It was painful to sit and listen to the tv commentators after President Obama's new conference last night. They had very little good to say about him and his performance. I thought he did a wonderful job of laying out the issues and explaining what he is trying to do. But to hear the "talking heads" you would think they had been listening to a different news conference altogether. I suppose that I am prejudiced to some extent because I think so closely to the way the President does.
I did feel some discomfort with the comments the President made concerning the unfortunate incident where a black Harvard professor was arrested in his own home. While I understand how it is easy to judge that incident as racially motivated on the surface, I think we all need to know more about the circumstances before we pass judgment on the policeman who arrested him.
If the professor was belligerent and uncooperative about showing his ID, then I would not characterize it necessarily as racial. I have had experience with policemen where they have become threatening to me, a white woman, just for going into the police station to report an accident I was involved in. You would have thought I had threatened one of them! A friend, another white woman, had a similar experience of her own with the police.
I believe that too many policemen are quick to promote a defensive attitude without warrant, and perhaps blacks have seen more of this than whites, but to some extent I think the police attitude comes with the territory of carrying the burden of protecting society. And this is not to excuse the police behavior. I have long thought that we need to train police better as to how to handle themselves when interfacing with the community.
I'm posting this in case other event hosts find it useful. Our event involves volunteers walking around a busy shopping area, inviting people to share their health care stories, and asking them to keep up the pressure on their legislators. Knowing that most people who will be volunteering have not been involved with planning the event, I wanted to provide them with key points ahead of time, and again on the day, so they can be prepared to talk about the key issues. The information contained below has been compiled from OFA conference calls, the President's town hall meeting on health care reform, and info in the public domain.
“CALL FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM” – TALKING POINTS
1) Why do we need reform?
· Forty-six million Americans are uninsured
· Health insurance premiums are growing four times faster than wages
· Half of all personal bankruptcies stem from medical expenses
· We spend at least 50% more than any other advanced country, but we don’t have better outcomes
· The system is already out of whack – costs will go up at least 6-8% per year if nothing is done
2) President Obama has called for health care reform based on three core principles:
· REDUCE COSTS
- Rising health care costs are crushing families, businesses, and government
- 1/3 of what we pay for is unnecessary
- The President is committed to achieving reform without adding to the deficit – this is possible
· GUARANTEE CHOICE
- Every American must have the freedom to choose their plan, doctor, and hospital, and a public insurance option
- A health insurance exchange, with a public health option, would give people that are currently without health insurance the free market buying power they need to obtain adequate health care
- President Obama has consistently said that if a family likes the plan they have, they will be able to keep it
· ACCESS FOR ALL
- All Americans must have access to quality, affordable care
- We need to move from quantity to quality of health care, where doctors are rewarded for health outcomes rather than procedures, and where insurers are regulated on discriminating practices such as pre-existing conditions and cherry-picking healthy patients
3) Why now?
Health care reform can no longer wait. It’s urgent that we act now - Congress is already discussing options for reform and they want to have a plan agreed before their summer recess at the end of July.
After 60 years of trying, and with the American people behind the move, this President will achieve health care reform.
4) Why a public option?
A public option will help drive down costs, expand consumer choice, and keep insurance companies honest. According to a New York Times/CBS News poll, 72% of Americans want the choice of a public health insurance plan.
This event was organized by private citizens and grassroots organizers in the State of Washington that support President Obama efforts at health care reform. We are a group of independent citizens who have come together because we are concerned about our health care system. We are not affiliated with or coordinated by the Democratic Party or Organizing for America.
I just filled out the Organizing For America (OFA) questionnaire, and in the comment section I suggested the following:
Once a week, OFA should email to its members a roundup of counter-arguments against the conservative talk show misinformation and agitprop.
So, when my neighbor confronts me with some rant that he heard on Fox news, I'll have a tidy counterargument at my disposal that matches what other progressives (the President included) are saying to counter the same piece of criminal bloviation. Helpful little tactics from the Karl Rove playbook -- frame the story and stay on topic.
I think this might be a more persuasive alternative to the often emotional but not too convincing arguments I see in media outlet "Comments" pages. No?
Thanks, President Obama, for doing the right thing.
(http://www.cyclopsvue.blogspot.com)
In speaking with people about the president’s Economic Recovery Plan, a common question from both supporters and detractors is: “Has the government ever succeeded in something like this?” As a person with degrees in both Economics and History I can state confidently that there have been several times in recent history where something like the current plan has succeeded in reversing our country’s economic fortunes. Perhaps the one example that best illustrates the point is the post World War II example of the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, or GI Bill.
As World War II was drawing to a close President Roosevelt and many of our nation’s leaders faced a daunting challenge: what will happen when more than 15 million soldiers, sailors, and airmen get laid off from their jobs at a time when demand for the industrial goods produced by war time industry collapses? The country had faced a similar crisis after World War I, and lack of action had led to the veterans’ “Bonus March” of 1932, and contributed to the depth of the Great Depression. Social upheaval and economic collapse were a very realistic fear!
Harry W Colmery, a former Republican National Committee chairman, was one of the earliest proponents of a government program to mitigate the effects of the war’s end on the economy. Warren Atherton of the American Legion greatly influenced the content of the bill, and Arizona Democratic Senator Ernest W McFarland guided the legislation through Congress. So, the bill had initial support by the minority party, was greatly influenced by a “special interest group,” and was championed by the majority party! The Economic Recovery Plan also enjoyed initial support from Republicans, but largely managed to escape special interest input because the speed in which it was passed, and ended up having to be passed by the Democrats with little support from the minority party.
The main parts of the bill were provisions for college or vocational training, and one year of unemployment benefits for returning service men. So, it invested in our future by creating a more educated and skilled work force while deferring many people’s entry into the work force, and provided immediate help to the unemployed. Subsequent legislation, after the war including the Employment Act of 1946, and various programs aimed at making home ownership a practical goal for most families also had a stimulative economic effect. The Marshall Plan, with its buy American provisions did as much to bolster our economy as it did to rebuild Europe.
While our challenges after World War II were brought on by different circumstances, they were similar to the problems we face today: industry that needs to be retooled, a collapse of world wide demand caused by the inability of consumers to pay, a surge of suddenly unemployed workers, all of which is happening after years of deficit spending by the federal government. The actions that the United States took spurred demand across our economy by directing government spending into programs that created long lasting value for our nation. The Economic Recovery Plan has exactly the same goal.
Our country’s reaction to the economic challenge that it faced after World War II was hugely successful and can largely be credited with creating the middle class that became, and remains, the main economic driver in the U.S. economy. Our country eventually had to stop deficit spending, and bring forth a balanced budget when the economy got to a stable point, but it can be said that government fiscal (spending) policy has a long and mostly successful history as a tool for dealing with economic hardship. President Obama’s Economic Recovery Plan, like the GI Bill, is aimed at solving a problem BEFORE it gets out of hand. History says that it can work, and it is worthy of our enthusiastic support.
I haven't blogged here in ages, too busy on the cyberspace front lines, LOL But I did want to share this in light of all of the Joe the Plumber spin going around today.
If you have not already seen it, PLEASE watch Obama's total unedited conversation with Joe, it is awesome!!!! Go Obama! You may want to email it to all you know to fight the republican spin which is VERY WRONG as you will see:http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=6031110
I'm looking forward to 11/4/08 and I hope it will be the beginning to a long relationship with all of you wonderful Obama supporters!
Based on independent research, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html and others, it looks as if, under Obama's tax plan, if you make between $251,000 and $603,000 that your taxes will not go up. The won't go down, but they won't go up - which is really, really important.
If this is true, then why isn't he highlighting it? Why does he say in EVERY debate that taxes won't be increased if you make under 250,000...why doesn't he say under 603,000...a number I have NEVER heard him use.
At the moment, the perception is that if you make over $250k that you will be taxed and it is scaring off undecided and independe voters. It is also making voters question the fairness of his tax plan. I think this would be far more effective in relieving the fears of the upper middle class if he used the $603k figure rather than the $250k benchmark.
Any insight on this strategy or is the data wrong?
Yesterday, Oct. 4, was my fifth week canvassing door to door for the Obama campaign. It has been a richly rewarding experience. One reward is the feeling of being part of history, of making change in America. No matter who wins on Election Day, our political landscape has already been altered by this campaign.
Talking face to face with voters is a lot more fun than I ever expected it would be. Once I got the hang of it, that is. The first time I tried to persuade a voter who was leaning toward McCain, I tried to recite the canned talking points on my walk sheet. Big mistake. I didn't even convince myself, much less the voter. After that, I ditched the talking points and followed the walk sheet's advice: Tell the voter why you are supporting Barack Obama. That led to fruitful conversations. I don't know if I have actually convinced anyone to vote for Obama, but I think I've put the case for Obama forward to several people more convincingly than a barrage of 30-second campaign spots could.
It's wonderful to find Obama supporters at the door, especially in my very conservative hometown. And it can even be interesting to find McCain supporters. I've only encountered one really rude voter. Some of the McCain voters are fearful; you can sense that they're afraid of hearing anything that you might say. Others are bold and secure. I had one extended conversation with a McCain supporter, and while we predictably failed to convince each other, we were able to debate amiably and without partisan bitterness, which is part of the change I am hoping Obama can bring about. We need to bury Rove-ism and bring back spirited but unspiteful, unrancorous debate between our parties.
But one of the best things about canvassing has little to do with politics. It's just getting to know your neighbors. I've encountered old friends who I haven't seen in years or decades. I'm getting to know both the beautiful and the ugly parts of my town better than ever. And I've made new friends at Democratic HQ as well as reconnecting with old ones. I am very glad I've been a part of this.
I stated a few days ago that Gov. Palin was likely to totally hang herself durring the debate and I was wrong about that... sort of. I think that Gov. Palin was successfull last night in what she set out to do which was to assure her base that she was not a TOTAL baffoon. That she did. To her credit, she did about the best job she was capable of doing last night. It was still FAR too little to prove to the country that she is ready to lead. Mr. Biden, however, deserves a great deal of praise for his performance. He was eloquent, reserved and likable.
What struck me as brutally obvious was how Palin constantly dodged questions and refered back to her well known talking points. The main platform issue that she seemed to focus on was energy policy. This makes sense as she comes from an energy state. Energy is an important subject, but as someone that apears to support the energy companies as much as she does, I just can't trust that she wouldn't pander to them while further harming the American public.
-Greg
Often in a debate as critical as last evenings, once the smoke clears and the insta-polls are put away, conventional wisdom sets in and a narrative develops about one or both of the candidates. The clear narrative last night was that John McCain was: condescending, rude, belittling, - in short an angry old man.
If you will recall it was similar narrative that developed after the first Bush-Gore debate. And Gore over-corrected himself in the second debate and came across even worse in the process. I GUARANTEE YOU that if the narrative from last night's debate becomes that McCain are all of the things I mention above. He WILL HAVE TO ADJUST and doing so will only make things worse for him because his base will cry foul for not being the a$#hole they love and the independents will become even further turned off.
THIS IS WHERE YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE - WE MUST BOMBARD THE BLOGOSPHERE - Daily Kos, Politico, The Caucus, MSNBC First Read, The Page, Swampland etc. - with comments about how McCain behaved. Between our efforts and what I hope is a SNL skit that drives the point home -- we have the power to shape the narrative.
NOW GET TO WORK!!!!!!
-Jim
Pointedly to the camera audience with a sideways glance at Palin:
"...and when you're President, you'll find you can't say 'timeout...I'm still studying up on that issue'".
Use of LANGUAGE is the KEY to winning this election. Obama is blowing it.
SOUNDBITES HE NEEDS: I WILL MAKE YOU SAFE. WE ARE FIGHTING ECONOMIC TERRORISM, HEALTHCARE TERRORISM.AMERICANS ARE TERRORIZED EVERYDAY. I FIGHT TO MAKE YOUR LIVES EASIER.
A great speech is forgotten when day after day while campaigning he uses WEAK verbs, the words maybe and probably and I think" ---as the bedrock of his language. Examine his response to freddie/Frannie mac scandal. He said, "it would be unacceptable to.." Just say "IT IS UNACCEPTABLE."
He wants to discuss the "ISSUES." DO NOT. THE WORD ITSELF CONJURES NOTHING ON A FEELING OR INTELLECTUAL LEVEL. SAY AMERCIANS ARE AFRAID. AMERCIANS ARE DESPERATE FOR JOBS.
FOR GOD SAKE, DO NOT PRAISE MACAIN AS A WAR HERO OR SAY HIS SERVICE IS LEGENDARY. He 's not your grandpa.
I worry that Obama is self destructive. It's not gracious or even politically savvy. It's fear. At this point, to refer to McCain is to take attention off of himself. Obama is supposed to be FIGHTING for himself ,instead he HONORS the guy who is BEATING him up.
HE IS THROWING AWAY VALUABLE SECONDS THAT COULD BE USED IN A SOUND BITE.
SOUNDBITES HE NEEDS:
I WILL MAKE YOU SAFE. WE ARE FIGHTING ECONOMIC TERRORISM, HEALTHCARE TERRORISM.AMERICANS ARE TERRORIZED EVERYDAY. I FIGHT TO MAKE YOUR LIVES EASIER.
He wants to discuss the "ISSUES." DO NOT USE THE WORD. THE WORD ITSELF CONJURES NOTHING ON A FEELING OR INTELLECTUAL LEVEL.
SAY AMERCIANS ARE AFRAID. AMERCIANS ARE DESPERATE FOR JOBS.
FOR GOD SAKE, DO NOT PRAISE MACAIN AS A WAR HERO OR SAY HIS SERVICE IS LEGENDARY.
Why is the Obama camp not getting on the offense?
I am not a citizen of this country yet and therefore not allowed to vote - but I've been a curious onlooker following this election cycle since the beginning of this year. I've read the blogs, the comments people put in but never reacted to it. However, at this juncture in the election I feel compelled to put in my own 2 cents.
As someone looking to be a part of this country, I feel that I also have a stake in this country and in this election. Now, I don't say that I support Obama's policies a 100% but I do see him offering solutions to the problems we face...some very common sensical ones. What I find horribly missing from the Republican ticket is the talk of any solution....apart from talking against earmarks and his support for the surge I hardly see McCain offering any substantive change/solution for "The Common Man".
I do understand that as D-Day nears the attacks get more vicious and farther from the truth and in McCain's case farther away from the issues. However, it is the ability of the opposing team to respond to those attacks and launch some of its own... that is the key to winning elections. It is appalling how relatively slow the Democratic ticket has been in taking M-P to task. Palin is new and there is a glamour/novelty factor attached to her, which is understandable. What is not understandable is her making her case with half-truths and the Obama - Biden ticket not calling her out more forcefully on that. Talking once about her stand on earmarks and saying the 'L-word' doesn't make it a forceful response.
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHY THE DEMOCRATS ARE NOT SHOUTING FROM THE ROOFTOPS ABOUT:
1. What specific change does John want from the Bush policies he's supported 90% of the time?
2. Palin thinks Climate change is not man-made
3. McCain has opposed minimum wage increases more than you can count
4. Palin opposes abortion even in cases of Rape & Incest
5. Supporting the surge doesn't make the war right in the first place and the expensive price we are still paying for it. Throw in the millions pumped in Iraq everyday
6. Call Palin out on her support to the Bridge to Nowhere, not selling the jet on eBay for profit but for a loss to a private company, her taking earmarks before opposing them for political convenience
7. Talk about Palin charging Taxpayers for staying in her own house, Troopergate
Bring the focus back on issues, debunk their attacks quickly, bring their records/beliefs in focus and attack them for not proposing any solutions - DO IT EVERYDAY, EVERY SPEECH, EVERY SURROGATE, WITH BARACK OBAMA & JOE BIDEN TAKING THE LEAD
So far it looks that the Huffingtonpost is doing a better job than Obama-Biden on this front!!!
So If Ms Palin sayed "No Thank You" to the bridge, ask her when she is going to give the money back to the American People.
The Republicans in my state (Washington) always want to give budget surplus back to the people so Sarah Palin should want to do the same.... right?!
Let's see her put her states money where her mouth is.
John McCain is unfit to be president. His heroic resistance to torture has been amply awarded with more medals than he ever flew missions and the fact remains he lost 5 aircraft and graduated 5th from the bottom of his class at Annapolis.
Counter the RNC acceptance speeches by acknowleging and praising them as winsome politicians with great American-dream histories of their own. BUT point out that neither their misrepresentations nor their promises add up -- for example, their economic plan is not supported by their arithmetic. The $16 billion McCain can save on stopping congress's beloved earmarks would not cover the $3 trillion that his-tax cuts-for-the-rich would cost in just the first 3 years (NYTimes).
In fact, we would like to see ANY arithmetic supporting any of McCain's promises. As for misrepresenting Obama's history or goals, it's easy to belittle something as foreign to the Republicans as being a true political servant by organizing instead of grabbing a high salary after being head of the Harvard Law Review. They just can't understand service in action versus slogan, or the difficult arithmetic necessary to reform health insurance, or to prevent taxpayer bailouts of rich gamblers who avoid regulation and transparency.
Their own confusion and lack of numbers to back up their promises makes their criticisms hollow. Your reported plan to say they are just more Bush league is too abstract and repetitive and is already as worn out as 'change we can believe in'. You need something more specific like above.Good luckJane Atwood
Here's the bottom line. If John McCain is so great this time around at the tender age of 72, then why couldn't he secure the nomination in 2000 when he was only a precocious 64? If he's so "Outside of the Beltway," then why are so many inside the beltway suddenly so proud to have someone that was bold enough to disagree with them?
America simply isn't impressed with the antics of a career politician that is waking up so late in the game. The Palin choice is a revelation of John McCain's archaic thinking: John McCain wants to buy your votes since he can't earn them the way Hillary did. Neither McCain or Palin can speak on the ability to change Washington with the same conviction Barack did on his historical night. And that is for a very practical, serious, and tangible reason. McCain is a maverick only in the arena of insider politics, but when it comes to old school methods, he is the king of kings.
But that is not the era we live in. John McCain has tried to apply the "Shake and Bake" method to the politics that he is long since familiar. Apply a fresh coat of paint, and sell you the same old broken house. That's their strategy. To me, the RNC is like a really boring church. No one wants to go to it, and the congregation will instead look for a preacher that really knows how to rally the troops. A preacher that sounds off on the things that really affect you will get you worked up to a new level of frenzy. Perhaps a truly joyous state.
Rejected in 2000, but accepted in 2008? What's with that?
This is a day and age where we need real solutions to real problems. Not a lather, rinse, repeat talking points guide to all things theoretical. Not just displays of character and attacks on the other party's candidate. Abortion, Gay Marriage, War, Oil. That is the entirety of the Republican platform. Nothing else. It doesn't even matter what issues actually face the nation. They don't know what the economy even is!
So long as the Dow Jones is above 11,000, the economy is doing okay, right?
Since America is currently 0-1 in the war against terrorism, they think that they can simply avoid all the other issues issues and that we'll believe that they know what's best for our country?
They are running the same campaign that John Kerry ran in 2004. Just then starting to realize the need to abandon our Oil dependency. Just then starting to realize the impact of Global Warming. Just then starting to realize the importance of the election. Remember the outcome of that one? This is now. The 2008 Republican National Convention is a joke, and the American Voting Public is tired of being insulted.
This is an excerpt from my DailyKos Diary. I'm gonna use this to feed traffic there, please. My aim is to keep it recommended, so as many people see it as possible and also so the embedded video goes viral. It is essentially Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanon, openly mocking Sarah Palin's qualifications for VP saying, "That... will... not... work." They are just laughing at her.
Problem, just moments later, Palin is announced and within hours, Buchanon is making the rounds of the talking heads show to crow about what a "brilliant" pick this is. It's a blatant look at the GOP message machine, how quickly they change their tunes.
This is perfect antithesis to the GOP talking points that have obviously made the rounds in the last few days.
I would recommend you forward this to everyone. If they are right-leaning, trying being a little stealthy, use a subject line like "Buchanon (or Scarborough) on Palin" since they're likely to watch it then.
Please click on my Kos blog and recommend if you have a sign in. Please click the "Digg" link too.
The video is here
