Well tonight I did some calling for Barack. The online system is great. Connecting with real people out of the blue is a fairly unpredictable pursuit. I spoke to a Republican who for voting for Barack, and I spoke to someone I thought was a Democrat who wouldn't tell me who he voted for because he thought I might be a shill for McCain. What I liked most about the experience was the ease of participation. Anyone can make a contribution from anywhere with a network connection even if you have a limited amount of time. There are a ton of reasons I want Barack Obama to win this election, most of which are written in other blogs posted here. One reason that isn't being discussed often enough is how extensively the mechanisms of democracy will have changed if he wins. Anyone can call or knock, anyone can blog, anyone can set up their own event. Technology is really making "by the people for the people" actually possible.
What intrigues me most about this angle of the campaign is what you do to harness all of this participation after such a revolutionary candidate gets elected. It seems to me that you would want to leverage all of these tools and more to make participation both online and in person a central premise of what it means to be an American. Barack's campaign is testament to the fact that many of us have a lot to contribute and will happily do so if the methods to do so are straightforward and provide feedback on how to make a difference.
Here's hoping this innovation in democracy continues......
I think everyone who cares about this country understands that some significant changes and sacrifices are going to be necessary to correct the issues we face. With that thought in mind, it is not sufficient for the next president to merely “win”. In order to get things done it will be important that a vast majority of the population be behind the leadership and that the executive and congressional branches are aligned. Quite frankly, like many “independents” I would normally prefer that there be checks and balances between the various branches of government but just as the Republicans have chosen to nationalize the banking system I feel now is not the time to have leaders second guessing one another. I just hope everyone remembers why they were elected.
For this reason, supporters of Barack Obama cannot let up in the final days and must continue to help the undecided understand why they need to support him.
The Obama Campaign has launched a visionary project to get people in communities together and talking. The effort is called “Listening to America” and the basic idea is that the people (yes, we the people) should have an integral part in defining the Platform of the Democratic Party for the next four years.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/listening/
Every four years both parties develop a platform. A platform is a document that outlines or summarizes the party’s stand on various issues. Essentially it’s a mission statement for the party and their vision for the future and, particularly the next four years.
When I heard about it I thought immediately what a fabulous idea. Being the nerd I am, I jumped at the chance to participate. I signed up as a host and selected the topic of Energy & the Environment. Each host may choose to select their topic differently, but I felt that if I selected the topic ahead of time, I would get attendees wanting to discuss that topic instead of trying to agree upon one topic from the multitudes available. I reserved a meeting room at the library and publicized the event to my family, friends and through the Obama website.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/4gw5h
We met Wednesday night and I had a blast. The goal was to develop a “plank” for the platform as a group after discussion and consensus. It was such an interesting experience. My husband Mike, my sister Leslie, my mother-in-law Sarah and I went and were joined by 9 others from the community – only one of which I knew. It was great to meet people in the community that share the same concerns you do, but not necessarily the same ideas. We had 5 democrats, 1 republican and 7 independents in the room and I don’t think anyone felt they were not included or heard.
After two hours of discussion and drafts, we came up with a rough draft of our plank…which I have to then distill down to a readable form and submit through the Obama website. The experience was energizing and positive and I just felt so good walking out after we were done (we closed the library down!).
The best part of all of this? That we even had the opportunity to participate meaningfully. That our participation was second to talking to my neighbors and making lasting connections. That despite difference in ideas, we share many of the same concerns. That service feels good and is expected again. That the Obama campaign gave us a stake and brought us together and asked for our ideas.
As Obama has said numerous times, this is your campaign. He’s built his campaign on $25 dollar donations (I know first hand as Mike and I give $25 a month) from millions of people. Barack Obama doesn’t just take our money to get elected, he expects ideas and service with it. We the people, by the people and FOR THE PEOPLE.
No matter what happens with this election, politics will never be the same because of Obama. He has changed the paradigm.
Barack Obama will always be my president.
McGovern, former Clinton backer, urges her to drop out
SIOUX FALLS, SD: Former Sen. George McGovern, an early supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, urged her to drop out of the Democratic presidential race and endorsed her rival, Barack Obama.
McGovern said he had no regrets about endorsing Hillary Clinton months ago, [which he did] even before the Iowa caucuses.
"She has run a valiant campaign….but Obama has won the nomination "by any practical test" and is very close to a majority of the pledged delegates.…It's time to unite the Democratic Party. Hillary, of course, will make the decision as to if and when she ends her campaign. But I hope that she reaches that decision soon so that we can concentrate on a unified party capable of winning the White House next November”, he said.
This new endorsement from Mr. McGovern is, of course, encouraging support for our candidate!
Thank you North Carolina, and thank you Obama supporters in the Great Hoosier State!
Hillary Clinton probably won't drop out of course, but with influential support being added almost weekly from honorable statesmen such as Ted Kennedy, Bill Richardson, and now George McGovern, the un-pledged Superdelegates are surely getting the message if they haven't already. I, for one, plan to take the time to contact as many individuals of influence such as John Edwards - as well as uncommitted delegates, and Superdelegates - and ask for their public support for Barack Obama, and I hope you fellow Obama supporters will as well.
Still, the potentially problematic issues that remain unresolved and that concern me are twofold.
First - For some unexplained "reason" there is still the possibility of Hillary Clinton being allowed to change the rules and have Michigan and Florida counted, which change she began clamoring for only when she realized that the groundswell of support for Barack Obama posed a decided threat to her ascension to the throne, excuse me, the Presidency. I know I am not the only person who would be VERY UPSET if that were to occur, and IMHO that would be an extremely DIVISIVE act on the part of those who have the POWER in that arena.
This nomination contest has morphed into an (extended) historic event that, from my perspective, seems not unlike a second Civil War, only one without physical weapons. I deplore the fact that the racial divide in the U.S. remains as wide as this election year is revealing to everyone, not just to people in this country but to people around the world
Secondly - There is the problem of the "association" with one J. Wright, to whom some are determined to keep our collective focus diverted.
Like others, I was stunned and outraged myself when the media circus came to town again and Wright was its star attraction. I don't know beans about public relations, but I am hoping that people who do will get to work disarming the opposition so their continued use of this absurd distortion of the Senator's LOYALTY (which is a virtue, not a vice, the last time I looked) in A PERSONAL, NOT A POLITICAL CONTEXT will be to their disadvantage.
Barack Obama has a heart for people. A person like that is not cutthroat and calculating and is not going to kick someone to the curb just because that person's views DIFFER from his. He is also is intelligent enough to know where boundaries exist in terms of what part of his public service career people are in, and whether they have a part in it at all, especially when it comes to his political office. I have a feeling that he is keenly aware of the separation of church and state.
I saw a page in today’s issue (May 7) of the L.A. Times online this morning, one that featured ONLY politicians and others who are DIRECLY involved in politics. In the most prominent position on that page were the photos of (from left to right): John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and, would you believe, Jeremiah Wright!
Would someone please inform the media that HE IS NOT A POLITICIAN? HE HAS BEEN ENTICED BY THE SENSATIONAL MEDIA (and others whose motives are impure) TO THRUST HIMSELF INTO THE POLITICAL SPOTLIGHT even though he has no place there. Clearly if this man had been as all-inclusively involved in Senator Obama’s life outside of the traditional religious rituals of marriage, baptism, and (basically obligatory) Sunday services, Barack Obama would have observed these attention-seeking aspects in a context outside of his religious activities. But Barack did not have this man as a “bosom buddy”, or an advisor to his political decisions, contrary to what the opposition would like people to believe.
But I insist that Wright be put into context. If the “sins” of the clergy are to be attached to anyone who won’t drop his or her “association” with a person or a church, then every person who, like myself, was baptized and raised as a Catholic “should” be expected to cut their ties with that church when we began to be aware of not only words, but the actions of the now infamous among those clergy. What when JFK and later Bobby Kennedy sought the Presidency? Looking back, if those cases of child molestation by priests had been made public prior to their bids for the highest office of the land, would we have expected JFK, or of Bobby Kennedy to leave the Catholic Church?
If someone who is Catholic wants to become the Presidential nominee in the future, what if, at some point, people learn that his or her priest had molested children, and the candidate-to-be had had that person as a friend? Would we assume that he or she condones pedophilia? How far are some people going to take this “association” thing?
And what of Hillary Clinton’s choice (which, by the way, I agree with) to not end her “association” with ‘that man’ whose actions were definitely immoral when he elected to commit adultery? There were those who criticized Mrs. Clinton for staying in her marital relationship with Bill Clinton even though his actions were illegal - as in sexual harassment - if my understanding of that law is correct. Her association with him goes back quite a number of years, and, if memory serves me, there was at least one other young woman with whom he was, let’s say, inappropriately involved.
When the Lewinsky affair nearly caused the impeachment of Bill Clinton I found the graphic description of their illicit behaviors to be a total embarrassment. I’m sure Hillary Clinton did not agree with what the person with whom she was associated for more than 20 years did, or, for that matter what he said when questioning about the affair began. I found the whole thing distressing and I just wanted it to go away. I find Jeremiah Wright distressing and likewise, I want him to go away and live his life somewhere other than on the political center stage.
Hello America: J. Wright, as well as the lapel pin silliness both need to be relegated to a backwater of our national consciousness, so THE REAL ISSUES THAT ARE PRESSING IN ON US CAN BE DEALT WITH…AND SOON! It's the economy, sweetie. And housing that is affordable at EVERY income level, or homelessness “will be with us always”, and its numbers will swell exponentially. And healthcare, or rather the lack thereof, as I personally know. And education, before America falls even FURTHER BEHIND THE REST OF THE "DEVELOPED" WORLD. And Mr. Bush's war in Iraq which has not made the U.S. safe (or even any safer?) from KNOWN terrorists (not to mention incipient terrorists). Is anybody concerned about the price of food and of gasoline? I don’t care about what someone inconsequential said in the past, I care about what is going to be done in the very near future.
Hillary Clinton IS hanging on in this nomination contest by a slender thread. This FACT has been reported on by credible experts – people who are presumably impartial and who know how to run the numbers. Mr. McGovern's restatement of that numerical reality should be a wake-up call for the wife of the former President. But she wants to win badly; it’s my perception that saving face is more her style than facing facts. But what I and many other Americans want, and will insist upon, is significant change in the way things are done. From where I sit it goes without saying that John McCain won’t take us there…and neither will Hillary Clinton.
My having been inspired – or I should say “fired up” – enough to connect with fellow Americans about this political process and to take the time to WRITE THOUGHTFULLY (a task which had become distasteful to me post-Master's thesis) says a lot about the persuasive nature of Senator Obama's sustained commitment to changing the way things have always been done.
“I don't contribute money to political candidates”, says I, yet I have made modest contributions into Senator Obama’s campaign coffers. “I don't participate in partisan politics”, I add, and I am passionately involved in communicating by phone and in writing about this nomination process to an extent to which I have never before been motivated in any of my MANY years as an adult.
I believe that the participation of ALL Americans is vital at this point in this country's history if the U.S. has any hope of thriving as a nation. I also firmly believe that it is any nation's fatal flaw to fail to include any group that resides among it. In unity there IS strength, and, make no mistake about it: divided we will fall.
We, the people, are the ones who are building the momentum behind the leadership of the ONE CANDIDATE - in the person of BARACK OBAMA - who has the unique combination of abilities that are needed if America is to come up out of the pit into which the past eight years has placed this country.
We stand behind and beside Barack Obama and pledge our support to the HOPE and POSSIBILITY of achieving The Dream that we all have of being a Great Society.
In this MSNBC article, Obama says he "is of two minds about this." Here is the full article, and if you have a strong opinion one way or the other, what should he do?
----BEGIN ARTICLE----
updated 9:27 a.m. ET, Wed., April. 2, 2008
WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama said he is conflicted about whether the U.S. should be a full participant in this summer's Olympics in Beijing because of China's human rights record.
"I am of two minds about this," the Democratic presidential hopeful said in an interview aired Wednesday on CBS' "The Early Show." "On the one hand, I think that what has happened in Tibet, China's support for the Sudanese government in Darfur, is a real problem."
Still, Obama said, "I am hesitant to make the Olympics a site of political protest because I think it's partly about bringing the world together."
Obama also expressed concern about Chinese trade practices.
"I am a strong believer in free trade, but I think that we have not been very savvy negotiators when it comes to China," Obama said. "I think they've played us. They definitely are stealing our intellectual property, and that has direct consequences in terms of the bottom lines for businesses here in the United States."
Tibetans frustrated with Chinese rule rioted in the streets of Lhasa on March 14, and protests then spread to other parts of China. The Chinese government says 22 people died in violence; Tibetan exiles say the violence and a harsh crackdown afterward left nearly 140 people dead.
The events called attention to Beijing's human rights record in the Himalayan region at a time when Chinese leaders had hoped for a peaceful run-up to the Olympics.
On Tuesday, 15 House members urged President Bush to reconsider his decision to attend the Beijing Olympics. Their letter cited the crackdown in Tibet, the Beijing government's close economic ties with the government of Sudan and recent suppression of religious and human rights advocates.
In February, Hollywood director Steven Spielberg withdrew as an artistic adviser to the Olympics' opening and closing ceremonies over China's support for the Sudan government.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
----END ARTICLE----
This is an important issue, as this is one that can direct the human rights issue.
Until later,
EMK
I am old enough to remember or have been involved in presidential elections only since 1992 (I vaguely remember 1984 and 1988). In none of those previous elections were there any significant ways for an average person in Pennsylvania to really be involved throughout the process unless they went to Iowa or New Hampshire or donated a lot of money. I'm not talking about paid campaign people or activists but the people who have busy schedules and need to keep their full time job or kids. The closest a candidate got was about 200 miles away in either Pittsburgh or Philadelphia. Maybe I just was not in touch with the 'right' people but I think there is a significant change this year.
Now I hear neighbors asking when is Obama coming to York, PA as if it is expected he will get to everywhere in the state. The campaign has almost 30 field offices in PA (some all volunteer) and has local teams in almost every township and borough. In my area the Obama organization appears stronger than the Democratic Party's. I understand this is the process that was done in most other states. If this is done in the remaining states because Senator Obama has to compete with Senator Clinton that will make the Obama campaign that much stronger. Seeing the energy in the area I would hate to have North Carolina, Indiana, Puerto Rico, or any of the remaining states not get some of the same attention.
My parents have complained about all the money being spent but I am starting to think that money is refreshing the soul of our country. Everyone is supposed to be involved in the election, participation is part of our civic duty. At least for once money is being spent refreshing something, allowing many more to participate and not just on TV ads, yard signs, and bumper stickers that will be thrown away in November (although there are plenty of those too).
The word is that the organization needs to stay in place for the general election and after Senator Obama becomes the president. I wonder too if the organization will rival what the DNC can do. I get excited thinking that we will empower Senator Obama to actually get things done by continuing to work locally. I am amazed that a leader has appeared who can do all this and is aiming not to conquer the world (like a Hitler, Stalin, or an Emperor) or stamp out other people (like leaders in Serbia, Sudan, etc) or cater to a few special groups or cling to principles without thinking (like George W Bush). That is the real promise of Senator Obama. It will be part of our responsibility to require that future candidates meet his level of integrity.
There is some real work to get done in PA yet and to get to the convention but after the last few weeks, none of the 'problems' I hear from journalists look unsolvable with a smart and honest candidate, strong campaign staff, and deep organization.
We can do better. Fight Fear. Usher in Hope. Yes We Can. Vote Obama.
This is, of course, the message of the Clinton campaign. Hope doesn't pay for $3/gallon gas, hope doesn't pay for medical bills, hope doesn't pay overdue mortgages, hope doesn't fill the prescriptions at the drug store, hope doesn't pay.
Bill Clinton restated this again at a campaign stop where he appealed to supporters for -- you guessed it -- hope. Hope that supporters would vote and attend the caucus Tuesday night, hope that Hillary could hold onto her candidacy via the Alamo, hope that her message would resonate with voters. This, from the man who came from the "town called Hope".
How sad that ambition springs so eternal that the Clinton campaign would be nothing more than a massive effort to tell voters in this nation that the status quo is all that matters, hope is dead, and screw all the people sacrificing time, effort, money and talent to get that hope message heard, because what really matters is 'experience'.
On the other hand, participating in the process makes all the difference.
Believe it or not, that's the first thought that popped into my head this morning, when I remembered the 100+ calls I promised myself that I'd make on behalf of the campaign today.
Not that long ago, I'd have resented that prospect (in fact, I'd have resisted the whole concept) at my core: forcing myself to "bother" people by phone on behalf of a political campaign. It would've seemed too much like being an unpaid telemarketer, I would have assumed at the time.
And everybody knows that everybody hates telemarketers, paid or not.
But something funny happened to me on my way to the phone this morning.
It started about a week before the February 5th Arizona primary, in fact: way back when (at least it seems way back when, now) a month or so ago: I attended a Barack Obama rally at Veterans Memorial Coliseum in Phoenix with my daughter Sara—and 14,000 or so of our now-close, like-minded friends that we hadn't yet met.
Then, in between explaining to Sara how and why the excitement generated by Barack's campaign reminds me of nothing so much as Bobby Kennedy's 1968 campaign, I realized that this campaign is fueled by the same faith — that we really can make a difference in determining the direction and destiny of our country And it asks each of us the very same question: Will we?
That was approximately the same moment that I remembered something that once seemed both crucial and obvious — but which I somehow managed to forget (or stopped wanting to remember) amid the disappointment and disillusionment I felt following the assassinations of both Martin and Bobby: That truly answering that question requires something more of us all than simply voting.
It always starts with (and centers around) hope, as Barack reminds us, but it also requires as much commitment and participation as each of us can create and sustain as citizen-subjects in the most noble political experiment ever attempted in this world: the democratic process.
That's why I started this blog with a statement that may seem to many to be such an heretical proposition — especially in the context of this reawakened citizen-activist's first blog entry at www.BarackObama.com.
Still, I hope, at least, it helps explain why I’m here and why I’m writing this — and why I need to stop writing, PDQ: Because my single vote in Arizona on February 5th really didn’t make that much difference.
On the other hand, the canvassing I did — door-to-door in my neighborhood and others, in the days after the Phoenix rally and before the Arizona primary — talking to voters, did make a difference, and a bigger one, at that.
And the calls I’ve made since, as one citizen-participant in this still-noble experiment of democracy to hundreds of my fellow citizens, has made an even bigger difference, still.
Which reminds me: I’ve got calls to make — in Rhode Island and Ohio and Texas and Vermont — while there's still time and still a difference to be made.
In fact, if you’d like to join me — and few hundred or thousand people like me — please feel free to do that.
After all, there literally are millions of people waiting to be reminded that yes, we can make it to the mountaintop — and it's still not too late to seek (and help shape) a newer, better world.
Hello,
I've coined a phrase (and an accompanying social website) that makes the point clear and simple for voters comparing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama: Hope Against The Machine.
Hillary and her posse are part (and masters) of "the machine" -- machine Democrats. Not that there's anything morally wrong with this, but it's definitely a defining characteristic of the Clintons approach to politics. The brilliant aspect of Obama's campaign is that he is finally giving voters a clear choice: Do we want hope that we can make things better, or continue to feed the machine that is in the business of keeping things the way they are?
Are we OK with the risks of politics as usual,or are we willing to take another kind of risk: a risk that there is a better way of doing things in and for this great country? In other words, do we believe in hope? And can hope itself be the power that challenges the machine?
All indications point to YES!
So, please join the conversation and submit your best ideas to (and vote for ideas you like) http://HopeAgainstTheMachine.com. It's a DIGG-style site where anyone can register to either vote for a great idea already posted or submit their own idea for publication.
This approach to idea management is in line with Obama's message: We are the change we've been looking for!
With a campaign motto of "Respect, Empower, Include", we need a Community page that encourages interaction, and allows us to better view the creative content produced by everyone (eg, a Yahoo style homepage, with ratings/rankings/most viewed that float good content up to the top, selectable categories--Rapid Response, Latest News, Policies, Campaign Strategy, Canvassing, etc).
With hundreds of thousands of participants, I'm certain that you would harvest MANY campaign changing ideas. Also by walking the talk, and providing a forum for change to happen bottom up, and for people to contribute the very best of their talent (yes, I know canvassing, calling, and donating are key--but hey, I went to college with Mark Penn, and would love to put my PhD to use to beat him in this one). We need to better utilize the mass of talent we have who are passionate about contributing what they can. think of all the attorneys, speechwriters, community organizers, ministers, teachers, policemen, computer professionals, etc who could contribute expertise. Could you add a wiki style community portal, along with at least occasional interaction with top staff responding to the best content that emerges from this process. there are so many widgets we could add that could be useful, fun, and occasionally, very impactful--eg, polls.
David
