arab-Israeli initiatives have in common is a renewed emphasis on diplomacy as a tool of American foreign policy—certainly more than has been the norm over the past eight years. The United States will want the backing of the world’s other powers— Russia, China, and Europe—and the partnership of America’s regional allies, including Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Consulting and concerting with all of these actors will also take time and patience.
Realities on the ground also call for a new approach to the promotion of reform in the region. Authoritarian regimes that are repressive and largely unresponsive to legitimate popular needs have set in motion a dynamic in which opposition has gathered in the mosque. Such polarization needs to be avoided. The answer is not early elections, especially not when parties with militiascontest them, but rather a gradual, evolutionary process of democratization that emphasizes the building of civil society, the opening of political space, and the strengthening of independent institutions (including political parties, the media, and the judiciary). The parallel encouragement of a market economy can buttress this effort.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Get ready for the in-law in chief.
President-elect Barack Obama's mother-in-law, Marian Robinson, is moving into the White House at least temporarily to join Michelle Obama and the two children, transition officials said Friday.
That's good news not just for late-night comics, but for 10-year-old Malia and 7-year-old Sasha. During the campaign, Robinson retired from her job as a bank executive secretary to help care for her granddaughters.
"Mrs. Robinson will be coming with the family to help the girls get acclimated, and she will determine in the coming months whether or not she wants to stay in D.C. permanently," said Katie McCormick Lelyveld, spokeswoman for Michelle Obama.
Michelle Obama also made another hotly awaited decision: She's keeping the White House chef. Cristeta Comerford took the job in 2005 and is the first woman and first minority to serve as executive chef.
"Cristeta Comerford brings such incredible talent to the White House operation and came very highly regarded from the Bush family," Michelle Obama said in a statement released by the transition team. "Also the mom of a young daughter, I appreciate our shared perspective on the importance of healthy eating and healthy families."
Plenty of in-laws have taken up residence in the White House before, not to mention cousins, grandchildren and other relatives.
"Throughout history there have been many extended first families in office," said Robert Watson, author of "Life in the White House."
Ulysses S. Grant's father-in-law, Richard Dent, stayed for several years. Harry S. Truman's mother-in-law, Madge Gates Wallace, lived there, too, and was critical of her son-in-law.
"She never liked him. She always felt that Bess had married below her station," said Myra Gutin, a first lady historian and professor at Ryder University in New Jersey.
"For his part, he was gracious. Whatever Mother Wallace wanted, she pretty much got."
Mamie Eisenhower's mother also had extended stays, but like her daughter she tended to sleep until noon, said Maria Downs of the White House Historical Association.
Even the presidents' mothers can be tough. Lillian Carter stayed in the White House and got on well with her son Jimmy, but Gutin said that when he first told her, "Mom, I'm going to run for president," she replied, "President of what?"
By all accounts, Obama has a good relationship with his mother-in-law. She had put off retirement for years, but finally retired last summer to take care of the granddaughters while their parents campaigned.
"She didn't want anyone else taking care of the kids but her," McCormick Lelyveld said. "She wanted to be the one there."
Barack Obama has called her one of the unsung heroes of his campaign, and spoke of holding her hand on election night.
But when asked by "60 Minutes" if Robinson would move in, he quipped: "Well, I don't tell my mother-in-law what to do. But I'm not stupid. That's why I got elected president, man."
I have been reading through so many questions on Change.gov, and I have noticed so many questions that I look at and wonder...what was this person thinking.
So here are some thoughts I would like to express...
One...so many have asked the question "why do I have to pay for individuals who did things wrong, when I did everything right?" My question is why, because someone is caught up in this economic downturn, do you automatically assume that the person has done something wrong? What about the people who did everything right, but because of others greed, they are in trouble...why do you assume the people asking for help do not fall into that category?
My second thought...Maybe we should all take a step back and understand what a President can truely do. I understand, and partake in the excitement of a President who promises change from the same old politics, but all of the questions requesting things completely out of the control of a President does nothing to advance the cooperation that will be needed between the Government and the communities they serve. I understand that everyone has the right to ask what they choose, but questions that request the President to do things beyond his control are not productive.
Common questions I have come across...and my thoughts on them...Please give me your input...these are meant to get ideas going, so that we can be more proactive in our Government...
I have come across several questions that have had to do with legalizing Marijauna and taxing it the same way we tax cigarettes and alcohol. The common argument is that this would give an instant boost to the economy, both by the tax revenue this would raise and also by the billions of tax dollars saved in law enforcement costs each year. I personally see the argument, whether or not I believe in the cause, as a plausible way to stimulate the economy. What are your thoughts on this?
The next question that I have seen over and over is in regards to U.S. stimulus...Why not give a stimulus check to each American adult...the amount varries based on the questioner, but range from $30,000 each to 1 million each...included in the stimulus package to be voted on later this month. The arguement...That giving that much would allow those who have been hit hard to pay their mortgage payments and get bills caught up, and will then continue to stimulate the economy by spending, saving, or investing the rest. What are your thoughts on this?
The last question I am going to address here is whether or not we should abolish the current tax system and go to a sales tax instead of income tax system? I would like to hear all your ideas on this subjects as I am still trying to weigh the pros and cons of each. What are your thoughts on this?
The great part about this is that you can vote on which questions you want the Obama team to answer...with the questions that get the most votes being the ones they answer...if you have time you should stop by change.gov and answer a few...
