New Mexico for Obama

Hello New Mexicans for Obama

Eric from Las Cruces, NM — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:25:58 EST

Hello New Mexicans for Obama,

I hope you are still as fired up as I am after last fall’s campaign, and after the incredible start the Obama administration has had, and that you are still motivated to organize for change.

I wanted to introduce myself to those of you I don’t know. My name is Eric Hilberg and I worked as a volunteer grass roots organizer on the Obama campaign in Southern New Mexico. Just like many of you, I knocked on lots of doors, made phone calls, led a neighborhood team of volunteers, and prepared walk lists and call lists for dozens of other teams here in Las Cruces. Together we won this election.

I am excited to serve as New Mexico’s Volunteer Liaison to Organizing for America, and I’m excited to tell you that Organizing for America is up and running. OFA’s mission is to mobilize our grassroots movement in support of President Obama’s policies for change and to build on and strengthen that grassroots organization we have all built together. I am an unpaid volunteer (not an official OFA staffer) who has been asked to help coordinate our efforts here in New Mexico with OFA’s national office.

I know that many of you are already utilizing the Obama network to organize in your communities. Your efforts holding house parties and collecting stories about the impact of the current economic crisis on New Mexicans helped pass the Economic Recovery and Stimulus Act, and your involvement will be critical to its success.

You can act today to support our economic recovery. Take a minute to thank the Senators and Representatives in New Mexico who supported the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and encourage them to continue working with President Obama to lift America out of the economic crisis. When you’re done, report back to us about the calls you made.

Throughout the next weeks and months, I look forward to working with all of you to ensure that Organizing for America is successful here in New Mexico. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or ideas as we continue to organize for change.

Thanks so much,

Eric Hilberg (erichilberg@gmail.com)

New Mexico Volunteer Liaison, Organizing for America

Abraham Lincoln Would Definitely Be Proud of his Country Today

Charles Penny — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:49:13 EST

A year ago, on this blog I have been so privileged to participate in, I posted an entry posing the question, ‘Wouldn’t Abraham Lincoln be proud today?’ Now, on this February 12, 2009, the bicentennial of Lincoln’s birth, we can say that, indeed, he would.

If Lincoln could return to visit us, what he would find most surprising about Barack Obama’s election to the highest office in the land would most likely be the capital ‘D’ next to his name. In Lincoln’s day, ‘Republican’ and ‘Democrat’ meant something very different from what they do today. The G.O.P. was initially sparked and founded by the anti-slavery movement, as many amateur political historian readers will be aware. It was long after Lincoln was called ‘Home’, precipitated by an assassin’s bullet, that the Democratic Party came to represent the down-trodden and others who in so many ways have been marginalized, disadvantaged or neglected by the larger society. Yet, on this date in 1809, the nation's first Republican president was born to, let's face it, a poor family in a backwoods Kentucky log cabin.

In all fairness to history, Lincoln might also be initially shocked by Barack Obama’s skin color as a President of the United States. Lincoln was, after all, a man of his time. At the outset of the Civil War, his prime objective was to hold the Union together. Only later, amid all the fraternal bloodletting of that conflict did he see the fundamental need to take his country to a higher place and emancipate the slaves throughout the land. But, it wouldn’t take sharp-minded Lincoln long to convert that shock into amazed delight. I would add that it might also, in his case, give him a sense of great humility that his own quest to create a more perfect union could result in a man who would have been held in chains in the Confederacy now occupying the seat of the leader of the United States of America that Lincoln saved. In fact, I contend that it is in that very humility combined with an extraordinary compassion cited by those who knew him and can be seen so clearly in the face that stares back at us from the portrait photos we have of Lincoln that the true greatness of ‘Honest Abe’ lies.

As a supporter of Barack Obama before the Iowa caucuses and even before he took to the same steps of the Old State House in Springfield, Illinois to declare his candidacy for President of the United States where Lincoln began his own long journey to the White House, I feel honored to be a witness to the service of a President Obama during our historic time we all share today.

Abraham Lincoln would be proud of his country today, yet, at the same time, humbled by his own significant role in charting its course to come closer to fulfilling the promises contained in the creed put to paper by the Founding Fathers. Furthermore, like President Obama is now from the same office Lincoln held nearly 150 years ago, he would be well aware of the many great tasks, unfinished and yet-to-be-begun, that lie ahead.

Repost of YES WE DID, YES WE MUST by Carla Mays, Jan 23rd, 2009

Jill 4 Obama — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 07:55:02 EST

YES WE DID, YES WE MUST By Carla Mays - Jan 23rd, 2009 at 10:01 am EST Also listed in: 8 groups

YES WE DID! YES WE MUST:

Þ Protect him from harm both verbal & phyiscal

Þ Stay "FIRED UP" by staying active

Þ Work Bi-Partisan to bring "Change" together

Þ Don't just bitch, get active and stay engaged

Þ Start and join a local "Change" group

Þ Be philanthropic, serve your community, state and nation

Þ Stick by Obama, STOP smears on the Right & the Left!!!! Hold yourself responsible as you hold Barack!

Join the future of this movement!!

http://change.gov/joinus

http://www.communityorganize.com

http://www.ourpresidency.com

http://www.usaservice.org

http://www.whitehouse.gov

Barack's DNC 2004 Speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWynt87PaJ0&feature=PlayList&p=B1939005B8A4D4ED&index=188

Barack's DNC 2008 Speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ato7BtisXzE&feature=channel

Barack’s Election Acceptance Speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wJ-2Zu_Iic&feature=channel

Barack’s Inauguration Speech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjnygQ02aW4

We are Proud Americans Today

Vicki "Hussein" in New Mexico — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:32:22 EST

January 20, 2009: I got up at 5:30AM this morning, dressed and made coffee, threw in a load of laundry, and stepped outside into the cold, clear New Mexico night sky. The bright stars and a slice of moon still hung in the darkness above me. Was it just over a year ago that we greeted candidate Obama to our State and I shook his hand? I felt so confident about this man and hoped he might be President this day. I got the flag and placed it in the flag holder on my front porch. I switched on the porch light to illuminate it. I feel very proud to be an American. I haven't felt this way about my country in a long time. Today I want to hug everyone I see. I feel a part of something great as we await the Inauguration today of Barack Hussein Obama as our 44th President. I think about the cold, the hungry, the oppressed, the war-weary, the unemployed, the frightened and the dispossessed who have little to feel proud about. I think the whole world is watching us to see if we can truly deliver on our promise. I wish President Obama well. And I wish America well.

New East Mountains for Change Group Launched

Vicki "Hussein" in New Mexico — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:15:55 EST

The energy and positive activity of our successful campaign to elect Barack Obama as the 44th President of the USA has motivated thousands of citizens to continue making a difference in their communities. Here in the mountains and rural area east of Albuquerque, many activists have stayed in touch and created a new group: East Mountains for Change. The new web site for East Mountains for Change is: http://emforchange.ning.com

East Mountains for Change meets regularly at the East Mountain Library in Tijeras and has Teams to focus on the following issues: Rural business, Energy/Environment, Health care and Education/Service learning. There will be a General Meeting of the East Mountains for Change group on Saturday, January 24, 2009 at the East Mountains Library at 2PM. Interested in attending an Inaugural Celebration Tuesday, January 20th? Check-out the Website for East Mountains for Change: http://emforchange.ning.com for place and time. Want to participate in the East Mountains Book Drive for our local Middle School in Tijeras: Roosevelt Middle School? This is a way to benefit our local teachers and students and honor our 44th President of the United States Inauguration. There are 3 ways to contribute1. Collect new or used books appropriate for ages 11-13*

2. USE VOUCHER AT BORDERS BOOK FAIR, JANUARY 7-9

3. Buy bookstore gift cards ($5.00 @)4. Donate check* or bring cash to the presentationRoosevelt Middle School in Tijeras serves 6th to 8th grade students, providing education and UNM health care services for a 500 square mile area. “Our students love to read,” says teacher Lefty Folkman.* Book list on request. Contributions are tax-deductible. Make Checks out to Roosevelt Middle School. Note book drive on check. Send checks c/o Jeanette Quintanar, 75 Thunderbird Lane, Tijeras, NM 87059Questions? Contact Bay Stevens 480-1999 bay@ReUseIt.info Book pick up: Jeanette Quintanar at 250-9683

Oogedy-Boogedy in the Bloxicon | It isn't so much God causing the GOP problems; it's his fan club.

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:23:56 EST

Oogedy-Boogedy in the BloxiconBy Kathleen Parker

Friday, December 5, 2008; 12:00 AM

When it comes to irresistible words, "oogedy-boogedy" has few peers.

In the several days since I first used the term in a column describing the Republican Party's "religious" problem, oogedy-boogedy seems to have entered the bloxicon. (New word invented right here, meaning: the blogosphere's lexicon.) Google produces more than 26,000 references.

Despite its sudden popularity, oogedy-boogedy is nonetheless causing some consternation and confusion. What does it mean and whence does it come? In the Dec. 15 issue of National Review, Ramesh Ponnuru writes that he doesn't know what oogedy-boogedy means, "but I gather it's bad."

Not so bad, really, but not so good either. Like most things religious and political, it's a matter of taste and timing. (See Ecclesiastes 3:1).

First, to the origins. "Oogedy-boogedy" was bequeathed to me several years ago by my dear, departed friend, political cartoonist Doug Marlette.

We were doubtless talking about our shared Southern heritage, about which one does not speak long without mentioning religion.

And, you betcha, oogedy-boogedy.

Marlette, whose childhood was spent among Pentecostals, Baptists and other passionate believers, had religion in his bones and forgot more scripture than most preachers can recall on a given Sunday. He also won a Pulitzer Prize for his lampooning of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker (peace be upon them) and their "PTL Club."

If Jim and Tammy Faye put you in mind of oogedy-boogedy, you're getting warm.

Otherwise, the term may best be illuminated by two connoisseurs of the linguistic arts: Fats Waller and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart.

The latter, unable to define pornography, famously said, "I know it when I see it." Waller, responding to a request to explain "swing," said, "If you got to ask, you ain't got it."

The list of commentators who ain't got oogedy-boogedy is long, though Ponnuru is the most recent to out himself. While dismissing assertions -- mine and others' -- that the Republican Party has a religion problem, Ponnuru acknowledges that social conservatives "could present themselves more attractively," and "pick their spokesmen more wisely."

That's a start, but let's take it another step. How about social conservatives make their arguments without bringing God into it? By all means, let faith inform one's values, but let reason inform one's public arguments.

That was and remains my point. It isn't so much God causing the GOP problems; it's his fan club.

The broad perception among centrists, moderates, conservative Democrats, renegade Republicans, etc., is that the GOP is the party of white Christians to the exclusion of others, some of whom might also be social conservatives.

One can believe this or not. But as the gazillions who have written me to say either that "God Is Here To Stay" or that "Conservatives Won't Be Silenced" ought best to know: Just because you don't believe something doesn't make it untrue.

It may be, as Ponnuru insists, that Barack Obama won for other reasons (health care, for instance) than that evangelicals repelled the less overtly religious. But oogedy-boogedyness remains a problem for the GOP, as hundreds of other letter writers confirm.

As long as the religious right is seen as controlling the Republican Party, the GOP will continue to lose some percentage of voters, and that percentage likely will increase over time as younger voters shift away from traditional to more progressive values.

The cause is not helped when someone of the stature of Rick Warren interviews the leading presidential candidates in his church, questioning them about their faith. If that's not a religious test, I don't know what is.

The glue that binds the GOP's religious right -- social issues, especially abortion -- is not insignificant and doesn't deserve to be dismissed. But nor should those issues be tied to scripture. Some religious conservatives understand this, but the memo apparently isn't reaching all the pews.

They might take a cue from Nat Hentoff, a self-described Jewish-atheist, who has written as eloquently as anyone about the "indivisibility of life" and the slippery slope down which abortion leads.

He uses logic and reason to argue that being pro-life, rather than resolving the religious question of ensoulment, is really a necessary barrier against selective killing, such as when someone else decides it's your time to die.

Hentoff's arguments, and others on related issues, ultimately may fail. But at least they will fail for reasons other than that oogedy-boogedy got in the way.

kparker@kparker.com

Bad Recession Requires Bold Responses

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:20:25 EST

OurFuture.org

Bad Recession Requires Bold Responses

On Monday, the National Bureau of Economic Research formally declared that the U.S. economy entered a recession in December 2007—the second economic downturn of George W. Bush’s presidency. We’ve lost jobs every month since then. This downturn, already long, is likely to be painfully deep unless our government quickly enacts an economic recovery program that is substantial, strategic, and sustained.

* The current recession is already unusually long. Recessions in 1990-91 and 2001 each lasted only eight months. This one has already lasted a year, making it the longest contraction since 1982. Virtually all economists expect this recession to continue through 2009, if not longer, which will make it the longest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Sources

* Americans continue to lose their jobs at an alarming rate. So far this year, 1.2 million workers have lost their jobs, and there are now 10.1 million unemployed Americans. U.S. employers cut 240,000 jobs in October and another 325,000 in November. On December 5, the Labor Department is expected to report an increase in the jobless rate to about 6.8 percent—the highest level since 1993. Some analysts believe the unemployment rate could reach 10 percent in 2009. Sources

* The housing market remains a disaster. The median price of a single-family home has dropped by 22 percent since July 2006. It is the first time since the Great Depression that home prices have declined for an extended period. Today, one of every 11 mortgages in America is delinquent or in foreclosure. One in six homes with a mortgage is under water, worth less than the mortgage. The average homeowner has lost more than $70,000 in home equity over the past two years. Nationwide, we’ve lost nearly $6 trillion in housing wealth. Home sales are at a seven-year low and experts say the housing market will continue to plummet into 2009. Sources

* Americans have lost $8 trillion in the stock market. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has dropped by about 40 percent in little more than a year. Sources

* Most have little or no savings with which to weather the economic storm. Our nation’s personal savings rate is now at its lowest point since the Great Depression. Sources

* Because of lost jobs, diminished assets and insufficient savings, Americans are now spending less. Consumer spending plunged in the third quarter of 2008. U.S. auto sales dropped 37 percent in November to the lowest annual rate in 26 years. Home construction has hit a 50-year low. Consumer confidence is at its lowest rate in history. Unless it is offset by government action, diminished consumer spending means the economy will continue to slow and unemployment will continue to rise. Sources

The Argument

Bush helped Wall Street but not Main Street. The Bush administration has used trillions of dollars to prop up Wall Street’s banks, but other than the ineffective tax rebates this year, Bush has opposed and threatened to veto any program aimed at putting Main Street back to work.

Senate Republicans have blocked even modest stimulus legislation. In September, Senate Republicans used a filibuster to kill a modest, $56 billion stimulus plan. Even today, as the economy nosedives, they continue to block similar legislation.

Economists call for a major economic recovery program. Leading economists like Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, Dean Baker—and even the great majority of economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal—support a large-scale economic recovery plan. Sources

Progressive Solution

America urgently needs a bold recovery program to keep itself from falling into a deep, painful recession. Without a substantial, strategic, and sustained recovery program to lift the real, Main Street economy, we risk economic disaster.

For more about our Main Street Economic Recovery Plan, click here.

About This Email
----------------
This is the fifty-first of CAF's Making Sense 2008 emails. We're sending brief talking points to our progressive allies throughout 2008 regarding kitchen table economic issues. Please feel free to share these with your colleagues. They can subscribe to our Making Sense 2008 email list here: http://ga3.org/caf/making_sense_2008_email_signup.html

Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.
Tell-a-friend!

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Campaign for America's Future.

OurFuture.org | Donate | Contact Us Subscribe to E-Publications

Nike turns a blind eye

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:11:19 EST

For mega-retailer Nike, workers' rights are taking a back seat to holiday profits.

This holiday, take a stand for the truckers who help keep Nike running!

Dear Worker' Rights Advocate:

When it comes to protecting workers' rights, it's time for Nike to stop talking about it and just do it.

Nike is one of the world's largest retailers – raking in billions in profits – but the truckers who haul all their sneakers to JCPenney say they have faced unfair working conditions including intimidation during contract negotiations and rising healthcare premiums.

Nike won't join other leading retailers in defending these workers, but you can.

Stand up for the drivers who ship for Nike – demand fairness TODAY!

Over 500 employees of Oak Harbor Freight Lines – the company that ships merchandise for Nike and Ralph Lauren to JCPenney – are on strike.

They're taking a stand against on-the-job abuses, including an outrageous proposal to cancel health coverage for retired employees, cut paid sick days and overtime pay for current employees, and reduce pension benefits.

But rather than negotiate in good faith, this shipping company has hired a notorious strike-breaking firm to strong-arm workers into giving up. What's more, the subcontractor reportedly recruited disadvantaged drivers from the south as replacement workers, promising them high wages and stable employment, then fired them when local employees became available.

Nike pretends to be an advocate for workers' rights – working hard to shed its association with sweatshops abroad – but hasn't stood up for these American drivers.

Show Nike that protecting America's workers is the right thing to do this holiday season. Take action today!

Thanks for all that you do.

Sincerely,

Liz Cattaneo
American Rights at Work
www.AmericanRightsatWork.org

Is Obama Truly Like Lincoln - As His "Team of Rivals" and Other Parallels Suggest?

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:09:58 EST

Is Obama Truly Like Lincoln - As His "Team of Rivals" and Other Parallels Suggest?

By EDWARD LAZARUS

Thursday, Dec. 04, 2008

As President-elect Barack Obama selects his cabinet and other top-level advisors, he is being widely hailed as having assembled a "team of rivals," a description borrowed from Doris Kearns Goodwin's book about Abraham Lincoln and the cabinet Lincoln assembled from among the powerful political figures that he had battled on the way to the presidency.

This is but one way in which Obama's victory, and the anticipation of his Administration, are linked in the public imagination to the Civil War now more than 140 years distant. And as I will discuss further below, this is altogether fitting. But while much of the linkage between Obama and Lincoln is cast in a rosy light, there is also a cautionary aspect to these ties that should not be wholly overlooked.

The Basis for the Obama/Lincoln Parallel

From the outset, it was inevitable that Obama would be considered against the backdrop of Lincoln, and he actively invited the comparison. Obama formally launched his campaign from the steps of the Old Capitol Building in Springfield, Illinois, the very place where Lincoln began his own run for the presidency. Obama's soaring rhetoric on that day, and on many since, borrowed openly from Lincoln's own exceptional eloquence. Recasting Lincoln's inaugurals for a modern-day audience, Obama called upon the better angels of our nature and the mystic chords that bind us together as Americans in divisive times.

As Obama's opponents attacked his relatively thin resume in elected office, the Lincoln comparisons deepened. Lincoln had served but a few years in Congress when he sought the presidency. It was his judgment, temperament, and political acumen - not long experience -- that guided the nation through its darkest hour. Obama's supporters, myself among them, saw similar strengths in him.

At an even more fundamental level, too, the very possibility of Obama's candidacy was tied directly to the Civil War, the end of slavery, and the enactment of the post-Civil War constitutional amendments granting persons of all races equal protection of the laws and equal access to the privileges and immunities of citizenship.

As is well-known, the road from constitutional promise to constitutional reality was long and arduous and full of backtracking and the occasional U-turn. By 1877, the Reconstruction of the South, imperfect as it was, had come to a close and the nation had sunk into decades of government-tolerated and government-sponsored racial subjugation.

It took a thousand small steps for the nation to find its way from Lincoln to Obama. Over decades of legal battles and boycotts and marches, amid sacrifice, lynchings, and even assassination, black Americans redeemed their Constitutional rights to vote, to attend desegregated schools, to live in the neighborhoods of their own choosing, and to participate in civil life on equal terms.

The landmarks on this path are legion: the early cases opening up previously all-white primaries to black voters, Truman's order desegregating the armed forces, Brown v. Board of Education, Selma, the Little Rock crisis, Martin Luther King's March on Washington, the court decisions enforcing the rule of one person/one vote, the great civil rights bills of the 1960s, the black legal and political leaders from Thurgood Marshall to Shirley Chisholm and Jesse Jackson.

Over time, changes in law were matched by changes in attitudes. Explicit expressions of racial bias became socially unacceptable. African-Americans rose to prominent positions in politics and business. Society as a whole inched closer and closer to King's dream of a world in which individuals would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

The Cautionary Side of the Obama/Lincoln Parallel: A Journey that Is Far From Finished

Obama's election, of course, was made possible by and reflects that very progress. To the last day, there were those who said that the so-called "Bradley effect" - the idea that many voters, in the privacy of the voting booth, simply would not pull the lever for a black man, whatever they might have claimed to pollsters - would swamp Obama's lead in the polls and vault John McCain into the White House. That did not happen and, on November 4, the death of the Bradley effect became another chapter in the long saga of the redeeming post-Civil-War possibilities and the ongoing challenge of healing the wounds of a conflict still lingering generations after the death of all of its combatants.

But for all that, the election results suggest that the Civil War still haunts us. Candidate Obama did better than his Democratic predecessor John Kerry in almost every section of the country. The one section, however, in which he did worse than Kerry - and significantly worse - is the swath of the old Confederacy that runs down the spine of the Appalachian Mountains, down to the Gulf Coast, and then across through Texas. The stubborn, unfortunate truth remains that, across most of the South, Obama commanded much less support from white voters than his less charismatic and otherwise less successful Democratic predecessor did.

One of Obama's challenges, thus, is Lincoln's unfinished business. In the hearts and minds of many in some parts of this country, the Civil War remains unfinished business. We are not yet fully one nation, blind to caste and color, indivisible. And it will take all of Obama's political skill - which is towering, as was that of the great President whom Obama self-consciously evokes - to end this conflict altogether.

Edward Lazarus, a FindLaw columnist, writes about, practices, and teaches law in Los Angeles. A former federal prosecutor, he is the author of two books -- most recently, Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court.

Battle looms on access to birth control | Advocates play tug of war over teenagers’ well-being

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:54:52 EST

Battle looms on access to birth control

Advocates play tug of war over teenagers’ well-being

By Eric Russell

BDN Staff

BANGOR, Maine — A state policy group that wants to preserve teens’ unrestricted access to birth control is gearing up for a potential legislative battle.

BANGOR DAILY NEWS PHOTO BY JOHN CLARKE RUSS Linda Ross (second from right) talks about her role as a parent while participating in a community forum on the topic of privacy and teens' access to family planning and birth control hosted by Penquis Community Health Services in Bangor on Tuesday night. "My goal as a parent is to provide them with the tools and resources to be healthy," said Ross. Next to Ross (left to right) are fellow panelists Dr. Connie Adler, chair of the Heart of Maine Campaign; Dr. Eric Brown, a Bangor family medicine physician; Unity College freshman Deirdre Birbeck,18 of Lincolnville, Priscilla Perry, a family nurse practitioner with Penquis Health Services; and Kate Brogan, policy analyst with Family Planning Association of Maine.

The Family Planning Association of Maine held the first of seven community forums on Tuesday in Bangor to discuss the importance of providing youth with options regarding birth control and reproductive health. The featured panel was largely preaching to a sympathetic choir of about 30 people, but the event’s organizers stressed that generating a coalition of support is paramount.

“Access to birth control will be challenged by the Legislature,” said Dr. Connie Adler, a Farmington physician and chair of the Family Planning Association’s Heart of ME campaign. “It’s really important that we have this conversation.”

The Heart of ME campaign was launched in response to anticipated legislation that would require parental consent before school clinics and other health care providers could prescribe birth control. Sen. Doug Smith, R-Dover-Foxcroft, who sponsored a similar bill unsuccessfully during the last session, has indicated he is considering revisiting the topic. Other lawmakers also may be considering submitting similar measures before the mid-January deadline for filing bills in the 124th Legislature.

Kate Brogan, a policy analyst with the Family Planning Association, said her group’s goal is to build a broad base of support to counteract aggressive campaigns on the other side of the issue. Powerful lobbying groups such as the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, the Maine Family Policy Council (formerly the Christian Civic League of Maine) and the Jeremiah Project have pledged support for parental consent in the past.

“They want to reverse 35 years of state law,” Brogan said. “So we want an army of people to be ready to contact legislators and have this conversation.”

Current Maine law does not require parental notification or consent for minors to be prescribed birth control pills as long as the prescriber believes the minor would suffer “probable health hazards” — including unintentional pregnancy — without them. In addition, emergency contraception, also known as “the morning-after pill,” is available without parental consent, along with pregnancy testing and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.

Dr. Eric Brown, a family physician in Bangor who sat on the panel, said it’s a no-brainer that teens should have access but added that not everyone knows their rights.

“My experience is that teens don’t have a clue,” he said. “They are just as surprised as parents.”

The issue of parental consent, which went largely unnoticed for many years, was brought back to light when the Portland School Committee voted 7-2 in October 2007 to make a full range of contraception available to sixth- through eighth-graders at King Middle School without requiring a parent’s approval. The vote didn’t sit well with some parents and community members who called for changes in the policy.

Linda Ross, a Hampden parent who sat on the panel at Tuesday’s forum, said all parents want to believe that their children are abstinent, but reality suggests otherwise.

“You can talk about abstinence, and you should,” she said. “But our kids are sexually saturated. Oftentimes we don’t bring it up because it’s hard. My daughters don’t have a choice but to talk to me because I just keep bringing it up.”

Unfortunately, Adler said, most parents are not like Ross.

“Eighty percent of teens who are sexually active would not seek assistance if parents had to be involved,” she said. “That’s a really big problem.”

All of the panel members agreed that open communication is the biggest factor. Maine, which used to have one of the nation’s highest teen pregnancy rates, now has the fifth-lowest.

“Communication is the biggest part of that,” Brogan said. “And access.”

In addition to the Bangor forum, the Family Planning Association of Maine has meetings planned in Augusta, Biddeford, Calais, Lewiston, Rockland and South Paris. A list of locations and times has not yet been completed, but it will be posted on the organization’s Web site, www.mainefamilyplanning.org.

Women need an advocate like Clinton

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:47:24 EST

Women need an advocate like Clinton

By KELLI CONLIN

First published in print: Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Hillary Rodham Clinton's nomination to be secretary of state provides her an unprecedented opportunity to bring her unique leadership, advocacy and diplomacy skills to the world's stage. We could not ask for a better candidate to help expand our country's foreign policy, which has for the past eight years focused exclusively on the military, to include a more comprehensive understanding of the global impact our policies have on economics, health and human rights.

But we need to make sure that our gain is not simultaneously our loss.

As a senator, Clinton has not only been a strong advocate for New York, but a singular champion for all the women of the United States. Clinton led the way for progressive, pro-choice legislation in the Senate and, because she represents New York, our state's priorities helped push the rest of the nation forward.

So when we think about appointing her replacement, we must ask what it truly means to replace Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It means replacing the woman who nearly single-handedly ended the Food and Drug Administration's foot-dragging on approving emergency contraception for over-the-counter access. Clinton's strategy of stalling a confirmation until the FDA made a decision ensured that women were more easily able to access this important method of back-up birth control.

It means replacing the woman who joined her fellow New York Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer to oppose the administration's plan to reduce federal reimbursements to health clinics (including family planning clinics, substance abuse counseling and mental health clinics). The predicted loss of $350 million in funds to our state would be devastating to health care providers and the more than 400,000 New Yorkers, many of them low-income, who rely on them.

It means replacing the woman who joined her colleague Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., to introduce the "Protecting Patients and Health Care Act," legislation that would that would block the Department of Health and Human Services from passing a bill limiting patients' access to basic reproductive health care service. Clinton and Murray have been leading the opposition to this misguided legislation since July, when rumors of the bill first began.

It means replacing the woman who has not only been a staunch ally on health care issues, but also a sponsor of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. This legislation would've helped close the pay gap and end the inequities that have shortchanged women and families for far too long.

It means replacing the woman who cosponsored legislation to repeal the global gag rule, to end funding for abstinence-only education and fund comprehensive sexuality education, to expand contraceptive access, and to codify the Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade ruling in federal law.

Simply put, there is no other senator who has shown such commitment, dedication and leadership when it has come to standing up for women's health and rights.

Some may argue that, with the election of a pro-choice president and additional pro-choice senators and Congress members, we no longer need an advocate like Clinton. We argue, though, that we need someone like her even more. Not to just defend against regressive legislation, but to push forward a proactive, pro-choice agenda. We need someone who not only represents New York's pro-choice values, but has the political acumen and ability to confront the entrenched power structures in the Senate. We need someone who has the same willingness to be an ally and advocate for New York and for women across the country.

We hope that as Gov. David Paterson considers the appointment of Clinton's successor, he will choose someone who will commit to upholding this legacy. Though gender need not his only guide, the governor must keep in mind that Clinton is one of only 16 women currently serving in the Senate and that her advancement provides an opportunity for another woman to build upon her foundation.

Kelli Conlin is president of NARAL Pro-Choice New York.

Pre-Emptive Pardons from the Man who gave us pre-emptive invasions | Will he or won't he?

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:59:21 EST

In America, no one is above the law.

Speak out against
preemptive pardons and restore the American values of justice and due process.

Dear ACLU Supporter,

There’s a real risk that President Bush may issue pardons to a number of high-ranking Administration officials for any activities related to torture, extraordinary rendition and other abuses.

That’s right. Even before they’re charged with a crime, Bush has the power to prevent any criminal investigation into the activities of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzales and others whose behavior raises serious questions.

Send a message to President Bush telling him you oppose preemptive pardons for torture.

We must make it clear that preemptive pardons aimed at letting high-ranking officials escape accountability for undermining the Constitution and violating the law go against American values of justice and due process.

Today, the ACLU is urging concerned people all across the country to speak out against these pardons. Americans -- and the world -- have a right to know the truth about torture and other abuses carried out in our name.

Tell President Bush: you oppose preemptive pardons for torture.

This weekend, both The New York Times and The Washington Post issued powerful editorials calling on President Bush to resist taking this inflammatory action. We need you to do the same.

As the Post put it, "no country should be in the business of concealing its history." We should be getting at the truth, not excusing those involved in shameless acts.

So, in a preemptive campaign of our own, the ACLU is urging people all across the country to tell President Bush that you won’t stand for preemptive pardons for people who were involved in torture, illegal detention, and other abuses.

Take action: Tell President Bush you oppose preemptive pardons for torture.

In its editorial, The New York Times made the case clearly:

"The Bush administration distorted statutes and case law to legally justify interrogation techniques that had long been considered torture under domestic and international law. It relied on sloppy or aggressive legal analysis as a basis for evading judicial review of a warrantless wiretapping program. It has at every turn chosen the most expansive interpretation of the law to rationalize indefinite detentions and deny federal court review to those in custody. It has, in short, determined its preferred course of action first and then stitched together absurd readings of the law to defend those choices."

The last thing America needs as we set out to restore the rule of law and repair America’s reputation in the world is a last-ditch Bush effort to pardon those who guided our country so far off course.

Please act now. Help the ACLU raise a powerful wave of protest expressing outrage that pardons by President Bush are even under consideration.

Sincerely,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
ACLU

P.S. Pardons could happen at any time. We need as many people as possible to take part in this effort as quickly as possible. Please forward this email far and wide.

Proposition 8: The Musical | A Damn(ing) Funny Video

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:27:10 EST

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones

I'm exhausted.

Bobby — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:36:12 EST

Started making GOTV calls yesterday to Virginia after I got the urgent email for phone call volunteers. I was already tired but that email scared me. The calls made didn't show up on my home page but oh well. Stayed up until 3AM watching returns. Sure wish we'd picked up 1 or 2 more Senate seats. The voter registration and GOTV operations really paid big dividends yesterday. Thanks to all donors and workers. Almost too tired to celebrate. It hasn't really sunk in yet. Seems like things are already moving fast too. Not much time to celebrate. That's it. I'm spent.

Keep an eye on Palin from now on

Liz — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 03:01:57 EST

One of our next duties is to keep an eye on Palin and send her back where she came from, sorry Alaska. Everything she stands for is wrong for America and we cannot let up on making sure she never obtains enough power to cause any more damage to our environment, wildlife and morals. We must stay vigilant and organized.

Thank you!!!!!!!!

Cory from Albuquerque, NM — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:25:37 EST

Thank you, God; thank you, Obama! I couldn't be more thrilled that Obama and Biden are our next Presidential team!

Our hope is real; our future is change - change for the better.

Thank you, God; thank you, Obama!

Obama Wins: Why All Americans Have a Reason to Celebrate

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:17:25 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/obama-wins-w...

Arianna Huffington

Posted November 4, 2008 | 10:23 PM (EST)

Obama Wins: Why All Americans Have a Reason to Celebrate

Even if your candidate didn't win tonight, you have reason to celebrate. We all do.

Ten months ago, when Obama won in Iowa, we had a glimpse of what was possible and what became real tonight. What I wrote then about one state is now true for the whole country:

Barack Obama's impressive victory says a lot about America, and also about the current mindset of the American voter.

Because tonight voters decided that they didn't want to look back. They wanted to step into the future -- as if a country exhausted by the last seven-plus years wanted to recapture its youth.

And they turned out in unprecedented numbers today to make sure that no amount of scrubbed rolls, malfunctioning machines, endless lines, or polling places running out of ballots would block the way.

The history of America is studded with great breakthroughs -- propelled by leaders such as Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, and Martin Luther King - followed by decades of consolidation and occasional regression.

The Bush years have clearly been in a period of regression. The repudiation of those years is now almost universal. Even conservatives are admitting it; over the course of today, I've received numerous emails from conservatives ending with some variation on "Go Obama!"

In America's journey toward a more just and truly democratic society, tonight is another milestone. And not just because the son of a Kenyan father and a mother from Kansas is now President-Elect. But also because tonight's outcome is a declaration that we are once again a nation more driven by hope and promise than a nation driven by fear.

Bush's re-election in 2004 was a monument to the power of fear. And McCain, his staff stocked with Karl Rove disciples, followed the Bush blueprint and played the fear card again and again.

Be afraid of Obama, the GOP warned us. Be afraid of something new, something different. He would meet with our enemies. His middle name is Hussein. He "pals around with terrorists," consorts with the radicals at Acorn (which is "destroying the fabric of democracy"), and doesn't see America "like you and I see America." A vote for Obama would be "dangerous" and "too risky for America."

The people of America listened, but chose to take the risk. So even if you voted for John McCain; even if you love Sarah Palin, who is still in search of the "pro-American areas of this great nation"; even if are Joe the Plumber - or, hell, even if you are Michele Bachmann - tonight is a night to be proud of America.

Obama's victory holds up a mirror, reflecting the country we are. And it turns out to be the kind of country we've always imagined ourselves being -- even if in the last seven-plus years we fell horribly short: a young country, an optimistic country, a forward-looking country, a country not afraid to take risks or to dream big.

Of course, it will take more than big dreams to help America dig out from the many crises we face. From the global economic crisis to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the day of reckoning is upon us.

But these challenging times also will provide the new president with the opportunity to really transform America. As Gary Hart points out, "Great presidents do not emerge form quiet times; they arise in times of chaos and crisis."

This is an idea that has animated Obama's candidacy from the beginning. As he put it on the stump many times last week:

We began this journey in the depths of winter nearly two years ago, on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois. Back then, we didn't have much money or many endorsements. We weren't given much of a chance by the polls or the pundits, and we knew how steep our climb would be. But I also knew this. I knew that the size of our challenges had outgrown the smallness of our politics.

Since that time, the size of our challenges has grown even bigger -- and the smallness of our politics has even downsized McCain from a noble hero to a hack fearmonger.

But over the course of this long and arduous campaign, Obama has repeatedly demonstrated the ability to inspire us to tap into the better angels of our nature -- to stir the American people to expect more of themselves than they otherwise would.

It's a theme Michelle Obama touched on many times on the campaign trail. "Barack Obama will require that you work," she said at a rally on the eve of Super Tuesday. "He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism; that you put down your divisions; that you come out of your isolation; that you move out of your comfort zones; that you push yourself to be better; and that you engage."

This call echoed something that historian and presidential biographer David McCullough had once said about JFK. "The great thing about Kennedy," he told me, "is that he didn't say I'm going to make it easier for you. He said it's going to be harder. And he wasn't pandering to the less noble side of human nature. He was calling on us to give our best."

And when Bobby Kennedy was agonizing over whether or not to run in 1968, he told one of his advisors: "People are selfish. But they can also be compassionate and generous, and they care about the country. But not when they feel threatened. That's why this is such a crucial time. We can go in either direction. But if we don't make a choice soon, it will be too late to turn things around. I think people are willing to make the right choice. But they need leadership. They're hungry for leadership." Forty years later, we are starving for it. Real leadership. Leadership geared to transforming the country.

Tonight is a night to celebrate the victory of a candidate who seized his moment in history and reminded America of its youth and the optimism it longs to recapture. Let's savor it.

The dark years of the Bush regression are almost done. It's time for another American breakthrough.

Guide For Watching Election Night Results

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:52:01 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/03/guide-for-watching-e...

Thomas B. Edsall
Edsall@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting From DC

Guide For Watching Election Night Results

November 3, 2008 10:34 AM

For those obsessed with the results on Tuesday night, here is a November 4 guide to watching television and searching exit poll data on the web.

There are three basic questions (with hundreds more to follow in the weeks ahead): 1) When can you feel confident about the outcome of the presidential contest?; 2) How well are Democrats progressing toward their goal of 60 seats in the Senate?; and 3) Will 2008 be another Democratic blowout, signaling the possibility that the party could establish a majority coalition in future elections?

The basic rule of thumb is to follow the poll closing times in each state. Once voting is stopped, the networks can start using detailed exit polling (HuffPost will post those polls here). If the networks are unwilling to call a given state, an examination of the exit poll data can often give you a clear signal of the ultimate results. The state-by-state exit polls released after poll closings will have large samples and should not suffer the defects that plagued the early findings in 2004 which pointed to a solid Kerry victory nationwide. (CNN and MSNBC have exit polls that are relatively easy to negotiate.)

For additional help, HuffPost has election night widgets from Google, CNN, and MSNBC that will allow you to watch the electoral vote count and the congressional balance of power with the national U.S. map or choose a state and see how individual counties are voting.

At 7:00 P.M. ETthe polls will close in Virginia, Kentucky, Georgia and Indiana.

Virginia is a crucial battleground state, and an Obama win there (without Georgia or Indiana) would suggest he is likely to take the oath of office on January 20. Turnout in the state is already reported to be off the charts. One person helping out the campaign there says that nearly half the expected electorate showed up by noon. The state also has a hot congressional battle being waged as well. Arch-conservative Rep. Virgil Goode, in a district that includes Charlottesville (UVA's home town) is in a tight fight with Democrat Tom Periello.

If Obama carries either Georgia or Indiana, look for a big Democratic night all around. If he carries both (along with Virginia), Republicans should consider turning on the gas and closing the windows. Conversely, if McCain carries Virginia, Indiana and Georgia, plan to stay up a little later.

There are Senate battles in these states as well.

The Kentucky Senate race, pitting Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell against Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford, a businessman and U.S. Army veteran, is a crucial contest in the fight for filibuster-proof control of the Upper Chamber. McConnell has a 5.7 percent advantage according to RealClearPolitics and a Democratic victory would be a major upset.

Another upset could be in the making in Georgia, where Democrat Jim Martin has been closing the gap in his challenge to incumbent Saxby Chambliss, although Martin remains 2.7 points behind. If Georgia goes for Martin, it will indicate that black voters are turning out in droves, mobilized by the prospect of electing the first African American president.

At 7:30 P.M. ET, polls will close in the Big Enchilada of 2008: Ohio -- as well as another important state, North Carolina, although officials there have the option of staying open until 8:30 if there are problems in completing the voting process.

Ohio has become the national battleground state and this year is no exception. Carried twice by George W. Bush, this year Obama is favored, with a 7 point edge, but neither side is taking it easy. The closing Ohio trend line has been in favor of McCain, who in recent days has cut in half what had been a double digit deficit.

The presidential race in North Carolina is a dead heat, and has been so for a month. The RCP average has Obama ahead by a statistically meaningless 0.3 percent. An Obama victory there would be another strong sign of a good night for the Democratic nominee and his party -- especially if combined with an Obama win in Virginia.

North Carolina Senator Elizabeth Dole (R) is fighting for her life against Kay Hagan (D) in the Tar Heel state. Hagan holds a 5.5 point advantage and appears likely to pull off an upset win, but the big question is whether Dole's last minute airing of highly controversial commercials linking Hagan to a "Godless" supporter gains traction.

At 8:00 P.M. ET, there will be a flood of voting results and poll data begins from key states, including Florida, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and New Hampshire. In addition, there are two crucial Senate races: Sen. John Sununu (R) v. Jeanne Shaheen (D) in New Hampshire, and Senator Roger Wicker (R) v. Ronnie Musgrove (D) in Mississippi.

Of the presidential states with 8 pm poll closings, Florida is by far the most important. RCP's 4-poll average in Florida gives Obama a 4.2 point edge over McCain. If that holds up, Obama would be well on his way to victory.

If, conversely, McCain wins Pennsylvania while holding Florida and other states carried by George W. Bush in 2004, it's a whole new ball game, and a late night: you will have to wait for returns from Colorado, New Mexico (both 9 PM ET closings) and Nevada (10 PM), to have any real confidence in the outcome.

In Connecticut, meanwhile, Rep. Chris Shay's - a perennial endangered GOPer - is hoping to be the lone House Republic left in New England. He could be hurt by Obama's appeal in the New York City suburbs - where he is a bit more popular than the average Democrat - but mainly by minority turnout in Bridgeport.

As a side note: The networks will not go anywhere near calling the presidential race until the polls close on the West Coast at 11 PM. Barring the Pennsylvania-McCain scenario, the odds are that the winner will be known to anyone following the results once the states with 8 PM closings are in.

At 9:00 P.M. ET, polls will close in a host of important states, including Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado, Louisiana and Arizona. Obama is looking strong in the first four. And in a surreal Democratic landslide, he could take McCain's home state - though that is incredibly unlikely.

Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado all have big Senate races. Al Franken's hopes of knocking of Norm Coleman seems destined for a too-close-to-call finish, with third party candidate Dean Barkley likely to take somewhere between 13-18 percent of the vote. The Udall brothers are expected to win in New Mexico and Colorado, both open seats. One of the few hopes for the GOP is for John Kennedy to win in Louisiana where polls have tightened. Though Mary Landrieux, the current Senator, seems likely to squeak out a win.

Minnesota also is hosting two interesting House races. Michelle Bachmann's rant about investigating un-American activity in the U.S. Congress catapulted her opponent into a nipping-at-her-heels position. Meanwhile, Ashwin Madia, a Marine vet and son of East Indian immigrants (who was subjected to political attack-ads that distorted his skin color) is poised to knock of Erik Paulson.

At 10 P.M. ET, the polls from Montana and Nevada will close. Montana will show the strength of Obama's mountain west appeal. His showing in Nevada will underscore how well his candidacy has done with Latino voters.

At 11:00 P.M. ET - the polls in California, Oregon and Washington will close. The gubernatorial race in the latter is the tightest in the country. In 2004, Republican Dino Rossi lost to incumbent Christine Gregoire by just 129 votes after a third recount. The two are at it again and it will likely, once more, be too close to call.

In California, it is a ballot initiative that is gathering all the headlines. Proposition 8 would eliminate the rights of same sex couples in the state. Early results show that a slight majority are against the initiative.

In Oregon, Democratic challenger Jeff Merkley leads incumbent Gordon Smith by 5.3 points. If Democrats are still on the cusp, with 59 seats, when Oregon's results are counted, it will take Alaska's results to be sure of the balance of power in the Senate.

At 1:00 A.M., polls will close in Alaska. Recently convicted incumbent Republican Ted Stevens looks like a probable loser to Democrat Mark Begich, who leads by 10.3 points -- although no one is going to state publicly that Stevens is politically dead until the results are officially declared. Rep. Don Young also hurt by ethical transgressions, seems likely to lose his post.

There is an even worse scenario for those with a desperate need to know: The Democrats could be at 59 Senate seats at 2 AM on November 5, but, when all the votes are counted in the Georgia race, a number of experts say that a reasonable expectation is that neither Chambliss nor Martin will reach the 50 percent required to win, and that Libertarian Allen Buckley will siphon off enough votes to force a run-off later in the month.

A New Kind of Pride

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:33:29 EST

A New Kind of Pride
By Eugene Robinson Tuesday, November 4, 2008; Page A17

Whoever wins this election, I understand what Barack Obama meant when he said his faith in the American people had been "vindicated" by his campaign's success. I understand what Michelle Obama meant, months ago, when she said she was "proud of my country" for the first time in her adult life. Why should they be immune to the astonishment and vertigo that so many other African Americans are experiencing? Why shouldn't they have to pinch themselves to make sure they aren't dreaming, the way that I do?

I know there's a possibility that the polls are wrong. I know there's a possibility that white Americans, when push comes to shove, won't be able to bring themselves to elect a black man as president of the United States. But the spread in the polls is so great that the Bradley effect wouldn't be enough to make Obama lose; it would take a kind of "Dr. Strangelove effect" in which voters' hands developed a will of their own.

I'm being facetious but not unserious. In my gut, I know there's a chance that the first African American to make a serious run for the presidency will lose. But that is precisely what's new and, in a sense, unsettling: I'm talking about possibility, not inevitability.

For African Americans, at least those of us old enough to have lived through the civil rights movement, this is nothing short of mind-blowing. It's disorienting, and it makes me see this nation in a different light.

You see, I remember a time of separate and unequal schools, restrooms and water fountains -- a time when black people were officially second-class citizens. I remember moments when African Americans were hopeful and excited about the political process, and I remember other moments when most of us were depressed and disillusioned. But I can't think of a single moment, before this year, when I thought it was within the realm of remote possibility that a black man could be nominated for president by one of the major parties -- let alone that he would go into Election Day with a better-than-even chance of winning.

Let me clarify: It's not that I would have calculated the odds of an African American being elected president and concluded that this was unlikely; it's that I wouldn't even have thought about such a thing.

African Americans' love of country is deep, intense and abiding, but necessarily complicated. At the hour of its birth, the nation was already stained by the Original Sin of slavery. Only in the past several decades has legal racism been outlawed and casual racism been made unacceptable, at least in polite company. Millions of black Americans have managed to pull themselves up into mainstream, middle-class affluence, but millions of others remain mired in poverty and dysfunction.

A few black Americans broke through into the highest echelons of American society. Oprah Winfrey became the most powerful woman in the entertainment industry by appealing to an audience that is mostly white. Richard Parsons, Stanley O'Neal and others became alpha males in the lily-white world of Wall Street. Through superhuman skill and unbending will, Tiger Woods came to dominate a sport long seen as emblematic of white privilege.

Along came Barack Obama, a young man with an unassailable résumé and a message of post-racial transformation. Initially, a big majority of African Americans lined up behind his major opponent in the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton. The reason was simple: In the final analysis, white Americans weren't going to vote for the black guy. Better to go with the safe alternative.

But an amazing thing happened. In the Iowa caucuses, white Americans voted for the black guy. That's the moment Obama was referring to when he said his faith in the American people was vindicated. For me, it was the moment when the utterly impossible became merely unlikely. That's a fundamental change, and it launched a sequence of events over the subsequent months that made me realize that some things I "knew" about America were apparently wrong.

Even if John McCain somehow prevails, that won't change the fact that Obama won all those primaries, or that he won the Democratic Party nomination, or that he raised more money than any candidate in history, or that he rewrote the book on how to run a presidential campaign. Nothing can change the fact that so many white Americans entrusted a black American with their hopes and dreams.

We can all have a new kind of pride in our country.

The writer will answer questions at 1 p.m. today at http://www.washingtonpost.com. His e-mail address is eugenerobinson@washpost.com.

The Election That LBJ Won | An Obama win would complete a journey begun 40 years ago.

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:20:50 EST

The Election That LBJ Won

Alabama troopers attack voting rights marchers at Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge in March 1965. (Associated Press)

By Richard Cohen Tuesday, November 4, 2008; Page A17

If the polls are right, if it don't rain and the creek don't rise, the winner of the presidential election is sure to be . . . Lyndon Baines Johnson. When he signed the epochal Civil Rights Act of 1964, Johnson knew he was also signing away the South and, with it, much of the white vote elsewhere as well. "We have lost the South for a generation," he supposedly said back then. For that generation, time's up.

Barack Obama is often called a transformational figure, and this election, it then follows, is a transformational one. I beg to quibble. Barack Obama is a confirmational figure, and this election confirms what has been gradually occurring in American society ever since that July day when Johnson virtually outlawed most forms of racial segregation in America. We've been transforming ever since.

My colleague David Broder dates to Dec. 8, 2007, the moment he knew "this presidential campaign was going to be the best" he'd ever covered. That was when about 18,000 people crammed into Hy-Vee Hall in Des Moines to see Obama and Oprah Winfrey, and you knew, if you were there -- and I was -- that something momentous was happening. There, on the stage, were Obama, his wife, Michelle, and Winfrey. I turned to my friend Joe Klein of Time magazine and said we were immeasurably lucky. We were witnessing history being made.

There, you see, was an immense throng of white people, with an occasional nonwhite face, sometimes Asian or Hispanic. It was a fairly young crowd, and no matter what their age or their race or their sex, they were drawn to this event by two black people -- Obama and Winfrey -- and it was hard to tell then who mattered more. At least in that place and at that time, the post-racial society had arrived.

I am not naive. Pockets of racism exist, and depending on the issue -- crime, for instance -- they can swell. But the country has changed. It has done so because of personalities, policies and actions that at the time might have been questionable. The civil rights acts of the Johnson era compelled whites to eat with blacks in the same restaurants and to share the same motels and hotels. Affirmative action accustomed whites to seeing blacks in positions from which they had, by custom or by law, been excluded. Blacks and whites could, in fact, work together. The racists were wrong.

Constant pressure on the entertainment industry to feature more African Americans paid off handsomely. Some of the top American entertainers are black -- Denzel Washington and Chris Rock, for instance -- and their audiences are multiracial. Still, it seems that certain themes do not do well. Washington's very good film "The Great Debaters," the story of the 1935 Wiley College debate team, was no box-office smash, maybe because it had a mostly black cast and was about a black college, or maybe because it had no car chases; probably, both.

Somewhere beyond the gaze of Karl Rove, America was changing. You could see it on TV all the time. Oprah -- not some white, Andy Griffith-type, as the 1957 Elia Kazan movie "A Face in the Crowd" envisioned -- had become the most powerful figure in the medium. Ellen DeGeneres also has a daytime talk show. She's a lesbian -- not reputed to be or reported to be, but proud to be. She's a hit, too.

America is a changed country. Blacks have been the mayors of majority-white cities and the governors of majority-white states (Massachusetts, for instance). The governor of Louisiana is Bobby Jindal, an Indian American, the senatorial contest in Minnesota is between two Jews -- one a former comedian, for crying out loud -- and the governor of California cannot even pronounce the name of the state.

The wedding pages of our newspapers announce the unions -- civil or otherwise -- of gay men and lesbians. The governor of Alaska accepted the vice presidential nomination of the family-values party accompanied by her pregnant, unmarried teenage daughter -- and (almost) no one batted an eye. Maybe this was because a recent president had extramarital sexual relations in the Oval Office and left the presidency with an approval rating in the mid-60s. It was the economy, stupid.

Just as John F. Kennedy was only incidentally a Catholic, so is Obama only incidentally a black man. It is not just that he is post-racial; so is the nation he is generationally primed to lead. This, of course, was the dream of the man who is buried on his beloved ranch -- the unheralded winner of this election. As he would put it: My fellow Americans, we have overcome.

LBJ, RIP.

cohenr@washpost.com

¡OBAMANOS!

Jeff Hartzer — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:43:37 EST

Today's the day-:-Tonight's the night.
¡OBAMANOS!

Barometric pressure is falling and the winds of change are rising in Albuquerque today...Truly a sense of strangeness in the air...A one time resident of 'burque, Jim Morrison penned these lines which are alive today in the high desert:

Strange days have found us
Strange days have tracked us down...

Strange eyes fill strange rooms/Voices will signal their tired end
The hostess is grinning/Her guests sleep from sinning
Hear me talk of sin/And you know this is it

Strange days have found us/And through their strange hours
We linger alone/Bodies confused
Memories misused/As we run from the day
To a strange night of stone

My Election Day Nightmare and Motivation to Get out the Vote Today

Tommy News — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:29:23 EST

My Election Day Nightmare and Motivation to Get out the Vote Today

My Election Day Nightmare
This morning before 4 AM, I awoke from a terrible, frightening dream. In that dream, Sarah Palin had become President, and she was giving orders in the White House cabinet room in her flat Fargo accent to her shady looking cabinet. I saw Karl Rove and Dick Cheney in the room, and other scary looking people. This dream has frankly scared the hell out of me and I decided to write this post and send it out to you with an urgent request to help keep my nightmare from becoming a reality.
This is yet another close election. We must work to avoid a repeat of 2000 and 2004 by getting out as many voters as possible. Please do everything you can today to help get Barack Obama elected and prevent 4 more years of the same failed Bush policies that have put our nation into two wars and the economic mess it is in and the very real possibility of an incompetent and dangerous Sarah Palin presidency. Help keep McCain-Palin out of the White House with your vote for Obama-Biden.

Get out and vote, volunteer, make calls, bring others to the polls. Every vote matters! Be prepared to wait on line to cast your vote. Don't get off the line. After you have voted, Starbucks is offering free coffee to voters as an incentive. Just go to Starbucks after you vote, and tell them you have voted to claim your free tall coffee. Bring a group to the polls and then to Starbucks! Then round up another group and do it again!
I urge you to help keep my horrible nightmare from becoming a reality.
Please also go to op-ed news and help me get my message out. Buzz up my article, digg it, rate it, and add a comment, to help get it read. Then please to work on getting out the vote today. Get on the phone and make sure everyone you know is voting. Forward this message on to your email list. Volunteer. Call voters in swing states. Bring water and snacks to voters waiting on line and tell them to stay on line until they have voted. Tell them about the free coffee at Starbucks. Offer water, cookies and snacks. Do everything you can to get voters on those lines and keep them there. The lines are predicted to be shortest from about 1PM to about 4 PM. Find out more here or call your party headquarters to volunteer.www.mybarackobama.com
Please, our very future depends upon it. Lets get to work.
-Tommy
Here is the link to my article, please help me get the word out TODAY!Click Here:http://www.opednews.com/articles/TAKE-ACTION-Get-voters-ou-by-Tommy-News-081102-549.html
TAKE ACTION: Get Voters out to the Polls and Pass This On. ROCK THE VOTE! Election day is approaching fast. We have very little time left to make this important voter turnout drive succeed.This is one of the most important elections of our lifetimes. The economy is in big trouble, jobs are disappearing, people are losing their homes, two wars are raging, and the cost of living is soaring. Millions have no health care and global warming needs to be addressed. The way to get the change we need is to elect the right leaders. Every vote counts, and your vote and participation in this voter turnout drive can make all the difference. It is your civic duty and your Constitutional right to vote, and your help is needed to get out the vote. Rock The Vote has made voting easier with the information you need. But you must act now, Election Day is November 4th! Please join in and help get voters out, and then pass this important message on to everyone in your address book. Click Here to see how you can help Rock The Vote! http://rockthevote.org/Go Here:http://www.opednews.com/articles/TAKE-ACTION-Get-voters-ou-by-Tommy-News-081102-549.html

From Rob Kall at Op-Ed News:

Don't go to work today. Don't stay home. Work as a volunteer in the early AM, then vote between 10 and 3 when the polls are least busy, then work some more.When the polls close where you live, start making calls for other states, other candidates. Keep going until you drop. You will be a part of history either way. Make sure you know you've done all you can, not just for your presidential candidate, whoever he or she is, but also for congressional legislators all over the nation.

Share your experience of the day with other OEN folks. Use this Diary:

Voting Day Open Thread-- Post reports, observations, Thoughts Links

Let us know what you're feeling, seeing, doing.

Me, I was up at 3:30 AM, unable to sleep, thinking about vote theft. I found my other half had been up with the election on her mind since 2:30. I leave in five minutes to work the early shift at the polls.

I spoke to my "ex" last night. She's a born-again who votes strictly on abortion (she wasn't when we met and married) and even she said she and her church people are saying prayers for whoever wins. I guess, if McCain wins, the world needs the US to go down the tubes, because it surely will, strangled, blinded, gelded, starved and tortured by right wing extremist traitors to democracy.

But I am fearfully hopeful today. We'll see how it goes, right? It's all we can do, besides work our asses off today. And, BTW, there were plenty of people in their seventies and eighties out canvassing, knocking on doors and phone banking over the weekend, and people in wheel-chairs. What's your excuse for not doing MORE today?

Laying the guilt on heavy today,

rob kall
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

It's Election Day

Shayne Adamski — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:27:39 EST

New Mexico, the polls are now open. It's a great day to elect Barack Obama President and Joe Biden Vice President.

All of the hard work and the long days come down to today.

It's up to us to finish what we've started.

CHANGE comes today!

But first, we need everyone to VOTE, and then we need everyone to VOLUNTEER.

YES WE CAN!!

Here are some tips to help you make sure Election Day goes smoothly:

* The polls are open from 7:00AM to 7:00PM. If you are in line by 7:00PM, it's your right to vote.

* If you have not received your absentee ballot, you can get another ballot at your polling place on Tuesday, November 4th.

* If you registered to vote by mail for the first time and didn't include ID, you must bring ID with you to the polls. The address on your ID does not need to match your registration address.

* You may be asked to remove or cover any campaign gear (Obama T-shirts, buttons, etc.) that you wear to the polls. As long as you comply, you still have the right to vote.

From Tikkun | Prayers before voting

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:54:10 EST

A note from Rabbi Michael Lerner
Join or Donate Now!

From Tikkun Magazine (www.tikkun.org)

Prayers Before Going to Vote
Posted Monday, November 03 2008 @ 01:00 PM PST

By Michael Lerner and David Seidenberg

Meditation or Prayer Before Going to Vote
by Michael Lerner

Thank You, the Power of Healing and Transformation in the Universe, that Your energy has moved through human beings in the past and inspired them to create democratic institutions that would give me and others this wonderful opportunity to participate in shaping our world. I know that the outcome of this election will have consequences for all six billion people on the planet, and that if democratic norms were to be fully established that they too would be able to participate in shaping the decisions about how the world's resources should best be used.

So I hereby take it upon myself to vote in a way that is sensitive to the needs of all the people of the planet, not just to those who are blessed to live in the richest and most powerful society. I recognize and affirm the unity of all being, and the interconnectedness and mutual interdependence of all people with each other and with the well-being of the planet itself.

As I approach this holy act, I recommit myself to the message revealed to the prophets and sages of old: that our highest task on earth is to bring more love and kindness, generosity and sanctity into the world, and that to do so we must vigorously pursue a world of justice and peace and avoid violence and hurting others directly or indirectly. May my votes actually contribute to these results.

Please give strength to those for whom I vote. If they are elected, let them actually contribute to achieving a world of greater peace, justice and love. If they are not elected, let my vote be one of the factors that contributes to empowering them to play a positive role in continuing their efforts for peace, justice and love, so that they represent my intentions and so that they do not personally fall back into despair or into personal opportunism and forget that they have the task of vigorously articulating the aspirations of those who were seeking through voting for them to bring more caring and more generosity into the world.

Give me the wisdom to understand those who do not vote in the way that I do. I already know that most people on this planet share with me the desire for a world of peace, justice, loving-kindness and caring. So it is hard for me to understand why they don't support the candidates who I see representing those values.

Please give me the wisdom to understand the complex psychological, social and political factors that could take fundamentally decent human beings and lead them into paths that may, I believe, lead to a world exactly the opposite of what they really want. And let that understanding empower me to be more compassionate in the way that I think and talk about those with whom I disagree, and more intelligent in finding ways to reach them, speak to their goodness, and bring them through my love and compassion for them to be able to see a better path to achieve the goals that they share with me.

>From this point forward, I commit myself to seeing the good in all others, and to finding the decency and generosity in those who disagree with me, and to keep that in front of my consciousness even as I continue to disagree with the paths that they have chosen - and let that understanding give me even greater energy to act for the causes of social justice and peace.

Meanwhile, let me also have compassion for the leaders of movements and candidates for office whom I do support - let me not judge them for their personal failings, for the ways that they are not in their PRIVATE LIVES the fullest possible embodiments of the ideals that they articulate. Yet let me simultaneously have the energy and commitment to hold them accountable in their PUBLIC ACTS to working even harder for social justice and peace and ecological sanity.

I know that my vote is only one little part of the whole, and nevertheless I will not belittle what I am doing today in going to vote. But neither will I use this vote as a way of excusing myself from doing more. I commit myself to putting more of my time and more of my energy and more of my money into activities explicitly aimed at tikkun olam, the healing and transformation of our planet.

Please let me be witness to a dramatic surge of the world's energies toward love, justice, peace, nonviolence, spiritual awakening, and ecological sanity - quickly and in my lifetime, and let it be so. Amen. Shalom. Salaam.

Let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with us!

Rabbi Michael Lerner
Tikkun Community

Voting Prayer
by David Seidenberg

With my vote today, I am prepared and intending
to seek peace for this country, as it is written (Jer. 29:7):
"Seek out the peace of the city where I cause you to roam
and pray for her sake to God YHVH, for in her peace you all will have peace."

May it be Your will that votes will be counted faithfully,
and may You account my vote as if I had fulfilled this verse with all my power.
May it be good in Your eyes to give a wise heart to whomever we elect today
and may You raise for us a government whose rule is for good and blessing,
to bring justice and peace to all the inhabitants of the world
and to Jerusalem, for rulership is Yours.

Just as I participated in elections today,
so may I merit to do good works and to repair the world with all my actions,
and with the act of...[fill in your pledge]...which I pledge to do today
on behalf of all living creatures
and in remembrance of the covenant of Noah's waters
to protect and to not destroy the earth and her plenitude.

May You give to all the peoples of this country the strength and the will
to pursue righteousness and to seek peace as a unified force
in order to cause to flourish, throughout the world, good life and peace,
and may You fulfill for us the verse (Ps. 90:17):
"May the pleasure of Adonai our God be upon us, and establish
the work of our hands for us; may the work of our hands endure."

If you can't pray in a voting booth, where can you pray? And where would you need more to pray? This prayer is not about casting a winning vote or supporting a particular party. It's a prayer that peace may come through whomever is elected, on behalf of the whole planet. It's also more than that: you, the pray-er, are invited to add your own pledge that embodies the ideals you are praying for and voting for, to live your prayer. This pledge is based on the Jewish custom of pledging to give charity, when going up to the Torah. What is your pledge on the occasion of "going up" to the voting booth? The two lines following this pledge express the intention to act in the highest interests of all creatures. Please modify these lines to express in your own words why you act. Read the Hebrew version at http://neohasid.org/resources/votingprayer.

~ Rabbi David Seidenberg, rebduvid86@hotmail.com www.neohasid.org, www.savethenegev.org. © 2008

Click here to view a PDF (Acrobat) version of Rabbi Seidenberg's prayer in English and Hebrew

ref:

http://files.tikkun.org/current/article.php/20081016155033441

web: www.tikkun.org
email: info@spiritualprogressives.org

Copyright © 2008 Network of Spiritual Progressives®.
2342 Shattuck Avenue, #1200
Berkeley, CA 94704
510-644-1200 Fax 510-644-1255

Who's to blame

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:42:25 EST

By now most people agree: George W. Bush's presidency was a devastating failure.

But Bush couldn't have done it alone. He got lots of help from his Republican yes-men and women in Congress -- and today I want to make sure you know exactly who they are.

Take a look at our list of Bush's closest backers in Congress, and forward this email to at least five of your friends so they know who's really to blame.

% of Votes with Bush

Rep. John Boehner (OH) 94%
Sen. Michael Enzi (WY) 93%
Sen. Mitch McConnell (KY) 92%
Sen. John Cornyn (TX) 92%
Rep. Roy Blunt (MO) 91%
Sen. Thad Cochran (MS) 91%
Sen. James Inhofe (OK) 91%
Rep. John Shadegg (AZ) 90%
Sen. John McCain (AZ) 90%
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (GA) 90%
Rep. Mike Pence (IN) 90%
Sen. John Sununu (NH) 89%
Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN) 89%
Sen. Pat Roberts (KS) 89%
Rep. Tom Feeney (FL) 88%
Rep. John Kline (MN) 88%
Sen. Elizabeth Dole (NC) 87%
Rep. Virginia Foxx (NC) 87%
Rep. Barbara Cubin (WY) 86%
Rep. Phil Gingrey (GA) 86%
Rep. Bill Sali (ID) 85%
Sen. Roger Wicker (MS) 85%
Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ) 84%
Rep. Steve Pearce (NM) 84%
Rep. Michele Bachmann (MN) 83%
Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (CO) 83%
Sen. Norm Coleman (MN) 82%
Rep. Mark Souder (IN) 82%
Rep. Joe Knollenberg (MI) 82%
Rep. Bob Goodlatte (VA) 82%
Rep. Lee Terry (NE) 82%
Rep. Jean Schmidt (OH) 81%
Rep. Steve Chabot (OH) 81%
Rep. Ric Keller (FL) 81%
Sen. Gordon Smith (OR) 80%

With President Bush's approval rating hitting a stunning new low of 22 percent last week, these members of Congress have been leaving human-shaped holes in the wall of the Capitol as they desperately try to run away from the President.

But they can't run away from their records. They can't run away from their irresponsible handling of the economy, their blind support for the mismanaged war in Iraq, or their repeated attempts to privatize Social Security.

We won't let them. We launched the Bush Legacy Tour to help make that point, but today we need you to spread the word simply by forwarding this message to at least five of your friends. Make sure everyone you know remembers who's to blame for the state of our nation.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Funk
Americans United for Change

Paid for by Americans United for Change
P.O. Box 65321
Washington, DC 20035

Contributions or gifts to Americans United for Change are not tax deductible. Americans United For Change can accept contributions from individuals, corporations, labor unions, and other sources in unlimited amounts. Americans United for Change is organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Start the party early & pull in every vote!

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:27:59 EST

Dear Get Out the Vote Activist:

With all the energy and excitement about Obama and this election, the reality is that some folks will have to wait in line before voting. But there's no reason for it to be a downer. With your help, we can turn it into a party!

Why a party? So many people showing up and voting for change is a reason to celebrate. And, of course, we need everyone to stick it out and vote. Here's the idea: If we can make the lines at polling places fun and entertaining, more folks will stay in line and vote. It's easy: after you vote (or while you're waiting), you can bring food, water, and entertainment for your neighbors who have a long wait. Just a few words of kindness and encouragement could mean the difference between a vote being cast or thrown away.

To learn more and sign up, click below:

http://colorofchange.org/party08/?id=2257-160034

How to Start a Party at the Polls

You can do this while you're waiting in line yourself, you can come back after you've voted, or you can go to other polling places in your area where you hear there are long lines. Here are some ways you can make the wait easier and more fun for voters:

Bring water, food, snacks. A lot of people might not have realized how long they'd have to wait. A little food and water can help give people the energy they need to power through. Cook something the night before, buy some bottled water to share. Healthy snacks are good, but you can also use the opportunity to get rid of extra Halloween candy.
Bring some folding chairs. Some people may need a break from standing; you can give them somewhere to sit.
Rain? Bring umbrellas, ponchos, plastic bags. Help people stay dry.
Tell jokes, juggle, provide some other kind of entertainment. Are you a comedian, dancer, or street performer of some kind? Put on a show! Make sure it's family-friendly.
Play some music or bring a boombox. Play an instrument? Bring it to the polls and play some songs. Bring a boombox. Take requests. Avoid music that might be offensive or abrasive to some people. Keep in mind that not everyone may like your music, so pay attention to how people are reacting; you don't want to drive anyone away.
Be prepared to cover up campaign t-shirts, buttons, etc. Some places have rules against campaigning within 100 feet of the polls. Wearing a t-shirt or button can be considered a form of campaigning, so if you're wearing gear from a particular candidate, be prepared to cover it up or change into different clothes if someone asks you to.
Above all, have fun, and spread it around. Help everyone out, not just people supporting your candidate. This is about making sure everyone has the right to vote. Voters disagree on many issues, but we should all be able to agree that participation in our democracy is an exciting thing. Help bring a festive spirit to the polling place.

Please let us know what you plan on doing, and read our tips for making sure we do this in a responsible and inclusive way. It just takes a minute:

http://colorofchange.org/party08/?id=2257-160034

Thanks and Peace,

-- James, Gabriel, Clarissa, Andre, Kai, and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
November 3rd, 2008

If you vote, Starbucks buys your coffee

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:16:05 EST

Election Predictions: Pundits Weigh In

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:00:21 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/02/election-predictions...

Election Predictions: Pundits Weigh In

The Huffington Post | November 2, 2008 12:27 PM

Make your own predictions below...

Karl Rove
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 338 McCain 200

Rove writes on his website:

The final Rove & Co. electoral map of the 2008 election cycle points to a 338-200 Barack Obama electoral vote victory over John McCain tomorrow, the largest electoral margin since 1996. All remaining toss-up states have been allocated to the candidate leading in them, with Florida (27 EV) going to Obama, and Indiana (11 EV), Missouri (11 EV), North Carolina (15 EV), and North Dakota (3 EV) going to McCain. The two candidates are in a dead heat in Missouri and North Carolina, but they go to McCain because the most recent polls conducted over this past weekend show him narrowly ahead. Florida, too, could end up in McCain's column since he's benefited from recent movement in the state.

Matthew Dowd, former Bush strategist

Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 338 McCain 200
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 250 Democrats 185 Republicans

George Will, conservative columnist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 378 McCain 160
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 254 Democrats 181 Republicans

Donna Brazile, Democratic strategist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 343
Senate Seats: 59 Democrats 39 Republicans
House Seats: 262 Democrats 173 Republicans

George Stephanopoulos, ABC News anchor
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 353 McCain 185
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats (59 if there's a run-off in Georgia) Republicans 40
House Seats: Democrats 264 Republicans 171

Mark Halperin, Time editor
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 349 McCain 189
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans
House Seats: 261 Democrats 174 Republicans
Watch these predictions on "This Week"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAQsDixbprw

Chris Matthews, MSNBC host
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 338 McCain 200
Senate Seats: 56 Democrats 42 Republicans
House Seats: 264 Democrats 171 Republicans

Nate Silver, statistician
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 347 McCain 191
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 258 Democrats 177 Republicans

Chris Cillizza, Washington Post columnist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: 312 McCain 226
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 266 Democrats 169 Republicans

Arianna Huffington
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 318 McCain 220
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans
House Seats: 254 Democrats 181 Republicans

Fred Barnes, Weekly Standard editor
Winner: McCain
Electoral College: Obama 252 McCain 286
Senate Seats: 55 Democrats 43 Republicans
House Seats: 255 Democrats 180 Republicans

Eleanor Clift, political writer
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 349 McCain 189
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans
House Seats: 265 Democrats 170 Republicans

Markos Moulitas, DailyKos founder
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 390 McCain 148
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans
House Seats: 268 Democrats 167 Republicans

Ed Rollins, Republican strategist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 353 McCain 185
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 249 Democrats 186 Republicans

Paul Begala, Democratic strategist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 325 McCain 213
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans

James Carville, Democratic strategist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 330 McCain 208
Senate Seats: 60 Democrats 38 Republicans

Charles Mahtesian, Politico national politics editor
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 311 McCain 227
Senate Seats: 56 Democrats 42 Republicans
House Seats: 256 Democrats 179 Republicans

Morton Kondracke, Fox News host
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 379 McCain 159
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 269 Democrats 166 Republicans

David Plotz, Slate editor
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 336 McCain 202
Senate Seats: 59 Democrats 39 Republicans
House Seats: 257 Democrats 178 Republicans

Obama wins North Dakota, has more paid staff in state than voters... Joe Lieberman thrown to pack of wild dogs behind Cannon Senate Office Building. Washington left without a Bush or Dole in office for the first time since, well, a really long time ago.

Alex Castellanos, Republican media consultant
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 318 McCain 220
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 42 Republicans

Obama wins Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Iowa and Florida; McCain wins Ohio and Missouri.... Coleman wins in Minnesota; Chambliss loses Georgia; Landrieu loses in Louisiana.

Dan Gerstein, Democratic media consultant, former manager of Sen. Joe Lieberman's re-election campaign
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 318 McCain 220
Senate Seats: 55 Democrats 43 Republicans
House Seats: 260 Democrats 175 Republicans

Tom Doherty, New York Republican consultant
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 331 McCain 207
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 42 Republicans
House Seats: 255 Democrats 180 Republicans

Robert Y. Shapiro, Columbia University political scientist
Winner: Obama
Popular Vote: Obama 53 McCain 47
Senate Seats: 58 Democrats 40 Republicans
House Seats: 259 Democrats 176 Republicans

Obama will hold all Kerry states and pick up Iowa, VA, NM, Colorado, NV.

Gary Jacobson, (University of California-San Diego political scientist
Winner: Obama
Major Party Vote: 52.7 Obama 47.3 McCain
Senate: 57 Democrats 43 Republicans
House: 264 Democrats 171 Republican

Sandy Maisel, Colby College political scientist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College 353 Obama 185 McCain
Senate Seats 59 Democrats 41 Republicans
House 265 Democrats 170 Republicans

Robert Erickson, Columbia University political scientist
Winner: Obama
Popular Vote: Obama 52.5 McCain 47.5
Senate Seats: 59 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 253 Democrats 182 Republicans

Obama wins Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, and Virginia, not Florida... Democrats pick up Alaska, Minnesota, Colorado, Oregon, Virginia, New Hampshire, New Mexico and North Carolina.

Alan Abramowitz, Emory University political scientist
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 361 McCain 177
Senate Seats: 59 Democrats 40 Republicans (with a run-off in Georgia)
House Seats: 256 Democrats 179 Republicans

Obama wins Co., Va., Fla., Oh., Ia., N.Mex. and Indiana.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-votemap,0,2338623.htmlstory?usergen=110100010111111011111210111110110010002001000000210

Courting the Pro-Palin Hooters Demographic in Va.

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:40:05 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/riley-murray/virginia-republica...

Riley Murray

Posted November 3, 2008 | 10:06 AM (EST)

Courting the Pro-Palin Hooters Demographic in Va.

Wayne: "She's a babe." Garth: "She's a mega-babe." Wayne: "She's from Babe-alon. She's Babe-alonian." Garth: "She's Babealicious...SCHWING!"

Mike Meyers (Wayne) and Dana Carvey (Garth) "Wayne's World" - Saturday Night Live

Republicans in Augusta County, Virginia have been working hard to sustain a rise in base enthusiasm for the McCain-Palin ticket. As a by-product of the full-out promotion of Sarah Palin, they are also attracting what can best be described as, the "Hooters" vote, from male voters. It all started with blue and white, 4 foot by 8 foot field signs stating, "I Am Voting For The Chick" campaign signs being planted outside local businesses in September. Smaller yard signs have sprouted up in next to McCain-Palin signs across the county, in Staunton and Waynesboro, and beyond. Local Republicans say that they have helped deliver more than 600 of the signs and have had sign orders from as far away as Florida and Alaska. The larger signs seem to be the most popular with male small business owners.

Seems like the tag, Caribou Barbie, works for some guys. A local outdoor sporting goods store is prominently displaying a Chick field sign along with "Sportsmen for McCain-Palin" signs. Palin's physical attributes, and her Alaskan hunting and fishing credentials, makes her a very popular gal with hunters and fishermen. Palin has become an object of desire for some younger guys, too. At the national level, it should have been no surprise that after the "hot governor" hype surrounding her nomination, the internet domain name "VPILF.com" was quickly registered. Explaining the meaning of MILF and VPILF is best left to the reader to discover.

Stalwart Augusta County Republican women, see no offense in using the "chick" label for Palin.
In an interview with a local newspaper, Local Republican activist/blogger, Lynn "SWAC Girl" Mitchell, said

"... the reason behind the sign's popularity is simply Palin's appeal to many Republicans in the area. "They just love Sarah Palin," she said. "And this is just a way for them to express how much they support this woman." However, not all reaction to the signs has been positive. Mitchell said she has heard negative comments from just a handful of people and some of the signs have been vandalized, such as when the word 'not' was inserted in the phrase on one of the larger signs. Mitchell said she does not believe the sign's use of the word, "chick," is being used negatively or in a sexist manner. "It is meant in a respectful way, which is reflected in the number of women that want these signs," she said. "I mean, I'm a chick and I don't mind." McCain-Palin spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said the signs are not campaign-issued or approved. While she said it goes to show the strong support Palin has in the Valley, she downplayed the importance the signs bring."

Of course other local folks are scratching their heads over the tone-deafness of local Republicans. Roger Watson, President & Publisher of the News Leader in Staunton, Virginia commented in his blog,

"If Barack Obama said in a debate or in a political speech something like, "John McCain and that Chick want to raise your taxes," it would be an international incident. I have no doubt that he would be roundly criticized by feminists, all Republicans and probably even Hillary Clinton. Hillary would put a chokehold on anyone who called her a chick. It might cost Obama the election and would certainly be parallel to George Allen's Macaca moment.
But local Palin supporters put signs in their yard calling the potential vice president a "chick." Those same people would probably be offended if their wife was called a chick by somebody. I would be offended if somebody I didn't know called my wife a chick. She might like it. I don't know. But I wouldn't."

Local physician, Elizabeth Pinkston, MD (News Leader, 11/2/08) adds her reaction,

"... as a woman and medical professional, I believe that the term "chick" is insulting to any woman, whether Republican or Democrat. From my experience, "chick" is a term used mostly by men to refer to a woman who is defined more by her appearance and social interactions than by her accomplishments. Despite my belief that Sarah Palin is out of her league and not qualified to take over the presidency of the United States at a moment's notice, she is a successful woman who deserves more than being referred to as a "Chick ".

The Chick sign phenomena is one more example of the widely divergent views in the on-going American culture clash, being fully aired in the final days of this presidential campaign. The so-called Republican base would appear to be conflicted over the family-values version of Palin, versus the hot babe version that appeals to the boys, young and old. Sarah's special assets are clearly of political interest to a 72 year-old former Navy pilot named, John McCain, who's had more than his share of beautiful women in his life.

Local Democratic headquarters, have seen a steady flow of self-identified Republican women, looking for Obama-Biden campaign materials. This is probably a leading indicator, signaling that many women of a certain age, who have spent a lifetime striving to reduce these stereo-typical labels, see the Chick label as one that diminishes their standing in the workplace. This local political campaign sign issue is not likely to get much attention beyond this traditionally conservative area. But I think this may be another small Macaca moment, for Virginia Republicans.

Women voters, of all ages, will have their say on this issue on Tuesday.

No Currency Left to Buy the Big Lies

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:31:35 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-cusack/no-currency-left-to...

John Cusack

Posted November 2, 2008 | 08:09 PM (EST)

No Currency Left to Buy the Big Lies

As I contemplated the real possibility of an Obama victory and listened to right wing pundits revise history still unfolding, I thought of titles for this blog:

"Neocon Logic: This Statement is Untrue"
"The Modern Free Market System is False But a New Revelation Shall Come"
" They Would Feast on Themselves: All the Money's Gone, Nowhere to Go"
I decided on:
"No Currency Left to Buy the Big Lies"

In the pre-capitalist reality, James Madison said when he put power in the hands of the business elite, he would be entrusting "enlightened statesmen and benevolent philosophers who would devote themselves to the welfare of all."

Clearly, he believed this statement in the way I guess some modern Republicans do. The only problem was that he eventually realized this didn't work and in 1792, disillusioned and worried about the democratic experiment, condemned what he called "the daring depravity of the times." He went on to denounce the business elites who, given ultimate power, "become tools and tyrants of government...they overwhelm government with their powers and combinations and are bribed by its largesse." That's how he perceived the system he had helped design. In 2008, this is an apt description of the Republican relationship to government and power.

Finally, some blue light, tectonic plate shifts, a sea change, we hear... a wave of despair carrying us to a new place. The bastards are finally meeting their grisly ends and will be discarded and abandoned as men come to power who will actually try to govern. I know we're supposed to be civil but I'm not a real believer in this method when dealing with crimes.

What does the sea change mean? How can we help people understand what is happening and help them contextualize it?

First the past: Senator McCain, Governor Palin and assorted surrogates are delusional and breathtakingly corrupt. They disgrace themselves and their country as they lie, smear, slur and write it off as political manner.

Yet the creeping truth must frighten them late at night: there is no currency left to buy the big lies.

There is no more money left to loan or borrow the big lies or to sell them. No more money left to pay off the debt, the wreckage in the wake. The orgy of excess has drained every bottle, smashed the furniture and left the cupboards bare. All that's left is derivative debts -- bets between liars and lies. Trillions of dollars. Turned capitalism into a Ponzi scheme for trading worthless paper. No real value anywhere. No matter how much money Ben Bernanke prints.

We are asked to stand over the abyss and experience our own destruction as another political game show -- just another surreal horse race. We watch millionaires and paid Republican hacks appear on television yelling "Socialist!" at Obama as if the Bolsheviks are coming to rape our daughters. These are the same people who oversaw the greatest upward redistribution of wealth in the history of this country. The same people who, through general lawlessness and a privatization frenzy, succeeded in shredding the Constitution, turning war, illegal domestic spying, security, border patrol, interrogation, and even torture into profitable industries gorging on the state.

So define the big lie: free marketers want free markets. Not so, the facts say. They are the biggest welfare freaks on the planet.

These men and keepers of the faith would lecture us with a straight face on the evil socialists/ communists/terrorists /vampires/space aliens who would dare "redistribute wealth" by amending the tax code. Two wars and the only shared sacrifice they want is more tax cuts for the rich and for the U.S. citizenry to continue shopping. As Sidney Falco said, you gotta give it to them, their gall is gorgeous.

If we stay the course, we are told, we will finally, one day, reach that shining city on a hill, the free market-based fundamentalist utopia. Even though all evidence points the other way, we should listen, reason, step back and watch them as they devour what's left of the government. They will feast on themselves -- the feast of carrion the Book of Revelation tells us -- but I digress, sort of. It's over. This would be a great system if there were no human beings.

Mathematical realism. Eat what you kill. The bottom line. Greed is good. Graphs and flow charts and metrics for success. All social organization is based on profit as the unifying force and engine of the common good and even social justice; worship the market, even as you corrupt it.

Our perfect system will provide for all.

And yet Wall Street cripples America and the world because it won't adhere to the same rules it says we must obey for the good of freedom. Because reality won't be a slave to their machine.

And so this is how we can rationalize privatizing war. At last look, with 630 corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton getting 40% of the $2 billion spent each week in Iraq, no one can doubt the corporatist dominance of the war machine.

Mathematically, the market crash shouldn't have happened according to their system, but human feelings make panic and panic cannot be calculated. I would bet that someday someone will discover that math adheres to a quantum reality: the participants and the observers affect the outcome. I digress again. But not really.

Instead of an international consensus based on trust and global community, the Neocons say trust no one, need no one, ask no one. Rigged, "open" markets are created at the barrel of a gun after bombing a country. We must all bow to the market.

Collapse, chaos, lawlessness. And even the market voted with its feet.

The era of market idolatry is over.

This is the end of Milton Friedman, Reaganomics and supply-side theory. This ideology has never been about free markets but a fundamentalist vision that is a cover for naked aggression and a social contract based on fear and greed. The government's job is to create optimal conditions for corporate profit, to privatize everything in sight and to sell off its own body parts. To literally devour itself.

So we have laws that allow borrowing money against derivatives -- basically a bet between two people who create nothing without collateral. They leveraged the public financial health on something you wouldn't be allowed to do in Vegas. It illustrates the corruption that has become institutionalized through deregulation and a culture of predatory greed. Alan Greenspan testified that he was shocked: business didn't regulate itself. The common good was not achieved by greed. Naomi Klein read him the definition of crony capitalism and asked if it fit the description of the Bush administration's relationship to its favorite corporations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09zvzzCOB2M

I suppose he was shocked about that too. His testimony was incredible and felt like it was coated in lies or at least standing deeply in their shadows. But one doesn't doubt him as a true believer, absolved of messy feelings of collective responsibility. We made him a high priest even though we saw the suffering and the cruelty of the system.

The final irony of the free-market Darwinist model is instead of the strongest and best surviving, it's really the weakest and the worst. From a moral and spiritual point of view this is hardly in doubt. See George Bush. The gospel he purports to serve tells us this but perhaps he saw Christ as a conqueror. I've always doubted men who call themselves Christians who live by the law of the jungle. The gospels, the Koran and the Torah make no bones about it: wealth is not strength; power often represents not the brightest and the best but the weakest and worst. The beast in the Book of Revelation is not a horn-rimmed devil but Rome. Empire. Any empire. Every empire.

As Bush leaves office, the real truth is this: the new economies of the world disprove everything he ever said. Apparently that doesn't matter.

Neoconservatives will lie in the weeds and gather forces, the same players in a revolving door. They want back in and if history has proved anything, worshiping the markets is not enough. We must actually kill to feed them. A horrible cross-pollination of fundamentalism, dementia and market fever has turned America into a willing enabler of corporate cannibalism. Nothing else to call it when murder is seen as a legitimate extension of economic policy. Preemptive war is not only justified but openly referred to as a market opportunity. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. As we look out at the wreckage -- world economies collapsing, nationalized banks and a complete loss of trust -- we can see the hypocrisy as all are revealed as true socialists on the way down, crying in their scotch and Ambien as they run to the state for cover.

Many, like the Financial Times, endorse Obama. But let's remember when the F.T. and the Wall Street Journal talked glowingly and starry-eyed about the "Baghdad Boom" -- as horrifying a moniker as Shock and Awe. It was not the site of a gold rush, it was the sight of massacre and armed robbery. Now these men jump like rats off a death ship but don't be fooled. Francis Fukuyama and company will just lay low, regroup and rebrand. They speak openly about such things, beaten but unbowed, with no moral connection to the fiasco they have fostered. They speak as passing spectators watching the Weather Channel, (see Frum, Kristol, Brooks and all the rest), rather than intellectual architects, defenders, and foot soldiers in an illegal war and the thirty-five year assault on the New Deal.

As we help Obama try to implement another New Deal, I asked Naomi Klein about the parallels to The Shock Doctrine as it's polar opposite. She told me:

"I have been talking about the need for a progressive shock doctrine in speeches a lot. I call it disaster populism and the key difference is democracy. The right has been using shocks to suspend and sidestep democracy, declaring states of emergency and the progressive use of shock to enlarge and deepen the democratic space to bring more people into the political process. This is why it is important to remember that the New Deal did not come only from kindly elites handing it down from on high, but also because those elites were under massive popular pressure from below. We can all use shock and crisis to move the political direction of the country, but the progressive route is a democratic one, the right is an authoritarian one, even if it takes place within an electoral democracy."

The real challenge is to erase the delusion that greed equals freedom and prosperity, let alone the hideous lie that it somehow spreads justice. Amazingly, we are asked to listen to this gibberish in political life no matter how high the bile rises.

Many believe economies must serve humanity and not the other way around. Economies must make a moral connection to the republic. Brace yourselves free marketers: the quality of economic and human transactions will have to take priority over money. Faith and hope have to manifest in the social transactions we make.

A new social contract could be coming based on a real currency my friend Kevin McCabe calls the currency of grace. It is a currency of economic fairness and institutionalizing concepts of shared responsibility; a currency based on the gold standard that every human has value and should be awarded respect and opportunity, the dignity that comes from human beings protecting each other from the values and ideals of a Darwinist world. Its spirit is in Keynesian economics, a mixed economy with regulated markets and social spending. In the new era, we must remove fundamentalist right wing economists as the high priests and kings. Their ideology will stay dead only if we remain vigilant and call things what they are. It's a battle for the idea of America and it's just beginning if Senator Obama becomes president.

We should worship God if we want to, not the markets.

R.I.P Studs Terkel.

For more on War, Inc. go to my MySpace Page, or Amazon.com.

May 13, 2006 -- The Day that John McCain Lost the Election

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:22:33 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/may-13-2006---the-...

Hilary Rosen

Posted November 3, 2008 | 09:43 AM (EST)

May 13, 2006 -- The Day that John McCain Lost the Election

Yes, it is a year for change. Yes Barack Obama knew that before most other politicians and capitalized on that with a unique and brilliant campaign that offered inspiration and principle to us in a consistent and explosive manner. We will elect him as our President tomorrow because he offers our country the best chance for the revival we desperately need.

But, May 13, 2006 is the day that John McCain lost the 2008 Presidential Election. My friend Mike Berman reminds me that that is the day he spoke at Liberty University. In my view, that day began the destruction of one of the best brands in American politics. It is the day that Senator McCain went to kiss the ring of Jerry Falwell, a right wing preacher who McCain had called "an agent of intolerance" in 2000. His visit's purpose was to court the evangelical voters and apologize for being the independent maverick he had been over the course of the last 15 years. He minimized the importance of the high visibility issues where he had broken with his party such as immigration, election reform, federal spending and the anti-gay constitutional amendment on marriage and promised that he would be a leader that the right wing could support and trust.

Earlier this year, many Democrats feared running against one candidate in this presidential Election - that candidate was John McCain. He was the one candidate in the Republican primary who everyone hoped wouldn't win. Sure the deeply unpopular Bush Presidency created an atmosphere that favored Democrats this year. But many assumed that given McCain's special brand of independence, he was the one candidate that could distinguish himself from the President.

But May 13, 2006 changed John McCain in two key fundamental ways that have poisoned his campaign and doomed his chances to ever become President. It soured the media on him and it empowered the evangelical right at a time when their overall influence in the country was dwindling.

He minimized his differences on immigration, on election reform, and changed his support in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy. He began to support every anti-gay initiative he could find. On those and so many other issues, he merged into the George Bush and right wing clone that in these closing days of the campaign have choked him beyond breath. In short, he sold his soul to gain the nomination of his party. When he chose Sarah Palin and made the ultimate sacrifice to the right wing choosing a VP candidate who would energize the evangelical base but clearly lacked his standard of quality in public policy, it cemented his changed persona forever.

Many republicans complained that the media has favored Barrack Obama in this election. In effect they are forgetting that it was John McCain who perfected media relations in his last Presidential run in 2000. Yet those same media allies soured on McCain as he became more and more of a political robot in the Republican message machine and the authenticity they had experienced with him was lost as he tumbled into a pool of right wing muck. It was unattractive for him to court those who had previously dissed him and he had rightly rejected as putting their prejudice and narrow-mindedness above a unified and prosperous country. And his campaign handlers knew that he could no longer provide the access t the media that had once been his hallmark because there was just too much to challenge him on. A once guileless politician suddenly had his true beliefs to hide.

Didn't he know that his uniqueness for his friends in the media was that he didn't fit into those stereotypes for a politician? That his original brand of maverick - rather than the empty word it has become - was exactly the kind of candidate the media would have continued to revere? Perhaps they even would have more aggressively challenged the upstart heir to the outsider brand - Barack Obama - if the original was still around?

And didn't he realize that just as he was concluding that he needed the right wing zealots to win the Presidency, the country had already started to reject their falsely premised "values based" agenda?

No, John McCain didn't understand how a trip to Lynchburg, Virginia on May 16, 2006 would doom his presidential dreams forever.

The Most Accurate Election Forecast? Hardcore Gamblers

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:17:28 EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-thomson/the-most-accurate...

Keith Thomson

Posted November 2, 2008 | 02:56 PM (EST)

The Most Accurate Election Forecast? Hardcore Gamblers

Recently I was in Kentucky, reporting on horseracing for Garden & Gun. A "whale" (bettor of thousands of dollars per day) I interviewed, Mike Maloney, successfully traded securities, options and futures, but chose to go to the track every day instead because it offered him a greater challenge. "There are many, many, many more factors to consider in betting horseraces," he said.

Maloney is a youthful fifty-two, with alert, light blue eyes and a cheerful demeanor. He doesn't chomp on a cigar. He's in no way a Damon Runyon character. I have reason to believe he's a sort of mathematical genius.

I asked him: "Do you think handicappers can forecast the outcome of the presidential election better than polls?"

He didn't hesitate. "Polls can be inaccurate. People may say what is politically correct, the questions may be leading, the pollsters may be biased. A pollster can still bill for an inaccurate poll. Bookmakers must make an accurate line or they lose -- period."

For a second opinion I went to Ray Paulick, who was a protégé of notorious oddsmaker "Jimmy The Greek" before becoming a handicapper for the Daily Racing Form. Now he's editor of the thoroughbred industry insiders' must-read Paulick Report. "Gamblers have more experience with cheaters," he said. "They take voter fraud into their metrics. Polls don't. Nor do polls take into account how each state's secretary of state factors in, or systems within a state designed to eliminate voters; Jimmy the Greek called these 'the intangibles.'"

The multi-billion dollar online gaming industry offers evidence that Maloney and Paulick are, as usual, on the money.

Michael Robb, political expert for the British bookmaking site Betfair.com, lets the record speak for itself: Halfway through Election Day in 2004, when a CNN poll showed Kerry taking the lead, Betfair had Bush with a 91% chance to win.

Of course that's just one election. Probably hundreds of fifth-grade social studies students correctly predicted Bush's margin of victory to a decimal place, right?

Betfair also had all 50 states right in 2004.

As did rival site Intrade.

Koleman Strumpf, a University of Kansas economics professor who tracks betting trends, believes wagering is an incomparable barometer of an election. Among the reasons he gave me:

Relative to the polls, the betting markets have to think hard about what they're saying since they are putting their money at stake. Also polls tend to reflect what people are thinking at a given moment, versus a forecast of what will happen on election day -- post-convention bounces, for instance.

With University of Arizona economist Paul Rhode, Strumpf authored a study -- "Historical Presidential Betting Markets," published in Journal of Economic Perspectives -- that demonstrates that the betting market's forecasting superiority is nothing new.

They begin with America's long history of wagering on political outcomes, which boomed in the 1880s when betting moved from poolrooms to the Curb Exchange, the predecessor to the American Stock Exchange. Betting on political outcomes often drew huge crowds to Wall Street and exceeded trading in stocks and bonds.

"In presidential races such as 1896, 1900, 1904, 1916, and 1924, the New York Times, Sun, and World provided nearly daily [betting] quotes from early October until Election Day," write Rhode and Strumpf.

The papers' sources were betting firms, which had men present at speeches made by the candidates in order to make "unbiased reports of the psychological reactions of the audiences."

In the fifteen elections between 1884 and 1940, the betting firms were wrong just once, in 1916, when Wilson upset Hughes. And the gamblers might have had a perfect record had the Curb Market stayed open long enough to take into account late-breaking news from the West.

The advent of polls marked the end of an era. "Prior to Gallup's introduction in 1936, newspapers had little else to report about the election horserace other than the betting markets," Strumpf said. "When scientific polls came along, newspapers had something to report other than markets they were oftentimes uncomfortable with."

Responding to such discomfort, state laws increasingly limited organized election betting. Betting persisted, but in the shadows. Accordingly little data exists from 1940 through 1984, though it's enough that Strumpf concludes gamblers were more accurate than the pollsters in that period too.

The advent of internet wagering offers a clearer picture: "Since 1988, the betting markets have definitely been more accurate," Strumpf said.

It's still illegal for United States citizens to wager on the presidential election; Betfair and Intrade try to bar American bettors. Several newer off-shore sites are more lenient, however.

Currently, Betfair lists Barack Obama as an overwhelming 1-7 favorite (paying $8 for a $7 winning bet). A John McCain win would pay $6.80 for every dollar bet.

"On Election Night I'll look at the movement on the betting sites to see what's going on," Strumpf says. "I watch CNN too, out of the corner of an eye, but it's not necessary."

NOW National Action Center | 6 Actions For Election Day!

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:57:19 EST

From the National Organization for Women:

6 Actions For Election Day

On Election Day, let's see change in this country. Let's get feminist candidates to Washington, D.C.! Here are six simple ideas of things you can do on Election Day to help secure feminist victories.

Get the word out about feminist candidates! Tell your friends, family, and neighbors.
Obviously, you can't vote if you don't know where to go. Remember to check where your polling place is and what you need to bring to the polls. To be safe, bring a photo ID and, if possible, your voter registration card.

VOTE!!! Be prepared for a long wait by bringing a folding chair or two -– you don't want sore feet to keep you from voting!
One thing to know is that your right to vote is protected. Know your election protection resources -- if something goes wrong, you may need to act fast! In that vein, you can Twitter from your cellphone to protect the vote.
Time to use your cellphone to get out the vote! Call your friends and remind them to vote, and tell NOW President Kim Gandy that you voted using Twitter. Sign up and let your feminist voice be heard.
Elections can be an all-night waiting game. You can track the polling results on websites such as CNN. In the days after the election, go to the NOW PAC website to see how well feminist candidates did.

The Progress Report | ELECTION '08: Get Out And Vote

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:48:01 EST

November 3, 2008

by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ali Frick, and Ryan Powers

All the ads, door-knocking, polling, speeches, and rallies culminate tomorrow as Americans head to the polls to vote in one of the nation's most historic elections. With 90 percent of the electorate holding the opinion that the country is seriously off track, voters are engaging in the political process as never before. Approximately 153.1 million Americans are now registered to vote (a record 73.5 percent of citizens 18 or older), record numbers are turning out to take advantage of the early voting systems in more than 30 states, and election officials are expecting record turnout overall. But with such unprecedented engagement comes the possibility of massive problems, including long lines, votes not being properly counted, and even deliberate suppression. Conservatives continue to demagogue about the potential of vast voter fraud, although they have virtually no solid evidence to back up their claims. The possibilities of such problems, however, shouldn't deter anyone from voting. As Mary G. Wilson, president of the League of Women Voters, noted, the "willingness of people to wait in line for this historic vote...is 'affirmation our democracy is alive and well.'" If you have any questions on how or when to vote, or if you would like to report problems registering to vote or casting a ballot, visit the Election Protection Coalition or call 1-866-OUR-VOTE. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights has more voter protection resources here.

MYTH OF VOTER FRAUD: In the weeks before the election, conservatives have stepped up their calls to combat "voter fraud," claiming that "hundreds of thousands of new voter registrations are questionable" in Ohio and warning that the election could be "stolen." On Oct. 23, Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) campaign sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey requesting a federal investigation into voter fraud. "Voter registration fraud can quickly turn into vote fraud -- especially in the case of absentee balloting and in states that do not require photo identification to vote," read the letter. No one wants a fraudulently registered person to vote. Luckily, it doesn't appear that this problem is real. The conservative focus on "voter integrity," which began when John Ashcroft was serving as President Bush's attorney general, "targets fraud in the voting process, from voter registration to voting and ballot counting." Voter integrity efforts have done more harm than good. "It's one of those great euphemisms," Pamela S. Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School, observed. "By and large, it's been targeted at minority voters." When pushed by ProPublica recently, the McCain campaign was able to produce virtually no evidence to back up its claims of rampant voter fraud. Scholars who have published extensively on election fraud are unable to think of a single example of registration fraud. In 2007, the New York Times reported that after a five-year effort by the Bush administration to crack down on supposedly widespread voter fraud, just 86 people were convicted.

POTENTIAL PROBLEMS: Aside from over-hyped concerns about voter fraud, there are real problems for legitimate voters trying to reach the polls. In July, a study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law warned that some voters may still face poorly designed ballots, similar to the Florida debacle in 2000. Last week, CNN reported that approximately 50,000 Georgia voters had been "'flagged' because of a computer mismatch in their personal identification information. At least 4,500 of those people are having their citizenship questioned and the burden is on them to prove eligibility to vote." Similarly, "numerical errors or misspellings" in Ohio have resulted in voter registration applications that did not match other government databases. Conservatives quickly jumped on this as evidence of fraudulent voters and tried to force the state to provide information making it easier for them to challenge the registrations, but the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed their case. When a person's voter status is in question, he or she is allowed to cast a provisional ballot, which is sometimes never counted. In Ohio's March primary, the Cleveland Plain Dealer found that 20 percent of the provisional ballots -- or approximately 20,000 ballots -- were rejected, even though "many people shouldn't have lost their votes." More perniciously, there have already been reports of deliberate voter suppression and intimidation. Early voters in North Carolina, who were mostly African-American, were heckled by a "group of loud and angry protesters," almost all of whom were white. A phony Virginia Board of Elections flier was recently distributed in Hampton Roads, VA, incorrectly telling Democrats that they were now scheduled to vote on Nov. 5.

ELECTION PROTECTION: While serving in the Bush administration, Ashcroft pursued "voter integrity" by assigning federal prosecutors "to watch for election crimes in each judicial district." This move troubled civil rights advocates. "A lot of assistant U.S. attorneys are going to be more interested in voting integrity than in voter protection," said Jon Greenbaum, a former lawyer in the Justice Department's Voting Rights Section. "How many people are scared off from voting because you ask them a question at a polling place? There is no way to know." In September, however, the Justice Department took a giant step away from the sordid legacy of Ashcroft and his successor, Alberto Gonzales, by announcing that it would not be stationing prosecutors at polls on Nov. 4.

ETHICS -- FRIEND OF COLEMAN FUNNELED $75,000 TO SENATOR THROUGH WIFE: A lawsuit filed late last week alleges that one of Sen. Norm Coleman's (R-MN) best friends and supporters, Nasser Kazeminy, used a Texas-based oil-rig services company to funnel $75,000 to Coleman through his wife Laurie's insurance firm. Paul McKim, who filed the lawsuit and who until last Friday was CEO of Deep Marine Technologies (DMT), says Kazeminy -- who owns about 50 percent of the company -- threatened to fire him if he did not agree to the deal. The lawsuit alleges Kazeminy explicitly sought to benefit Sen. Coleman: "In March 2007, Kazeminy began ordering the payments of corporate funds to companies and individuals who tendered no goods or services to DMT for the stated purpose of trying to financially assist United States Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota." The lawsuit alleges that the money was sent through Laurie's insurance firm, Hays Companies, to make it "appear as though the payments were made in connection with legitimate transactions." Coleman called the suit's claims "false and defamatory," but Friday, McKim produced records documenting the payments to Laurie Coleman's firm, Hays. Earlier this month, Harpers reported that Kazeminy "covered the bills for Coleman's lavish clothing purchases at Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis" -- a topic the campaign was not eager to discuss.

HEALTH CARE -- A BLUEPRINT FOR REFORM: On Friday, the Center for American Progress and the Institute on Medicine as a Profession released The Health Care Delivery System: A Blueprint for Reform, a compilation of policy recommendations for reforming the health care delivery system. The book transcends popular campaign rhetoric to offer policy makers concrete solutions for transforming the health care system into an organization that places patient care ahead of insurer profit. Assuming the implementation of universal coverage, the project makes specific policy recommendations to help Congress and the next President to transform the American health care system to promote quality, efficiency, patient-centeredness, coverage and wellness. The blueprint seeks to build-up the health care infrastructure (workers, tools, and knowledge), fix the health organization (in which doctors don’t work as integrated teams to coordinate patient coverage), improve the quality of care, and encourage patient participation in the management of chronic diseases.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS -- LIEBERMAN TOLD SYRIAN AMBASSADOR THAT McCAIN WOULD TALK TO SYRIA: Foreign Policy Magazine recently interviewed Syrian ambassador Imad Moustapha, who said that the next president, no matter who he is, would likely engage Syria diplomatically. "I have reason to believe that even if [Senator John] McCain becomes president of the United States, he will also be inclined to sit and talk with Syria," Moustapha said. "I can tell you this on the record: Senator Joe Lieberman, who is supposed to be very close to McCain, has said this explicitly and very clearly to me personally." It would be a startling turn for McCain and Lieberman, both of whom have been sharply critical of politicians seeking to engage Syria. McCain adviser Max Boot denounced the Israeli government for engaging Syria, declaring, "John McCain is not going to betray the lawfully elected government of Lebanon." Recently, the campaign attacked an adviser to Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for attending a legal summit in Damascus, comparing it to "unconditional summit meetings with state sponsors of terrorism." Last year, Lieberman joined the conservative attack machine in slamming Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for visiting Syria. "I believe her visit to Syria was a mistake, that it was bad for the United States of America," Lieberman said. "And I say this because we're in a war. We're in a war against the Islamic terrorists who attacked us on 9-11-01."

ETHICS -- SENATE MAJORITY LEADER REID SAYS STEVENS 'IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SERVE' IN THE SENATE: On Saturday, Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) issued a statement declaring that his close but embattled friend, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) would "retain his Senate seat while the legal process moves forward" regarding Stevens' recent conviction on seven counts of lying on Senate disclosure forms to hide hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts. "I am absolutely confident that Ted Stevens will be sworn into the Senate while he appeals this unjust verdict," said Inouye in the statement. But Inouye's claim was swiftly rebuked by House Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on Saturday night. "While I respect the opinion of Senator Daniel Inouye, the reality is that a convicted felon is not going to be able to serve in the United States Senate," said Reid in a statement. "As precedent shows us, Senator Stevens will face an ethics committee investigation and expulsion, regardless of his appeals process." On Thursday, the Alaska Bar Association sought to suspend Stevens' law license on an interim basis, pending completion of his appeals.

On Tuesday, millions of voters "will use paper ballots rather than the touch-screen machines that have caused concern among voting experts." However, "the change does not guarantee a smooth election day." Voting experts are predicting machine and ballot shortages in several swing states and late tallies on election night."

Except for Alaska, every state in the country is either in a recession or "dangerously close" to one, according to Moody’s Economy.com. In March, just five states were in recession, but that number expanded to 30 by the end of September. Nineteen other states are at risk of falling into recession.

Former Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin and EPI's Jared Berstein write: "With the current financial crisis, our joint view is that for the short term, our economy needs a large fiscal stimulus that generates substantial economic demand."

CQ reports that Washington DC's lobbying firms are enjoying a business boom in the midst of a bear market. Due in part to the financial bailout, Washington lobbying firms signed up more than 500 new clients last month. "The annual cost of Washington lobbying will probably hit $3 billion for the first time ever." More »

"Nearly one in five U.S. mortgage borrowers owe more to lenders than their homes are worth, and the rate may soon approach one in four as housing prices fall and the economy weakens." A report released Friday showed that "7.63 million properties, or 18 percent, had negative equity in September, and another 2.1 million will follow if home prices fall another 5 percent."

Dozens of the roughly 225 detainees who remain imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay "are said by military and intelligence agencies…to have connections to top leaders of Al Qaeda or to have other serious terrorism credentials," including 20 said to be Osama bin Laden's bodyguards. The profiles of the detainees will make it difficult for the next president to close the facility, the New York Times concludes.

And finally: How to crank call Gov. Sarah Palin. Canadian radio DJ Marc-Antoine Audette caused a stir this weekend when he called Sarah Palin and successfully duped her into believing that he was French President Nicolas Sarkozy. How did he pull it off? "We started by calling the governor’s office in Alaska, and after that, we were transferred from one person to another. It took us about four days, we spoke to about a dozen people, and that’s how we were able to speak to her," Audette said. "Call it luck, call it perseverance, call it what you want -- but I never thought we would be able to do it."

Though he will likely end his tenure with one of the lowest job-approval ratings in history, President Bush is earning praise for "engineering what may be the most carefully considered and potentially successful presidential transition in modern times."

MISSOURI: Secretary of State Robin Carnahan is expecting a 76-percent turnout of voters Tuesday, just shy of the 1992 record of 77 percent.

ELECTION : At least 13 million people have already voted.

ECONOMY: "Governments -- from the largest states to the smallest cities -- are caught up in the tightening web of the financial crisis and looking to Washington for help."

THINK PROGRESS: "Coal Booster" Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) would "put coal out of business."

WONK ROOM: Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) claims that offshore drilling and her own determination lowered gas prices.

YGLESIAS: The "blame Iceland first" crowd.

UNQUALIFIED OFFERINGS: How marriage equality is uncontroversial through the eyes of a child.

"We will balance the federal budget by the end of our first term."
-- Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), 10/30/08

VERSUS

Q: You're not going to be able to do it [balance the budget].
HOLTZ-EAKIN: I couldn't agree with you more.
-- McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin, 10/30/08

The research team that brings you The Progress Report and ThinkProgress.org needs fall interns! Click here for more information.

Making CommonCause | Protect the Vote on Election Day

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:40:59 EST

Dear Voting Rights Advocate,

If you are heading to the polls tomorrow, please be sure to take this number with you: 1-866-OUR-VOTE (1-866-687-8683). This national, toll-free election protection hotline can help with any voting-related questions or problems you might encounter.

Before going to vote, please be sure to:

* Find out in advance where your polling place is. You can call 1-866-OUR-VOTE to find your polling place and confirm your registration, or look up your voting location here.
* Know what you need to bring to the polls. Check out our website for state-by-state voting information.
* Give yourself plenty of time to vote. Lines will likely be long in many places.

You can help Protect the Vote by passing the 1-866-OUR-VOTE hotline number on to everyone you know who will be voting tomorrow. The national election protection coalition, which Common Cause is proud to be part of, is committed to making sure every eligible voter is able to cast a ballot, and every ballot is counted accurately. If there are problems on Election Day, we want to be able to get to the bottom of them as fast as possible.

Also, Common Cause will hold an hour-long briefing call on Election Day at 5:30pm eastern time for all members and activists to talk about what we're hearing and seeing around the country. We'll have representatives from our national office on the line to talk about big-picture trends, and our staff who are on the ground in states like Ohio, Florida, Colorado and North Carolina to give reports from the field.

Please RSVP now, and we'll send you the toll-free dial-in information. We will take questions at the end of the call; however, please do not wait for this briefing call if you have a problem to report. Call the Election Protection hotline at 1-866-OUR-VOTE to relay any problems in your area.

Thanks for all you do,

Susannah Goodman
and the rest of the team at Common Cause

P.S. Here are a few more ways that you can help Protect the Vote tomorrow:

* TwitterVoteReport.com: Use your Twitter account, cell phone or any touch-tone phone to report on your voting experience. It's easy -- click here for more information about how to "Tweet Your Vote".
* MyFairElection.com: Rate your polling place and your experience of voting. Your rating and those of other voters will produce a real-time map of voting conditions throughout the country on November 4.
* Video the Vote: Shoot a video of your experience on Election Day and share it with the world. Some states have laws restricting when and where you can take pictures or video at voting sites – so be sure to check out the rules in your state before taking out your camera.

Forward this email Give to Common Cause Visit the CommonBlog

Common Cause is a national nonpartisan organization with chapters in 38 states. Our mailing address is 1133 19th Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20036. Our phone number is (202) 833-1200.

Secretaries of state give Dem firewall

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:13:56 EST

Secretaries of state give Dem firewall

By AVI ZENILMAN | 11/2/08 6:57 PM EST

in those five states Democrats are now in a more
advantageous position when it comes to the inter-
pretation and administration of election law — a
development that could benefit Barack Obama if
any of those states are closely contested on
Election Day. Photo: AP

In anticipation of a photo-finish presidential election, Democrats have built an administrative firewall designed to protect their electoral interests in five of the most important battleground states.

The bulwark consists of control of secretary of state offices in five key states — Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio — where the difference between victory and defeat in the 2004 presidential election was no more than 120,000 votes in any one of them.

With a Democrat now in charge of the offices, which oversee and administer their state’s elections, the party is better positioned than in the previous elections to advance traditional Democratic interests —such as increasing voter registration and boosting turnout — rather than Republican priorities such as stamping out voter fraud.

Perhaps more important, in those five states Democrats are now in a more advantageous position when it comes to the interpretation and administration of election law — a development that could benefit Barack Obama if any of those states are closely contested on Election Day.

The effort began in 2006 when a group of liberal California activists created an independent 527 group designed to elect secretaries of state.

The Secretary of State Project ran independent ads of its own and ensured that donors — many of whom were affiliated with Democracy Alliance, a network of wealthy fundraisers that channels money to liberal causes across the country — knew which candidates deserved donations.

They were frustrated by the ballot-counting actions of former Florida Republican Secretary of State Katherine Harris in 2000, and former Ohio Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell in 2004, both former campaign chairmen for George W. Bush who became prominent electoral boogeymen to the left.

“We were tired of Republican manipulation of elections,” said Michael Kieschnick, a founder of the group who is also the president of Working Assets, a company that provides credit cards and mobile phone services to progressive organizations.

“It seemed like lots of decisions were made by people who were pretty clearly political operatives.”

According to the group, it raised and bundled $500,000 for the 2006 races.

The group says it spent $30,000 on ads in Ohio, went on the radio in New Mexico and ran cable ads in Minnesota. In all seven target states — which also included unsuccessful campaigns in Colorado and Michigan — the Democratic candidate received a larger proportion of their money from out-of-state donors than the Republican, according to a Politico analysis.

This year, the project is supporting Democratic candidates in four more states: Missouri, Montana, Oregon and West Virginia.

Secretary of state races still come with a much lower price tag than higher profile state races, but in recent years the increased scrutiny has upped the cost.

In Colorado, the 2002 candidates for secretary of state raised less than $120,000 combined. Four years later, Republican Michael Coffman raised about $450,000 while Democrat Ken Gordon raised almost $600,000.

In Michigan, the heavily self-funded Republican incumbent Terri Lynn Land outraised Democratic long-shot Carmella Sabaugh by a 4-1 ratio, but the margin would have been greater if not for the almost $30,000 Sabaugh received from out-of-state donors.

“It was very uplifting to know that a progressive group is really interested in getting secretary of states. It was very rewarding to see that,” she said of the project. “I think they actually contacted me.”

Along with Kieschnick, who gave the maximum $3,400 to Sabaugh’s underdog campaign, the list of donors included California venture capitalists (and Democracy Alliance stalwarts) Debra and Andrew Rappaport and a Utah investor named Arthur Lipson.

An alumnus of Wall Street, Lipson gave more than $25,000 directly to the 527 and also donated to individual secretary of state candidates in Colorado, Minnesota and Ohio.

“I would’ve given zero dollars to secretary of state races without the Secretary of State Project,” he told Politico.

Potential contributors who visit the site can either give directly to the group or send money to candidates through ActBlue, an online tool for liberal candidates. In 2006, ActBlue delivered more than $24,000 in small donations to New Mexico Secretary of State Mary Herrera’s campaign, about 7 percent of her overall budget.

Republicans have recently criticized Herrera first for hiring the son-in-law of Rep. Tom Udall, the Democratic Senate candidate, as director of the state Bureau of Elections, and then replacing him with a former Udall chief of staff.

But the biggest lightning rod, for both cash and controversy, has been Ohio.

In 2002, Kenneth Blackwell raised almost $1.6 million for his race while his Democratic challenger raised about $400,000. Four years later, Democrat Jennifer Brunner — who won the race — and her opponent each raised more than $2 million.

The Brunner candidacy emerged as a small cause célèbre on the left: While only 20 percent of her funding came from out of state, 12 out of the 18 individuals who gave the maximum $10,000 — a list that included Teresa Heinz Kerry — hailed from outside Ohio.

“It was extremely helpful in raising people’s awareness on the importance of having good people occupy the office of secretary of state,” Brunner said. “I received significant support from the SOS Project, which helped me toward the election.”

Democrats keyed in on Ohio after Blackwell purged the rolls of longtime nonvoters, issued decisions that limited which provisional ballots would be counted, and allowed what some saw as suspiciously long lines in Democratic areas on Election Day. Bush won the state that year by just over 100,000 votes out of more than 5.5 million cast.

Blackwell disputes the claims that his actions were politically motivated and said the elements of the left that accused him of election theft were attempting “to exploit a situation where most people have superficial knowledge of how elections are managed.”

Likewise, Brunner has spent the past several months embroiled in a series of legal battles with Republicans.

On Sept. 29, the day before early voting began, the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed her decision to allow residents to register and vote on the same day, during the week-long window after early voting in the state begins, and before the voter registration period ends.

Republicans had objected to the window, which they said would open up the floodgates for one-stop voter fraud.

On Oct. 2, the Ohio Supreme Court struck down her directive regarding 1 million absentee ballot applications that the McCain campaign had issued: The campaign had included an extra, unnecessary checkbox on the form, and Brunner had ruled that a failure to check the box — even if the registrant signed the form — meant the application could be rejected.

The court said Brunner’s interpretation, ostensibly to prevent voter fraud, served "no vital purpose or public interest."

The next day, a local Republican official filed a lawsuit to allow outside observers at early voting sites — Brunner had insisted that the election workers already in place would provide enough of a check.

“Secretary Brunner ran on a platform that called for absolute independence come election time,” former Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro said on a conference call organized by the McCain campaign. Petro also criticized Blackwell for excessive partisanship in 2004. “She’s issuing directives that demonstrate a partisan tilt.”

Earlier this week, Brunner called on the Ohio attorney general to investigate get-out-the-vote calls made by Republicans in 19 Ohio counties, which some voters had confused as calls from their local election board.

When asked about Brunner, Kieschnick was careful to qualify his praise. “Our view would be that Jennifer Brunner made decisions that opened up elections to more people,” he said. “It’s never quite what you want, but by and large she’s so much better than Ken Blackwell.”

“I think you can’t separate partisan attacks from elections,” said Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller. “I view it as one of my primary responsibilities to be as objective as I can. … My goal is to assure the public that we have integrity in the system.”

Miller’s office recently made headlines when it raided a local office of ACORN, the community organization, to investigate allegations of voter registration fraud. “I’d like to emphasize that I think the system in Nevada works,” he said. “Although there are claims of registration fraud that we’re hoping to substantiate. … I don’t think we’ve seen any evidence that this is going to translate into voter fraud at the polls.”

Emerging Trends from the 866-OUR-VOTE Hotline

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:59:15 EST

Emerging Trends from the 866-OUR-VOTE Hotline

Published by alan on November 2, 2008 in Election 2008, early voting and longlines

Over 80,000 voter calls have now been received at the Election Protection Command Center.

Some emerging trends:

· Broward County leads Florida in voter requests for assistance.

· Registration-related problems rank #1 in nearly every battleground state - hundreds of calls focus on that problem, most often in Texas, New York, New Jersey, Georgia, Florida, Colorado, and California

· Georgia voters are reporting more incidents of voter intimidation than any other state. Other reports of voter intimidation, scams or misinformation are also emerging in Ohio and Missouri.

· Florida voters rank #1 in requests related to criminal status and voting.

· Early voting problems are also being noticed particularly in Ohio, Missouri, Georgia, Florida and California

Other News

REJECTED REGISTRATIONS.

Officials in Delaware County, Pennsylvania have rejected 250 voter-registration applications and questioned more than 4,000 others, alleging concerns over voter fraud and potential mismatches. In Georgia, Secretary of State Karen Handel is proceeding with an effort to send letters to 4,770 registered voters believed to be non-citizens. The secretary’s office took up the charge after counties stopped their verifications processes over DOJ questioning.

ALL IN POLLWORKERS’ HANDS.

Lines, registration problems, what you can or can’t wear. All of these issues now and on Election Day may come down to how they are handled by volunteer pollworkers. Pollworkers work long hours often with minimal compensation. Many states and localities are actively recruiting more volunteers in an effort to stay ahead of the rush on Election Day.

UPDATE: Added in links to database searches.

The Promised Land ...a message from Michael Moore

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:46:49 EST

The Promised Land ...a message from Michael Moore

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

Friends,

Tomorrow.

All of us.

You, me, and everyone we know.

Eight years is enough. Eight weeks was enough.

We have a chance to redeem this country, to prove we're better than this, that which Bush has made of us.

McCain is right about one thing: Barack Obama is the most liberal senator in the United States Senate. More liberal than Ted Kennedy. When was the last time you had a chance to send the MOST liberal senator to the White House? Trust me, it won't happen again in our lifetime.

Every vote is critical -- even in hard red states like Texas and Alabama; and true blue ones like New York, California and Michigan. Tomorrow, we need to create a massive popular vote that will give Obama a stunning mandate to return this country to we, the people. Let's write one for the history books and rocket Obama into the White House.

Expect trouble tomorrow. Stand your ground. Don't let some clerk turn you away. Make noise. Call the media if they won't let you vote. Let the Obama camp know. Check out his Voter Protection Center. Know where your polling place is. Be careful inside the voting booth. The ballot still reads like a Sudoku puzzle. Be prepared for long lines. That's ok, you know how to bring the party with you! Make new friends. Plot your local revolution. The 28-year rule of Republicans (and Democrats who act like Republicans) is over. The Reagan Era dies tomorrow night. My God, I truly thought it would never end.

There are over a million of you on my list. Each of you know 5 or 10 people who may not vote. Offer to drive them to the polls. If they live across the country, call them and tell them how much it means to you that they go vote for Obama. Take your co-workers to lunch -- and to vote. Be creative. Come up with ways to convince the undecided to get their decided on and go vote. Make it fun. Lead the horse to water.

60 seats in the Senate!

30-seat increase in the House!

President Obama!

It's in your hands. The Promised Land.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MichaelMoore.com
MMFlint@aol.com

Join Mike's Mailing List | Join Mike's Facebook Group | Become Mike's MySpace Friend

MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Vote No on Hate! Help Defeat California Proposition 8; Florida Amendment 2; Arizona Proposition 102; Arkansas Act 1

Tommy News — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:04:26 EST

Please watch this important short video and then forward this urgent message on to your entire address book today!http://www.noonprop8.com/messages
MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Vote No on Hate! Help Defeat California Proposition 8; Florida Amendment 2 Arizona Proposition 102 Arkansas Act 1 And Vote Obama-Biden Too! Florida Amendment 2 What the Amendment Says Amendment 2

"Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized." 6 Reasons to Say No 2Taking Away Benefits
Amendment 2 could take away existing benefits from all unmarried Floridians Hurting Seniors
Amendment 2 could force seniors to choose between important benefits like sharing health care and important government benefits. "Gay Marriage" Bait & Switch
Amendment 2 claims to ban "gay marriage" but Florida already has multiple laws banning same-sex marriage Massive Government Intrusion
Amendment 2 puts the government where it doesn't belong - regulating the personal relationships of Floridians Hiring Expensive Lawyers
Amendment 2 could force unmarried Floridians to hire expensive private lawyers just to protect their basic legal rights Dramatic Consequences
Amendment 2 could take away job benefits from university employees and be used as a defense to domestic violence - as in other states which passed similar amendments Click Here to Help:http://www.sayno2.com/Arizona Proposition 102 Proposition 102, if approved by Arizona voters,
will amend the Arizona Constitution

Arizona voted NO in 2006

Now we have to vote NO again in 2008.

Help us make it loud and clear —
VOTE NO on Proposition 102 on November 4th

The state has more important issues to address.

Keep Phoenix Politicians out of Marriage!Click here to help:http://www.votenoprop102.com/web/home.phpArkansas Act 1http://arkansasfamiliesfirst.org/This proposal would ban anyone who is unmarried from serving as a foster or adoptive parent—gay and straight alike.It applies to both public and private adoption, and deprives children of loving, nurturing homes. What We Believe

We oppose Initiated Act 1 because it works against the best interests of children who need loving homes. We can all agree that children should be placed in loving permanent homes where they can be nurtured and raised in an encouraging environment. We ought to be making that easier, not harder, to do.
We believe that child welfare experts, who know what is in the best interests of children, should decide on a case-by-case basis who should be a foster or adoptive parent. We oppose a blanket rule that bans otherwise qualified people from being foster or adoptive parents.
Arkansans should not deny loving homes to the children who need them most.

We Need Your Support

Arkansas Families First is organizing and working to defeat Initiated Act 1—and we need your help! Please contribute to our campaign, sign up for email alerts, find opportunities to volunteer.

Click here to help:http://arkansasfamiliesfirst.org/California Proposition 8 Vote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! Vote No on Prop 8 - Equality for All
California Proposition 8 is a California ballot initiative that would make same-sex marriage in California illegal. This discriminatory initiative is on the statewide California ballot this November 4th.Civil rights matters should not be placed on the ballot, but unfortunately this is on the ballot, and we must work to defeat it. This discriminatory measure affects people nationwide. not just in California, but only Californians can vote on it. Gay people deserve the same EQUAL rights as everyone else. Anything less is discrimination.As long as the government makes laws about and codifies civil marriage, all people must be included in those laws equally. Churches are then free to bless those unions or not. There are plenty of Progressive and tolerant churches that will. Please think about this: How does someone else's marriage affect yours? It does NOT! Vote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! Go here to learn more about California Proposition 8 and donate to help fight it:http://noonprop8.com/homeVote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! We need your help and we need it now. Please pass this message on! Here are the facts:Vote No on Prop 8 - Equality for AllWhat Is Prop 8?

The following information will be included in the November ballot materials.

Ballot Title and Summary

Proposition 8:

ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Fiscal Impact: Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact to state and local governments.

On August 8, 2008 Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley ruled that the Attorney General's Title and Summary of Proposition 8 is accurate.

Ballot Argument

OUR CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION -- the law of our land -- SHOULD GUARANTEE THE SAME FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS TO EVERYONE -- NO ONE group SHOULD be singled out to BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY.

In fact, our nation was founded on the principle that all people should be treated equally. EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW IS THE FOUNDATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.

That's what this election is about -- equality, freedom and fairness, for all.

Marriage is the institution that conveys dignity and respect to the lifetime commitment of any couple. PROPOSITION 8 WOULD DENY LESBIAN AND GAY COUPLES that same DIGNITY AND RESPECT.

That's why Proposition 8 is wrong for California.

Regardless of how you feel about this issue, the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society, just like the freedoms of religion and speech.

PROPOSITION 8 MANDATES ONE SET OF RULES FOR GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES AND ANOTHER SET FOR EVERYONE ELSE. That's just not fair. OUR LAWS SHOULD TREAT EVERYONE EQUALLY.

In fact, the government has no business telling people who can and cannot get married. Just like government has no business telling us what to read, watch on TV or do in our private lives. We don't need Prop 8; WE DON'T NEED MORE GOVERNMENT IN OUR LIVES.

REGARDLESS OF HOW ANYONE FEELS ABOUT MARRIAGE FOR GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES, PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE SINGLED OUT FOR UNFAIR TREATMENT UNDER THE LAWS OF OUR STATE. Those committed and loving couples who want to accept the responsibility that comes with marriage should be treated like everyone else.

DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS are NOT MARRIAGE.

When you're married and your spouse is sick or hurt, there is no confusion: you get into the ambulance or hospital room with no questions asked. IN EVERYDAY LIFE AND ESPECIALLY IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS, DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS ARE SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. Only marriage provides the certainty and the security that people know they can count on in their times of greatest need.

EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW IS A FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE. Prop 8 separates one group of Californians from another and excludes them from enjoying the same rights as other loving couples.

Forty-six years ago I married my college sweetheart, Julia. We raised three children -- two boys and one girl. The boys are married, with children of their own. Our daughter, Liz, a lesbian, can now also be married -- if she so chooses.

All we have ever wanted for our daughter is that she be treated with the same dignity and respect as her brothers – with the same freedoms and responsibilities as every other Californian.

My wife and I never treated our children differently, we never loved them any differently and now the law doesn't treat them differently, either.

Each of our children now has the same rights as the others, to choose the person to love, commit to and to marry.

Don't take away the equality, freedom and fairness that everyone in California -- straight, gay or lesbian -- deserves.

Please join us in voting NO on Prop 8.

Why Vote No on Prop 8?

"Proposition 8… would eliminate the fundamental right to same-sex marriage. The very act of denying gay and lesbian couples the right to marry – traditionally the highest legal and societal recognition of a loving commitment – by definition relegates them and their relationship to second class status."
Los Angeles Times Editorial, August 8, 2008

Regardless of how you feel about this issue, we should guarantee the same fundamental rights to every Californian. Vote No on 8.

Let's remember that gay and lesbian people are our neighbors, our friends, our coworkers and our family members. They are nurses, firefighters and small business owners. Same-sex couples are loving and committed couples who want to get married. They care for each other, they pay taxes and they want to protect each other and take responsibility for each other, just like other couples. We should not hurt same-sex couples in California by eliminating their right to marry.

It's not the government's place to tell couples who have been together for years whether or not they are allowed to marry. In California, we let people decide what is best for themselves – without government interference. Eliminating fundamental rights for same-sex couples treats them differently under the law – AND THAT'S WRONG. Vote No on 8.

Domestic Partnerships are NOT the same as marriage. Domestic partnerships are just legal documents. They don't provide the same dignity, respect, and commitment as a marriage. In a marriage, a paramedic doesn't tell you that you cannot get into an ambulance with your spouse. Married couples can automatically make life or death decisions for each other in these crisis situations, no questions asked. Vote No on 8.

Regardless of how you feel about this issue, it's wrong to eliminate the fundamental rights of fellow Californians – and hurt our friends, neighbors, coworkers, and family members. THAT'S WRONG.

Proponents of Prop 8 continue to lie in their television ads.

Here's what's fiction and what's fact:

Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.

Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education, and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it, and the Yes on 8 campaign knows they are lying. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has already ruled that this claim by Prop 8 proponents is "false and misleading."

Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.

Fact: Nothing in Prop 8 would force churches to do anything. In fact, the court decision regarding marriage specifically says "no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs."

Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent's objection to the school curriculum will happen here.

Fact: Unlike Massachusetts, California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don't agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won't affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.

Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…

Fact: Prop 8 is not about courts and judges, it's about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn't grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren't supposed to protect rights and freedoms. This campaign is about whether Californians, right now, in 2008 are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.

Fiction: People can be sued over personal beliefs.

Fact: California's laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.

Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.

Fact: The university has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.

Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, CA parents won't have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.

Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.

Regardless of how you feel about the issue, we should not eliminate fundamental rights for ANY Californians. Please vote NO on Prop 8

http://noonprop8.com/campaign_updates?id=0001

Donate

We need your help and we need it now. There are so many ways you can help fund the fight against Prop 8. You can help to raise much-needed funds and educate your friends and family about why it is so important for Californians to vote NO on Prop 8.

Click Herre:http://www.noonprop8.com/page/?id=0052

Sign up to receive more information on Prop 8

http://eqfed.org/equalityforall/join.tcl

Click Here to help:California Proposition 8 Vote No on Prop 8 - Equality for AllFlorida Amendment 2 http://www.sayno2.com/Arizona Proposition 102http://www.votenoprop102.com/web/home.phpArkansas Act 1 http://arkansasfamiliesfirst.org/
And Vote Obama-Biden Too!

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

One Sentence Summary of What is Wrong With McCain's Economic Plan

Crunchy Middle — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:10:54 EST

You can't even maintain a baseball stadium without different prices for different seats but John McCain thinks you can run a country that way.

BE the CHANGE

Mitch Manzella — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 04:50:36 EST

Be the Change is a groundbreaking multi-tiered youth vote campaign providing a direct role for artists who support Obama to increase voter turnout. Through pre-recorded messages, musicians will alert their fans to vote on Election Day. Artists may also choose to send follow-up messages to their fans detailing their personal reasons for supporting Sen. Obama in the days leading up to the election. These unique messages give musicians an opportunity to personally reach out to their fans and start a bi-directional conversation with their fans about issues and politics.

http://www.musicfordemocracy.org

By leveraging the power of online music communities, Music for Democracy is engaging segments of the youth vote that are overlooked by traditional campaign operations. This extends beyond the college campuses where the majority of the young voter outreach is taking place. Only about 20% of the youth vote (18-29) lives on a college campus. Although 2008 has been called the "Year of the Young Voter," funding for youth vote groups is only a quarter of what it was in 2004. "Be the Change" reaches out to the non-college youth voter where they are most likely to be found, online and on their cell phones.

http://www.musicfordemocracy.org

A Morning Pick Me Up

L. Glory — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 04:30:59 EST

Here's a little something to start Monday off right.

http://www.theobamaexperiment.com/Videos.html

Here's looking to a Bright BLUE Tuesday Voting Day!

:Lilly

Of Single Issues, Greed and Social Justice

Crunchy Middle — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:03:47 EST

There is much that is tragic about the polarization of our nation. I think that one of the most tragic must be the attempt to exploit and manipulate the religious beliefs of good people for political purposes. The moment reason ceases to be an opiate religion becomes a threat.
This is the reason for simple condemnation of ones opponents. The moment that human beings begin to engage in rational discourse then people become threats. An examined faith is the foundation for social justice, for our interaction within, without and with a higher power. A faith that is unexamined will make us turn a blind eye to our own imperfections and the injustice commited against our fellow man.

Churches have reinforced and challenged power structures. Religion has hindered and helped in matters of social justice throughout the world. The abuses of faith are listed as are its triumphs but for much of our modern history there is a constant. Religion can exist outside the state and that makes it a threat.

Threats must be isolated, hence the necessity of organizations that wish to preserve any status quo that does not seek social justice to focus the attention of the electorate away from their true intent. Single issues are opiates that are particularly essential because they turn gazes from the destruction that evil men do in the name of justice. Pick your issue and you will find polarization with its goal being the isolation of our fellow human beings from liberty.

The last thing that power wants is an educated electorate filled with people that actually talk to each other. Such movements are catalysts and dangerous. We cannot have labor movements again gathering in churches so better to isolate the US from THEM. We cannot talk about the poor so best to call them those who will not work rather than those who cannot find work. We cannot talk about why there is inequality in our society so we are given promises that we will be protected from THEM. All but US are G-dless so that we will be free to cast the first stone this is the mantra that begs us join. All we must do is remember to put others before ourselves, and the mantra begins to dissolve, for we begin to know that we are not alone.

We were founded in WE not in I for our founders knew that rallying to selfishness was cowardly and not worthy of a people that would embrace courageous acts. Ours was a new vision, a new concept and greed was not a virtue championed. Ours was a legacy of challenging the greatest of odds for great change was not out of our reach if we would have the courage to honestly face our problems and address them. We can face down the enemies of our people, foreign and domestic. Hate is not an aspect of justice, its path is divergent and its handmaiden is shackled liberty. No matter what comes I know that, for me at least, this is just the beginning. The greatest gift of this election is the reinvigoration of my faith, not just in a higher power but in my humanity. It compels me to include rather than to exclude. It begs me not to stop, compels me to sacrifice and believe for the next generation till my weary life draws nigh and hopeful breath sustains my soul to gather on the next plane. Beyond that I know that I am not alone.

Women's Media Center | Election Edition: Rachel Maddow, Lynn Sherr, The Green Party

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:07:05 EST

October 31, 2008

We open on a celebratory note -- The Women's Media Center and I have been chosen for the North Star News Prize -- awarded by the North Star Fund for "shining an important light on the challenges facing women in media, as well as eloquently capturing the broader national themes at the center of the struggle for social change." The organization -- and the prize -- are named for the anti-slavery newspaper, the North Star News that black abolitionist Frederick Douglass founded in 1847. We are so honored -- and encouraged. As Douglass wrote in 1847, "We believe that what ought to be done, can be done."

MediaTrack 2008: Women.Media.The Vote.

With just days before the election, some essential reading:

On our home page now-MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has something to say about Sarah Palin, esteemed journalist and author Lynn Sherr writes on why she thinks non-voters should have their toenails removed (ouch!), prize-winning historian Mary Hershberger asks why the media won't examine the McCain war record. Nida Khan brings up the other campaign, the one with two women candidates: Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente of the Green Party. And Robin Morgan tackles "faux feminists."

Our Progressive Women's Voices participants give us serious takes on looming issues: national security expert Lorelei Kelly tells us why women must take charge; Ellen Bravo, who advocates for paid sick leave, sympathizes with Barack Obama's break from the trail to see his ailing grandmother, and blogging star Joanne Cronrath Bamberger writes about one congresswoman who went a few steps too far. WMC DC correspondent Peg Simpson focuses on possible wins for women in Congress.

As we close in on the finish line to this very long presidential campaign, it might be useful to review the more than 80 commentaries and reports about the election, all written by women, that have appeared on our website: from announcements, through the tumultuous primary season, and into the general. Our panel, co-sponsored with the Paley Center for Media, From Bella to Hillary: Women, Politics and the Media examined the possibilities of women candidates. You might also want to take a look again at our report, Bias, Punditry and the Media, an examination of media's performance during the primary, with recommendations for moving forward. Video clips from the WMC forum that inspired the report, From Soundbites to Solutions, are on our home page. In addition to holding briefings of our own, we have collaborated with many organizations to make sure women are fairly represented in the media, including our video, Sexism Sells, But We're Not Buying.

PWV Election Update:

Melanie Campbell, Executive Director of National Council on Black Civic participation, which represents 80 civil rights groups nationally, is on the road, attempting to prevent voter fraud. She's written a guide to make sure your vote is counted.

Maria Teresa Peterson, Executive Director of Voto Latino, guested on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 this week, is signed up to do several days of election coverage for MSNBC.

Margot Dorfman, Executive Director of the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce testified before Congress on the effect of the economic turndown on women businesses, covered by The Wall Street Journal.

On Election Night I'll be doing some analysis for French TV (the WMC is going international!) Post election analysis includes leading two discussions: for New York Women in Communications with Arianna Huffington and Geraldine Ferraro and Marie Wilson -- and for the Women's Leadership Exchange with Valerie Plame among others.

On Wednesday, November 5th, several PWV-ers will participate in The Day After: A Feminist Town Forum, sponsored by The Center for New Words in Cambridge, Mass. Watch the webcast, and follow bloggers Veronica Arreola (Viva la Feminista) Deborah Siegel (Girl with Pen) and Gloria Feldt (Heartfeldt Politics.)

Be sure to read Veronica's Ms. Magazine review of the anthology edited by the Center's head, Jacklyn Friedman and WMC Honorary Advisory Council member Jessica Valenti of Feminsting.com: Yes Means Yes! Visions of Female Sexual Power & a World Without Rape…then get the book. It has a piece by another PWV-er, Latoya Peterson, who edits Racialicious.com. And Salon's Rebekah Traistor, so good as a "Soundbites" panelist of ours at the Democratic Convention, has a great piece on the effects of the election on Katie Couric, Campbell Brown and Rachel Maddow: "Ladies of the Nightly News".

To stay informed before, during, and after, sign up for our Exclusives, and Daily News Briefs, delivered directly to you.

We're working to make sure women are visible and powerful in the media. Please join our effort, by contributing to WMC.

WMC Round-Up

Meet the Press: Word is that NBC may be nearing a decision on a replacement for the late Tim Russert. Since our beginning, the WMC has been lobbying for women to host the Sunday morning news shows-the ones that influence policy and determine "news." We salute the efforts of a private citizen, Margot Friedman, who has started a Meet the Press campaign, Don't Let NBC Dis Women. We urge you to join up-and start campaigns of your own for full participation in media! Let us know about them!

League of Black Women: The WMC conducted a webinar for the League, headed up by Sandra Finley, which does great research on leadership, keeps track of participation of African American women in corporate life. It has a membership of thousands across the country.. We went through the steps of establishing media relations, and the impact of women of color this election cycle.

10/13 BlogHer: The DC Blogher conference drew several hundred bloggers -- I shared the closing plenary, on the blogging influence in elections, with CBS's Leslie Stahl. You may know that BlogHer has a following of some 30,000 women bloggers! Lisa Camahort-Page, Lisa Stone and Stahl, of 60 Minutes, was there in her role as an owner of wowOwow the online magazine. Partners include Whoopie Goldberg and Liz Smith. All woman owned! An interview with Michelle Obama is up now.

10/14 TimeWarner Media & the Presidency Conference: The WMC was a part of the two-day forum that attracted nearly 100 of the big guns of media. Unfortunately, women were vastly outnumbered. On the "Media & Power" panel, there were no women; on the "Is the Media Biased ?" panel there was no person of color. Lisa Witter of Fenton Communications organized the "Women & the Election" panel where 7 of the 14 or so women spoke, including Karen Tumulty of Time, and me. Our work -- not nearly done! See Marcia Yerman's WMC piece on this and BlogHer.

10/23 Lifetime: Got to watch Andrea Wong, the impressive new President of Lifetime TV, conduct business. As part of a panel presentation for advertisers, I talked about the power of sponsors: to know how many women are involved in productions they support, to influence portrayals of women-and to take note of the absence of women of color, especially. Willow Bay, senior editor of the Huffington Post, moderated. WMC is a media partner of Lifetime's Every Woman Counts campaign, which has produced some valuable bi-partisan polling of women in America.

Martha Burk, Money Editor of Ms. Magazine, also participated. She's got a great new book, Your Money and Your Life, The High Stakes for Women Voters in 08 and Beyond. And a radio program that is must pre-Election day listening with Huffington Post Editor in Chief Arianna Huffington, United Farm Workers Co-founder Dolores Huerta, and financial advisor Suze Orman.

Congratulations

Pat Mitchell, the WMC's board co-chair, has been inducted into the prestigious Broadcasting & Cable Hall of Fame. The president of the Paley Center for Media , and former head of PBS, Mitchell was also honored by the Center for Advancement of Women for her outstanding contributions to media and to women's issues internationally.

Gloria Steinem, co-founder of the WMC,was honored with the Minerva Award at Maria Shriver's California Women's Conference, described as "a warrior for women's rights and for equality for all." Some 14 thousand women gathered in Long Beach to discuss empowerment. Before the conference, Gloria, Maria, and fellow awardee Billie Jean King were interviewed by Oprah. You can view a clip of the after-conversation here. You can read Rosalie Maggio's report on the conference for us here.

In closing, we highly recommend your seeing the Pray the Devil Back to Hell, Abby Disney's documentary about the Market Women of Liberia. Winner of Best Documentary at the Tribeca Film Festival, it opens in theaters next week. It's a definite do not miss -- take all your friends!

In our next newsletter we'll take you on the road with WMC co-founder Jane Fonda.

Until then, remember to vote!

With warmest wishes,

Carol Jenkins
President
The Women's Media Center

About us:
The Women's Media Center (WMC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan organization making women visible and powerful in the media. Through our website, media training programs, and advocacy work, the WMC ensures that women are represented as they are: powerful newsmakers, informed experts, and sought-after media professionals. For more information, please visit www.womensmediacenter.com.

Mr. McCain, America's Women have not waited 232 years for Sarah

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:43:13 EST

Color of Change | Together, we made an impact

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:37:36 EST

Dear Color of Change Supporter:

Before we participate in this historic election, we'd like to thank you for calling out John McCain and Sarah Palin's shameful use of race-baiting and fear-mongering. Combined with our partners at Brave New Films, more than 100,000 people signed the petition asking McCain and Palin to end their divisive campaigning; in addition, over 1,500 people called the RNC and McCain headquarters in response to outrageous robo-calls connecting Senator Obama to terrorism.

Because of you, we were able to publicly call out this destructive campaigning as not only wrong, but also dangerous. We were able to highlight the ways the McCain campaign and RNC manufactured an atmosphere that fueled anger and fear--setting the stage for incidents like that of Ashley Todd--a college Republican operative who said that she was mugged, sexually assaulted, and had a "B" carved into her face by a black male Obama supporter (later, Todd admitted she made the whole thing up).

You were part of a growing chorus speaking out against these tactics--and together, our voices made an impact:

The New York Times made a strong critique of McCain's racist tactics in their endorsement of Senator Obama;
Several GOP senators came out against the RNC robo-calls;
Paid callers in Wisconsin and West Virginia quit their jobs--refusing to read the Obama terrorism script;
John Kerry's PAC took a similar action--asking their supporters to call on members of Congress to denounce the robo-calls.

We've proven again that when we stand together we are a strong voice for change. Thank you for being part of this effort.

Thanks and Peace,

-- James, Gabriel, Clarissa, Andre, Kai, and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org PAC team
November 2nd, 2008

P.S. Here are a few links to coverage of our campaign, plus a link to an episode of Brave New Foundation's "Meet the Bloggers" on the topic:

1) The McCain-Palin Rallies: The Worst Hits, Huffington Post, Oct 14, 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/mccain-palin-rallies-the_n_134474.html

2) Tell McCain to end the politics of hate. Jack and Jill Politics, Oct 14, 2008
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/10/tell-mccain-to-end-the-politics-of-hate/

3) Meet the bloggers: Race in the Presidential Election, Brave New Foundation, Oct 24, 2008
http://meetthebloggers.org/show_102408.php

4) When will McCain/Palin finally choose to end the politics of hate? Pam's House Blend, Oct 14, 2008
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7558

5) Voters make 1,100 calls to RNC and McCain/Palin offices, crying foul over fear-mongering robo-calls. Pam's House Blend, Oct 21, 2008
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7690

6) Will McCain stop fear-mongering tactics? Electronic Village, Oct 14, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/4wh7px

Some Things Campaign Volunteers can Do Monday and Tuesday*

Tommy News — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:06:34 EST

**Some Things Campaign Volunteers can Do Monday and Tuesday***Get Campaign Information here or call your local party headquarters:www.mybarackobama.com Hi everyone,Final plea - If you want to see Democratic victories where you live, and are available for even one hour the day or evening before the election, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE choose a candidate or election, call the office near you, and offer to help. Not sure where it is? Google the candidate, proposal, your area and the word "office". There are Obama offices in even the smallest communities in swing states, for example. Also, consider the local Democrats office, state reps, senators, commissioners, etc.The day before, there are always:- yard signs that can be put out before dawn on election day near polling places (schools, post offices, churches, etc.),- doorknob signs and phone calls, reminding people where their polling places are and the times they are open,- stacks of leftover literature that can be placed on front doors,- tired, overworked, stressed out staff who need nourishment.Campaign staff in every election are going crazy trying to get these last minute things done. If you want to see your candidates/proposals win, please go see how you can help in the final hours! If these ideas do not float your Democratic boat, please take an hour and call every Democrat you know. Make sure they are planning to vote, know where their precinct is, and the hours they are open. Tell them Obama needs a team of Democrats below him to get the job done right. Offer to babysit, give them a ride, or whatever it takes to get them to the polls on Tuesday, and keep them there until they vote. On election day - Bring some water bottles and granola bars to people in long lines. Offer to hold their space in line while they use the bathroom --- whatever it takes!!! (Just don't campaign while in line or wear campaign stuff). Research shows, when young people, minority members, working people, women, and other groups VOTE, DEMOCRATS WIN. Let's all help them get them to their voting booth!Bring people to the polls Tuesday and then to Starbucks for a free tall coffee. Just tell Starbucks you voted and they will give you a free tall coffee.Call voters in swing states and use the scripts available here:www.mybarackobama.com YES WE CAN!!!!!!Thanks,Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

Video: Michelle Obama Surprises a NM Field Office

Shayne Adamski — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:59:24 EST

When Michelle Obama was in New Mexico on Tuesday, October 28, she made an unscheduled stop at the South Santa Fe - Zafarano Field Office and thanked the staff and volunteers for all of their hard work. She even helped them make a few phone calls and reach out to voters!!

Watch the video...and then signup to volunteer and help us Get Out the Vote.

STUDENTS: Volunteer on Election Day

Shayne Adamski — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:53:38 EST

Are you off from school on Election Day?

Some High Schools around the state have Election Day off, TUES, NOV 4TH.

This is an amazing opportunity for you to participate and volunteer in this historic Presidential Election.

DON'T WAIT. SIGNUP TODAY and help us win this election.

http://my.barackobama.com/NMhseday

McCain VS Obama

La Susa — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:15:59 EST

Im not in favor of McCain because he wants to cheat workers, and give more money to the extreamly rich that make 250,000.00 or more! Yo no estoy en favor al McCain por que el quire enganiar a los trabajadores y dar mas dinero a los ricototes, la cual que hacen 250,000.00 y mas!

Im not in favor of McCain because he is too old, 72 years old, and placed Palin as VP. Poor Palin dosn't know much about the world, much less about how to run Our Nation. Yo no estoy en favor al McCain por que ya esta muy viejo, 72 anos, y puso a la Palin de VP. La pobre Palin no sabe mucho del mundo, menos como correr nuestro Nacion!

Im not in favor of McCain because he says he knows how to do everything, but really what has he done in, practicly nothing in 20 years. Yo no estoy en favor al McCain por que el dice que el sabe como hacer de todo, pero a la deveras no ha hecho casi nada en 20 anos.

Im not in favor of McCain because he lies too much! There are so many lies I cannot place them all here, it is an embarrasment! Yo no estoy en favor al McCain por que miente demaciado! Hay tantas mentiras que no los puedo ponerlos todos aqui, es una veruenza!

I voted for Senator Obama because he wants to help those workers who pay way too much in taxes. He wants the rich that make 250,000.00 or more to pay taxes as it was during the years of President Clinton. Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el qiere ayudar a aquellos que trabajan y pagan demacido taxes. El quiere que los ricos que hacen 250,000.00 y mas que ellos pagan taxes como era en los anos del Presidente Clinton.

I voted for Senator Obama because he realized when his mom was ill that the insurance companies didn't want to pay the bills because her illness before she died being cancer was considered 'pre-existing'. And she sadly died with the worries of the bills. Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el se dio cuenta que cuando su mama estaba enferma las companias de seguranza no querian pagar los cuentos por que querian decir la cual que la enfermedad que cancer que tenia su mama antes de murir que era 'pre-existing'. Y la pobre murio con penas de los cuentos!

I voted for Senator Obama because he knows what it is like to live in poverty, for when he was a child he and his mom were on foodstamps. And his manerism is one of humility. Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el sabe como es vivir pobre, cuando el era nino, su mama y el estaban es las estampas. Y tiene un modo de ser que es humide.

I voted for Senator Obama because he knows what it is like to live without a dad. His dad left when he was only two years old. And he knows that there are many mothers with children who are alone and suffering with mounting bills. Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el sabe como es vivir sin un papa. El papa de el se fue, cuando el no mas tenia dos anos de edad. Y sabe que hay muchas madres con ninos que estan solas y sufiendo con biles demasiados.

I voted for Senator Obama because he wants to give many jobs to the people! Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere a dar muchos trabajos a la gente!

I voted for Senator Obama because he wants all students to have the opportunities to go to collage, not just the rich! Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere que todos estudiantes tengan la oportunidad a ir al colejio, no, no mas los ricos!

I voted for Obama because he knows we have to stop the war in Iraq, and look for that man Bin Ladden who killed nearly 4 thousand people here in the United States on September 11, 2001. Yo Vote al Obama por que el sabe que tenemos que parrar la guierra en Iraq y buscar al hombre ese Bin Ladden; que mato ha casi 4 mil personas aqui en Los Estados Unidos en Septiembre 11 del 2001.

I voted for Senator Obama because he dose not want American companies to leave to China, and he wants them to stay here in the Untited States. Yo Vote por el Senador Obama por que el no quiere que las companias Americanas se van para China, el quiere que se esten aqui en Los Estados Unidos.

I voted for Senator Obama because he wants to help companies make new inventions, so that we will not be dependant on other nations for oil. Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere ayudar a las companias hacer invenciones nuevas, para no estemos dependidas en otros Naciones para el aceite.

The tax calculator: El calculador de taxes:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGgFgH

Acuerdencen! Remember!

La Susa — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 14:10:35 EST

Acuerdencen al los ancianos y gente debiles a llevar sillas para que se descansan cuando voten en el dia 4 de Noviembre, por que se me hace que va a ver mucha gente!

Remember to remind the elderly and weak to bring chairs so that they can rest, when they go vote on November 4, because I belive that there will be a lot of people!

Yo No Quiero Al McCain

La Susa — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:31:12 EST

Yo no quiero al McCain por que el quire enganiar a los trabajadores y dar mas dinero a los ricototes, la cual que hacen 250,000.00 y mas!

Yo no quiero al McCain por que ya esta muy viejo, y puso a la Palin de VP. La pobre Palin no sabe mucho del mundo, menos como correr nuestro Nacion!

Yo no quiero al McCain por que el dice que el sabe como hacer de todo, pero a la deveras no ha hecho casi nada.

Yo no quiero al McCain por que miente demaciado! Hay tantas mentiras que no los puedo ponerlos todos aqui, es una veruenza!

Yo no quireo al McCain por que a mi se me hace que ya perdio su mente! Y como puede correr nuestro Nacion asi?

Yo Vote Al Senador Obama

La Susa — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:07:56 EST

Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el qiere ayudar a los pobres y ha aquellos que trabajan y pagan demacido taxes. El quiere que los ricos que hacen 250,000.00 y mas que ellos pagan taxes como era en los anos del Presidente Clinton.

Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el se dio cuenta que cuando su mama estaba enferma las companias de seguranza no querian pagar los cuentos por que querian decir la cual que la enfermedad que cancer que tenia su mama antes de murir que era 'pre-existing'. Y la pobre murio con penas de los cuentos!

Yo Vote por Senador Obama por que el sabe como es vivir pobre, cuando el era nino, su mama y el estaban es las estampas. Y tiene un modo de ser que es humide.

Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el sabe como es vivir sin un papa. El papa de el se fur, cuando el no mas tenia dos anos de edad. Y sabe que hay muchas madres con ninos que estan solas y sufiendo con biles de masiados.

Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere a dar muchos trabajos a la gente!

Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere que todos estudiantes tengan la oportunidad a ir al colejio, no, no mas los ricos!

Yo Vote al Obama por que el sabe que tenemos que parrar la guierra en Iraq y buscar al hombre ese Bin Ladden; que mato ha casi 4 mil personas aqui en Los Estados Unidos en Septiembre 11 del 2001.

Yo Vote por el Senador Obama por que el no quiere que las companias Americanas se van para China, el quiere que se esten aqui en Los Estados Unidos.

Yo Vote al Senador Obama por que el quiere ayudar a las companias hacer invenciones nuevas, para no estemos dependidas en otros Naciones para el aceite.

TAKE ACTION: Get Voters out and ROCK THE VOTE!

Tommy News — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:02:46 EST

TAKE ACTION: Get Voters out to the Polls and Pass This On. ROCK THE VOTE! Election day is approaching fast. We have very little time left to make this important voter turnout drive succeed.This is one of the most important elections of our lifetimes. The economy is in big trouble, jobs are disappearing, people are losing their homes, two wars are raging, and the cost of living is soaring. Millions have no health care and global warming needs to be addressed. The way to get the change we need is to elect the right leaders. Every vote counts, and your vote and participation in this voter turnout drive can make all the difference. It is your civic duty and your Constitutional right to vote, and your help is needed to get out the vote. Rock The Vote has made voting easier with the information you need. But you must act now, Electon Day is November 4th! Please join in and help get voters out, and then pass this important message on to everyone in your address book. Click Here to see how you an help Rock The Vote! http://rockthevote.org/Dear Rock the Vote Friends,

Last year, Rock the Vote joined with Live Earth as its partner. On 7-7-07, millions of people worldwide experienced Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis. In doing so, they were making the commitment to take action against the climate crisis. Besides the hundreds of thousands of people attending the Live Earth concerts on seven continents, over 10,000 "Friends of Live Earth' in 195 countries participated in house parties to watch the event and at least ten million more people viewed the concerts online.

Don't be left behind! Join the millions of people across the world who have pledged to take action against the climate crisis.
Together, we will solve the climate crisis.

Remember to register to vote because you can't vote if you're not registered! Why is voting important when it comes to stopping the climate crisis? Well, here are some things to consider:

- The next U.S. president will inherit a country that makes up less than 5% of the world's population but produces nearly a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases.

- Legislation regarding environmental issues is crafted by the lawmakers YOU elect.

- Congress appropriates the funds for the development of clean renewable energy sources.

- The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, which has the legal responsibility to regulate carbon emissions, will be appointed by the next president.

Register now at and tell your friends to register as well.

The future is now. We cannot wait. Together we will make a difference.

Get Ready Rock The Vote: Tuesday 11-4 is Election Day This November 4th is Election Day in The United States of America. It is your Constitutional right and your civic duty as an American to vote. Your vote matters, EACH and EVERY vote counts! This year's elections offer you some important opportunities to make your vote count! I urge you to get ready to vote Tuesday, November 4th. Voting is one of the most important things that you can do. The polls open early, and stay open late. The time to act is now. Get out and vote, don't miss your chance to make a difference! Tell your friends, family, co-workers and neighbors to vote. Remind them that election day is November 4th. Offer to bring people to the polls or go with them. Pass this message on to everyone in your address book. Rock The Vote! Tuesday, November 4th http://www.rockthevote.com/home.html November 4th--Election Day 2008--is just around the corner. The bottom line is if you target and talk to people they will vote. Get Involved! Click Here to Rock The Vote:http://www.rockthevote.com/home.html

Our future and real change depends on you.Project Vote We cannot turn out voters who never made it onto the rolls to begin with. By the time Election Day 2009 comes around it will be too late; the time to act is now.

It turns out there are still a lot of people in Washington and our state capitals who are working to discourage Americans from voting.

One of our most important groups working to register and protect voters -- Project Vote -- recently released a study which documented in great detail years of voter suppression all over the country. The result is that hundreds and thousands of minority voters, many of them 'single mothers,' were purged from the rolls and deprived of their right to vote in 2004 and 2006. That is outrageous!

And if it sounds sickeningly familiar, you are right. These are the same anti-American tactics that kept people from voting in the South during the Civil Rights movement. And it has to stop.

Please join is in this monumental battle for our democracy. Step up and say there is nothing more important than the ability to vote in America. Will you fight with us to ensure that every single eligible voter can go to the polls?

By the time Election Day comes around it will be too late. We cannot turn out voters who never made it onto the voter rolls to begin with. Early work to get voters on the rolls and make sure they stay there no matter what is crucial to our fight to take back our democracy. Project Vote http://www.projectvote.org/If you are registered to vote get out and VOTE! The polls open early and close late. Vote before or after work or on your break. Find out where to vote here or contact your local Board of Elections: http://www.rockthevote.com/electioncenter/If you are not registered to vote, register now!Call or write your local board of elections for a voter registration form or click here to get one:http://www.rockthevote.com/http://projectvote.org/our-work-pages/our-work/voter-registration.html
Not sure who to vote for?Educate yourself. Read the Voter's Guide in your local newspaper or on line to find out who and what is on the ballot in your Election District. Read the websites of the candidates and parties to find out where they stand on the issues that matter to you. Ask about the candidates and find out their qualifications and where they stand. Talk to people and find out who they are voting for and why. Read the ballot initiatives and find out what they mean and how they affect you. Get a sample ballot before you go into the voting booth and take your time deciding who and what to vote for. You Can Make a Difference! ROCK THE VOTE Tuesday, November 4th I invite you to join our Yahoo groups here for informative news and discussion:Click these links and join our fine groups: 4 United We Stand Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/4UnitedWeStand/Matthew Shepard Pride and Tolerance Grouphttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/MatthewShepardPrideandTolerance/New York State Senate Shift Control To Democrat Grouphttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewYorkStateSenateShiftControlToDemocrat/
--
Together, We Can Change The World, One Mind At A Time!
Have a great day,
Tommy

MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Vote No on Hate! Help Defeat California Proposition 8; Florida Amendment 2; Arizona Proposition 102

Tommy News — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:29:52 EST

MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Vote No on Hate! Help Defeat California Proposition 8; Florida Amendment 2; Arizona Proposition 102 And Vote Obama-Biden Too! Florida Amendment 2 What the Amendment Says Amendment 2

"Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized." 6 Reasons to Say No 2Taking Away Benefits
Amendment 2 could take away existing benefits from all unmarried Floridians Hurting Seniors
Amendment 2 could force seniors to choose between important benefits like sharing health care and important government benefits. "Gay Marriage" Bait & Switch
Amendment 2 claims to ban "gay marriage" but Florida already has multiple laws banning same-sex marriage Massive Government Intrusion
Amendment 2 puts the government where it doesn't belong - regulating the personal relationships of Floridians Hiring Expensive Lawyers
Amendment 2 could force unmarried Floridians to hire expensive private lawyers just to protect their basic legal rights Dramatic Consequences
Amendment 2 could take away job benefits from university employees and be used as a defense to domestic violence - as in other states which passed similar amendments Click Here to Help:http://www.sayno2.com/Arizona Proposition 102 Proposition 102, if approved by Arizona voters,
will amend the Arizona Constitution

Arizona voted NO in 2006

Now we have to vote NO again in 2008.

Help us make it loud and clear —
VOTE NO on Proposition 102 on November 4th

The state has more important issues to address.

Keep Phoenix Politicians out of Marriage!Click here to help:http://www.votenoprop102.com/web/home.phpCalifornia Proposition 8 Vote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! Vote No on Prop 8 - Equality for All
California Proposition 8 is a California ballot initiative that would make same-sex marriage in California illegal. This discriminatory initiative is on the statewide California ballot this November 4th.Civil rights matters should not be placed on the ballot, but unfortunately this is on the ballot, and we must work to defeat it. This discriminatory measure affects people nationwide. not just in California, but only Californians can vote on it. Gay people deserve the same EQUAL rights as everyone else. Anything less is discrimination.As long as the government makes laws about and codifies civil marriage, all people must be included in those laws equally. Churches are then free to bless those unions or not. There are plenty of Progressive and tolerant churches that will. Please think about this: How does someone else's marriage affect yours? It does NOT! Vote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! Go here to learn more about California Proposition 8 and donate to help fight it:http://noonprop8.com/homeVote No on 8, Vote No on Hate! We need your help and we need it now. Please pass this message on! Here are the facts:Vote No on Prop 8 - Equality for AllWhat Is Prop 8?

The following information will be included in the November ballot materials.

Ballot Title and Summary

Proposition 8:

ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

On August 8, 2008 Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley ruled that the Attorney General's Title and Summary of Proposition 8 is accurate.

Ballot Argument

Why Vote No on Prop 8?

"Proposition 8… would eliminate the fundamental right to same-sex marriage. The very act of denying gay and lesbian couples the right to marry – traditionally the highest legal and societal recognition of a loving commitment – by definition relegates them and their relationship to second class status."
Los Angeles Times Editorial, August 8, 2008

Regardless of how you feel about this issue, we should guarantee the same fundamental rights to every Californian. Vote No on 8.

Regardless of how you feel about this issue, it's wrong to eliminate the fundamental rights of fellow Californians – and hurt our friends, neighbors, coworkers, and family members. THAT'S WRONG.

Proponents of Prop 8 continue to lie in their television ads.

Here's what's fiction and what's fact:

Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent's objection to the school curriculum will happen here.

Regardless of how you feel about the issue, we should not eliminate fundamental rights for ANY Californians. Please vote NO on Prop 8

http://noonprop8.com/campaign_updates?id=0001

Donate

Click Herre:http://www.noonprop8.com/page/?id=0052

Sign up to receive more information on Prop 8

http://eqfed.org/equalityforall/join.tcl

Call for Obama volunteers

Tommy News — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:08:23 EST

Call for Obama volunteers

Dear MoveOn member,

The 2008 election is in 48 hours. Obama needs your help. And you can make a difference right now, right where you are.

The Obama campaign has put out an urgent request for volunteers in the swing states. It's up to us to recruit them by calling MoveOn members in swing states and helping them volunteer. Our website makes it easy for you to call. And it really, really works: our phone calls have recruited more than 145,000 volunteers in states like Ohio and Florida!

But Obama still needs more, and we're down to the wire. We set an audacious goal of making 175,000 calls this week—but our momentum is so phenomenal, we're raising the bar to 250,000 calls! Come through for Obama when it counts—click here now:

http://pol.moveon.org/obama/teams/index.html?id=14960-10306849-LruGMAx&t=2

To make calls with our tool, all you need is a phone and a computer. Try it for just five minutes, and you'll see how fun and easy it is; many of the MoveOn members you reach will be grateful you called. Here's one:

I am glad I was able to help and hope that it has made a difference. I always wanted to help out, but never knew where to go or how to sign up. Thanks for the invite!—Stacy M., Indiana

We can't leave anything to chance in this election. Help us hit our target of 175,000 250,000 calls, and send the reinforcements Obama needs for the final push—click here to sign up now:

http://pol.moveon.org/obama/teams/index.html?id=14960-10306849-LruGMAx&t=3

Thanks for all you do,

–Justin, Adam G., Peter, Aisling, and the rest of the team

Call for Obama volunteers

Tommy News — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:04:28 EST

Call for Obama volunteers

Dear MoveOn member,

The 2008 election is in 48 hours. Obama needs your help. And you can make a difference right now, right where you are.

http://pol.moveon.org/obama/teams/index.html?id=14960-10306849-LruGMAx&t=2

I am glad I was able to help and hope that it has made a difference. I always wanted to help out, but never knew where to go or how to sign up. Thanks for the invite!—Stacy M., Indiana

We can't leave anything to chance in this election. Help us hit our target of 175,000 250,000 calls, and send the reinforcements Obama needs for the final push—click here to sign up now:

http://pol.moveon.org/obama/teams/index.html?id=14960-10306849-LruGMAx&t=3

Thanks for all you do,

–Justin, Adam G., Peter, Aisling, and the rest of the team

A special message from Jill Biden to Veterans and Military Families

Shayne Adamski — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 23:26:02 EDT

Watch this video from Jill Biden...

...and encourage everyone you know in the military to return their Vote-by-Mail ballots so their vote is counted in this historic election.

Read more on Barack and Joe's positions on the issues affecting veterans and military families.

Holy moly | These Republicans have no shame

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 23:19:30 EDT

These Republicans have no shame.

In North Carolina, Elizabeth Dole is back with another reprehensible TV ad. This one features the same outrageous personal attacks against Kay Hagan's religious faith as Dole's previous ad, despite repeated calls for Dole to repudiate such vile smear campaigns.

In Alaska, convicted felon Ted Stevens told a local newspaper that he "hadn't been convicted of anything" and that "there's not a black mark by my name." At this point, Stevens seems to be in some pretty serious denial.

They think they can say anything to win. The DSCC won't let that happen. Thanks to your generous contributions this cycle, we have been matching the Republicans dollar-for-dollar in each and every battleground state. We couldn't have done it without you.

Now, to bring all these victories home, we need to expand our proven field program in North Carolina, Alaska, and across the country, but it will take an extra $100,000 from the DSCC grassroots before midnight tonight. We already have 6,000 volunteers in just these two states, and they're ready to make 500,000 voter contacts between now and Election Day. With your help, it could be even more.

You are running out of time to have a big impact on Election Day. Remember, a group of Democratic senators will triple your gift today, so if you act right now you can help our volunteers reach three times as many extra voters.

Without your continued support today, we'll lose races we could otherwise win. The next few hours could make all the difference.

Click here to rush $50, $75, or more to the DSCC in the critical hours before midnight. We can't win North Carolina and Alaska without you.

The contours of the Senate races are changing almost hourly. The RNC is pouring $5 million into battleground races in a desperate, last-ditch effort to prevent us from getting that filibuster-proof majority.

So far - thanks to you - Republican efforts aren't working. The latest polls give Jeff Merkley his biggest lead of the cycle in Oregon. Al Franken holds a small lead in Minnesota. Even Jim Martin, our candidate in Georgia, has pulled to within two points.

The DSCC's field program will make a difference in all these races. It all comes down to this. If you help us reach our goal once again, we can just keep bringing more and more voters to the polls.

We need your continued support right away if we're going to win the filibuster-proof majority.

Click here to rush $50, $75, or more to the DSCC in the critical hours before midnight. We can't win North Carolina and Alaska without you.

You and your recent contributions have been the engine driving our success for this entire campaign. Thank you once again.

Now, with just hours left, I know I can count on you once again to help us finish the job. Do not wait. Soon, there will literally be no tomorrow.

Sincerely,

J.B. Poersch
Executive Director

We only have hours left to meet our daily goal. Give now and your contribution will be matched 2-to-1, tripling your impact.

If you received this message from a friend, click this button to join the DSCC.

Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, http://dscc.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

60 seats

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 23:06:09 EDT

Dear Stacey,

The moment you and I have worked toward for so long is nearly here. Democrats are working around the clock to ensure that on Tuesday we begin a wave of progressive change across our country by electing Barack Obama. But that progressive change will only happen if we secure a 60-seat Senate majority -- and we're running out of time.

Republicans are now shifting resources to hotly-contested Senate races to prevent a filibuster-proof majority, launching constant attacks on EMILY's List candidates Kay Hagan and Jeanne Shaheen. And we have the power in these last 96 hours to provide the resources to help these extraordinary women fight back.

I wouldn't be in the Senate today without EMILY's List -- so believe me when I say that every dollar of your direct contributions to Jeanne Shaheen's and Kay Hagan's campaign accounts will be put immediately to use in getting out their voters.

Click here to make a direct and immediate contribution to Jeanne Shaheen and Kay Hagan.

U.S. Senate, New Hampshire -- Jeanne Shaheen
Republican to defeat: John Sununu

A $5 million smear campaign. Granite State voters are finding it difficult to open their mailboxes or turn on their TV sets without seeing another vicious right-wing attack on New Hampshire Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen. The Susan B. Anthony List is among the latest to join the nearly $5 million in special-interest attacks on Shaheen with nasty, outrageous radio ads and mailers about the former governor's record on choice. Shaheen maintains a narrow lead in the polls against incumbent John Sununu -- but as we learned in 2002 when New Hampshire GOP operatives illegally jammed Democratic phone lines, the Republicans are so desperate to hold this seat they'll stoop to anything if necessary. Shaheen needs to raise $150,000 in this final stretch to overcome Republican dirty tricks and bring Democrats one seat closer to a 60-seat majority.

Click here to make a direct and immediate contribution to Jeanne Shaheen.

U.S. Senate, North Carolina -- Kay Hagan
Republican to defeat: Elizabeth Dole

Neck and neck in the Tar Heel state. Polls continue to show Kay Hagan is neck and neck with GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole. Right-wing special interests have kicked into high gear here -- the National Rifle Association and U.S. Chamber of Commerce both made substantial television buys. Meanwhile, the Raleigh News and Observer has joined nine North Carolina newspapers in endorsing Hagan, citing "her grit, her intelligence and her imagination." Hagan needs to raise $180,000 by election day to overcome Dole's significant financial advantage and bring Democrats another seat closer to a filibuster-proof majority.

Click here to make a direct and immediate contribution to Kay Hagan.

We're on the verge of a new day in America. With Jeanne Shaheen and Kay Hagan joining me in the Senate, we can turn the economy around, end the war in Iraq, and safeguard a woman's right to choose. But first we must seize this moment. We must ensure the 60-seat majority necessary to make the change we need.

Thank you for all you are doing to help Democrats reach a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority. Together, we will repair -- and rebuild -- the country we love.

Sincerely,

Sen. Barbara Boxer

Make sure you receive email updates from EMILY's List. Add information@emilyslist.org to your approved senders list.

Paid for by Jeanne Shaheen for Senate and Hagan Senate Committee Inc.

Contributions or gifts to EMILY's List are not tax deductible.

Design by Plus Three | Powered by ARCOS

Fight the McCain Economics LIES!!!!!!!

La Susa — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:35:06 EDT

EconomyObama's Stance on the Economy Barack Obama's Tax Savings Calculator:http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGgFgH

Barack Obama has offered a detailed plan to get America’s economy back on track, by creating new jobs and easing the burden on hardworking Americans by offering middle-class tax cuts three times the size of McCain’s.

Plan to Strengthen the EconomyThe Problem

Wages are Stagnant as Prices Rise: While wages remain flat, the costs of basic necessities are increasing. The cost of in-state college tuition has grown 35 percent over the past five years. Health care costs have risen four times faster than wages over the past six years. And the personal savings rate is now the lowest it's been since the Great Depression.

Tax Cuts for Wealthy Instead of Middle Class: The Bush tax cuts give those who earn over $1 million dollars a tax cut nearly 160 times greater than that received by middle-income Americans. At the same time, this administration has refused to tackle health care, education and housing in a manner that benefits the middle class.

Learn More

McCain's Stance on the Economy

John McCain’s economic policy is the same as George Bush’s. It ignores middle class Americans, giving $200 billion in tax cuts to corporations, including $4 billion in tax breaks to Big Oil, while leaving over 100 million middle-class Americans with no relief. Economists say McCain’s plan will add $3.4 trillion to the national debt.

McCain Lieing Again!!!!!!!

La Susa — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:25:55 EDT

McCain says Obama wants to re-distribute the wealth!

Who has been burdened by taxes the last 8 years? The Middle Class, because the million and billionaires have enjoyed a tax break, that McCain wants to make permanent!!!!!!!

Obama wants to tax the million and billionaires, and belive me, those folks are not small businesses!!!!!!!!

McCain is using fearmongering to sway votes in his favor!

Who was with Bush on the 'Privatizing of Social Security'? McCain?

When Sen McCain claims to have been tested to be United States President; in 1962 when he sat in a plane cockpit, during the Cuban missle Crisis, why didn't McCain run for USA President way back then? It's only been 46 years ago.

McCain says he knows how to win wars, what wars has he won?

McCain says he knows how to fix corruption, what corruption has he fixed?

McCain says he knows how to fix Wallstreet, when has McCain ever fixed Wallstreet?

Yo, Arnold R-Gov of Calif.

La Susa — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:56:23 EDT

We can take your 'skinny legs' insults, but we cannot take four more years of McCin-Bush economics!!!!!! Was it not you Arnold R-Gov of Calif. that asked for a bail out for the State of Calif. a few days after the AIG bail out? So you want the hard working middle class to bail out Calif., because you don't know how to balance a budget? And allow the billion and millionaires to get richer and richer?

Do the math!!!!!! See Barack's Tax Calculator!

http://www.my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGgFgH

Get Educated! Use the Brain Muscle! Look it up in the dictionary!!!!!!!

The insults and fear mongering has gotten way out of hand! Just because Sen Barack Obama wants to make healthcare affordable for everyone, dose not mean a socialistic government! Way too many of our working families are going bankrupt because of the sky rocketing costs of healthcare! And those who don't have healthcare, are often treated when it is too late, driving up the costs of healthcare for all of us!!!!!!! Of all develped countries in the world, the USA is lagging far behind, with high infant mortality rates etc. etc.! The past 8 years the middle class has payed above and beyond their fare share, while the rich get richer! Now the middle class are loosing jobs left and right, they need a break! And I don't think it's too much to ask the million and billionaires to pitch in their fare share! Our economy depends on the middle class! they are the buying power of America! Small buisnesses fall under the catagory of middle class people because they earn far less than 250,000.00 dollars a year!!!!!!!!

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of ...
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Democracy is a form of government in which the supreme power is held completely by the people under a free electoral system. It is derived from the Greek ...
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

Capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Capitalism is the economic system in which the means of production are distributed to openly competing profit-seeking [1] private persons and where ...
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Marxism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Marxism is the political philosophy and practice derived from the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Any political practice or theory that is based on ...
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist

It's time: America should take a chance and make Obama the next leader of the free world

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 04:15:31 EDT

From The Economist print edition

It's time

Oct 30th 2008
From The Economist print edition

America should take a chance and make Barack Obama the next leader of the free world

IT IS impossible to forecast how important any presidency will be. Back in 2000 America stood tall as the undisputed superpower, at peace with a generally admiring world. The main argument was over what to do with the federal government’s huge budget surplus. Nobody foresaw the seismic events of the next eight years. When Americans go to the polls next week the mood will be very different. The United States is unhappy, divided and foundering both at home and abroad. Its self-belief and values are under attack.

For all the shortcomings of the campaign, both John McCain and Barack Obama offer hope of national redemption. Now America has to choose between them. The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence. But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama’s inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. Yet it is one America should take, given the steep road ahead.

Thinking about 2009 and 2017

The immediate focus, which has dominated the campaign, looks daunting enough: repairing America’s economy and its international reputation. The financial crisis is far from finished. The United States is at the start of a painful recession. Some form of further fiscal stimulus is needed (see article), though estimates of the budget deficit next year already spiral above $1 trillion. Some 50m Americans have negligible health-care cover. Abroad, even though troops are dying in two countries, the cack-handed way in which George Bush has prosecuted his war on terror has left America less feared by its enemies and less admired by its friends than it once was.

Yet there are also longer-term challenges, worth stressing if only because they have been so ignored on the campaign. Jump forward to 2017, when the next president will hope to relinquish office. A combination of demography and the rising costs of America’s huge entitlement programmes—Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—will be starting to bankrupt the country (see article). Abroad a greater task is already evident: welding the new emerging powers to the West. That is not just a matter of handling the rise of India and China, drawing them into global efforts, such as curbs on climate change; it means reselling economic and political freedom to a world that too quickly associates American capitalism with Lehman Brothers and American justice with Guantánamo Bay. This will take patience, fortitude, salesmanship and strategy.

At the beginning of this election year, there were strong arguments against putting another Republican in the White House. A spell in opposition seemed apt punishment for the incompetence, cronyism and extremism of the Bush presidency. Conservative America also needs to recover its vim. Somehow Ronald Reagan’s party of western individualism and limited government has ended up not just increasing the size of the state but turning it into a tool of southern-fried moralism.

The selection of Mr McCain as the Republicans’ candidate was a powerful reason to reconsider. Mr McCain has his faults: he is an instinctive politician, quick to judge and with a sharp temper. And his age has long been a concern (how many global companies in distress would bring in a new 72-year-old boss?). Yet he has bravely taken unpopular positions—for free trade, immigration reform, the surge in Iraq, tackling climate change and campaign-finance reform. A western Republican in the Reagan mould, he has a long record of working with both Democrats and America’s allies.

If only the real John McCain had been running

That, however, was Senator McCain; the Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated. The fiscal conservative who once tackled Mr Bush over his unaffordable tax cuts now proposes not just to keep the cuts, but to deepen them. The man who denounced the religious right as “agents of intolerance” now embraces theocratic culture warriors. The campaigner against ethanol subsidies (who had a better record on global warming than most Democrats) came out in favour of a petrol-tax holiday. It has not all disappeared: his support for free trade has never wavered. Yet rather than heading towards the centre after he won the nomination, Mr McCain moved to the right.

Meanwhile his temperament, always perhaps his weak spot, has been found wanting. Sometimes the seat-of-the-pants method still works: his gut reaction over Georgia—to warn Russia off immediately—was the right one. Yet on the great issue of the campaign, the financial crisis, he has seemed all at sea, emitting panic and indecision. Mr McCain has never been particularly interested in economics, but, unlike Mr Obama, he has made little effort to catch up or to bring in good advisers (Doug Holtz-Eakin being the impressive exception).

The choice of Sarah Palin epitomised the sloppiness. It is not just that she is an unconvincing stand-in, nor even that she seems to have been chosen partly for her views on divisive social issues, notably abortion. Mr McCain made his most important appointment having met her just twice.

Ironically, given that he first won over so many independents by speaking his mind, the case for Mr McCain comes down to a piece of artifice: vote for him on the assumption that he does not believe a word of what he has been saying. Once he reaches the White House, runs this argument, he will put Mrs Palin back in her box, throw away his unrealistic tax plan and begin negotiations with the Democratic Congress. That is plausible; but it is a long way from the convincing case that Mr McCain could have made. Had he become president in 2000 instead of Mr Bush, the world might have had fewer problems. But this time it is beset by problems, and Mr McCain has not proved that he knows how to deal with them.

Is Mr Obama any better? Most of the hoopla about him has been about what he is, rather than what he would do. His identity is not as irrelevant as it sounds. Merely by becoming president, he would dispel many of the myths built up about America: it would be far harder for the spreaders of hate in the Islamic world to denounce the Great Satan if it were led by a black man whose middle name is Hussein; and far harder for autocrats around the world to claim that American democracy is a sham. America’s allies would rally to him: the global electoral college on our website shows a landslide in his favour. At home he would salve, if not close, the ugly racial wound left by America’s history and lessen the tendency of American blacks to blame all their problems on racism.

So Mr Obama’s star quality will be useful to him as president. But that alone is not enough to earn him the job. Charisma will not fix Medicare nor deal with Iran. Can he govern well? Two doubts present themselves: his lack of executive experience; and the suspicion that he is too far to the left.

There is no getting around the fact that Mr Obama’s résumé is thin for the world’s biggest job. But the exceptionally assured way in which he has run his campaign is a considerable comfort. It is not just that he has more than held his own against Mr McCain in the debates. A man who started with no money and few supporters has out-thought, out-organised and out-fought the two mightiest machines in American politics—the Clintons and the conservative right.

Political fire, far from rattling Mr Obama, seems to bring out the best in him: the furore about his (admittedly ghastly) preacher prompted one of the most thoughtful speeches of the campaign. On the financial crisis his performance has been as assured as Mr McCain’s has been febrile. He seems a quick learner and has built up an impressive team of advisers, drawing in seasoned hands like Paul Volcker, Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. Of course, Mr Obama will make mistakes; but this is a man who listens, learns and manages well.

It is hard too nowadays to depict him as soft when it comes to dealing with America’s enemies. Part of Mr Obama’s original appeal to the Democratic left was his keenness to get American troops out of Iraq; but since the primaries he has moved to the centre, pragmatically saying the troops will leave only when the conditions are right. His determination to focus American power on Afghanistan, Pakistan and proliferation was prescient. He is keener to talk to Iran than Mr McCain is— but that makes sense, providing certain conditions are met.

Our main doubts about Mr Obama have to do with the damage a muddle-headed Democratic Congress might try to do to the economy. Despite the protectionist rhetoric that still sometimes seeps into his speeches, Mr Obama would not sponsor a China-bashing bill. But what happens if one appears out of Congress? Worryingly, he has a poor record of defying his party’s baronies, especially the unions. His advisers insist that Mr Obama is too clever to usher in a new age of over-regulation, that he will stop such nonsense getting out of Congress, that he is a political chameleon who would move to the centre in Washington. But the risk remains that on economic matters the centre that Mr Obama moves to would be that of his party, not that of the country as a whole.

He has earned it

So Mr Obama in that respect is a gamble. But the same goes for Mr McCain on at least as many counts, not least the possibility of President Palin. And this cannot be another election where the choice is based merely on fear. In terms of painting a brighter future for America and the world, Mr Obama has produced the more compelling and detailed portrait. He has campaigned with more style, intelligence and discipline than his opponent. Whether he can fulfil his immense potential remains to be seen. But Mr Obama deserves the presidency.

ACTION ALERT: Days Away from Historical Election

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:57:33 EDT

Days Away from Historical Election

We are only a few days away from Tuesday's historic election, and the stakes for progressives have never been higher. From healing our economy to restoring our global reputation as a world leader, from providing health care to all Americans to ushering in a green economy, this is our moment. Voting in this election is the most important thing you can do. Click here to find out where to vote.

We are committed to fueling the next progressive era by running advocacy campaigns pushing for progressive policies. Our three current campaigns are:

How Did This Happen? -- A campaign to stop conservatives from escaping responsibility for the financial crisis. Don't let conservatives rewrite history.

The Golden Pledge -- A campaign opposing Social Security privatization. Take the Golden Pledge today.

A Progressive California Voter Guide -- Our Progressive Voter Guide provides California's progressives with our recommended vote on each of the 12 ballot propositions.

Once the election is over, the real work to restore America's progressive values begins. We will be launching more advocacy campaigns in the months ahead to take on those standing in the way of progressive change. Working together we can face the challenges in front of us.

Thank you for helping to fuel to the next progressive movement,

Alan and the I Am Progress team

I Am Progress is a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the sister advocacy organization of the Center for American Progress. The Action Fund transforms progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communications, legislative action, grassroots organizing and advocacy, and partnerships with other progressive leaders throughout the country and the world. The Action Fund is also the home of the Progress Report and Think Progress, the blog that pushes back daily.

Media Matters: The Right's "bias" charade

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:50:25 EDT

October 31, 2008

The Right's "bias" charade

by Jamison Foser

At the end of the 1992 presidential campaign, there was a flurry of news reports about the possibility that the media had favored Bill Clinton over incumbent George H.W. Bush, and that the media's coverage of the race helped Clinton win.

Such complaints might seem a little odd, given the media's relentless focus during that campaign on Clinton's alleged relationship with Gennifer Flowers, his youthful marijuana use, and his purported "draft-dodging."

Still, complaints from conservatives about the media's coverage of the 1992 campaign worked to their benefit by complimenting their campaign to undermine Clinton's "legitimacy" as president. And they caused reporters, always sensitive to (typically bogus) charges of biased reporting, to bend over backwards to disprove their critics -- an instinct that, no doubt, contributed to the absolutely brutal media coverage Clinton received almost immediately upon his election.

How brutal? How quickly? The Los Angeles Times explained in a 1993 look back at the earliest days of the Clinton presidency:

Twelve days after President Clinton took office -- with only 1,448 days left in his term -- Sam Donaldson of ABC News was on a weekend talk show, saying, "This week we can talk about, 'Is the presidency over?' "

That same day, a Page 1 story in the Los Angeles Times warned, "The President must tighten his grip or risk disaster."

Later that week, a Page 1 story in the New York Times said, "The President desperately needs a victory, as soon as possible."

And that was barely six months in to Clinton's first term. Sure, by then reporters had suggested Clinton's presidency was over before it reached the end of its second week and inaccurately obsessed over his Air Force One haircut. But they were just getting started; the wall-to-wall coverage of Whitewater and countless other trumped-up faux scandals was still to come.

But no matter how hostile, how relentlessly negative, how scandal-obsessed the media were in their coverage of Clinton, conservatives kept right on going with their complaints of liberal bias. On October 26, 1996, The New York Times reported:

Sounding like a crusader, Bob Dole implored his audiences today to "rise up" against the nation's news organizations, which he said were protecting the Clinton Administration ...

"We've got to stop the liberal bias in this country," he declared ... "Don't read that stuff! Don't watch television! You make up your mind! Don't let them make up your mind for you!"

[...]

At another point he asked: "When do the American people rise up and say, 'Forget the media in America! We're going to make up our minds! You're not going to make up our minds!' This is about saving our country!"

Singling out The New York Times for the second straight day, Mr. Dole went on: "We are not going to let the media steal this election. We're going to win this election. The country belongs to the people, not The New York Times."

[...]

Mr. Dole's complaints against the news media -- reminiscent of those by President George Bush in the waning days of his losing 1992 campaign -- are greeted with wild cheers. Mr. Dole said today that President Clinton would be losing the election if he was not "getting propped up by the media."

A Nexis search yields 539 hits for "Clinton and Whitewater" in the The New York Times between January 1 and October 26, 1996 -- nearly two per day. And that focus hardly let up as the campaign reached the home stretch; there are 42 hits for "Clinton and Whitewater" in the Times from October 1-26. Nor was the Times alone in hammering away at Whitewater during the fall campaign: Expanding the search to all news organizations yields 2,412 hits for the month of October alone.

And that's to say nothing of the relentless media focus on Democratic fundraising controversies. Or the various other Clinton "scandals," most of which turned out to exist only in the fevered imaginations of the news media. Or the fact that the news media, having obsessed for years about Clinton's infidelity, buried a story about an alleged Dole affair that his campaign aides considered a "mortal threat" threat to his candidacy.

Let's stop there for a second: Just weeks after The Washington Post, which had reported on allegations of infidelity on Clinton's part, spiked a story about an alleged Dole affair, Bob Dole was running around accusing the media of being in the tank for Clinton. That's awfully reckless behavior -- if Dole actually believed the media were against him. Sincere or not, Dole's complaints ring hollow; I can't think of a presidential candidate whose alleged "scandals" received more election-year coverage than Clinton's in 1996. Such coverage isn't the whole story, of course, but it's awfully hard to justify claims that the media were in the tank for Clinton when they were running so many reports about Whitewater and other such nonsense.

But Dole's wasn't the most absurd conservative claim of media bias during the Clinton years. For that, we have to look to the pro: Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center. On February 9, 1998, the Minneapolis Star Tribune ran an interview with Bozell in which he complained that the media weren't devoting enough coverage to the Monica Lewinsky story.

Given that most observers would likely agree that the Lewinsky saga involved the longest, most intense media feeding frenzy in modern American history, Bozell's claim should be self-evidently fraudulent.

On the off chance that it isn't: On February 9, the day the Bozell interview ran, there were 529 news reports mentioning "Clinton" and "Lewinsky," according to a search of the Nexis database. Those 529 hits include 59 television transcripts, eight hits in the New York Times folder, and 11 for USA Today. In just one day. And that was a typical day, not an unusual one.

Still, Bozell told the Star Tribune, apparently with a straight face, that the media had "stopped" covering the story -- "as they always do." Five hundred news reports a day, and Bozell thought the media had stopped covering the story. This is up-is-down, black-is-white, the-moon-is-made-of-green-cheese stuff. And it is typical of conservative media criticism.

Why do they make such absurd claims? Because it is clear that it works. (If, unlike many journalists, you understand what the goal is.)

Which brings us to 2008.

John McCain's campaign, and its conservative allies, have spent much of the year attacking the news media. No surprise there; that's what conservatives do, even conservatives who have been the beneficiaries of a decade of glowing, fawning coverage from swooning reporters.

McCain and his allies were attacking the media back in the Spring, when reporters were obsessively scrutinizing Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- and openly acknowledging that they weren't giving McCain similar scrutiny. They attacked the media in late summer, when the media were breathlessly touting the "authenticity" of a Sarah Palin speech that was filled with falsehoods. And they have attacked the media throughout the fall, even as it has become clear that the scrutiny reporters promised back in the spring that they would eventually give McCain isn't coming. It isn't a coincidence that scrutiny never came: it is, in part, an obvious and intended result of the attacks McCain and his allies have been leveling on the media all year.

But if, as the polls suggest, Barack Obama is elected next Tuesday, those attacks will have ultimately proven unsuccessful, right? Wrong.

First, that's a silly way to assess whether a strategy has "worked"; a candidate can derive benefit from a strategy without winning.

Second, it ignores the long-term goals of the attacks: to delegitimize an Obama presidency in the eyes of many Americans, and to browbeat journalists into covering an Obama administration much more critically than they otherwise would.

Whether those goals are met depends in part on whether journalists take the attacks seriously, or recognize them as the predictable continuation of a right-wing work-the-refs strategy that is so fraudulent it even involved claiming the media were devoting insufficient attention to Monica Lewinsky. And it depends in part on whether progressives push back on the bogus narrative that the media handed Obama the election, or simply ignore it.

Unfortunately, the conservative complaints got some superficial support from a recent study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) that claimed that John McCain has received much more "negative" coverage than Barack Obama during the campaign.

The PEJ study quickly got significant attention from the establishment media and blogs.

But while the study lends rhetorical support to the conservatives' arguments, it is nearly useless as an actual assessment of how the media covered the campaign.

First off, it is worth noting this little nugget about the study's methodology, buried at the end of the PEJ report: "Talk radio stories ... were not included in this campaign study of tone." PEJ offers no justification for the exclusion of talk radio. Not a word. In what surely must be a coincidence, talk radio skews further to the right than any other medium.

Now, here's PEJ's description of how it assesses whether a news report is "positive" or "negative":

To examine tone, the Project takes a particularly cautious and conservative approach. Unlike some researchers, we examine not just whether assertions in stories are positive or negative, but also whether they are inherently neutral. This, we believe, provides a much clearer and fairer sense of the tone of coverage than ignoring those balanced or mixed evaluations. Second, we do not simply tally up all the evaluative assertions in stories and compile them into a single pile to measure. Journalists and audiences think about press coverage in stories or segments. They ask themselves, is this story positive or negative or neutral? Hence the Project measures coverage by story, and for a story to be deemed as having a negative or positive tone, it must be clearly so, not a close call: for example, the negative assertions in a story must outweigh positive assertions by a margin of at least 1.5 to 1 for that story to be deemed negative.

OK ... anyone want to guess what that means in practical terms?

Unfortunately, the few actual examples of "positive" and "negative" coverage PEJ offers do little to clarify its methodology, and less to inspire confidence. For example, PEJ notes:

Some of that positive coverage was related to evidence that the financial crisis was aiding Obama. "Recent economic woes have given Democrat Barack Obama a clear lead over Republican John McCain," declared a story posted on AOL News on Sept. 24, citing a 9-point lead for Obama in a new Washington Post/ABC News poll.

That's what counts as "positive" coverage of Obama? A fairly straightforward report that a poll finds Obama in a "clear lead" over McCain? And, it seems, much of Obama's "positive" coverage consisted of reports like that:

The data clearly point in this direction for some of the explanation. Of those stories that focused mostly on polls, a clear majority (57%) were positive for Obama, while less than a quarter (23%) were negative. Similarly, stories about the electoral map, swing states and campaign strategy were even more favorable (77% positive vs. 6% negative). These represent the most positive element of Obama's coverage.

So, if a candidate is winning, and the polls show that, and the media report that the polls show the candidate winning, that counts as "positive" coverage. Well, OK, it's true that such a story is "positive," but it tells us nearly nothing about the media.

Examples of "negative" coverage of McCain similarly fail to illuminate. Here's the first:

On Sept. 24, he announced he was suspending campaigning to return to Washington to work on a rescue bill and advocated delaying the first debate, scheduled two days away in Oxford Mississippi. ... [S]ome of the coverage depicted McCain's decision-making in an unflattering light, such as a Sept. 26 CNN.com piece stating that "some fellow lawmakers said McCain hadn't contributed much to the financial debate, and senior campaign advisors told CNN they believed it was politically crucial that McCain show up in Oxford, Mississippi."

Actually, that's the only example of negative coverage of McCain. As Bob Somerby noted, "According to Pew, McCain has been hit with a bunch of 'negative stories' in the six weeks under review ... But what do these 'negative stories' look like? In the age of the simple electronic link, it's incredible that Pew provides no examples."

To PEJ's credit, it says only that coverage of the candidates is "positive" or "negative," not "favorable" or "unfavorable" or that coverage is "biased" in favor of a given candidate. As a literal matter, describing news reports such as the CNN.com example as "negative" is defensible, though it doesn't really tell us much.

But many people interpret those descriptions as evidence of "bias" -- as PEJ must know they will do. Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz, for example:

Critics, including many conservatives, say the media have been too easy on Obama, and bias cannot be discounted as a factor. A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that from the end of the conventions through the debates, McCain's coverage was more than three times as negative than Obama's.

Such interpretations are simply not defensible. PEJ's explanation of its methodology suggests that a purely factual news report about McCain trailing in the polls constitutes a "negative" report -- as would a report debunking a McCain lie. Again, such a report could defensibly be described as "negative" for McCain, but interpreting that as evidence of media bias is absurd. Debunking a lie isn't "bias," it's what journalists should be doing every day.

PEJ made no effort to assess things that actually could give some indication of whether media coverage has been unfair - whether news reports were more likely to uncritically report false claims from one candidate, or whether similar controversies surrounding each candidate received disparate coverage, for example. (Media Matters has documented several such examples of double standards that have benefited McCain.)

PEJ did offer this intriguing statement:

Much of the increased attention for McCain derived from actions by the senator himself, actions that, in the end, generated mostly negative assessments. In many ways, the arc of the media narrative during this phase of the 2008 general election might be best described as a drama in which John McCain has acted and Barack Obama has reacted.

That seems to support my observation that the media have covered precisely what McCain wants them to cover:

The truth is that when John McCain says "jump," the media still ask, "How high?" Think about this: When was the last time McCain or his campaign has wanted the news media to focus on something, and they have refused? From "lipstick on a pig" to Bill Ayers, the media have scampered after whatever mud McCain has flung, like a puppy dog chasing a stick thrown by its master. Sure, sometimes they have pointed out that McCain is lying -- and that's tremendous progress for a profession that has spent a decade flatly asserting McCain's honesty. But -- as I've explained in the past -- even as they've debunked McCain's claims, they've too often privileged the lie by allowing those claims to drive their coverage.

Unfortunately, PEJ did not explain its assertion that "the media narrative ... might be best described as a drama in which John McCain has acted and Barack Obama has reacted." Examining that idea more fully could have actually told us something useful about whether the media have favored one candidate or the other, in effect, if not intentionally.

PEJ's analysis may have only limited academic value. But there's nothing academic about the need to rebut its flawed conclusions. If the media themselves perceive that Barack Obama benefited from favorable media coverage -- as is suggested by their uncritical citation of the PEJ study -- that perception could have ominous implications for the coverage he will receive if he becomes president.

As a 1993 Christian Science Monitor op-ed by a University of California-Irvine professor noted:

[H]ow the media treat a new president may have less to do with personality, personnel, perks, or pessimism than it does with how the media treated that president as a candidate. Treatment of a new president may be inversely related to their coverage of the president as a candidate for office. The easier the media's treatment of a presidential candidate during the campaign, the harsher will be their treatment once the candidate has become president. Conversely, harsher treatment of a presidential candidate during the campaign may precipitate a much longer media honeymoon for a new president.

Forward This E-mail To A Friend
Share your concern about conservative misinformation

Sign up
Did a friend forward you this email? Click here to sign up to receive Media Matters for America email alerts.

Your victory in Ohio - and a problem in New Mexico.

Stacey A. Ward, Esq. — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:38:44 EDT

You beat back voter suppression in Ohio — now, can you help in New Mexico?
New Mexico voters are counting on you. Tell Attorney General Mukasey to investigate and prosecute voter intimidators in New Mexico. Time is short; we must act now.

This week, an astounding number of you banded together to tell the Department of Justice not to investigate 200,000 new voters in Ohio. Tens of thousands of you fought back, and according to the New York Times, you won: the Department of Justice will not act on President Bush's sickening request.

This is great news, but there's more work to be done. It's not enough for the DOJ simply to "do no harm." It must also actively investigate and prosecute illegal voter intimidation where it occurs. Here at CREDO, we're paying close attention to potential voter suppression issues that could affect voters around the country. Today, we're writing to let you know about a problem in New Mexico that could lead to voters being disenfranchised.

The problem: Private investigators have been showing up at the doors of poor and Latino voters — asking them intimidating questions, insinuating that they don't have the right to vote.

Who's affected: New Mexican voters in good standing who have every right to go vote on Election Day — but who may not show up at the polls if they've been frightened in their own homes.

The solution:

Click here to e-mail Attorney General Mukasey — the Department of Justice is charged with stopping voter suppression and protecting every American's right to vote. A spokesman for the DOJ's civil rights division has said that they are "looking into" this problem, but that's not good enough. We need a serious investigation worthy of these insidious tactics.
Pass this e-mail on to your friends and family, especially those in New Mexico — with only days left till the election, we need to make sure that as many New Mexico voters as possible are educated about this problem so that if intimidators show up at their homes, they'll know the right thing to do: Shut the doors in their faces.

Thank you for working to protect our democracy.

Kate Stayman-London, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets

P.S. If you want to learn more about this issue, you can do so by clicking here.

© 2008 CREDO. All rights reserved.

Get action alerts on your mobile phone! Click here to join CREDO Mobile Action; we'll text you on important issues when your voice is urgently needed in Congress.