Organizing for America | Posts with the tag HRC

Posts with the tag HRC

Page 1 of 7 | Next | Last

By Cindy from Gresham, OR - Aug 28th, 2009 at 2:35 pm EDT

Members of Congress,

Senator Kennedy would never have compromised on the government run public option. His integrity would never have allowed him to trade our health and financial stability in exchange for repubican votes.

Let's be clear. The Insurance Industry will protect their profit margin, and the profits to come, at all costs. Republicans need money in order to take back congress and win the presidency. They need the public option to fail.

Sen. Enzi told his constituents he wasn't negotiating: " It's not where I get them to compromise, it's what I get them to leave out." Sen. Grassley tells his constituents that the bill would allow the government to “pull the plug on grandma” and ignores the call for an armed march on Washington, at his town hall meeting.

The republicans are out for blood, and it will be this way until Obama is defeated. Stop the "bipartisanship:" It only works if both parties are honestly working together. The republicans are not, and they will not. They are literally out to destroy Obama, and the Blue Dogs are cooperating.

Because of profit driven Insurance we pay between $3-6000 more per person than any other industrialized country, we don't have universal coverage and we are rated 37th as a nation for our Health Care (just above Costa Rica). Free Market means the Insurance Industry pits patient care against profit margin. The less treatment you provide, the more money you make. The more people you refuse to cover because of pre-existing conditions, the larger the profit margin.

The top 10 rated countries have universal coverage, require non-profit health care whether it's public or private sector, and have sustainable % of GDP. Singapore, rated 6th, has the lowest % of GDP because it requires public health care to compete with private.

Republicans argue that “Europeans” have higher unemployment; in the “double digits,” and their % of GDP is growing faster. This is patently false: the top 10 rated countries for health care have unemployment rates equal to, or less than ours. They spend between 3.6% and 11% of GDP on healthcare.

It’s staggering to hear republicans even try to make that argument when we don’t have universal coverage, we have higher unemployment rates and we’re spending 17+% of GDP on healthcare. If we had universal coverage under our for-profit model, it would skyrocket the % of GDP spent, financially cripple our citizens, and bankrupt the nation.

The Insurance Industry launched a full force attack against the public option. Why do you think that they are fine with the co-ops, or privately run public option, but adamantly opposed to a government run public option? It's because it would cut into their profit margin. Stocks for the Insurance Industry soared at the idea the White House might be willing to substitute co-ops or privately a operated public option, because neither are viable competitors.

Republicans are also pushing for “Romney Care” as a bipartisan option. If you read Kay Klazar article in the Globe: "Bay State health insurance premiums highest in country," it shows how insane that idea is.

Then there are loud cries for Tort Reform, and how much that will save. It will not save anything, it benefits Insurance companies and doctors at the expense of the patient. This helps doctors pay less for malpractice insurance, which are ridiculously high, but it also spares them from high consequences in cases of egregious malpractice. The worst part of Tort reform helps the Insurance Industry's profits. If a health insurance company is sued for refusal of treatment, or tests requested by a doctor for their patient, they will literally have zero consequences. Suggested is a limit of $250,000 per patient. Patients lose, doctors and the Insurance Industry win.

Republicans want competition across state lines? It sounds great in theory. The problem is it becomes "a rush to the bottom." Insurance Companies will move to states with the least regulations. You buy insurance thinking you’re covered, as your state requires, but it's not required in the state where the insurance company is located. Patients get less coverage, often outrageous out of pocket expenses, but pay for the same premiums, this increases the profits for insurance companies.

The Blue Dogs are insisting on Co-ops. This was tried from 1930's -1940's and failed; funding was cut off. They do not affect Insurance Industry pricing (GAO study done March 2000). Co-ops that become actual competition (e.g. blue cross/blue shield) are bought up and run by the Insurance Industry to keep prices steady. They remain non-profit but do not affect % of GDP or price to the consumer. Nothing prevents the Insurance Industry from buying up, buying out, or even starting co-ops to prevent real competition (e.g. blue cross/blue shield). They can claim co-ops "work" without decreasing their profit margin or "triggering" a public option.

The republicans are comparing a government run public option to Medicare. They state the obvious, that Medicare is going bankrupt. Medicare is going bankrupt because it is used to hold money paid in over decades, then at 65 when seniors need the most expensive care, we pay the bills. A government run public option is absolutely nothing like this. The services would be the same, but it is exactly like a non-profit private insurance without the advertising, exorbitant salaries, and billions to lobby congress.

Now President Obama and the Insurance Industry, along with the Blue Dogs, are talking about a private run public option. So they can say we have a “public option.” This is not anymore viable than a co-op. It would succeed as private insurance, but would be like any other non-proft Insurance. It would have the same financial outcome: no price reduction, increased profits for the Insurance Industry, and national bankruptcy. Non-profits run by the private Industry are not really “non-profit.” All “profits” are used for expenditures, advertising, lobbying, outrageous salaries, etc. and written off. They do not lower prices because that would affect the profit margin for the entire industry.

Pitting Profits against Patients is economically unsound, unethical and a conflict of interest. When you think about this, it is outright ghastly. We are paying billions for Insurance Industry advertising, exorbitant salaries and billions more for them to lobby against us to increase their profits and remove competition. Without a non-profit government run public option, prices will not be lowered; it would accelerate the increase in % of GDP spent on health care. This will force tax increases to an unsustainable level, heavily subsidize profits for the Insurance Industry, bankrupt our country and the Democrats will be blamed.

Are you more concerned about elections/re-election than your constituents’ health and well-being? Are you really going to continue your complicity in lying, dis/misinformation, and deceiving the public for political gain? The fact that 45-53% believe all these lies is your responsibility and it is unconscionable. Are you actually willing to vote against a government run public option at the expense of your constituents’ health, financial stability and our nations solvency?

Colleagues who lie, or constituents who believe and propogate those lies, must never be allowed to dominate. If you are truly concerned about your constituents and our nations solvency, then you will vote for real reform, even if it means losing your job.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (1) | Report Objectionable Content

11/19 Cabinet updates... Do you agree?

By EMK - Nov 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm EST

Also listed in: 6 groups

HHS Sec. Tom Daschle: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27805121

HRC still going for SoS via Bill Clinton: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27802004/

Your Thoughts?

EMK

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

HRC + LCR = GOP, Not GLBT

By Vanessa Edwards from Houston, TX - Oct 11th, 2008 at 2:11 pm EDT

http://transpolitical.blogspot.com/2008/09/hrc-lcr-gop-not-glbt.html

reprint from TransPolitical blog: 9/9/08

“I don't know about the rest of you, but I am absolutely furious about this. Not only is this inequitable, it's fuckin dismissive and disrespectful.” — Steven Driscoll, National Stonewall Democrats Board Co-Chair

Can anybody tell me why HRC had such prominence with the Obama Campaign once Hillary was officially out of the race? They even proffered their own handpicked trans person, a relative unknown to the trans community itself that they brought onto the business council, to be the campaign’s transgender steering committee member. And this for what support they’ve shown?

As Andrew Sullivan noted at the time Hillary dropped out, HRC’s own board of directors had given to the following presidential candidates’ campaigns:

That’s right, zero to Barack Obama’s campaign by the time Hillary Clinton had suspended her campaign. Immediately after, Obama graciously allowed HRC’s current and former executive director, and one of their board doing the speaking on a campaign conference call to the LGBT community (including, though rarely mentioning, the plethora of trans leaders who long worked the campaign). HRC even played petulant, suggesting it would take time for their ranks to come around and pleading for “patience” from the campaign until they decided to engage. Read More »

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Saturday: Hillary Rodham Clinton to Tour Michigan, Rally Support for Obama

By Josh In Michigan - Sep 24th, 2008 at 10:37 am EDT

Also listed in: 92 groups

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will be campaigning for Barack Obama across Michigan this Saturday, September 27th, making stops in Flint, Lansing and Grand Rapids. Senator Clinton will be talking to Michigan voters about the steps Barack Obama will take to help turn Michigan’s economy around, standing up for the state’s working families and bringing about the change Michigan needs.

Further details of Senator Clinton’s tour will be released as they become available.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (3) | Report Objectionable Content

Obama speaks out on GLBT equality: from HRC

By Helping Heroes - Aug 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm EDT

When I am President of the United States, gays and lesbians will have somebody who will fight for equal rights for them, somebody who opposes Don't Ask, Don't Tell, somebody who's fought to make sure that gays and lesbians aren't discriminated against on the job or hospital visitation. Because they are our brothers and sisters, and I don't mind anyone knowing where I stand. Barack Obama, 2007

That last part is my favorite: "I don't mind anyone knowing where I stand." For Barack Obama, standing up for GLBT rights isn't something he does behind closed doors, away from TV cameras. He does it with pride and resolve, without hesitation.

We've never had a President who's spoken like this. But we can – yes, we can – if we all pitch in.

John McCain's negative attacks are working. McCain is ahead by 5% in one poll this week. Make a donation to the Obama campaign through HRC and send a powerful message: people who care about GLBT equality are counting on Obama to stay strong.

Contribute to Sen. Obama's campaign in the next 48 hours and move us one step closer to a pro-equality White House.

The deadline to make your gift is Thursday night, when Sen. Obama accepts the Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States in Denver. That's your last chance to have your gift count towards the donation limits that are set for the primary season – and the best way to send Obama into the general election season with the strength to beat John McCain.

Thursday night's speech comes 45 years to the day after Martin Luther King spoke of his dream on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Sen. Obama has made it clear that he believes the struggle for GLBT civil rights is an extension of the historic movement led by Dr. King – equally consistent with America's founding principles, equally urgent as a moral imperative.

Barack has promised to work for "an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all – a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters."

Donate before Sen. Obama accepts the nomination on Thursday and help break the anti-gay stranglehold on the presidency.

But it doesn't start and end with the presidency. You can make sure a President Obama has the strong allies and leaders he needs in Congress when you support these courageous pro-equality candidates:

Congressman Mark Udall, who has earned a 100% on HRC's scorecard and whose opponent for the U.S. Senate, former Rep. Bob Shaffer, earned flat 0% ratings in Congress;
New Hampshire's former Governor Jeanne Shaheen, who signed a repeal of the state's ban on gay adoption, enacted a law to ban workplace discrimination, and supports her state's new civil union law;
Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who has clearly and publicly opposed Arizona's discriminatory marriage ballot measures, in 2006 and again this year. She faces a tough reelection campaign against the state senator who cast the final and deciding vote that put the marriage amendment on the ballot this year;
Iraq War veteran and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" opponent Ashwin Madia, who is running for a hotly contested seat in the battleground state of Minnesota;
Comedian, writer, radio talk show host, and outspoken supporter of the GLBT community, Al Franken, who will be running against the Minnesota incumbent, Senator Norm Coleman;
Mark Begich, who is running against the corruption-mired Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens. The race is an opportunity to replace a senator who's repeatedly cast votes against the GLBT community--voting for the Federal Marriage Amendment and against the Matthew Shepard Act--with a true GLBT advocate;
Congressman Tom Udall, who supports key HRC legislation such as the fully-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act and strong hate crimes prevention legislation, and will be running for the open Senate seat in the battleground state of New Mexico.

All these candidates, Sen. Obama included, are in tight races. The winners will be the ones whose supporters tried the hardest, dug the deepest, and gave the most.

Give by Thursday night and help them win.

There's so much at stake. There's never been an election like this one. Believe me, Michelle, you're going to want to be a part of this.

Warmly,

Joe Solmonese
President

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Let's Define What LEGACY Is - Who Has It, and Who Doesnt Have It

By Tanya - Aug 26th, 2008 at 12:04 pm EDT

Also listed in: 8 groups

As of recent..we have been hearing a lot of talk of the Clintons. They have been invading the space of the airways with what they want, how they want it, and who they want it from.I've shared my feelings over and over again about this so I won't repeat anything you've already read. I am going to make some points though. Read More »

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

The Vice Presidential Olympics: A Play By Play

By Jackie - Aug 21st, 2008 at 6:34 pm EDT

Also listed in: 4 groups

The full article

Excerpt:

Hello, sports fans. As we near the end of our quadrennial games, let’s take a look back at how we got to where we are now:

The Titan Who Fell - Hillary Clinton: Perhaps the victim of her own hype, the former First Lady crashed in a big way in the primary round in the most anticipated event of these games- the quest for the White House. As of late 2006, just after Team Democrat had taken gold in Senate races, House races, and gubernatorial races alike, pundits across the country were ready to place the gold medal around Clinton’s neck. But Clinton failed to achieve what had been a “sure win,” forcing her to settle for silver in the presidential event. When it came time for the vice presidential race, many of Clinton’s fans remained behind her. However, the down-and-dirty strategy that she displayed in the presidential race cost her some serious ground in the latter event, effectively ruling her out of the following qualifying rounds for the vice presidency.

Disqualified for Foul Play - John Edwards: Every four years, hearts are broken around the world when we find out that our heroes don’t pass the requisite tests prior to competition. Sometimes, it’s doping and steroids. Other times, it’s a different kind of cheating. The race for the presidency requires that candidates not only refrain from performance enhancers (i.e., illegal campaign contributions, etc), but also that they maintain a history of ethics and integrity commensurate with the prestige of these games. And if you can’t meet the requirements for the presidential event, it’s not likely that you’ll fare too well in the vice presidential race, either. Like Mom always said, cheaters never prosper…especially if it is on your wife while she’s battling cancer.

Playing for the Wrong Team - Michael Bloomberg and Chuck Hagel: For most of his life, Mike Bloomberg was on Team Democrat. But when the qualifying race (primary) for the New York Mayoral race looked a little crowded, Bloomberg switched to Team Republican, despite remaining a Democrat at heart. Now, he’s on a team of his own (Team Independent). Technically, that made him a contender for the vice presidential event. But in the long, storied history of these games, never has an Independent joined the national ticket of a Democratic presidential gold medal winner. And while Republican Chuck Hagel might similarly have seemed like a good idea, you can bet that if it’s tough for an Independent to win gold here, it’s damn near impossible for a member of Team GOP.
Click on the link to see the rest of the VP contenders... :OD

The full article

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Notes on Entrepreneurs & Freedom Fighters

By oklib77 - Aug 20th, 2008 at 12:19 am EDT

Anyone here read Thomas Frank's truly fab excerpt from his book, The Wrecking Crew, in Harper's? Anyone else here read about how ultimate loser, Ralph Reed, skipped his own McCain fundraiser?

***** How is it that the Right Wing has taken the lead re the language of both policy & social politics? Obama is our best hope since Kennedy & FDR to reverse this travesty.

***** Hate to come on like Lichtenstein, or a tired, old semiotics don, but, Democrats must learn how to use language better. Liberal should not be a swear word.

***** Andrew Sullivan on the Daily Dish today nailed it re McCain's torture. By Bush's, Cheney's, Rumsfeld's, Fleith's, Gonzalez's, Yoo's, HELL, even Mukasey's definition, McCain was not tortured. Of course, McCain was tortured. I would wish that hell on no one, but the double standard & Orwellian Newspeak of this administration is so disgusting as to make me ill.

***** Just for kicks: Time Horizon.

***** My idea of Freedom Fighter does not include Oliver North within its purview. I think more of John Henry Faulk, or Barbara Jordan.

***** I wish I was there at that meeting between McCain, Bush, & Rove, to hear the apologies for So Carolina 2000, & the grim mafia-like assurances re this current election. McCain is nowt himself anymore, a Faustian bargain made in order to win.

***** The McCain campaign's negative, ridiculous TV ads have had their effect & have since been toned down in order to absorb a backlash. They are desperate, Faustian howls at the moon; Rovian war games. There will be more ugliness from Camp McBush/Rove, for sure, but they have yet to define their candidate. Watch how the "Morning in America" McCain moments fall flat & Obama seizes the high ground & makes this country feel good again, & begin to squelch fear in their hearts & believe.

***** "Evrybody had a hard year ... Evrybody pulled their socks up/Everybody put their foot down."

***** All credit to Jon Stewart & his fab Daily Show for these "just for kicks" language notes. & here's another one: Enhanced Interrogation.

***** Michigan is ours, but it will be tight. Colorado is ours, but it will be tight.

***** The convention will be magical. Clinton speaking on the anniversary of a Woman's right to vote, & Obama accepting the nomination on Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" anniversary. I cannot wait.

Let's win this thing folks. My polling station is within walking distance (by the way, I don't have a drivers license & have never driven!) & so is the Contra Costa County dem HQ! I'll be hitting the phone lines & the doors these coming months & I want you folks to do the same.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

PUMA = Delusional

By Tanya - Aug 11th, 2008 at 1:49 am EDT

Also listed in: African Americans for Obama | Sacramento For Obama | Students for Barack Obama

I got a bone to pick..Ive been tryin not to focus too much on yall since I know you love the atttention..

But you all are goin around saying something that is totally inaccurate

“DNC Gave Obama the nomination because of yada yada yada”

Lets get something straight…and since im a factual kinda gal..Ill go ahead and give you some facts first.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (2) | Report Objectionable Content

And If It Wasn’t For THEM You Wouldn’t Even HAVE BEEN

By Tanya - Aug 11th, 2008 at 1:47 am EDT

Also listed in: African Americans for Obama | Sacramento For Obama | Students for Barack Obama

I’m going to go ahead and spend some time writing my own blog tonight. I’m a little irritated. Well, a lot! I got a few bones to pick all with the same theme.

I’m going to go ahead and start with the ignorant bitchasses that keep saying…

“You’re just voting for Obama because he is black!”

I will try and respond to this without cursing or getting angry.
Since I’m a factual kinda gal, let’s look at the facts.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Best Reasons 2 Elect Sen. Obama

By new day 4 us - Jul 20th, 2008 at 12:09 pm EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Someone, a former Hillary supporter had written a blog post regarding her lack of enthusiasm for supporting Sen. Obama as she came over from the Hillary camp. She wanted other bloggers on MYBO to give her reasons to support Sen. Obama enthusiastically.

One of the points that attracted me to Sen. Obama's bid for the presidency was his efficiency. Yes, that is a point that has not merited great discussion. The article linked below will detail the differences between the McCain campaign and Sen. Obama's campaign which speaks to the cause of efficiency.

If the efficiency and the focus of the Obama campaign can be translated to the workings of the US govt. once Sen. Obama takes office, can you imagine all the millions of dollars that could be saved in our wasteful government's intertwinings and bureaucracies ?

To this blogger, I appreciate your loss - I can imagine how I would have felt if Sen. Obama had lost. Both of these campaigns were not only campaigns, but movements as well. Movements that both of these candidates carried and carried well. While I am sorry that you do not resonate with Sen. Obama's campaign, the other alternative is frightful.

So I am giving you my initial primary reason for supporting Sen. Obama and supporting him enthusiastically. And I hope that if all the MYBO bloggers can add to your list, maybe you can find a point that will resonate with you to support Sen. Obama with all the enthusiasm you had for Sen. Clinton.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-burrell/can-america-afford-a-mcca_b_113591.html

Thanks ~

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (1) | Report Objectionable Content

PUMA

By Kristina in Colorado Springs - Jul 7th, 2008 at 5:45 pm EDT

I recently had the pleasure of being invited to the PUMA buses to the DNC in August. I very happily turned down the offer and told them this.

"You couldn't pay me to get on that bus. I support HRC and will continue to be an HRC supporter but I will not support any action that will most likely result in another 4 years of Bush-like policies. McCain is incapable of breaking his ties to Bush and his policies. He flip flops regularly and denies what he's said even when the evidence is thrown in his face. If you wanted the change in this nation that HRC spoke of during her campaign, support Barack Obama for President."

Can someone please explain to me why Democratic HRC supporters are in favor of supporting McCain and booing Obama? I don't believe that they favored HRC because of her policies if they are now turning to McCain. Obama is the only candidate with policies that even relatively relate to HRC's policies. She did not endorse McCain, she endorsed Obama. If you support or have supported HRC, you need to stand behind her decision and back Senator Barack Obama for President.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (3) | Report Objectionable Content

From Yahoo News - Bob Beckel - http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20080625/cm_rcp/its_not_even_close_obama_shoul_1

By FairfaxBrian - Jul 2nd, 2008 at 5:25 pm EDT

It's not even close. Compare Hillary Clinton to all the names being floated for Barack Obama's running mate and the conclusion is beyond obvious Senator Obama, you are a very smart man which makes me confident you are ignoring the advice of the Washington chattering class who are strongly opposed to you putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket .

The chatterers are nice people but let's face it, most have never been involved in a campaign, know nothing about targeting, or persuadable voters, or analyzing polls beyond the match race and favorability ratings. They are people who harbor negative feelings towards Hillary Clinton formed years ago and who stubbornly ignore the evidence of her political maturation.

On the outside chance Senator you are listening to this uninformed conventional wisdom I offer the following rebuttal of the chatterers arguments and the case for choosing Clinton. For the record I did not support Clinton's campaign for the Democratic nomination.

* The chatterers insist she will be a drag on the ticket and bring the Republican base to the polls in huge numbers. If it is not obvious to the chatterers yet, they should pay closer attention the vicious anti Obama tirades by right wing bloggers and conservative talk radio show hosts. The Right will come to the polls all right...to vote against Barrack Obama in droves with or without Hillary Clinton.

* A drag on the ticket. Please. Hillary Clinton immediately expands the electoral map putting states in play that are currently out of Obama's reach; West Virginia, Kentucky, and Arkansas. She helps move toss up states to leaning Democrat; New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada (if Obama breaks north of 60% of the Hispanic vote he wins all three, Clinton helps get him there). Clinton helps solidify weak Democratic states including Pennsylvania and Michigan; she can bolster Obama's lead in Ohio and probably makes Florida competitive which it is not currently. Any other VP candidate that can expand the map like this? Not even close.

* Chatterers insist Clinton will be a distraction to your campaign. Exactly what does that mean? That she will be on another page and therefore step on your message? Ridiculous. There is no more disciplined, on message politician in America than Hillary Clinton. But the argument raises a question; why would she want to step on the message? If the message doesn't succeed then you don't succeed, then Hillary doesn't succeed. Why would she want that?

* Then there are the Bill Clinton arguments including his refusal to release contributors to his foundation. Fine, get him to agree to release the information but insist Cindy McCain release all her financial holdings, her separate tax returns for seven years, the amount of money her companies have paid in lobbying and pr to promote the sale of alcohol, and every position she holds in every company in which she has a financial interest or is on the board of directors. I think you will find the McCain campaign less insistent on Bill's financial disclosure.

* The Clintons are likely to make gaffes on the campaign trial the chatterers insist. Hillary Clinton has just finished running in 54 contests and got better and better with each one. Name me one of the other VP choices who can come close to matching her campaign skills. Certainly Bill Clinton made some mistakes during the nominating campaign but mostly because he took attacks on his wife too personally. He is still the best campaign horse in the stable. With Hillary on the ticket he'll campaign daily, without her only occasionally. Set Bill Clinton free in Appalachia and watch the anti Obama votes go way down.

* If you are elected Senator, so the charge goes, the Clintons will be constant problems for you. Hillary will promote her own agenda and Bill will wander the West Wing subverting your presidency. Absurd. When you get sworn in as president your stature will dwarf the Clintons. You have the Oval Office, Air Force One, and loyalists staffing the White House that wouldn't listen to Bill Clinton unless you insisted on it. I'd be surprised if he was in the White House more than a few days each year.

* As for Hillary subverting you, see above. Her political future will be dependent on your success; therefore she has every interest in promoting your agenda. The alternative (without her on the ticket) is much more problematical. She will be a huge force in the Senate with her own base and agenda. Would you rather have her out of the tent on the Hill permoting her own ideas or in your tent promoting yours? Not even a close call.

*A few other benefits of Clinton on the ticket; no one will be a more effective attack dog against McCain and the Right than Hillary. She can take the heat and defend you (something you are increasingly forced to do yourself). Every attack on McCain by Clinton will get wide coverage. No one has had more experience than Hillary on taking the Right to the wood shed and beating them to a pulp. She becomes the lightening rod, you go back to change and hope. Can any other VP choice do that? Not even close.

* By putting Clinton on the ticket you marry up the best money and organizational operations in the history of the Democratic Party. It wasn't her national organization that screwed up it was her supposed brain trust. With her money people committed, a $400 million dollar budget is very doable. Does any other VP choice have an organizational and money base like that? Not even close.

* You will sit atop the most unified Democratic Convention since the advent of television. The picture of you and Hillary Clinton together is a nightmare for Republicans. The GOP operatives are yearning for you to pick anyone besides Clinton. You scare them, she scares them, together you are their worst nightmare.

* Finally, and maybe most important of all, McCain and the Right have only one hope of defeating you Senator, and that is to make you too naÃ¯ve and risky to be Commander in Chief. Your vice presidential choice must reek of experience. The argument against Clinton is she represents the past and hurts your change message. Sure the voters want change from what hasn't worked, but they embrace past success. Most voters recall the Clinton years (from a policy perspective at least) as successful. A message of change combined with a record of past success is a more comforting message than change alone. Can another VP candidate provide that level of comfort? Not even close.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

The Booing has to stop

By Michael Whitehead - Jun 17th, 2008 at 11:59 am EDT

Also listed in: 6 groups

I was overjoyed to be at the Obama rally in Detroit last night, and especially excited that Al Gore was on hand to officially endorse Obama at the event. I even got to be on the floor within spitting distance of the stage.

But I was very disappointed with the level of loud booing that greeted Granholm when she onstage to introduce Gore and Obama. Yes, I know she came out early for HRC, and that it she was pulling strings to force the process to go HRC's way by cheerleading for an early Primary in defiance of the DNC calendar.

But guess what? The nomination battle is over. Obama won. It's time to exercise not just good sportsmanship, but exemplary sportsmanship. Booing HRC and her high profile supporters only lenghtens the time that HRC's most ardent supporters stay on the sidelines. They are looking for excuses and examples to feed their hurt feelings. And when we boo "Jenny from the Block" or any other (especially female) high profile HRC supporter, we are co-dependent in allowing the HRC uber-faithful to infer "sexist behavior."

Those who know me personally know I am painfully introverted, but I was driven to loudly, but as gently as I could manage, admonish the young people around me on the floor to "BE NICE!" when the booing erupted at Granholm. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm simply old enough to be "old-fashioned" but in my world you don't "rub someone's nose in it" one day and expect them to seemlessly work shoulder to shoulder with you the next.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (8) | Report Objectionable Content

Shortie: More Calls for an HRC VP Offer

By ZapDuff - Jun 12th, 2008 at 12:31 pm EDT

Also listed in: 9 groups

The last week has seen a huge spike in O-Forum listerv messages such as this one:

BestYet Communications wrote:

I have given this some thought and I still believe the "dream" ticket is still the way to go with Clinton being the vice president...

Obama could be making a big mistake by not taking advantage of all she has to offer but I also look at history being made and how important this is to women in this country. If we can now say a black man can be president, can't we also say a woman can be vice president?

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (4) | Report Objectionable Content

HRC as VP?

By Michael Whitehead - Jun 12th, 2008 at 7:35 am EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Before those various groups and individuals continue their insistence that Obama won't/can't get their vote without putting HRC on the ticket, they need to step back and ask a couple of questions:

1. Does HRC want the job? Frankly, I don't think so. She enjoys more freedom and independence of action as a sitting US Senator. And they don't name landmark pieces of legislation after VPs. This might be her chance to create the"Clinton Health Care Act", the piece of legislation that will (finally) allow us to catch up to the rest of the developed world.

2. Does HRC being on the ticket really improve chances of winning? What good is it to be on the ticket if the ticket falls short of victory? Sure HRC will energize some portion of the "18 million" who voted for her. It also may do what McCain cannot: energize conservatives to actually participate in this election.

3. Does insisting that she be given the spot help her if she DOES want it? Obama may gain more from "staring down" a major bloc of the Party from Independent voters than from bowing to the demands of what is rapidly becoming a relatively small but vocal cadre of activists. “Hillary holds the entire Latino community in the palm of her hand,” said. Rep. José Serrano (D-N.Y.), whose district went heavily for Clinton. ( http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/hispanic-dems-warn-obama-he-risks-losing-latino-voters-2008-06-11.html ) I take it that Rep. Serrano is discounting the recent polling that indicates Obama is making significant progress with Latino voters post-HRC's endorsement. It may be that adding HRC to the ticket is not any better for the ticket than any other choice, and that HRC may have to show how she can help an Obama Admininstration better than other choices can. Indeed, that is the very factor that led Bill Clinton to choose Al Gore.

I'm not pretending that I know the future. HRC may well want to be VP. Obama's selection team may conclude that HRC is the best #2. There may be more to gain than to lose by putting her on the ticket. But all this VP talk at this moment is premature. It may make for great pundit talk, but it really is not on Obama's front burner and won't be until Caroline tells him that her team has finished creating the only short list that counts.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (3) | Report Objectionable Content

Hillary Transitioner Concerns/Thoughts/Conversations

By Hillary Transitioner - Jun 12th, 2008 at 4:26 am EDT

Also listed in: 5 groups

1) Hillary Supporter --> McCain Supporter :: The dynamics of ideals

I being a HRC Supporter am beside myself wondering where, why, how things went off the track. I respect everyone's opinion even if it is starkly different than my own. I do my best to also understand the motives behind the opinion. Not to persuade or break down but to ensure my own reasons are in line with yours. There have been so many disaffected Hillary Supporters that have left not only her camp but have decided to leave the DNC. I honestly do not understand the motives. To go from Hillary's beliefs to McCain's is such an about face that for me, is shocking. I suppose this post is for those who have moved from Hillary TO McCain. I know that you are all on here reading posts. I myself AM a "rebid" Hillary Supporter. However now that Hillary has asked me to transition... I am.

I have looked at McCain's positions on the war, Roe V Wade, gay marriage, economic reform, foreign
affairs, etc. and I know that my ideals are better represented through Obama than McCain. I have
chatted with some Hillary to McCain voters and for some it is not necessarily about ideals it is about
experience. And that is where I can no longer begin to understand.

I have chosen a path of ideals rather than one of experience and I respect anyone's choice to follow a
different path.

You know, I have been on the McCain website reading about his ideals I would invite anyone to do there
and read about what his vision for this country is. For me, they are just not in line with the way that I would like to world to become. I have read where Obama stands on a lot of things and for the most part his ideals and my own are right on (Just like Hillary and I).

While I disagree with anyone's decision to back McCain - I respect it. Everyone has different triggers
that motivate them. And for some it is not so much bout the policy as it is about the experience of the candidate. Which does make sense to me. But I hope that you and I can respectfully disagree and STILL be friends.

2) Extreme Name Calling

I have heard about some of the extreme name calling some have felt from the Hillary side coming from the Obama camp. Some HRC Supporters have stated that since they were not supporting a racially diverse candidate they must be in fact racist, part of the KKK, nazis, so on and so forth..etc.
I have NEVER experienced ANY of that here. And if it were to be projected at anyone - it would MOST LIKELY be me. I think out of most of the outspoken Hillary supporters - my voice is loud, proud and not so mild. lol I can say that I preferred Hillary vs. Obama. NO ONE has ever called me racist or any of those horrible things associated with it. I do not think I have called anyone here a sexist because they were voting for a male... So I am having an extremely difficult time identifying with those alleged victims.

I will NOT say that my presence has not been met with some... resistance. For some Pro-Obama people my "Pro-Hillary Rhetoric" was too much and they told me so. But you know, some of those people are now on my friend list and I respect the fact that they told me - flat out - where they stood and why they felt the way that they did. That is not anything but communication, establishing boundaries and line of proper communication. I respect anyone that is capable of being able to verbalize their position without using words of hate. Even though my blogs have been criticized, here I am, "on the others side." I have not been muzzled or "beat" into submission. I came here right after Hillary asked me as well of all of her supporters to do so. Ever since that moment, I have been fighting for her and all HRC supporters to ensure our place in the Obama Camp. I am here to ensure that the ideals that Hillary fought so hard for are fully represented, respected and the interests she safe guarded will live on through our efforts of uniting our country.

3) Supporting Hillary does not exclude you from Supporting Barack

I stand here today only because Hillary believed in me and I believed in Her. I did as she asked me to do and now I stand beside Barack and His Supports not only as a Hillary Supporter... but as one of them.

I can say with certainty I was foaming at the mouth when the media attacked her. I was so upset I
canceled my cable TV (of which I suggest everyone do as part of the media protest). I have a hard time understanding that while Hillary and Barack were fierce competitors they have always been fighting for the same causes. Fighting for everyone that has been kicked down, counted out, left out, and muted from this and all previous elections. Which brings me to Michigan and Florida. I live in Florida and I did NOT make the change to move up the dates. That was done by the incumbent republicans. Not the will of the voters. I feel that our votes where not fully counted, but by protesting and voting for McCain how does this benefit Hillary, her ideals or her ability to implement new laws?

What I am trying so hard to understand is knowing how Hillary felt (about a lot of things), her ideals, those little things that made her uniquely her... how do they translate to McCain?

Is the rallying for McCain by the HRC supporters, a form of protest or rather a feeling that he has more experienced than Obama (regardless of platform). I suppose that even those that have been cut deepest by the HRC division and have decided to stand with McCain not necessarily because of his principals but rather by refusing to side with Hillary and Obama solely because they feel McCain has more experience.

I am at this point trying to better understand how they feel and why they feel it. I am asking for
anyone's help. I need help in understanding why anyone (as Hillary supporters) would ignore Hillary and side with the one person she has fought so hard against.

4) It's never too late to reconcile the division

Its never too late to listen, to respect one another and to understand. It is only too late for those
who want it to be. I think there is a majority of people that are upset at the way that Hillary was
crucified by the media. But I also belive those people want to reconcile. I also think that a certain amount of that 'anger' is unfairly being directed at Obama and his supporters. We all have said things that was not civil discourse. However, what puzzles me is that I do not see much anger towards the media outlets. They report who said what when and then regurgitate and reinterpret what was meant by it... I came here, the the Barack Camp, because I was asked to by the one person I believed in - Hillary Clinton. Now that I am here I am glad that I put aside my anger. However I will continue to voice my opinion, to work to solve my differences with people and to work together for a unified cause, to make the US a better place for everyone.

I acknowledge that everyone can see the world differently. I see it differently than a lot here and yet, I am embraced. I admit that am a little bitter about what has happened to Hillary. She deserved better. This frenzy of emotion can only be pinpointed to one source - the media? Its a lot easier to report that Hillary's pant suit is ugly that is it about how Barack and Hillary are inline on 99.9% of the issues. We are talking about the SAME people that reported the DAILY happeneing of Britney Spears... Yeah... So whos to really blame here? But you know.. rather than let it fester, I am working as an agent of change rather than casting my ideals aside and believing that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. That is just poor logic and it will never suit my interests.

McCain disliked everything Hillary stood for and for me to side with anyone they must be capable of representing what Hillary stood for. That path does not lie with McCain. His ideals are starkly
different and backward to what Hillary believed. For some breaking away from Hillary is a sign of
protest against the DNC's decisions, for others it is a form of punishment and for a few it is a way to completely divide people from their basic beliefs.

I do not know where each person fits into any of these but what I know, for me, my ideals are greater than any candidate, greater than any document or president. My ideals are eternal and forever. To give up on them is to give away my very soul.

If your ideals have in fact changed then the concept of a divide really no longer exists for you because you were never in line with Hillary to begin with or at least for the reasons she stood for. For those that are upset but still hold the ideals of Hillary close to their hearts I invite them to discuss them here.

It is never too late to reconcile - even if others say differently even it they try to whip your emotions into a a frenzy...even if they are your freinds. I ask you to open your mind to the possibility that we are very much alike and that our ideals can transcend the dirty politics we saw through this primary.

Thank you so much for coming by and I look forward to your responses.

-Scott in Tampa.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (8) | Report Objectionable Content

Thank You HRC!

By Stephanie - Jun 8th, 2008 at 2:29 pm EDT

Also listed in: 9 groups

Thank you to HRC.. it could not of been easy for her yesterday. But it was the right thing to do. I for one have a new found respect for her as of yesterday. She really did come through for all Americans and for Obama and for that I say thank you.

Now lets get on with unity and beating McSame in Novemeber, because the one thing we know for sure is ..YES WE CAN!

Obama '08!!!

Peace - Stephanie.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

HRC Supporters need to calm down

By Andrew - Jun 8th, 2008 at 12:36 pm EDT

I spent a productive afternoon today cruising hillaryclinton.com's blog space to get a feel for the pulse of Clinton's die-hard supporters.

It doesn't look good.

90% of the latest comments were variations on "McCain in '08, Clinton in '12," "BHO is a fraud," "Obama scares me," etc. Those who pointed out the obvious, that both Democrats varied actually very little on the issues and blindly supporting McCain would be a slap in the face ot their own interests, were shot down as trolls and Obama infiltrators.

I guess the moral of all this is that Obama has a long way to go to win over these embittered Hillary supporters. Granted, the Internet isn't an entirely accurate tool to guage how they feel, since it by its nature represents only the most devoted of the bunch. But I doubt that they can be written off aths people who wouldn't have supported Obama anyway. I'm looking forward to some joint Clinton/Obama outreach this summer to show a united front against the kind of ignorance reigning over those posts.

Also, it's important that Obama supporters show their best face too. None of this being rude business or namecalling, especially since Obama himself is kind of the namecaller's dream.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (6) | Report Objectionable Content

Looking to November 4, 2008

By TheBlaqueProfessor - Jun 7th, 2008 at 5:40 pm EDT

Also listed in: Florida For Obama

History has been made. The first African American presidential nominee for the Democratic party has been determined. But the fight is not over. John McCain, whose policies, for the most part, mirror GWBush's, is going to play hard and dirty. With Sen. Clinton's backing, Sen. Obama stands a good chance to win the White House. I'm happy beyond words that this first leg is over, but am certainly afraid of the outcome for Americans if McCain should win because he played the religious, race, or experience cards, none of which are legitimate. I hope that the women who supported Sen. Clinton so vehemently were not in her camp for the sake of gender, but rather for the sake of national policy. If the former is true, they were probably Republicans anyway; but if the latter is true, I just don't see how the could flip to the Republican party and feel good about themselves as women because the first right they will loose is the right to choose what happens with and inside of their own bodies. So ladies, let's join together and support Barack Obama. His skin, name, and age don't matter. His policies, which, for the most part, are the same as Hillary Clinton's, are what matters.

FIRED UP AND READY TO GO. LET'S MAKE THIS CHANGE, FOR ALL AMERICANS' SAKE. YES WE CAN!!

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Page 1 of 7 | Next | Last

Posts

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.