Worked: I contributed the cost of 200 color reproductions of the original Pledge form, which 1) made the Event look official, 2) the 'brand' elicited a positive emotional response, & 3) it made each potential signer feel special. Included in my Feedback to OFA is a proposed mechanism whereby supporters can contribute bulk-print materials to local Events. In the meantime, see if a supporter who can't physically attend the Event might instead perhaps choose to contribute in this way.
Worked: I contributed the cost of a printing shop to create 6x9 color cards of Fairey's red/blue/cream portrait off Google Image, this version with PROGRESS at the foot, selecting the thickest laminate material which doubled the cost, but this way a true Collectable was created, which could be stood-up rather than filed away and boxed. We called them an Office Toy, to stand up on one's desk/bookshelf. My cost was $250 for merely QTY 35, but one of my Event signs said: 'First 35 Pledges get one of these!' and they were extremely popular and motivating. I will try to do the same at future Events because word/envy will spread in the community, creating motivation for new people to attend upcoming Obama Events. If you like the idea, see if you know someone who might want to contribute a give-away like this to your event.
Worked: We taped to a pole near our Event table my standing cardboard life-sized Obama. I had a paper taped above him: "Good Day! Do you support me?" and another light-hearted sign to the side "Free cell pics!" This was very popular and helped identify our group in front of a busy market, even to folks driving by.
Worked: We printed color-text signs and taped them up on a poster next to my life-sized Obama: 'Those who resist Progress are the guardians of the Status Quo'; 'Rebuild and Renew for a Century of Progress!'; 'Show your Support! Will you sign this Pledge now?'; and a final one with green large-fonted 'Energy', 'Health Care', and 'Education', each followed by the Pledge verbiage. This allowed passers-by to get the message, too.
Then, we were wow one of the Events Nationwide that was covered by the media (NBC News/MSNBC) and in their news rotation for that evening and I am soo glad I brought out all the bells and whistles. Some of us are already figuring to do it again next Sat, at another populous location in a progressive area. There's no reason we can't keep doing this semi-regularly. As opposition to him builds, President Obama will need every committed supporter we can bring on board.
I think what I dislike most about Sarah Palin and John McCain is the ease with which they mislead or outright lie to their audiences. Surely, they and their advisors know the truth about various issues that are being discussed in the television and print media and Online. Still, you will hear them say in their rallies, as I did just now with Sarah Palin in Iowa, that Obama voted to raise taxes for people making $40,000 a year and that he wants to take away your hard earned money and "dole" it out to those who don't pay taxes. (Leaving out the fact that those who earn so little that they don't pay income taxes, still have to pay property taxes and sales taxes on necessities, including gas for their cars and taxes and fees on their phones.) Notice the verb 'dole' being used to suggest welfare.
In her closing set of repetitive questions on do you want a politician or a leader, she asked, "Do you want a politician who won't disavow a group that has committed voter registration fraud or do you want a leader who won't tolerate it?" She knows that this question implies that Obama supports voter fraud and that the average voter may not know the difference between voter registration fraud (which doesn't affect the vote) and voter fraud which does. She hopes that most people will not know that McCain has praised (quite deservedly) the ACORN group for its efforts to register voters who have been neglected in the past. She does exactly what has given politicians a bad name. She distorts the facts. She omits needed information for discovering the truth. And, worst of all, she lies! McCain does it, too.
The polls suggest that voters are catching on to their antics. What I have to wonder, though, is why so little has been made of the verdict that she 'abused the power of her office' in Alaska. I also wonder why newspeople don't clarify McCain's frequent boasting that she is "the most popular governor in the United States" which suggests that all governors were compared with each other, as in a beauty contest, and she won the most votes from American citizens of all states. He should be reminded that by recent polls her popularity has gone down from 80% to 68% in Alaska, which by now must put her below the popularity rating of other governors in their states and that she no doubt achieved the high rating because she mandated that some of the huge revenues from the oil companies be divided among Alaska's citizens. So, everyone gets a personal check each year instead of that money being used to pay for needed improvements in Alaska. Then, those improvements become 'earmarks' for the budget of the whole country.
From accusing Obama of saying he wanted to 'attack' Pakistan, inferring that saying he would meet with leaders of foreign countries without preconditions meant he would not make careful preparations before such meetings, suggesting that he gave into Putin after the Russia/Georgia conflict just because he first suggested that both sides should show restraint, insisting that Obama's plan for removing the troups from Iraq would not be done carefully and with consideration of concurrent conditions in that country, to saying he has not worked across the aisle in the Senate are just a few of the bits of disinformation that McCain and Palin include in their interviews and rallies across this nation. (May I never have a reason for such a long sentence again!}
Perhaps, we should all get the e-mail addresses of our newspeople and demand that they make these things clear as they use OUR airwaves to inform us. One more thing to work on!!! I must add that there are a few places we can get honest information: Air America and Pacifica Radio, C-SPAN, PBS with Bill Moyers, and frequently on MSNBC with Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow.
To answer Governor Palin's question: I want leaders that tell the truth when they know it and admit it when they have made mistakes or have been wrong. It's not an either or situation.
Now, back to my calls for the Obama campaign!
I'm Breeze Bryson and I approve this message! 10/25/08
(the Mass Appeal lie) by: Shade Law (all rights reserved) From “The Reverse Neuro-Linguistic Programming Internet Series” ©2003- 2008
Embattled are we the people from the Government. Embattled are we the people, from laws with no spirit or heart. Embattled are we the people on the Net, from not only TOS, but hidden laws that make no common sense... which incorporate less Spirit with no Balance of good common sense and Heart. Embattled are we the people,....
for more please visit... http://xrayyoursoul1.wetpaint.com/page/What+do+you+believe+in%3F
I was absolutely HORRIFIED to read in the Huffington Post that the slanderous robocalls that accuse Barack Obama of working closely with terrorists that kill Americans are coming from Brooklyn.
This past week, Shoff, a Freeborn, Minnesota Democratic County Commissioner, received the Hollywood call while at work. Because state law dictates that any such calls be made by an actual human, Shoff demanded that he be connected to the supervisor. That official, who worked at the robocall shop King TeleServices in (Red Hook) Brooklyn, New York, said that they had been contracted out by FLS-Connect.Officials with King TeleServices did not respond to messages seeking comment.Asked about the connection to King TeleServices, a receptionist for FLS relayed a message from her supervisors that implicitly acknowledged that they have been working on behalf of the Arizona Republican: "If it is having to do with the McCain campaign or the RNC, you will have to direct your question to them."
Post your interest, ideas, suggested date, time, here, or email me at clarknt67ATnycDOTrrDOTcom
Scott Wooledge
Only five newspapers -- the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune -- are traveling regularly with Obama and John McCain.--Howard Kurtz
The rest were gutting their newsrooms even before the financial meltdown.
I understand the calm, cool strategy the campaign is pursing and I'm quite impressed by the steadiness by which the S.S. Obama is being steered, especially when it came to dealing with the wildcard of the race: Sarah Palin. Overall, I think the strategy in dealing with Palin and the media so far has been a net positive for Obama. In the weeks following McCain's hastily made choice of a running mate, the Obama campaign wisely ignored her and resisted fueling the media fire around her. That may have worked in some regard, but enough time has passed that the sparkle that surrounds Palin has faded, but so have the memories of her ridiculous answers to basic reporter questions and the controversy about her selection and her past. Now her positive ratings are too high to ignore, and much of that is due to the way the media glorifies her Joe-Six-Pack appeal and adorable way of side-stepping questions. She energized her base, but fortunately for us, she is not well liked by independant and swing voters. From what I am hearing, the big question for many of those voters who have not committed their vote for one party or another is whether or not Palin is acceptable enough to let them still vote for McCain.
Sarah Palin is easily the most controversial and divisive figure to enter Presidential politics in years. However, it appears that the television media has applied a policy of self-containment when discussing that issue, and only discusses topics which the political campaigns brings up through releases, speeches or in interviews with surrogates. Today's main stream media, particularly the cable news networks other than Fox, are paranoid of those who strive to label all those who do not support a strict right-wing ideology as "Liberal Media" so it seems they overcompensate by avoiding policy analysis or any real journalism....they just discuss what the campaigns want them to discuss. In the absence of new topics to discuss from either campaign, the talking heads resort to fluff and tabloid-like topics because they feel people are more interested in being entertained than being informed. What Palin wears is discussed more often than her shaky record on ethics. The reporters look bored and want something juicy to chew on....and it would be a welcome releif if that chew-toy wasn't a listing of everyone Obama ever knew and seemed objectionable.
Because the Obama campaign has ignored Palin she has hereto received a free pass on her involvement with the AIP, the anti-semitic slant taken by her mayoral race, troopergate, etc...and McCain has largely gotten a pass by the media for his risky, Hail Mary choice of someone who could be the next president based on a meeting and a phone call. You can avoid bringing up her church issues and still cut down her claims of being a "reformer" (who was found to have abused her power for personal gain) or being patriotic (supporting a secessionist organization that hates the government is not exactly "patriotic"). At some point the Obama campaign surrogates should suck out the wind from the McCain/Palin sails by going after Palin (and McCain's lack of judgement for picking her) in some capacity. Even Fox News sometimes feels the need to cover official campaign announcements for fear that their viewers may look behind the "fair-and-balanced" curtain and find out that the network has a very specific political agenda, so I think we need to give the news anchors, radio show hosts, and all forms of talking heads something more interesting to talk about than the BS about Ayers and Wright.
Just firing a shot across the bow through surrogates or a press release could spur conversation and would at least make sure that the Troopergate findings that came out Friday are not already old news by Tuesday. Deflating the Republican base who is energized and inspired by Palin may not win us more votes, but it could cool the enthusiasm enough to make a needed difference in their Get Out The Vote efforts, and it could ramp up Palin's negatives enough to make her less acceptable to the moderate voters who are still on the fence. I believe it is time to unleash the wolves and get the media to change the subject.
In the midst of the obsession of the mainstream media to watch every McCain grimace, and count the number of times that Obama agreed with his opponent, or catch the few McCain gaffes on names and facts, thus far I see that no one today has said much about his idea to create a league of democracies that will apparently move across the globe like the Fantastic 4 thwarting evil-doers like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (pronounced AK-Ma-DEEN-ah-JAD, senator McCain).McCain's idea of international diplomacy seems to sadly be...
As I sit and listen through the news, conventions etc. I find it hard to stomach FOX NEWS' cable station. I have never in my life heard such angry, hateful people deal with a candidate the way they deal with Barack Obama, his family and campaign.
I am overwhelmed by the fact that there are so many issues that his family have gone through that has not even been spoken of, yet this act of control and poise has not been portrayed to the viewers at all.
Barack is right because he doesn't fly off the handle. He doesn't play childish games of "copy cat" or "top this". He does what he does, he does it in excellence and it shows all throughout this campaign. Barack is forward thinker. He has come through several hard issues and still kept his pride and dignity no matter what the attack and they were ugly.
There is so much to say but I'd like to hear from you. What's on your mind?
I've been very disappointed in the media's coverage of Sen. Obama's interview at the Saddleback Church this week. Although I thought he could have answered the question on when a fetus is entitled to rights/protection and the question regarding the strings that federal funding places on faith-based activities better, his handling of and his positions on all the other questions were inspiring and dead on. Overall, his answers were much more responsive and profound than Sen. McCain's, yet the media highly praised McCain's performance and focused ad nauseum on Obama's "above my pay grade" comment. Now tonight, we're hearing that H. Clinton wasn't really vetted for the VP slot, and other such nonsense. CNN's new claim is that it is independent and unbiased. What can be done to also push it (and other media outlets) to be less superficial, more analytical, and more accountable for the very important role that they play in our society?
A discussion on 30 July 2008 between 10 and 11 in the morning characterized Barack Obama as presumptuous. This description has been appearing with some frequency on television commentaries since Senator Obama concluded his successful overseas tour. In this particular rendition of the seemingly never-ending story, the black commentator rejected the label. I want to assert that I, a 62 year old, white, Vietnam veteran, also reject this description. In fact, I find this to be a covert way of accusing Senator Obama of being uppity.
You may have seen reports today about Barack Obama's coming trip abroad and the media entourage that will accompany him. Some 200 journalists have asked to accompany Obama on the costly trip, which will include stops in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the campaign will be able to accommodate only one-fifth that number. NBC News anchor Brian Williams, Charles Gibson of ABC and Katie Couric of CBS will make the trip, too, it appears.
But the coverage also feeds into concerns in Sen McCain's campaign, and among Republicans in general, that the news media are imbalanced in their coverage of the candidates, just as aides to Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton felt during the primary season.
As a media observor I must admit that, yes, the media coverage -- at least in the general election -- has been unequal. According to the Project for Excellence in Journalism, Obama has led in coverage in all five weeks since the race narrowed to two presumptive nominees.
Once Senator John McCain and the RNC began circumventing the McCain/Feingold limits via the creation of the “McCain Victory ‘08 Fund” with its $70,000 per individual donations they really left presumptive Democratic nominee Senator Barack Obama with no reason to keep extending his offer to limit campaign spending by accepting public financing. They sprang into faux outrage, of course, ready to accuse him of a flip-flop despite the fact they’d not accepted Obama’s conditional offer. Follow the money, not the spin, and you discover that this has gone virtually unreported. The commercial media outlets have a conflict of interest; reporting on the McCain fund undermines their profits.
The media has a wierd way of covering the candidates and the issues that concern America. My wife
and I were talking about the the response Barack gave about the speech and q&a Pastor
Wright gave and my wife said something that i found simple yet deep. She said " it dosen't matter
what Barack does because they are giong to say that his response wasnt enough or they are going
to use his words against him." I thought about that statement and it got me to thinking that rather
than the media keep on repeating how Barack slammed his Pastor and how he was furious, why
don't they do what they are supposed to do and focus on the issues that concern our country. The
fact that they aren't talking about Obama's plans for healthcare or how he would give college
students 4000 annually in return for volunteer service speaks volumes about what they want this
race to be about. Hopefully tomorrow we can get up and the news headlines reads " Let us give
you objective differences between Hillary's proposals and Barack's proposals. I hope im not asking
for too much.
Rev. Wright has a right to defend himself and fight back against the immoral attacks that have come against him in the past weeks but recently I believe he has done nothing but hurt the Obama campaign as they try to make a stand in Indiana and North Carolina. Over the past few days he has been on talk shows and at dinner banquets giving speeches. I've seen him on CNN and MSNBC more than I've seen Clinton, McCain and Obama combined. Rev. Wright is an outspoken and passionate speaker but I think recently he has been doing more than just correcting the image that was made of him. He has been projecting himself into the spotlight that should be occupied by Barack Obama and the other candidates. The major media outlets will always jump at the chance to talk about a character like Rev. Wright and they have numbed my ears to the sound of his name with the amount of coverage they have given him.
When Rev. Wright talks he makes some good points, but he also makes overreaching and fiery statements that ostracize him from the general public. Wright also still seems to think that what he said in the infamous clip was justified and he continues to show no empathy towards the people who have taken offense to the video clip of him denouncing America. I know his comments were taken out of context and that it was only a ten second clip from a speech that was almost an hour long but he still needs to reconcile with the public who will never hear the rest of that speech. Even today in Detroit he said things that rural American's will undoubtedly be offended by.
I realize that it is a difficult - maybe impossible - task to calm such an impassioned person but someone should try. He needs to realize how much of a spectacle he has become and step aside elegantly before he ends up turning a crack in the ground into a gaping hole that Mr. Obama won't be able to climb out of.Please feel free to post your thoughts and ridicule mine.
