Hillary Clinton Supporters: No Unity – No Dollars

It’s all about the money.

It’s all about the money for Big Media tool Barack Obama.

Barack Obama thinks he can become president if he raises enough money.

Obama is Big Media’s tool so he does not need to worry about being vetted. Obama thinks that now it’s all about the money.

Obama’s money well is running dry so Obama needs Hillary donors for new cash infusions.

Let’s discuss what this all means and what to do about it.

* * *

First, 2 short articles to document how in the bag Big Media is for Obama and the state of mind of Hillary’s big money Democratic donors:

(1) Obama is Big Media’s tool. Notice how in this New York Times article Obama’s flip-flop-flim-flams are described. The New York Times describes Obama’s noxious flip-flop-flim-flammery as a graceful dance. Big Media does not say Obama flip-flops. No, Big Media describes Obama’s flip-flop-flim-flammery as “a pragmatist’s shift toward center”, “calibrated positions on variety of issues”. If it was Hillary Big Media would be shouting “pander” and “flip-flop”. Obama’s flip-flops are “marked by artful leaps and turns”; Obama “has executed several policy pirouettes in recent weeks” . Obama’s nonsense press releases are called “Delphic”. Big Media tool Obama will not be vetted by Big Media.

(2) Last night’s fund raiser with the great Hillary Clinton and the race-baiting, gay-bashing, woman-hating B.O. did not go well.

ABC’s Kate Snow reports: The crowd’s mood was but strained but supportive at Thursday’s meeting between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and about 150 of Clinton’s top donors at a Washington hotel. [snip]

One major Clinton donor described it this way: “This felt like when your mom forces you to go visit your Aunt Ida and she has to pinch your cheeks and you’re sitting there in an uncomfortable suit and you can’t wait to leave.”

Another Clinton-leaning person who was in the room said after the meeting wrapped up that there is still “a lot of anger” toward Obama among Clinton’s wealthiest fans.

It was pretty bad,” this source said. He said donors were joking that the scene was like “an Irish wake” and that you “could cut the air with a knife” it was so tense in the room.

He better go back to the internet,” said one donor about the Democratic nominee’s fundraising tactics.

It’s Hillary Held Hostage . At last night’s hostage event Terry McAuliffe noted Hillary Clinton donors had raised $230 million dollars for Hillary. Also, Hillary slapped the boobishly unaware Obama – She lamented that the party had only won three of the last 10 elections. “That is a sobering thought,” she said, adapting her electability argument from the primary campaign.

* * *

For a long time we have urged a fundraisers strike against the Democratic? National Committee. We now additionally urge a fundraisers strike against the Democratic? National Convention and B.O.

Democratic big money donors are usually team players. Democratic big money donors do not like to oppose the Democratic Party. Democratic big money donors do not like to be “off the reservation” in any way. However we are seeing very encouraging signs and privately hearing from Democratic big money donors that many are joining the resistance.

The strike is beginning to take shape.

The fundraisers strike began at least as early as March 15, 2008 with Paul Cejas leading, over the disenfranchisement of Florida by undemocratic organs of Party power.

Also, in nasty articles by self-hating Obama supporters the flags of resistance can be seen. This nasty article recounts a fundraiser for B.O. at Gloria Steinem’s home in which Hillary supporters clearly are not silent:

“I am a good friend of Hillary’s,” she declared. “I’ve had her at my home, and I have always been there for her. I am here to tell you how angry and hurt I am and how hurt all Hillary supporters are by the sexist, disgusting way Hillary was attacked and pilloried by the media in this campaign. Until some acknowledgment of that is made, I am full of anger. I know the Democratic Party could have stopped it. I know Obama could have stopped it. But, everyone was silent and just let it happen and …”

Next up: a professor who took a full six minutes announcing her credentials and then said, “I used up my entire pension supporting Hillary. I went to 13 states and knocked on doors. I want everyone in this room to write in the name of Hillary Clinton on the ballot when they go to vote and …”

Another woman announced that she intended to launch a boycott of MSNBC. “I want all of you to sign my petition.”

The chairperson of “Women for Obama,” Becky Carroll, had flown in from Chicago and said she was tired. You’d be tired too with all that invective flying around the room. But Ms. Carroll couldn’t very well intervene, if catharsis was what was needed to unite Democratic women. Ms. Carroll was in a tough position – too tough to point out that Hillary Clinton had announced that her supporters should “take our energy, our passion, our strength and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama …” These emotional outbursts — and there were several more — are just what male chauvinists say about woman’s incapacity to coolly assess a situation.

Even in the nasty anti-Hillary women hating articles the signs of resistance from long-time Democrats and big money Democratic donors can be seen.

Ricki Lieberman in her Electability Watch newsletter wrote (get Ricki’s newsletter by writing to rrlieberma@gmail.com):

There has been discussion about whether or not some of us who were invited should go to the finance meeting in DC on Thursday. I fully understand and appreciate the decision of some people to go. It is not mine – I am NOT going – but I actually do feel more confident knowing that a few others will be there to support Hillary – she has made it known through the primary season how much it means to her to go places and find familiar supportive faces, all the more so, I expect, now when she will be in chillier settings.

I know those who go will give Hillary the warmest most heartfelt welcome, and some may sit on their hands for BO. Some of us feel that he needs to know that she is our candidate and as of now he has done nothing to deserve support from her supporters. Further, he has not demonstrated that he is electable and can return Democrats to the White House, something we all want.

I think we all have to recognize that what follows will be a period of mixed messages, of ambiguities and uncertainties. There will be public and private positions and positioning. And perhaps even some mis or dis-information. Imagine!

Ricki Lieberman has also written:

Funders – please, no $ to BO or the DNC, not one penny! Abstinence! [snip]

Together we will fight against the hostile takeover of our party by the Obama, Pelosi, Dean and Reid coup. 18,000,000 of us can do it if we stay together and do not fragment.

Barbara Layton has not surrendered either.

Hillary friend Lady De Rothschild says NO to B.O. as does Haim Saban as does WomenCountPac’s Susie Tompkins Buell.

Other big money Democratic donors have shown remarkable courage in defense of democracy and Hillary Clinton. Marc Aronchick, Clarence Avant, Sim Farar, Robert L. Johnson, Chris Korge, Marc and Cathy Lasry, Hassan Nemazee, Alan and Susan Patricof, JB Pritzker, Amy Rao, Bernard Schwartz, Stanley S. Shuman, Jay Snyder, Maureen White and Steven Rattner – some or all might join the resistance – overtly or covertly.

We commend these donors for the leadership and courage they have shown. We applaud them for speaking out for the grassroots of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton.

Long-time, influential, big money Democratic donors have a lot of clout. We urge them to act in a unified manner and speak forcefully on behalf of the Democratic grassroots.

These big money Democratic donors are the ones who contribute tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic? Party committes and affiliates. The Democratic? Party cannot function without them.

The Democratic? Convention is short on cash having failed to meet fundraising goals. The Democratic? National Committee has almost no money.

Obama is choking off all money to 527 groups so that Obama is the only one with cash because Obama’s sole strategy is to desperately amass money.

Obama has raised approximately $287 million in the primaries and now the well is running dry. In May, Obama and McCain raised about the same amount of money.

Obama absolutely needs Hillary supporters to send him money. Obama particularly needs Hillary’s big money Democratic donors who raised $230 million.

The Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting raised $21.5 million last month. He had $31.5 million in the bank, up $10 million from the end of April.

Obama had his weakest fundraising month of the year. The Illinois senator’s campaign raised $21.9 million in May. The disclosure came a day after the Democratic candidate’s reversal on the question of whether he would take public financing for his presidential bid, a move which drew sharp criticism from McCain.

Obama’s campaign said it had $43.1 million in the bank at the end of the month, with debts of about $304,000.

McCain’s campaign said the Republican spent $11.6 million during May and ended the month owing $1.27 million, with $31.5 million in the bank. That figure is up $10 million from the end of April.

Obama’s fundraising figure for May is less than the $30.7 million he raised in April.

The Obama number above includes $10 million which is in general election funds which means Obama and McCain are now at financial parity. Of course the DNC has only $4.4 million while the RNC has $53.6 million. McCain can count on support from the RNC’s tens of millions. Obama will not get a penny from Howard Dean’s near insolvent DNC.

The Obama calculation is that his well of donations is already dry but that now he can tap Hillary supporters for the $300 million Obama will need for this election if the Superdelegates ignore the fact Obama is unqualified and unelectable and gift him the nomination.

Obama wants to spend money raised by Hillary Clinton supporters in order to intimidate John McCain. Obama has worked hard to forget that even when he outspent Hillary by 5-1, 4-1, 3-1 in Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, West Virginia, Indiana, California, etc., etc. Hillary still beat him.

McCain will beat Obama too no matter how much money Obama raises.

Obama is unelectable but believes if he outspends McCain 6-1 or 7-1 or more outlandish sums, then he can win. Obama could not win against Hillary when he outspent her 4-1 and Obama will not beat McCain if he only outspends McCain 4-1. That’s why Obama wants cash quickly from Hillary supporters.

Hillary Clinton’s Democratic donors must treat Obama with the same contempt Obama subjects Hillary Clinton and her supporters. Let Hillary spend the summer fundraising and taking her message to Americans. Let Obama raise his own cash from his internet dens of Hopium.




156 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton Supporters: No Unity – No Dollars

  1. The big mainline women’s organizations were hapless in this campaign. Cynthia Ruccia responded to a big mainline women’s group last night on Larry King Live.


    Doing this from memory, from a few days ago, the RNC had over $50 million.

    The Dems? $4.4 million.

    Hey, you guys want to rent a big tent from Rent-a-Center? I think you could rent one for $150 / day. And if you cut it down to two days, you’d save $300!!

    And instead of “a balloon drop”, you could “drop a balloon”. I’d recommend a red balloon:
    a) blue represents “real” Dems, so you can’t use that color
    b) DNC should be red in the face w/ embarrassment
    c) The DNC is in the red

  3. Los Angeles Times has a story which links to Big Pink:


    Our cousins over at The Swamp have an item this morning spotlighting just how nagging a problem Barack Obama faces in trying to woo some disappointed Hillary Clinton supporters in facing off against John McCain. It seems a couple of notable New Hampshire Democrats — James McConaha, a former Clinton administration farm official in New Hampshire, and his Democratic activist wife, Valery Mitchell — have no intention of hopping aboard the Unity bus.

    Picking up a story in the Nashua Telegraph, the couple have agreed to lead Democrats for John McCain. And that’s not the only anti-Obama group out there comprising Clinton supporters. In fact, though polls show most of her backers moving to Obama, there is a large and vociferous crowd out there that refuses to go along.

    Whether this is enough of a counter tide to have an impact in November is the big question, of course. And it will matter most in the battleground states — a few thousand Clinton supporters voting for McCain here in California, for instance, isn’t likely to turn the state red. But it could be an issue in states where the red-blue divide is narrower.

    Regardless, campaigns are an amalgamation of a lot of moving parts, and it can’t be a good distraction for the Obamans to have to go out and try to run down strays from the Democratic herd.

  4. I just got a phone call from a very young man with a foreign accent that I could hardly understand. He gave me a l-o-n-g talk about BO and why I should vote for him and then he wanted us to give $100 to the BO campaign.

    I listened politely and then replied, “After the way Hillary was treated…” and I only got those 6 words out before the young man hung up on me!!!!!!!!! I was SO disappointed because I had an earful for him.

  5. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/longtime_nh_dems_buck_obama_cl.html

    Some people are just saying no to Unity and just saying no to coming together behind the presumptive Democratic nominee.

    Two longtime Democrats in New Hampshire said yesterday that they would lead “Democrats for McCain,” rather than back Sen. Barack Obama for president.

    While Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton are trying to rally Democrats in Unity, N.H. today, James McConaha, a former Clinton administration official, and his wife, Valery Mitchell, a Democratic activist, are working to gather support for the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain.

    “I think in general both of us felt that this is such an important position, perhaps the most important job in the world that it requires a person who has the experience and the competence to hold it,” McConaha told my friend, Kevin Landrigan with the Nashua Telegraph. “We just liked Senator McCain for a lot of reasons. In our minds, he is that person.”

  6. not a dime to the DNC, B-HO, DSCC, womens groups such as emily’s list, NARAL, NOW, or even the NH state dems. not a dime.

    i will only donate to hillary’s campaign debt and john mc cain, should B-HO be the nominee. end of discussion.

  7. Another great article, Admin.

    Not only do Clinton voters control November, so do Clinton donors.

    In other words, you’re toast Obama. Payback’s heading your and the DNC’s way.

    It’s really too bad you had to be a sexist, misogynistic, arrogant, Stalinist punk. How very unfortunate that was.

    Oh well. You can go on back to the Senate and your NOI staffers on November 5th and start to heal the wounds from your electoral humiliation.

    But wait…with the amount of bad news and NoBama sentiment that is in the air, I think that Hillary is starting to look a lot better to the Dem powerbrokers, AKA the superdelegates.


    Thanks to all the Big Pinkers who make this site the great resource that it is, starting with Admin. You guys are fantastic and we are winning this fight, as Carbynew was correctly saying in the last comments section.

    Obama is reeling, and dropping fast in $$ and poll numbers. His boot licking of the Clinton donors and his meaningless $2300 for Hillary’s debt are the surest signs yet that he’s effed and him and his illicit Chi-town posse knows that the jig is up.

    Buh-bye, Bwak.


    If you haven’t seen the article that was linked last night in the Washington Post about the PUMA movement, I recommend it and also ask that if you can that you take a moment to post a comment there (registration at the WaPo is required) as well as recommend other PUMAs’ comments. I posted there again in the last hour after posting last night. My handle is ‘Truth6,’ but I sign my name at the end of the posts.

    The media cannot ignore us any longer and the typical anger, ranting and general idiocy of the astrobots there in those comments shows that they are very afraid of the media’s covering our activities and they know that they have a bum steer in Bambi. Go and help inflict some more misery on Axelrod’s minions if you get the chance and let the media know we are here to stay.


    Admin, the NY Times’ attempts to smooth-over Bambi’s flip-flops isn’t fooling anyone. The guy is exactly what he has shown himself to be: Not only NOT a ‘change’ but even more of a typical politician than most.

    He’s a panderer, a liar and a wannabe thug talking about knives, guns and brush-offs. And the left is pissed off at him about FISA and other betrayals.

    Spin hard, NY Times. However, no amount of centrifugal force is going to keep Humpty Dumpty Bambi from flying apart at the seams.

    Fraud, meet world.

  8. The farce show is on!

    no money, no unity, no vote for BO.
    no money, no vote for BO and his train of elected traitors

  9. Let Pelosi, who is worth about 200 million, put her own money in ….a true hypocrite who only now claims she is a victim of “sexism” everyday. A clear attempt to dismiss Hillary once again.

  10. A little Rezko news which we will write about at a later date. This long awaited article confirms some of our judgments about Obama and Fitzgerald which we will detail later:


    Barack Obama’s name could have been invoked more at the corruption trial of his former fund-raiser Tony Rezko.

    But it appears prosecutors opted against bringing Obama into the mix during the two-month trial.

    Newly unsealed documents show that prosecutors sought to call witnesses to testify about Rezko’s ties to Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

    The Illinois senator was the recipient of “straw” campaign contributions made by others on behalf of Rezko — money that Obama has since given to charities.

    The documents indicate that prosecutors considered offering witnesses to explore why Rezko used others to contribute to Obama and also to Blagojevich, and U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve ruled that they could. But they did not end up offering any such testimony during the trial.

    “Witnesses will testify that Rezko was a long-standing supporter and fund-raiser of Barack Obama,” prosecutors wrote.

    Later, St. Eve ruled that Obama references would be allowed into the trial, but prosecutors apparently opted not to invoke Obama’s name.

  11. Oh, WOW, thanks, admin, for that news about the big doners showing that they know who the REAL Democrats are! They have the power to put some big teeth into our movement for election reform as well as put down the illegitimate pretender to the throne! That Lady and her husband are perhaps the most influential people in the world. Zippideedoodah! – made my day!

  12. hey all… So my blog clintondem. Blogspot. Com which is listed on Just Say No Deal was recently marked as spam and shut down. I am livid. I can’t help but feel it is one of Obamas bloggers trying to silence me. How dare they?! This is my outlet and my right to free speech. Has that happened to anyone else’s blog? No money for BHO!

  13. KUDOS, Admin! Another great article.
    Everyone, Listening to the news while driving and I almost had to pull over and grab the barf bag.
    Here are 2 (paraphrased) comments from BO and his crew.
    About the meeting last night; apprently Bo said he really needs HRC and can’t win without her
    a news report on WABC radio says that when asked about HRC and the VP the response was while it couldn’t
    be ruled out there were others on the list such as McCaskill of MO. 👿
    This is exactly why i don’t want HRC involved on any level with Obammerrhoid. how DARE anyone insinuate that Clair-o isd fit to clean HRC’s shoes much less mention her in the same sentence as a candidate for VP!

  14. Ironic symbolism: the DNC has only 4.4 mil – if they don’t shape up that will be the only 44 they earn!

  15. LJ: I saw this on another blog. Perhaps, NOQuarter or The Confluence. Some blogs have been marked as Spam, and shut down.

  16. LJ: Sorry to hear what happened. Sounds like the work of the Axelrod’s astrotrolls, or a Larry Lessig project. Hang in there and don’t let the bastards get you down.

    I just left a comment over at the LA Times’ article which mentions Big Pink (or tried to anyways; comments are moderated so we’ll see if it gets through). They have the Obama “Snob” picture in the header. Very fitting.

  17. Thoughts; Wasn’t the Jeremiah Wright video aired AFTER BO racked up delegates in the 11 caucuses after ST?
    Isn’t that when he supposedly opened up an ‘insurmountable’ delegate lead?
    Isn’t it odd that the godamn-america-reverend was outed AFTER the DNC apparently assumed BO had the nomination sewn up?
    Don’t you think it might have been deliberately leaked then to give BO plenty of time to recover from it?
    Wasn’t it after the 11 caucuses that the media turned even more brutal toward HRC?
    And where the heck is the Rev these days?

  18. basil: yes, it was after Bo had that string of wins, when FOX broke the news. They had been working on it, for about a year, according to Hannity. I guess, they wanted to make sure, Hillary wouldn’t win. What a farce.

  19. admin, all,

    WOW! I just read through the Chicago SUn’s article on Rezko saying that prosecutors intentionally downplayed (covered-up????) BO’s connection to Rezko during the trial!

  20. Barack Obama Voted Four Times To Allow Criminal Charges Against Homeowners Who Defend Their Person and Home With a Gun – The Hypocrisy continues unabated at great speed.

    In a victory for individuals across the nation, whether they know it or not, the Supreme Court has decided the 2nd amendment does do what it says — give the people the right to keep and bear arms. Barack Obama’s rapid reversal from opposition to agreement on the issue would make mere mortals snap in half under all the G-forces.

    Despite Obama’s propensity to say and do anything to get elected, just like with Kennedy v. Louisiana, Obama’s record does not match his rhetoric.

    In fact, Barack Obama specifically voted four times in the Illinois Legislature to allow criminal charges against a homeowner who used a firearm in self-defense of their person and home — specifically what the Supreme Court says is a constitutional right. Obama may say he supports it, but his record says exactly the opposite.

    Read on . . .

    In 2004, the Illinois Senate considered S.B. 2165 (IL 2004), sponsored by Senator Ed Petka (R-Plainfield). The bill came about because of an arrest in Wilmette, IL in late December of 2003. A 54-year-old businessman shot and wounded a man who had broken into his home for the second time in 24 hours. Cook County prosecutors found the shooting justified, but the businessman, Mr. DeMar, faced a fine and possible destruction of two guns under a 1989 village ordinance prohibiting handgun possession.

    S.B. 2165 would allow residents to use self-defense as a basis for seeking dismissal of criminal charges stemming from local gun ordinances if they used the banned weapon in an act of self-defense in their home, business or property.

    Obama voted no on third reading March 25, 2004, and voted no on concurrence to a House amendment on May 25, 2004. In fact, Obama voted no four times: in the Judiciary Committee, on Third Reading, in the Judiciary Committee’s vote on concurrence with the House, and on the final concurrence.

    Luckily for the people of Illinois, the legislation passed despite Obama’s opposition. Had he had his way, people in Illinois could still be prosecuted for defending themselves against crimes.

    But that’s not the only time Obama has voted against the people’s right to keep and bear arms.

    In 1999, Obama voted in favor of S.B. 177 (IL 1999). The legislation required guns to be secured by trigger locks, placed in a lock box, or placed in a location that a reasonable person would believe to be secure from a minor. Likewise, in 2003, Obama voted for H.B. 2579 (IL 2003) for a law that restricted the rights of Illinois’s citizens so that they could only buy one gun a month. The law created the offense of “unlawful acquisition of handguns.”

    In 2001, Obama voted against S.B. 604 (IL 2001), which would have allowed individuals who have valid orders of protection against other individuals to carry concealed weapons for their protection. The bill would have created an affirmative defense against a charge of violating Illinois’s concealed carry law if the person had a lawfully issued protection order against someone seeking to do harm to the person.

    In 2002, Obama voted against S.B. 397 (IL 2002), which amended the Firearms Owners Indentification Card Act. The legislation was specifically crafted for sporting events and allowed a non-resident participating in a sanctioned competitive shooting event in Illinois to purchase a shotgun or shotgun ammunition in Illinois, but only at the site where the event is being held, for the purpose of participating in the event.

  21. Basil:

    The link to His44 is the words ‘out there’ in this section of the blog:

    Picking up a story in the Nashua Telegraph, the couple have agreed to lead Democrats for John McCain. And that’s not the only anti-Obama group out there comprising Clinton supporters

  22. birdgal,
    The dots are blinking all over the place. The more you peel back the layers the more you see how absolutely corrupt the entire process is.

    I especially hold Cruella responsible for a lot of what happened. I recently read a 2004 article in which she outlined her plans for what happened this year. I saved it . . . . . somewhere.

    But something that bothers me is with knowing how smart the Clinton’s are, didn’t they see this train-wreck coming? It couldn’t have been a complete shock to them, could it? I mean, BC is the quintessential savvy pol.

  23. Thanks paul.

    Will check it l;ater.

    Hey, what about the Manning-MO expose! 😉

    Even though he is a convicted felon (for theft in Florida, I believe, as well as simple battery in NYC) he sure is entertaining and manages to hit on the truth that whites aren’t allowed to say. I think he’s a riot!

  24. moonpluto,

    Guess he changed his mind before the Philly rally comment that if the repubs bring a knife to the fight he’ll bring a gun coz, afterall, he’s heard through the grapevine that Philly likes a good brawl.

    What a farce.


  25. carbynew Says: Repost from last thread

    June 27th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
    A Fund-Raiser For Nader Set In Litchfield
    By: Emily M. Olson

    LITCHFIELD-Dorothea DiCecco and her husband, Mario, have opposed the war in Iraq since it began, and make their sentiments known by standing on the green every Sunday morning with signs protesting its impact on U.S. troops, the federal budget deficit and beyond.

    Now, at Mrs. DiCecco’s invi­tation, a more famous opponent of the war, and of corporate America, Ralph Nader, is coming to her home for a fund-raiser. Mr. Nader, who has family ties to Winsted, is running for president in November as an Independent Party candidate.

    “The Independent Party, of which he is now a member had a meeting last Sunday. I had thought about having a get together for him, and a fund-raiser,” said Mrs. DiCecco, a former professor of biology at the University of Connecticut who retired in 2003 after a 40-year career as an educator.

    “I mentioned it to the Inde­pendent Party people here in the area, and then Ralph called me and said that he only was available on Sunday, June 29. So I said, “I’ll do it, I’ll work it out.’ So we’re having it this Sunday, June 29, from 2 to 5 p.m.”

    She is inviting as many people as possible, and although Mrs. DiCecco would love to charge $10,000 per person for the benefit, she’s “realistic” and is only charging $100. It will be worth attending, if only to enjoy this particular resident’s food. Mrs. DiCecco is a wonderful cook. She’s not sure how much to make, though, and wants people to RSVP as soon as possible.

    “I realize the hours of the fund-raiser are after lunch and before dinner, but people should have good food. So I’m going to make a fresh summer buffet,” she said.

    Her home on Norfolk Road will be a perfect place for people to chat with Mr. Nader. “We have a nice deck that overlooks the Bantam River and that will be fun, a nice setting,” she said. “And whoever comes will be able to talk to Ralph … he wants to talk about what his mission is.”
    Mrs. DiCecco is frustrated by “many things” happening in the world today, and believes Mr. Nader’s views align with her own. She also thinks his way of thinking could influence future decisions made by candidates and elected officials around the country.

    “We feel his views, once supported, could influence other candidates,” she said. “That’s what his role is going to be in this election, to get people to believe in what he’s doing. I’m appalled by the role of corporate government and its control over what we do, and I really like what he has to say about things like that.”

    Mr. Nader’s Web site, votenader.org, explains that he is “a consumer advocate, lawyer, author, and has been named by Time Magazine as one of the 100 Most Influential Americans in the Twentieth Century. For over four decades Ralph Nader has exposed problems and organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest groups to advocate for solutions. … His efforts have helped to create a framework of laws, regulatory agencies, and federal standards that have improved the quality of life for two generations of Americans. His groups were instrumental in enacting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

    “In the past decade, Nader has dedicated himself to putting people back in charge of America’s democracy, launching three major presidential campaigns,” the site continues. “Because of Ralph Nader we drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breath better air, drink cleaner water, and work in safer environments. … In the 1980’s, with the election of President Reagan, powerful corporate interests gathered momentum and became increasingly assertive in the pursuit of their narrow interests, throwing up roadblocks to Nader’s efforts to advance the well-being of the American people.

    With the two major parties dialing for the same dollars, their differences dwindled on most major issues (single-payer healthcare, living wage, replacing fossil fuels and nuclear with many practical variants of solar power, and a foreign policy that wages peace instead of war). After working for 40 years on behalf of the health, safety and economic well being of the American people, Nader took stock of the situation: “I don’t like citizen groups being shut out by both parties in this city-corporate occupied territory-not having a chance to improve their country.”

    Mrs. DiCecco met Mr. Nader last year when he visited the Hickory Stick Bookshop in Washington to sign copies of his book, “The 17 Traditions,” about growing up in Winsted. “While he was signing the book, we got chatting, about politics and things at large, and he invited me to dinner after the signing. It was he and his sister [Claire] and my husband, Mario and I, and we had a really nice time and got to know him.”
    The friendship developed from that point, she said. “He sent me books to read, and I really enjoyed them,” she remembered. “And when he gave his speech in Waterbury a few months ago, I went to that. I wanted to reciprocate the dinner [we had shared with him]. I asked his sister Claire to come to dinner with us. But by the time he was done, all the restaurants were closed. So they came to my house, and I basically threw together a meal. We were up to midnight talking. It was a wonderful time.”

    Although some people call Mr. Nader “a spoiler” in the presidential election, Mrs. DiCecco thinks his decision to run is a good thing. “This is a democracy,” she said. “Why shouldn’t people be allowed to express their views? He’s the best choice as far as I’m concerned, and I’ve chosen to support him.”

    To RSVP for the fund-raiser, call 860-567-5763 or send an e-mail dorotheadicecco@aol.com.
    “I’d like to know by [today] who’s coming so I know how much food to make,” Mrs. DiCecco said.


  26. Basil: I love Manning. He is doing a great job and I hope he keeps it up in the face of the pathetic death threats he has received.

    Carbynew: Thanks for all of your hard work on linking and posting the great articles you get. I can tell you, personally, your efforts have helped me greatly to stay up to speed. Thanks! 🙂

    I say we use Nader and McKinney as much as possible if BaJoke is nominated in August. There’s no reason not to and they can provide options for those who don’t want to vote for McCain but who refuse to vote for Bwak.

    Nader can be our Perot with BaDork playing Poppy Bush. That’ll do just fine if the coupists stay their course in August.

  27. Can EMILY’s List Get Its Mojo Back?
    The storied Democratic women’s political action committee is looking to rebound from losses in 2006 and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s failed White House bid.
    by Bara Vaida and Jennifer Skalka

    Sat. Jun 28, 2008

    Money Machine
    Over the past decade, EMILY’s List has consistently been among the top PACs in terms of total receipts. The group bundles contributions and sends the money to its endorsed candidates. [more…]
    EMILY’s List founder Ellen Malcolm took the stage at the group’s annual donor luncheon in Washington this month to a rousing ovation from supporters who had packed into the Omni Shoreham ballroom for grilled-chicken salad and a pep talk. Still smarting from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s defeat in the Democratic presidential primary, the tall, broad-shouldered Malcolm, who co-chaired the New York senator’s campaign and has, over the past quarter-century, helped create one of the most powerful progressive fundraising machines in Democratic politics, copped to feeling uncharacteristically vulnerable.

    “I appreciate your warmth,” Malcolm announced, perched at the spotlighted podium. “I’m a little emotionally fragile.”

    Malcolm, 61, wasn’t simply seeking sympathy from loyal followers. She has had a rough month. Clinton was the quintessential EMILY’s List candidate: an abortion-rights, women-first dynamo and a star in the political firmament.

    Although EMILY’s List is not to blame for Clinton’s narrow loss to Barack Obama, the group had a lot riding on her candidacy–politically and psychologically. Her defeat calls into question the very core of EMILY’s List’s strategy–that women will back female candidates in the interest of equality, and that gender and identity politics can trump issues, message, and personality. Clinton’s failure, in many ways, is also a reflection of the divide between Baby Boomer women (the foundation of EMILY’s List) and their daughters, who, according to exit poll data, came out in force in the primaries for Obama. Among women age 29 and younger, Obama routinely defeated Clinton in key primary states, even in contests that Clinton won, while Clinton overwhelmingly beat Obama among women age 45 and older. (See chart, pp. 22-23.)

    Clinton’s fall from front-runner to runner-up capped a challenging few years for EMILY’s List, which pioneered the use of direct mail and donor bundling to raise early money for Democratic women candidates. In the 2006 election, Democrats triumphed mightily, yet EMILY’s List faltered, as 74 percent of the challengers it backed lost their general election contests.

    In the current campaign cycle, meanwhile, the group has drawn fire from other Democrats for employing divisive tactics–from pitting abortion-rights Democratic women against Democratic congressmen who also favor abortion rights, to feuding publicly with another high-profile abortion-rights group about its decision to endorse Obama.

    EMILY’s List has won wide praise over the years for leveraging the power of women at the polls and building an unprecedented network of progressive female donors. But now some political observers say that the group’s influence may be waning.

    “They’ve been too narrow,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio Democrat who believes that EMILY’s List missed an opportunity to back female candidates who are more moderate on abortion rights but care about other progressive issues, such as the minimum wage.

    “I represent women who organize unions, carry mail on their backs, raise children, fight harassment in the workplace,” added Kaptur, who opposes abortion and represents working-class Toledo. “They love their husbands and their sons. And with EMILY’s List, I always felt there was a class-based, gender-based divide.”

    As the November election looms large, EMILY’s List has to demonstrate that its message and approach are still valid–even as the political world morphs to accommodate the Facebook generation–and in essence prove that it can still win.

    “People will ask if they’ve lost their mojo, just because Hillary lost and because of the [2006] congressional elections,” said Thomas Schaller, associate professor of politics at the University of Maryland (Baltimore County). “I don’t think it is necessarily because of anything that they’ve done, but I don’t know that it’s not. People are puzzling over this.”

  28. Well, I forced myself to watch it on Fox via internet. BO should kiss her ass as she could not have been more graceful.

  29. jbstonesfan:

    Hear you…
    but I say to hillary….I will not reconsider my decision. No way m’aam!!!

    McCain is NOT Bush!!!

  30. I agree….if you think his supporters respect us/Hillary, just look at the venom they post at Huffington. They still hate her…..she will be blamed for anything that goes wrong…

  31. It should off/could off been the other way around…She would have been Prez and he could have learned a hell of a lot from her….she was cheated for small term gains but the party will never recover imo.

  32. Corruption In Congress
    And I now have the proof!

    Last week, on June 20, the House of Representatives approved a compromise bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The bill sets new electronic surveillance rules that effectively shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits resulting from the government’s warrantless eavesdropping on phone calls and viewing of emails of private citizens in the U.S. Approximately 40 lawsuits have been filed with potential damages totaling in the billions of dollars.

    On March 14 of this year the House passed an amendment that rejected retroactive immunity for phone carriers who helped the National Security Agency carry out the illegal wiretapping program without proper warrants. Ninety-four House Democrats voted in favor of this measure–rejecting immunity–on March 14, then ‘changed’ to vote in favor of the June 20 House bill–approving immunity.

    “Why did these ninety-four House members have a change of heart?” asked Daniel Newman, executive director of MAPLight.org, “Their constituents deserve answers.”

    Yes, they DO deserve answers. It’s strictly against the Constitution to put a law on the books that’s retroactive.

    US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9: No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

    So, this “law” that they just passed for retroactive immunity for breaking the law and violating EVERYONE’s privacy is unConstitutional.

    However, let’s take a look at the proof:

    Comparing Democrats’ Votes (March 14th and June 20th votes):

    Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:

    $8,359 to each Democrat who changed their position to support immunity for Telcos (94 Dems)
    $4,987 to each Democrat who remained opposed to immunity for Telcos (116 Dems)

    88 percent of the Dems who changed to supporting immunity (83 Dems of the 94) received PAC contributions from Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint during the last three years (Jan. 2005-Mar. 2008).
    That’s right, coming in at number 7 is Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House.

    So, let’s take a look at Nancy’s activities:

    The Senate has already passed a FISA measure that includes the retroactive immunity provision, and Senate Republicans have vowed not to compromise on the issue. Bush has also promised to veto any legislation that reaches his desk that doesn’t include immunity. On Thursday, he said a vote for the House bill “would make our country less safe.”

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rebuffed him, saying: “The president is wrong, and he knows that.”

    Well, that sounds like Nancy’s lying right? But, here’s where it gets REALLY interesting:

    Beyond the FISA bill’s evisceration of the rule of law, the Fourth Amendment and surveillance safeguards, what has always been so striking with this controversy has been how transparently sleazy and corrupt it reveals the Congress to be. Right out in the open, telecoms have just led Congressional supporters of telecom immunity around like little puppets. It’s just amazing — though extremely common — that while negotiations over the bill occurred in total secrecy, with civil liberties groups and the public at large being completely excluded, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer “negotiated” directly with the telecoms over how the telecoms’ amnesty bill should be written.

    Wasn’t she the one who said she would “get rid of the culture of corruption”? It’s pretty clear that not only did she not, she became a part of it, and sold out American’s Constitutional rights.

    Now, I have many, MANY liberal readers, and I get a lot of hate mail from them, but tell me, where’s your screams for justice? Are you so blinded by Bush hatred that you can’t see corruption within your own ranks? Why do you suppose she isn’t doing anything about Dodd’s cozy relationship and sweetheart deal with Countrywide, all the while, he’s pushing for a $300 BILLION DOLLAR BAILOUT of them and other companies who made poor business judgements?

    Call for her impeachment, otherwise you’ll all look like hypocrites and you’ll be getting the Congress you deserve.

  33. Admin,

    Gonna print it out and read!

    Is Obama’s name mentioned in the motion? I skimmed but didn’t see it.

  34. Look I can understand Fitzgerald’s teann not wnting to bring in Obama’s name spefically during the trials.
    The chicago jury may not have convicted Rezko if that had happened! Or the defence would have callled for a mistrial.

    Now it is open game for them to mention Obama….for the sentencing!!! or just for public info!

  35. Speaker Pelosi Discredits Troops

    In recent weeks, the situation on the ground in Iraq has improved as a result of several factors, including the troop surge. General David Petraeus sent 30,000 additional American troops to Iraq, and also formed an alliance with particular Sunni tribesmen, and added 100,000 sunnis to the ranks of our troops.

    These additional security forces have had a dramatic effect on the situation in Iraq, as reported in this story. Last month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the audacity of attributing the success of our troops in Iraq to “the goodwill of the Iranians.” She said this, “Whatever the military success, and progress that may have been made, the surge didn’t accomplish its goal. And some of the success of the surge is that the goodwill of the Iranians.”

    Now prior to the surge, much of the violence in Iraq was because Iran was funding the insurgency. So for Nancy Pelosi to say that Iran, whose dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an outspoken anti-American, suddenly has “goodwill” towards us is absolute lunacy. Furthermore, her statements are slanderous against our troops, who risk their lives to secure freedom for the Iraqis. In saying this, Pelosi totally blows off their accomplishments, and attributes our success to our enemies. This is just one of many revealing looks into the anti-American sentiment that so many liberals hold. Speaker Pelosi and her liberal colleagues are showing even more that they are part of the “blame-America-first crowd,” which minimizes this country’s accomplishments and highlights its faults. Her comments made me seriously question her patriotism and love for this country.

    I posted this because I want DEMOCRATS to understand that WORDS matter. I have relatives and friends in the military and very few DEMOCRATS who are anti-war support the children and families of our MILITARY that is protecting OUR country with their sacrifice. BUT when 911 happened in NEW YORK city and D.C. Democrats YELLED the LOUDEST about SECURITY and putting OUR young men and women and their family in HARMs way.

    They called for the FIRST RESPONDERS for HELP, they WANTED the MILITARY on ALERT, so now 7 years late WE HAVE A DEMOCRATIC SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE praising a known country with terrorist activities against AMERICANS given the credit for the SUCCESS in IRAQ.


  36. The Boston Globe Reveals the Catastrophic Failures of Obama’s Housing Efforts

    I don’t begrudge Barack Obama the modesty of his accomplishments as a community organizer. Stemming the tide of urban decay in Chicago’s worst neighborhoods in the late 1980s was beyond even the most tireless efforts of one man. “Sisyphean” is the term that keeps coming to mind, but I would note that what Obama actually accomplished – “a successful effort to convince the city of Chicago to locate a jobs placement office on the far South Side and his part in a drive to push the city to clean asbestos out of a housing project in the same area [Altgeld Gardens]” – aren’t a ton to show for three years of effort.

    As a state legislator, Obama had been in office for all of four years before he decided he was ready to replace Rep. Bobby Rush in Congress. The voters in his district didn’t see it that way. Relatively powerless when Democrats were in the minority, Obama’s accomplishments piled up in the final two years in the state legislature, as his political godfather, Emil Jones Jr., helped Obama take a lead role in just about every piece of high-profile legislation. By the end of 2003, Obama focused heavily on the upcoming U.S. Senate race.

    This brings Obama to the U.S. Senate. His first general election ad touts a bill he didn’t vote for, his signature accomplishment in foreign policy (the nuclear nonprofileration bill) was so uncontroversial it passed by unanimous consent; and with his signature domestic policy accomplishment, ethics reform, nonpartisan observers conclude he has exaggerated his role in passage. Two years isn’t a lot of time to bring about “real change,” and most of his supporters would concede that Obama’s accomplishments as a freshman senator have been modest. He’s been rebuked by his colleagues for taking credit for legislation he had little role in crafting.

    It’s easy to wonder whether the candidate who talks about “real change” and pledges a government that will “heal the sick” and “stop the oceans from rising” actually knows how to get big things done – or whether he had the patience. Obama would seem to have the skills and brains to be a legendary community organizer, or state legislator, or U.S. senator. But momentous accomplishments in each of those positions take time, and at each level, Obama hit a wall, and turned his attention to a position of greater power.

    I note this as the Boston Globe takes a comprehensive look at Obama’s efforts at housing as a state legislator and as a U.S. senator, and comes to devastating conclusions. The policy changes Obama pushed have been catastrophic failures for the public, but lucrative for his donors.

    As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.

    But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies – including several hundred in Obama’s former district – deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.

    Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.

    Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers – including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko – collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama’s campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama’s own accounting.

    One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.

    Obama has said that his preference for private companies acting as landlords of these developments rather than the Chicago Housing Authority was inspired by his experience with Altgeld Gardens. I can understand that instinct. But one of the problems of constantly moving on to the next promotion is that you never get to see the consequences and ramifications of past actions.

  37. “I HOPE HE [MCCAIN] DIES BEFORE NOVEMBER!” said Obama Supporter.

    When an Obama supporter hears something she didn’t like she decided to call and complain.The problem is she called the wrong radio show. She intended to call The Quinn & Rose Show, but instead got somebody else who also broadcast from the same building. If you need another example of just how tolerant and caring liberals aren’t. Listen to this caller hope McCain dies before November.

    Liberal tolerance on display:

  38. Hillary looked wonderful today even though I disagree with her efforts. Bambi is still dead to me because I do not trust him nor am I “into” him. Sorry Hillary .. won’t be onboard your efforts. I hope at least Bill is able to stay away from hitting the campaign trail

  39. kostner Says:

    June 27th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
    “I HOPE HE [MCCAIN] DIES BEFORE NOVEMBER!” said Obama Supporter.

    to all obamabot morons, be careful what you wish for.

  40. Obama Hires New Religious Affairs Adviser
    By Michelle Boorstein
    Shaun Casey, who teaches religion and politics at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C., has been hired by the Obama campaign to focus on outreach to evangelical voters.

    Casey, who has been informally advising the Obama campaign on faith issues for a year, next month will become a formal part of the faith outreach staff, Casey said today. His title will be senior adviser for religious affairs.

    The Obama campaign plans a strong push to attract religious voters — with small group “faith forums” held around the country, regular meetings with clergy of various faiths, frequent appearances in religious media and a faith outreach staff of a half-dozen that may grow as the general election nears. Expert observers, however, say they find the senator’s outreach to white evangelicals the weakest part of the effort. It will be Casey’s job, he explained, to get Barack Obama’s story and policy positions out into the evangelical world.

    Casey, who was raised an evangelical and received his undergraduate degree from Abilene Christian University before heading to Harvard Divinity School, has also informally advised Sen. John Kerry and Democratic Party chair Howard Dean in the past.

    Casey teaches politics and elections at Wesley, a Methodist school where he is an associate professor of Christian ethics. He is about to come out with a book on the role of religion in the 1960 presidential campaign, which calls the beginning of the modern era of religion and politics.

    In a recent interview, Casey said he tells his students these days that Democrats have been “downplaying” their faith while Republicans have tried to “gin theirs up.” In the 2008 presidential race, he said, “those two things are being subverted. [Sen. John] McCain is uncomfortable talking about his faith and Obama is talking about it a lot.”


  41. Grover Norquist on Obama: “John Kerry with a tan”

    John McCain has been trying hard of late to link Barack Obama with Jimmy Carter in the public consciousness, hoping that the “ineffectual” label that many voters affix to the former president will prove transferable.

    But Grover Norquist — the conservative activist who specializes in promoting an anti-tax agenda and, more generally, revels in the role of agent provocateur — is offering a different comparison.

    Norquist dropped by The Times’ Washington bureau today and, as part of his negative critique of Obama’s liberal stances on economic issues and other matters, he termed the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee “John Kerry with a tan.”

    Since Norquist isn’t running for anything, he can get away with such remarks; we doubt McCain will be incorporating the line into his speeches anytime soon.

    Norquist’s clout on the right is such, however, that McCain and his aides will pay attention to his thoughts on who would fit well in the second spot on the GOP’s presidential ticket. And in his chat with Times’ reporters and editors, he was especially high on Bobby Jindal, the recently elected governor of Louisiana.

    Norquist touted Jindal’s success in pushing through tax-cut and ethics reform legislation during his short tenure as Louisiana’s chief executive (no mention was made of the flap surrounding the governor for failing, so far, to live up to a promise to block a pay raise for state legislators).

    Nominating Jindal for vice president also would generate a mother lode of contributions for Republicans from Americans of East Indian descent, Norquist predicted.

    Another recipient of kind words as a veep prospect was Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota; Norquist praised his record on taxes save for one “mistake” — approving a hike in state cigarette taxes in years past.

    Norquist’s most recent book is entitled “Leave Us Alone,” which makes the case that Republicans can put together a post-Ronald Reagan governing coalition by appealing to voters who want government to stay out of their affairs.

    Along those lines, he predicted that one reason conservative radio talk show hosts will rally behind McCain — who many of them have been cool toward — is that some Democratic leaders are advocating a return of the “fairness doctrine.” That’s the abandoned federal rule that required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing political viewpoints.

    — Don Frederick

  42. WOW Thanks ADMiN and to those of you who have posted so much good stuff to read (well that’s all subjective to how you per sieve the information,obviously anything rocking against BHO’s wave is GOOD IMHO)

    I how ever am out the door shortly for a weekend visit in south dakota (finally get to see the hubby for a couple days) I can’t wait to get this move done and over with, i am tired of living in two different houses/states etc.

    I hate being a single mom! ( did that for 10 yrs prior to meeting my current hubby) never want to revisit again! LOL

    I will be home on sunday and check in and TRY to catch up on all the great reading already here and all that is to come over the weekend.

    I hope you all have a great weekend!!

  43. Here is a link to a NQ article abut the Rezko-Obama connection.


  44. Obama-Only Stories Outnumber McCain-Only Stories by Nearly 4 to 1

    Today’s Peggy Noonan column has a revealing statistic: in Google News there are currently 138,000 news articles on Barack Obama and 97,000 on John McCain.

    But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

    The vast majority of campaign stories have to mention both candidates, if only to report on the other candidate’s response to another’s volley. This statistic alone tells us nothing about who’s in the “lede.”

    So I decided to try an experiment.

    I searched for stories that mentioned Obama but didn’t mention McCain in Google News. 69,473 stories.

    And stories that mention McCain but not Obama? 19,135.

    That’s a stunning 3.63 to 1 ratio. Read on.

    A 3-to-1 ratio is confirmed by Yahoo! News, which is perhaps more selective about its sources. There, it’s 26,098 Obama, 8,719 McCain.

  45. Mayor Menino denies snub of John Kerry
    By Dave Wedge

    Mayor Thomas M. Menino yesterday insisted his decision to skip the Democratic state convention two weeks ago was not a snub to Sen. John F. Kerry even as one of the mayor’s top operatives said his troops were not rallied to support Kerry there.

    “I talked to John Kerry a week before the convention and he knew I wasn’t coming,” Menino said yesterday after an appearance in East Boston.

    The Herald yesterday detailed a long-standing feud between the two high-profile pols and reported that Menino didn’t lift a finger to help even as Kerry sought convention backing for his re-election bid.

    Kerry had been seeking to keep Democratic primary challenger Ed O’Reilly off the ballot, but O’Reilly got 22 percent of the vote – far more than the 15 percent he needed to force a September primary. It’s the first time Kerry will face a primary opponent since 1984.

    Menino flatly denied a falling out with Kerry and said he told his supporters to back the senator. He did, however, acknowledge that he did not push delegates to travel to Lowell for the vote.

    Asked if he and Kerry are friends, Menino replied: “Yes.”

    Kerry campaign manager Roger Lau told the Herald Menino “was helpful” before the convention.

    “The mayor has always been good to us,” Lau said.

    But operatives say privately that there is no love lost between the two. The bad blood can be traced to a bitter public feud during the 2004 Democratic National Convention, when Kerry skipped a speech to urban mayors hosted by Menino.

    Menino also blasted Kerry’s campaign as “incompetent” at the time and slammed the senator for intervening in a contract dispute between the mayor and the police union that was disrupting the DNC.


  46. Time poll: Virtual dead heat

    Those Newsweek and LA Times polls look more and more like outliers or worse. With both Gallup and Rasmussen showing either outright or virtual ties in their presidential tracking polls, Time offers even more evidence that Barack Obama has failed to pull away from John McCain after clinching the nomination. Even more troubling, McCain holds his own among a sample of registered voters as opposed to likely voters, a sample that should favor Obama
    Illinois Senator Barack Obama enters the General Election with a tight lead, 43% to 38%, over Arizona Senator John McCain, according to a new TIME Magazine poll of registered voters. The poll shows Obama gaining only a slight bounce from Hillary Clinton’s departure from the campaign early this month.
    When undecided voters leaning towards Obama and McCain are accounted for, the race narrows to a mere 4 percentage points, barely above the poll’s 3.5% margin of error. Thirty percent of those who remain undecided said they lean towards McCain, 20% said they were leaning toward Obama with 46% citing no preference. Overall, 28% said they could still change their minds in the four months left before the November election.
    After five months of bruising primaries, Obama’s lead now is narrower than the one he held over McCain in TIME’s poll this past February: 48% to 41%, including leaners. The bright spot for Obama is with Latino voters, a group he overwhelmingly lost to Clinton in the primaries, but now leads 51% to 34% over McCain. Among Catholics, another group Obama struggled with in Democratic primaries, McCain leads Obama 57% to 43%

    Time did not include a breakdown of its sample or its methodology, which is a big red flag. Newsweek and the LA Times oversampled Democrats substantially in reaching their conclusions, and the lack of this data makes it difficult to determine whether the Time poll has the same problem. Most media outlets include their raw data, and Time’s failure to do so should at least raise eyebrows.
    The results should raise eyebrows anyway. Obama has actually lost ground since February, which dovetails with his collapse in the final months of the Democratic primary. This tends to underscore the shakiness of the Obama phenomenon; it hasn’t translated into general-election enthusiasm, and the trends are going in the wrong direction. Among the wider and less-predictive sample of registered voters, that has to cause a great deal of concern among Democrats who thought Obama would sail to victory on the puffery of “hope and change”.
    That’s not the only bad news here for Obama either, although Time tries to minimize it:

  47. WHOA!

    For those who don’t have time to read the NQ article and the Motion admin linked;

    “Because the evidence the prosecutors presented regarding Obama’s involvement with Rezko and Aramanda is so compelling, Judge St. Eve ruled it was appropriate for prosecutors to invoke the name of Barack Obama during the Rezko trial. All this prompts a few questions:

    * Do the prosecutors involved in Operation Board Games intend to broach other aspects of Obama’s deep and problematic entanglements with Antoin “Tony” Rezko?
    * Will this scandal resurface after the Democratic Convention in August?
    * Is Rezko the first of many corrupt Chicago machine dominoes to fall?
    * Are Presidential candidates usually embroiled in fraudulent schemes involving investment firms, the Illinois Teachers’ Pension Fund and questionable campaign contributions?

  48. Sorry for multiple posts, but check this comment at NQ;

    ‘I have it from sources deep in the Chicago US Attorney’s office that they are actively pursuing charges against Obama but they understand the need for compelling irrefutable evidence and are proceeding with caution. The other side of this is that the US attorney’s office is well aware that if Obama wins before they can indict him and Daley, then Obama is going to replace Fitzgerald and kill the investigation post haste.’

    Sound familiar? The same strategy has been used to award BO the UN-dem candidacy. 😈

  49. Per NH Union leader.
    Get A Grip, NH, Obama’s Coming

    NEW HAMPSHIRE RESIDENTS, grab something sturdy today. Barack Obama is coming and his ability to switch positions on major issues is dizzying. It wouldn’t matter, except Obama wants to become President. If that happens, hold on for dear life.

    This is the man who eloquently declined to disassociate himself from his hate-filled friend and pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. His “incendiary” remarks were taken out of context, Obama said. He was like family, like a grandma.

    But Obama cooly threw “grandma” under the bus when it became politically advantageous.

    This is the man who stoutly defended public financing of the presidential race, until he knew he could raise and spend millions of dollars more by refusing it. And he has the chutzpah to blame John McCain for his own hypocrisy.

    Obama professes to believe in a religiously-diverse nation. But he has declined to speak at a single mosque. His staff keeps Muslim women out of camera range and yelps bloody murder if his own middle name, Hussein, or his father and stepfather’s Muslim religion are discussed.

    Obama said he would meet personally with the President of Iran, without pre-conditions. But speaking to a pro-Israeli group a few weeks ago, he had changed his tune entirely. Iran, by the way, may now be as little as six months from building a nuclear bomb.

    Imagine having this inexperienced, opportunistic Obama in the White House with an anti-American, Islamist extremist state holding nuclear weapons.

    Which leads us to Obama’s views on Iraq. Having opposed the war there, Obama then called for U.S. withdrawal by spring 2007. And he opposed the U.S. surge strategy. Now he says he will “move to end U.S. combat forces in Iraq” and also “make sure that we continue with the progress that’s been made in Iraq.”

    Talk about doublespeak. The progress is fragile but real. The surge is responsible. And Obama will continue the progress, but withdraw our troops?

    Issues like Iran and Iraq are no small thing. Our next President needs to show a steady, dependable sense of command. We don’t need one who changes his basic positions as if he were changing his socks.

  50. I will NEVER donate to Bambi after what he did this past year. No way, come hell or high water.

  51. I’m dizzy and deja-vuish, feeling more and more the way I felt during the original 1990 Gulf War, watching CNN as American troops poured into the region, listening to the nightly histrionics that Hussein would invade Kuwait any day now, the US would retaliate, all the while stupidly thinking the US wouldn’t be so blatant, Hussein wouldn’t be so stupid. But suddenly the only images on TV were non-stop 24/7 clips of the US bombing iraqi motorcades, the retreating iraqi army, the US attack on Baghdad . . .
    I didn’t watch much TV or listen to much news for years afterwards.
    I get the same feelings about the Obamaroid Coup.

  52. Basil: I am so angry with the democratic leaders for foisting this fraud and crook, upon the American people. Some hope and change; just more Chicago-style politics at a national level.

  53. Is Massachusetts ready to dump Kerry
    The monarchy, of course, is the Kennedy Dynasty

    A Guest Editorial by Ken Pittman

    Jeff Beatty may be the man to finally beat the Massachusetts liberal. The Democratic Party’s accusation that the Republican Party is only for elitists has resonated with the fishermen, immigrants, construction crews and farmers of the Bay State since the civil war era.

    In the United States most people are accustomed to electing their leaders. However, in Massachusetts there is a sort of liberal Democratic monarchy which has had a grip on her citizens since the Great Depression.

    No Boston Democrat has ever ridden the coattails of the Kennedys better than John Forbes Kerry. The monarchy, of course, is the Kennedy Dynasty. Joseph Kennedy built a financial empire which quickly expanded into Boston’s political realm. The wheeling and dealing, intimidation and power grabs are all documented. The storied and tragic history of his sons we all know. What you may not know is how sympathy for the Kennedys has meant synergy for the Democratic Party in Massachusetts.

    No Boston Democrat has ever ridden the coattails of the Kennedys better than John Forbes Kerry. As a boy he sailed with JFK and at some point decided that he wanted to be like JFK but he needed parallels. He volunteered for Vietnam while in the navy, documenting his experiences on videotape. From Swift boat to Senate, Kerry’s plan worked. Standing in Ted Kennedy’s shadow wasn’t the goal but he failed to surpass Kennedy and has been far lesser in terms of “getting it done”. Kerry isn’t known in Washington for accomplishments in terms of tangible or visible things. Instead he specializes in being controversial on hot item issues. Say what you will about Kennedy but he brought the bacon home. Kerry? Not so much, though he has had a long-time love affair with the liberal media, giving birth to the nickname, “Live shot” Kerry .

    Kerry is credited in Vietnamese history books for turning the war around for the communists. He sided with Daniel Ortega against the Reagan Administration. Even the ultra-liberal Village Voice believes that, as the Senate Chairman on POW/MIA affairs, he covered up evidence that a significant number of live American POWs were not returned to America. He voted against the Iraq war before voting for it. He promised America that Hussein had WMDs before calling President Bush a liar for agreeing with him.

    Still, he has been returned to D.C. by the voters in Massachusetts four times. Will they do so again?

    The Monarchy continues for the Kennedys despite Ted’s brain tumor but Kerry’s days may be numbered.

    A Democrat has had the audacity to challenge Kerry in this year’s primary and despite Kerry trying to get “his” party to throw Ed O’Reilly off of the ballot, the little known trial attorney gained 23% of the delegates, needing only 15%. Former Mass Democratic Party chairman Chester Atkins said, “John is an important senator, an important partner to Ted Kennedy and an important national voice. To have John distracted by someone who is just a nuisance candidate would be unfortunate.”

    Republicans are elitists?

    The fact that almost 1 in 4 Democratic delegates want to see someone else represent Massachusetts as senator is astonishing. Recent polls have shown even more shocking results for the Democratic presidential nominee of ’04. A recent poll taken by Suffolk University (the only ones to get New Hampshire’s primary right) shows that only 38% of voters want to see Kerry re-elected. After the primary, Kerry has one of the best stories in the 2008 election season waiting.

    Meet Jeff Beatty. Beatty is a retired US Army Delta Force assault team commander, a former CIA counter-terrorist agent and served the FBI as a hostage crisis analyst. Beatty, a Harwich, Massachusetts resident recently sold a security consulting firm which he founded and ran for 12 years. This guy would make Tom Clancy blush. Beatty has appeared on all major television networks as a national security analyst. In that capacity:

    He predicted a package bombing 6 months before the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta
    He sent letters out to major airlines warning them to “harden the cockpit doors”. He urged security measures to prepare for hijackers who may use the planes as missiles. These letters went out in April of 2001.
    He was on the first Black Hawk helicopter ever shot down and then rescued American medical students in Grenada after he was wounded in the crash.
    Now Jeff Beatty is ready to take on Senator Kerry who was once thought to hold one of the safest seats in Washington until only a year ago. A Zogby Poll taken in July of 2007 showed that Kerry soundly defeats any Republican, Beatty included. However, the same poll shows a statistical tie when the same voters were allowed to review Beatty’s credentials.

    This could easily be the second most important race in America

    Beatty’s donor list is well over 30,000 and has the backing of many Special-Ops alumni.
    Beatty, who was adopted at the ripe old age of 4 days, doesn’t know what his ethnicity is other than to say he is an American. He claims he never thought of himself as someone who would run for office but after 9/11, he knows, in his mind, America can do better than John Kerry who missed over 75% of the Select Senate Committee on Intelligence meetings during the 1990s when the US was under constant attack by Islamic zealots (for those paying attention and not catching the waves on Nantucket). Beatty thinks he will be more engaged than Kerry who wasn’t present for one committee meeting for over a year after the first bombing of the World Trade Center.

    Beatty is also making inroads with territory thought to be a Democratic given; labor.
    Beatty is meeting with union officials reminding them of Kerry’s coddling of illegal immigrants who are seizing their jobs. Beatty also points out that the New Bedford fisheries union has disintegrated without any resistance from Senator Kerry.

    This could easily be the second most important race in America this November. If the bluest state in the union actually gives the boot to a liberal icon like John Kerry for a CIA counter-terrorist and Special Forces alumni such as Jeff Beatty, that would be a significant message to the nation and to the world.


  54. basil 9, I predicted that as soon as I heard about the Rezko thing. Its just ridiculous, I mean Blogjevich said Rezko helped Nancy Pelosi, so why do now know that she wants the fraud put in.

    The stupid idiots must realize that we (the opposition) is going to do everything possible to make sure he isn’t elected!

  55. Poll shows Kerry vulnerable, but is that good news for O’Reilly?
    By Edward Mason
    Staff writer

    June 19, 2008 12:02 am

    BOSTON — A recent Suffolk University poll that indicates a thin majority of voters are dissatisfied with U.S. Sen. John Kerry, would seemingly be good news for Gloucester attorney Edward O’Reilly, Kerry’s Democratic primary challenger.

    But Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos, who conducted the poll, said private surveys he’s conducted for other clients, and which weren’t released, show O’Reilly substantially behind the junior senator, no closer than 20 points anywhere in the state. In one typical district, O’Reilly is down 57 percent to 26 percent.

    “I haven’t seen a scenario where the (polling) numbers are close,” Paleologos said.

    Yet O’Reilly said he’s upbeat. O’Reilly said he expected the results to be even worse, given that he was virtually unknown before the June 7 Democratic Party convention.

    “I thought I’d come out in the teens,” O’Reilly said.

    The 7NEWS/Suffolk University poll of 500 Massachusetts general election voters was conducted by Paleologos between Sunday, June 8, through Tuesday, June 10.

    It indicated that 51 percent of respondents said it was time to give someone else a chance, while 38 percent said Kerry should be re-elected. Nine percent were undecided.

    A Suffolk University poll in April 2007 also found support for the junior senator soft.

    O’Reilly, a former Gloucester city councilor running his first statewide race, said the poll gives him hope.

    “People down a lot more than me have come back to win,” O’Reilly said.

    Suffolk found that a credible candidate could knock off Kerry, who was elected to the Senate in 1984. Respondents were not asked if they preferred O’Reilly or the Republican candidate, Jeff Beatty of Harwich. Paleologos said O’Reilly doesn’t appear to be that candidate.

    “He (O’Reilly) could be credible on the issues,” Paleologos said. “But looking at the cold, hard numbers, I haven’t seen a district where O’Reilly was close.”

    Besides being less well known, O’Reilly is significantly outgunned by Kerry, who has more than $9 million in the bank compared with O’Reilly’s nearly $300,000.

    O’Reilly said he’s counting on improved name and issues recognition through free media. He’s appeared on radio and television in recent days, and his strong performance at the convention earned him statewide media coverage.

    He also hopes a series of debates and town meeting-style forums he’s proposed, but which Kerry has not committed to, will help him gain ground.

    O’Reilly also expects that voters unenrolled with a particular party, a majority in Massachusetts, will propel him to a win.

    “Unenrolled voters are a group I haven’t tapped into yet,” O’Reilly said.

    Fifty-six percent of unenrollled voters want Kerry replaced, compared with 34 percent who want him re-elected, according to the poll.

    That may not help O’Reilly, though. Unenrolled voters tend to stay home for the party primaries, Paleologos said, and come out in big numbers for the general election. Since O’Reilly is challenging Kerry in the primary, that does not bode well, Paleologos said.

    But that could help Beatty, the Republican, in November.

    “A big influx of independents, who knows what happens here,” Paleologos said.

    The margin of error for the June 8 to 10 poll is plus or minus 4.40 percent at a 95 percent level of confidence..Marginals and 130 pages of cross-tabulation data are posted on the Suffolk University Political Research Center Web site http://www.suffolk.edu/college/1450.html.

    Edward Mason may be contacted at emason@gloucestertimes.com.


  56. This whole government is in the pocket of big business and the crooks are on both sides of the fence(dem and rep)! When Nancy got the Speaker of the House on the campaign of bringing the troops home and making bush and co. own up to their illegal activities and possible impeachment, she once she was in chose to take impeachment off the table and she never brought the troops home. I think the dems behind BO are in bed with Bush and the Retards are made a deal to knock Hillary out. They don’t want her in because of her wanting to help the middle class. They also know she wouldn’t change Fitzgerald, she would let him get the job done. Now the delimma, is do we know if McCain is going to replace him if he is elected??? I don’t think so, that why some of them don’t like him, but I don’t know!

  57. Poll shows Kerry vulnerable, but is that good news for O’Reilly?
    By Edward Mason
    Staff writer

    June 19, 2008 12:02 am

    BOSTON — A recent Suffolk University poll that indicates a thin majority of voters are dissatisfied with U.S. Sen. John Kerry, would seemingly be good news for Gloucester attorney Edward O’Reilly, Kerry’s Democratic primary challenger.

    But Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos, who conducted the poll, said private surveys he’s conducted for other clients, and which weren’t released, show O’Reilly substantially behind the junior senator, no closer than 20 points anywhere in the state. In one typical district, O’Reilly is down 57 percent to 26 percent.

    “I haven’t seen a scenario where the (polling) numbers are close,” Paleologos said.

    Yet O’Reilly said he’s upbeat. O’Reilly said he expected the results to be even worse, given that he was virtually unknown before the June 7 Democratic Party convention.

    “I thought I’d come out in the teens,” O’Reilly said.

    The 7NEWS/Suffolk University poll of 500 Massachusetts general election voters was conducted by Paleologos between Sunday, June 8, through Tuesday, June 10.

    It indicated that 51 percent of respondents said it was time to give someone else a chance, while 38 percent said Kerry should be re-elected. Nine percent were undecided.

    A Suffolk University poll in April 2007 also found support for the junior senator soft.

    O’Reilly, a former Gloucester city councilor running his first statewide race, said the poll gives him hope.

    “People down a lot more than me have come back to win,” O’Reilly said.

    Suffolk found that a credible candidate could knock off Kerry, who was elected to the Senate in 1984. Respondents were not asked if they preferred O’Reilly or the Republican candidate, Jeff Beatty of Harwich. Paleologos said O’Reilly doesn’t appear to be that candidate.

    “He (O’Reilly) could be credible on the issues,” Paleologos said. “But looking at the cold, hard numbers, I haven’t seen a district where O’Reilly was close.”

    Besides being less well known, O’Reilly is significantly outgunned by Kerry, who has more than $9 million in the bank compared with O’Reilly’s nearly $300,000.

    O’Reilly said he’s counting on improved name and issues recognition through free media. He’s appeared on radio and television in recent days, and his strong performance at the convention earned him statewide media coverage.

    He also hopes a series of debates and town meeting-style forums he’s proposed, but which Kerry has not committed to, will help him gain ground.

    O’Reilly also expects that voters unenrolled with a particular party, a majority in Massachusetts, will propel him to a win.

    “Unenrolled voters are a group I haven’t tapped into yet,” O’Reilly said.

    Fifty-six percent of unenrollled voters want Kerry replaced, compared with 34 percent who want him re-elected, according to the poll.

    That may not help O’Reilly, though. Unenrolled voters tend to stay home for the party primaries, Paleologos said, and come out in big numbers for the general election. Since O’Reilly is challenging Kerry in the primary, that does not bode well, Paleologos said.

    But that could help Beatty, the Republican, in November.

    “A big influx of independents, who knows what happens here,” Paleologos said.

    The margin of error for the June 8 to 10 poll is plus or minus 4.40 percent at a 95 percent level of confidence..Marginals and 130 pages of cross-tabulation data are posted on the Suffolk University Political Research Center Web site http://www.suffolk.edu/college/1450.html.

  58. kostner, We sure need to get that margin wider for McCain. We all know BO and CO. can make dead people vote. I know he is getting all the felons elected, so we are going to have to campaign hard after the convention in August. Of coarse, the shoe that will drop in October “the whitey tape” should help McCain in a big way. I am scared this fraud just might pull this off and if this happens I’m moving to Canada!

  59. I hope O’Reilly either takes Kerry out or softens him up and then Beatty defeats him.

    That would be a gigantic blow to the coupists.

    Ofraudma is falling apart. Dobson torpedoed him, his numbers are in free fall, and Fitzgerald and Sinclair are poised to bring him down permanently.

    Excellent. Let’s fan the flames as hard as we can on every front.

    Ofraudma is teetering. Time to put him on his ass, for good.

  60. Kerry Prepared To Go Down In Flames In November


    John Kerry is facing his first primary challenge in 24 years from upstart Ed O’Reilly. Poll numbers suggest of general election voters, only 38% believe Kerry should return to Washington. Many cite the lack of work he’s done for the state. Others point to his endorsement of Barack Obama when an overwhelming majority voted against him. Some also note he voted to authorize the war in Iraq and their not happy about that.

    Seeing though it looks like Republicans will pick up a seat in November in Massachusetts as Sen. Kerry goes down in flames, Democrats should probably focus on beating Kerry with O’Reilly to prevent such a loss. Reportedly, John called Teresa on the farm in Pennsylvania crying that he was going to have to work and didn’t know what to do. 2008 is getting interesting.

    On another note, since we’re discussing Massachusetts politics, Ja, that Ted Kennedy, he’s some, well, portly guy.. Word has it the stairs in the Senate chamber on the side where Democrats hang out are starting to buckle, the same stairs Kennedy has walked up and down for 40 years. But Teddy rushed to the rescue to offer a new plan. He called on a tax hike on diet food to pay for it’s refurbishment.

    Then there is Jimmy Carter and Al Gore, who were sitting around at a local salon getting a pedicure, reminiscing about good ol’ times. Jimmy asked Al what his fondest memory was and Al replied inventing the Internet Jim, what else! Jimmy said yes that was something Al. Al asked Jimmy what his favorite memory was. Jimmy stopped for a moment and contemplated. He then said you know Al, it had to have been when I sought my daughter Amy’s advice on the proper procedures for packing belongings into a moving van and the quickest driving route from D.C. to Georgia.

    Ja, those Obama supporters are something else. Reportedly they are willing to approach Clinton supporters now to heal the party. They’ve drived-by three already.


  61. Hey John Kerry:

    Unload yourself of the joke that is Obama, that’s step #1 if you want to win in November.

    He just gave you all the cover you need by punking the left on FISA.

    You want an excuse, now you have it.

    If you tie your wagon to Obama, you and Teresa will be spending a lot more time together soon.

    BaJoke isn’t Midas or Messiah, he’s Medusa.

    And guess who’s candidacy he’s looking at now and turning to stone?

    Free John Kerry — from Barack Hussein Obama.

  62. Just want to encourage others to go and post in the comments section of the LA Times article which Admin posted a link to near the top of the comments. I was able to post there (they moderate the comments) and my post went up as “Paul F. Villarreal | June 27, 2008 at 10:28 AM” (the blog keeps Pacific time, natually).

    The media is catching on. Let’s help them understand the depth of our cause.

  63. Agreed Universal, about posting on L.A. Times site and elsewhere. Part of the mission of Big Pink is to spread the word as far and wide as possible.

    We are getting the word out. In 2008 Unity is a location not a state of mind for Democrats. Unity, New Hampshire is without doubt a lovely town though Obama probably thinks it is filled with bitter, clingy Americans.

  64. The following is why you cann’t just write in Hillary name or not vote or vote thirth party. you have to vote Mccain to defeat BHO.

    Turnout is the Recipe for a Landslide
    Charlie Cook: “It is entirely plausible that McCain will attract as many votes as President Bush did in 2004, given that Republicans often vote out of habit or a feeling of civic duty. But there is a very good chance that Obama will receive a record number of votes, far exceeding what John Kerry got in 2004. And pollsters might not be able to detect a turnout surge in advance.”

  65. basil9 Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 3:58 pm


    Why is HRC cooperating?

    Hill is thinking of her future, either in 2012, or in August. If Obama encounters a candidacy-killing event (Rezko, birth certificate, etc.), and SDs want to switch, Hillary has to show what a good sport she was.

  66. Universal, I doubt Kerry will do an about face regarding Obama. He’s in too deep. Of course, if he had any sense…

  67. For the third straight day, Gallup Poll Daily tracking shows Barack Obama and John McCain tied in national registered voter preferences for the fall election, each now with 44% of the vote

  68. The Feminist Threat
    by Rachael Barkow@Obamapost

    Almost 40 percent of Senator Hillary Clinton’s supporters either favor Senator John McCain or are undecided, according to the latest Associated Press-Yahoo News poll. Some media accounts have spun this as a glass-is-half-full scenario for Senator Barack Obama because more than half of Clinton’s supporters intend to vote for him. Today’s joint Clinton/Obama rally in Unity, New Hampshire is an effort to increase that number. But whatever the data mean for Obama, the cup is hardly running over for the feminist movement.

    Undoubtedly, women account for a considerable chunk of that 40 percent. And, equally likely, most of these women must be, like Senator Clinton herself, committed advocates of a woman’s right to choose whether to have an abortion – one of the defining causes of the feminist movement in the past four decades. How can these same women be unsure of their vote in November or, worse yet, committed to John McCain, perhaps the most anti-choice candidate in history?

    The answers are bleak for feminists. These women are either ignorant or angry.

    So, let’s start with the women who have not yet bothered to consider what a vote for McCain would mean for women’s rights. A recent poll commissioned by Planned Parenthood found that half of women supporting Senator McCain in battleground states did not know his position on abortion. In fact, George Will estimated that three-quarters of the country do not know McCain is pro-life. The lack of knowledge is not because the facts are up for debate. Senator McCain has stated publicly and unequivocally his views on abortion: he told a group of supporters in South Carolina this year that “I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned.” And he has a long record of opposing abortion rights. He voted against allocating federal Medicaid funds for abortion even when the woman was the victim of rape or incest. He supported a complete ban on women in the military getting abortions at overseas military hospitals even when those women use their own money.

    Senator McCain’s lack of concern for the health of women goes further than his stance on abortion. He opposes requirements on health care plans to provide contraceptive coverage. He endorses an abstinence-only approach to sex education.

    And lest there be any doubt how these views would translate to his judicial nominees, Senator McCain has made it crystal clear in a recent speech that he will support judges who share his views, including his anti-abortion stance. As with so many things, he intends to follow the path of President George W. Bush; he is on the record stating that he will select Justices in the mold of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, jurists who have already demonstrated an unwavering conservative voting record.

    Senator Obama, in contrast, has pledged to make the preservation of “women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President.” He voted against Justices Roberts and Alito and has made clear that he wants “people on the bench who have enough empathy, enough feeling, for what ordinary people are going through.”

    This is not merely a theoretical disagreement between candidates. We are one vote away from having a majority of the Court hostile to Roe v. Wade, and the next President will replace at least one Justice who supports abortion rights and probably more. But some of Hillary Clinton’s supporters have not even bothered to engage in the 10-second Google search that would give them McCain’s positions on these issues.

    But what about the women who do know the facts? Some of the women in that 40 percent must know McCain’s views on these issues and are not fooled by his campaign’s efforts to appear friendly to women by prominently featuring the female former CEOs of Hewlett-Packard and eBay. Informed female supporters of Hillary Clinton should be lining up to volunteer for Barack Obama. That a sizeable portion of them are unsure what to do next isn’t just bad news for Senator Obama. It’s bad news for the women’s movement.

    A woman’s right to choose and reproductive freedom have been central pillars of the women’s movement. If these women no longer feel strongly about those issues, on what basis are they now voting?

    Is there another cause or issue greater than this one for these feminists? Certainly one can think of many pressing concerns. But Senator Obama is aligned with Senator Clinton on almost every major policy issue – and Senator McCain is not.

    The most likely answer to the question of why some of these women are supporting McCain or are undecided is a frightening one for the feminist movement. It seems that many of these women would cast their vote for McCain to demonstrate their fury at Hillary Clinton’s failure to secure the Democratic nomination.

    Cynthia Ruccia, the co-founder of a group of Ohio Clinton supporters angered by what they saw as sexism during the primary campaign, says she plans to vote for Senator McCain even though she favors abortion rights. “Sexism is neither Democratic nor Republican, and it needs to stop,” she said.

    But a protest vote for Senator McCain as a way of decrying sexism simply doesn’t make sense. One of the hallmarks of the women’s movement –until now – has been its focus on action and results, not self-destructive symbols or the cult of personality.

    Another has been to challenge the stereotype that women are too emotional to be trusted in positions of power where important decisions are made.

    If these women cast their ballots in ignorance or a fit of rage, the glass wouldn’t just be half empty for feminists. It would be shattered – and that’s not the glass feminists have been trying to break through all these years.

    Seem like someone is angry that Women have a brain and will not LIE DOWN AND BE ABUSED. I don’t see KICK ME on the back of my VALUES and let’s see…when then ROE vs WADE and the SUPREME court because the central stand of the WOMEN RIGHTS MOVEMENT?

    I mean we’re are being TOLD by MEN what our FIGHT should be about and it is NOT SEXISM AND MYSOGINY?

  69. Many of us got Howie’s request for our $$ yesterday.

    It was cleverly disguised as a demand, BTW.

    Here is my response…and it fits right in w/ Admin’s approach:

    to democraticparty

    show details 6:10 PM (22 hours ago)


    I agree Dr. Dean, you do have your work cut out for you…like bringing the many milllions of Hillary Clinton’s supporters and associated delegates into the DNC fold. Three things you must do immediately:

    1) see to it that national delegate status is restored to any delegate who has been stripped of their right to go to Denver because said delegate is a Clinton supporter.

    2) immediately make a public statement about the national convention’s first ballot process and who will be on that ballot.

    3) have a little tete-a-tete with Speaker Pelosi about her public appearences. I know you do not have cable TV…neither do I. But you need to get a copy of the speaker’s June 24, 2008 appearence on Greta Van Susteren’ s program. I imagine you have a staff person who owns a Tivo and can make a copy for you. Watch for this question from the speaker to Ms. Van Susteren: PELOSI: “What are they outraged about?” Could she be any more dismissive and condecending toward Senator Clinton and the millions of Democrats who supported her?

    Not a good way to bring us along, Dr. Dean. Not good at all.


    P.S. Opps, forgot to respond to the “donate” part: not on your life. Not until you start treating Senator Clinton like the political asset she is to the Democrat Party.


  70. Kostner, some of the Obama incense burners actually believed Obama would win with double digit leads. Obama used to say he would not be happy with “only” a 51% victory. Now, the Hopium is beginning to wear off and they realize presidential election landslides are a thing of the past.

  71. carbynew,

    Obamabots are playing their abortion terror card again. It’s quite amusing actually.

  72. admin,

    On ‘no quarter’, there’s a great youtube video, the guy is lecturing how to debunk programmed obamabots’ talking points. I can’t find the link. It’s great.

  73. I am really sorry…

    Democratic Party…not Democrat Party.

    Have some new software, and I apologize.

  74. She Had Such Nice Things to Say
    To get McCain elected, Carly Fiorina is talking up … Hillary.

    Jonathan Darman
    Updated: 2:35 PM ET Jun 14, 2008

    For the past 15 months, Carly Fiorina has given her life to John McCain. A brand-name businesswoman owing to her tumultuous tenure as CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina serves as “victory chairwoman” of the Republican National Committee and is the McCain campaign’s most outspoken and energetic female surrogate. But as she strolled around a dining room in the battleground state of Ohio last week, praising “a focused, determined, intelligent, empathetic, powerful leader,” she wasn’t talking about the GOP nominee. She was talking about Hillary Clinton—a woman, she told the 50 women gathered to see her in a Columbus suburb, who’d been wronged. “Women in positions of authority, particularly bold women who are trying to change things, are … caricatured differently, commented upon differently and held to different standards,” she said. “I watched all of this happen to Hillary Clinton.”

    This kind of talk was candy for the crowd—and Fiorina knew it. She’d traveled to Columbus at the invitation of Women for Fair Politics, a coalition of Ohio Clinton supporters formed to protest what they see as an injustice done to Hillary by the Democratic Party. Two weeks after their candidate dropped out of the race, the group’s founders are far from falling in line behind Obama, a man they accuse of “Swift Boating” the Clintons and participating in an act of sexism. Mostly lifelong Democrats, the group reached out to Fiorina as part of a broader bolt toward the GOP. “We need to elect John McCain in 2008,” said Cynthia Ruccia, a Franklin County Democratic Party official and group cofounder. “That’s the only way the Democratic Party will learn it can’t treat women this way.”

    The War for Women is on. In the two weeks since Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, the GOP has pushed women to give its candidate a second look, lavishing praise on Clinton, wallpapering cable TV with female surrogates and, ever so discreetly, reminding female voters just how moderate McCain can be. While Republicans are happy to help sow Democratic discord (six of 10 men at the Columbus gathering were from the McCain campaign), few in either party expect a massive defection of liberal women. But the McCain campaign thinks that distaste over what happened to Clinton, combined with its candidate’s appeal, could help McCain break through to independent females. They are a serious prize for the senator. With women making up 56 percent of the swing vote, according to a recent Rasmussen poll, wooing women could be McCain’s most important task.

    Fiorina is eager to be his ambassador, using her legendary communications skills to soften McCain’s image. In the corporate world, she was known for embracing risk, and on the stump, she tries to make a virtue of McCain’s weakest points. In Columbus, unprompted, she brought up Iraq: “When he said, ‘President Bush, you’re wrong about how to prosecute the war in Iraq … and Donald Rumsfeld [is] the worst secretary of Defense in history’ … the Republican Party beat him every day.”

    But at H-P, Fiorina also earned a reputation for sometimes using her superior sales skills to mask underlying problems with the product. Trying to ease the Columbus women’s fears about McCain’s pro-life views, Fiorina claimed the senator “has never signed on to efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade.” (McCain said in 2007 he thought Roe “should be overturned.”) In her presentation, she strayed far from the GOP comfort zone, telling voters McCain “will not drill in ANWR [the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]” and “diversity is about competitive survival.”

    These are the kinds of liberties a surrogate can take in the early days of a general-election campaign. But they reflect a broader dilemma facing McCain: as primary-season memories fade, can he really compete for women without losing his base? It’ll take more than good surrogacy. Between now and November, some of the women who are furious with Obama might remember that there was a time when they were equally mad at George W. Bush and the GOP. Jimi James, a 77-year-old retired schoolteacher, nodded approvingly for most of Fiorina’s talk. But afterward she said that, mad as she was at Obama, she couldn’t vote for McCain. “He seems like a decent man,” she said. “But at the end of the day, you can’t trust the right wing.”

    Please remember this is a NEWSWEEK article and they are in the TANK for OBAMALAND.

  75. No unity, no money. I have previously given money to first Democratic 2nd Dist. Rep. Dave Loebsack and volunteered for him in 2006. First time I ever gave the Democrats money. Then I gave money to Sen. Claire McCaskill in her campaign against Talent in Missouri. Never again. I made hundreds of phone calls for Sen. Amy Klobuchar in Wisconsin as part of my volunteering for Moveon.org. Never again. I quit Moveon.org for endorsing Barack Obama. I’ve given money to Emily’s List. No more.

    I still support Hillary Clinton, and I’ve given her money many times. I will no longer give money to any Democrats except my county supervisor, Terrence Neuzil, a good guy whom I know personally. I despise what Howard Dean did as chairman of the DNC. No money, no support for him. Not ever. Same goes for Nancy Pelosi.

    I am so mad I am not going to vote for Barack Obama.

  76. Admin:

    You have been rolling the last week or so, and thank goodness for that. Not only are you prolific but your pieces are fantastic! Great work!

    I agree completely. I just got back from posting two more comments on the WaPo article on the PUMAs:


    There are many excellent comments there from those in our movement as well as the predictable astrotroll attempt to try to con the media people that they are the majority and not the minority of numbers which they in fact are.

    And that is why, like Admin is saying, it is crucial to go and hit these comment sections and other media outlets in concentrated, strategic ways. Not every post or place needs to be attended to, but places with more visibility like WaPo or the LAT should be. I have posted another comment on the LAT piece that is linked at the top of this comment section as well in answer to some totally disingenuous astrotroll who was trying to say that PUMAs seem ‘elitist.’

    Give me a break. Have you seen the results from the WV or KY primaries?

    Anyways, the astrotrolls and their leaders understand the the core battle being fought for on the ‘net and beyond is for the media narrative. And so the more that we show our strength in these comments sections and support articles like the WaPo’s and the LAT’s, the more coverage we will get. We have to continue to move the operation beyond just Fox News and get it out to as many distributors as possible so that they will do our work for us.

    Again, the astrotrolls understand this. One of the comments on the WaPo article was essentially “Hey, stop covering these PUMA people.”

    No way.

    Go out, spread the word and help get this info out beyond Big Pink’s borders. No need to kill ourselves here but if we all just keep doing what we have been doing, and doing it efficiently, pretty soon ‘the machine’ will scale our efforts for us.

    We’re winning now. You can feel the momentum swinging in a huge way. BaDork is on the ropes and it is up to us to keep him there, on the defensive.

    Love it!


  77. kostner wrote:

    For the third straight day, Gallup Poll Daily tracking shows Barack Obama and John McCain tied in national registered voter preferences for the fall election, each now with 44% of the vote

    Keep your eyes on those polls, folks! Bambi ain’t getting anywhere near the traction he said he would, and Republican strategists are licking their chops at the chance to win yet ANOTHER election against a wimpy, elitist, out-of-touch, all-talk-no-action Democratic candidate. Traditionally, in a political landscape like the one we have now, where Bush’s approval rating is in the gutter and Democrats have been turning out in record numbers, whomever the Democratic candidate is should have at least a 10-point lead. Leave it to Bambi not to.

  78. LAT’s article link that mentions Hillaryis44.org:


    Both the WaPo article and the LAT’s piece require that you be a registered member to post comments. The LAT moderates their comments and thus there is a delay on their posting.

    If you need to get registered, go for it and let the arrows fly!

  79. basil9 Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Sorry for multiple posts, but check this comment at NQ;

    ‘I have it from sources deep in the Chicago US Attorney’s office that they are actively pursuing charges against Obama but they understand the need for compelling irrefutable evidence and are proceeding with caution. The other side of this is that the US attorney’s office is well aware that if Obama wins before they can indict him and Daley, then Obama is going to replace Fitzgerald and kill the investigation post haste.’


    I’m envisioning this movie where our hero Patrick Fitzerald is racing against the clock to beat the fraud before he gets into the White House.

    So, this is why Obama ran for President? because otherwise, he would be sitting in Jail with the Governor and Rezko. That sure is an interesting incentive – 4 years ago, BO said he was uncomfortable running for President having not served in a day in the Senate and after serving a few months, NOW he was ready…OR was it because he would be facing jail otherwise.

  80. Hillary Said The Magic Words. What Now?Posted on June 9th, 2008 by The Stiletto in 2008 Election Coverage, All News, Arizona News, Civil Rights, Illinois News, New York News, Society and Culture, US News, US Politics



    Ellen Malcolm of Emily’s List, the pro-abortion women’s PAC that supported Hillary, tells The WaPo that while “Obama will have to work” to win the women’s vote, “[o]nce the spotlight is on the choice between Senator Obama and Senator McCain, the picture will become clearer.”

    Yes, but this clarity may have a surprising result.

    Cynthia Ubaldo, 44, of Columbus, OH, “switched her registration from Democratic to independent and donated $10 to Mr. McCain.” She tells The Times that Hillary’s endorsement is “a mandatory, empty gesture,” adding “I’m sure Hillary’s cussing Obama out to Bill and Chelsea as we speak.” She is not supporting McCain as a form of protest, she prefers him to Obama: “This guy is not a conservative.”

    In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Republican pollster Whit Ayres predicts, “There are going to be some real disgruntled women who feel like Barack Obama took what should have been Hillary Clinton’s because he wasn’t willing to be patient. John McCain is a very attractive alternative to people who are upset. He’s not a threatening Republican; he’s not a right-wing Republican.”

    For her part, The Stiletto has spoken to several Hillary supporters and feminists in New York who say they plan to stay home on election day (the vast majority) or to vote for McCain (a handful), whom they consider the lesser of two evils. Why? Dinkins.

    In a recent interview on “Your World With Neil Cavuto” a calm and coiffed Harriet Christian explains (video link) why she plans to vote for McCain in November:

    If Hillary Clinton does not get the nomination for president, I will not vote for Obama – not just because of Obama, but because I feel the Democratic Party has left me. I have not left them.

    McCain is rolling out the welcome mat for disaffected Hillary supporters, as well as independent women. Recent polling data suggests they may be receptive to his overtures, reports TownHall.com’s Amanda Carpenter:

    Primary race exit polling showed white female voters have supported Clinton by 24 more points than Obama and his favorability ratings among white women suffered a 13-point drop- from 56 percent to 43 percent – since last February, according to a May 29 Pew Research polling report. The same poll showed Obama losing that demographic by eight points to his GOP general election opponent John McCain, 41 to 49 percent.

    The gap was also apparent in a private poll conducted last month by McLaughlin & Associates last month. It found McCain had a 49 to 38 percent edge over Obama among white women nationwide. …

    “Most of us feel that the Democrats need to be taught a lesson for their silence on the subject of sexism and the peril they will find themselves in for ignoring their most loyal base of voters,” blogged Cynthia Ruccia, founder of Women for Fair Politics, Thursday. “I for one, believe strongly that when it comes to sexism, we will continue to be treated savagely the way Hillary was treated if we don’t speak up now and always.”

    Washington-Post ABC News polling over a three-month period, suggests that up to 25 percent of Hillary’s core supporters will “defect” to McCain. A Pew Research Center poll conducted just before primary season ended put the number at 28 percent, reports the WaPo:

    Other data in the new Pew poll may add to the concern among some Democrats. In that survey, the percentage of Clinton supporters holding a positive view of Obama continues to slide: Forty-five percent of them view Obama favorably, down from 58 percent in December, before the voting started.

    The Clinton voters most open to switching sides this time in Post-ABC national data are white women, white voters without college degrees, older voters, moderates and those prioritizing experience over change. This is the most fertile territory for McCain to repeat the feat of one of McCain’s heroes, Ronald Reagan.

    Twenty-six percent of Democrats crossed party lines to vote for Reagan in 1980 after a bruising fight for the Democratic nomination between President Jimmy Carter and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) – a battle that lasted all the way to the convention.

    In a nod to her close-but-no-cigar achievement, Obama released a glad-handing statement thanking Hillary for her support: “I honor her today for the valiant and historic campaign she has run. She shattered barriers on behalf of my daughters and women everywhere, who now know that there are no limits to their dreams.” But Clinton donor Deborah Larkin tells The Times “It’s going to take more than … saying that Hillary has made great strides and that will help his children.”

    Some of Hillary’s supporters want Obama to put her on the ticket, warning that “Hillary is not interchangeable,” as Alida Black put it, adding that she won’t be appeased by another woman being selected for the Number Two spot.

    However, the veep spot isn’t good enough for women like Ubaldo and Christian. Here’s how Christian answers (video link) Neil Cavuto when he asks whether Obama will lose to McCain (“Absolutely”); whether Obama is qualified (“If he were a white man … he would have never jumped into the race with the inexperience that he has.”); whether she is concerned about McCain’s Supreme Court picks (“You have justices … there now who don’t uphold many of the things I believe in who are not appointed by Republicans.”); and whether she feels more comfortable with McCain running the country (“Absolutely.”).

    As for a “dream team” ticket, Christian makes it clear to Cavuto that she would vote for the ticket only if Obama was her veep, “because Hillary would be running the country, not Obama.” Otherwise, she’s sticking with McCain.

    By the way: In one of his typically thoughtful and erudite articles, “When Disadvantages Collide,” the WaPo’s Shankar Vedantam writes:

    In the Democratic nomination battle, black women have found themselves in a … bind. Whether you are talking about Obama supporters such as Oprah Winfrey, or Clinton supporters such as Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) … black women are accused of treachery: Clinton supporters are accused of being race traitors and Obama supporters are accused of being traitors to their sex.

    Well, The Stiletto is a woman and a Republican – which puts her in a bind as well (not that anyone in the MSM seems to notice or care). As a feminist, The Stiletto would have liked the option of electing a woman president. As a Republican, she would have voted against Hillary because of her policy positions. Still, she is deeply disappointed that she will not be able to step into the voting booth and see Hillary’s name there.

  81. carbynew Says:
    “June 27th, 2008 at 4:46 pm

    “Kerry Prepared To Go Down In Flames In November”

    Reply to Carbynew,

    That’s great news!! I’ll donate to Sen. John Kerry’s Democratic rival in the primary, Ed(?) O’Reilly. I’d love to see that worthless son-of-a-gun Kerry go down. It’d serve him right. I held my nose when I voted for him for president.

    And here I thought for a minute that I wouldn’t donate to a Democrat. O’Reilly IS a Democrat, right?

  82. Gender becomes focus of Clinton campaign post-mortem
    By Thomas Fitzgerald/The Philadelphia Inquirer (MCT)
    Saturday, June 7, 2008 2:24 PM CDT

    PHILADELPHIA – Two hecklers interrupted Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s January campaign event in a high-school auditorium in Salem, N.H., demanding, “Iron my shirt! Iron my shirt!”

    Clinton paused as police escorted them outside. “Oh, the remnants of sexism – alive and well,” she said, adding, to applause, that she was hoping to “break through the highest and hardest glass ceiling.”
    Six months later, Clinton’s failure to crack that barrier is prompting an assessment beyond the usual dissection of a campaign’s tactical and strategic mistakes: What role did her gender play and what does it mean for the future?

    The consensus among pollsters, strategists and scholars is that Clinton’s experience will make it easier for the next woman to run for president. After all, Clinton raised about $200 million, got 18 million votes, and won the votes of droves white working-class men never expected to be part of her base.

    “For most voters, a woman president is no longer a hypothetical,” said Ellen Moran, executive director of Emily’s List, a group that works to elect Democratic women. “Now, we can see it. She answered the question of whether a woman can hold her own in a venue that has been male-dominated since the birth of the nation.”

    First, though, presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama will need to win over angry female Clinton supporters who have vowed not to vote for him.

    What Clinton called the “remnants of sexism” were pretty virulent. Consider the obscene T-shirts; some news media fixation on her pantsuits and appearance; some male commentators on cable TV who mocked her voice as shrill or joked about emasculation.

    More than that, though, some Clinton supporters saw discrimination in repeated calls from party leaders and pundits for her to withdraw, even though she was winning the later primaries. The same pressure has faced trailing male candidates in the past but it seemed disrespectful to many.

    “Women who have been the backbone of the Democratic Party feel our party has betrayed us – this was our time,” said Cynthia Ruccia, 55, a Mary Kay cosmetics dealer from Columbus, Ohio, who formed Clinton Supporters Count Too, a protest group. “This campaign brought out some very ugly fissures.”

    She said she’s going to vote for McCain. “Let’s see them try to win without us,” Ruccia said.

    Jennie Walker, 45, came to Clinton’s rally in New York City on Tuesday, the night Obama clinched. “I admire her for sticking it out,” said Walker, who will consider voting for the Republican. The last days of the primaries were “absurd,” she said. “No man would have been asked to quit. It’s so gender-biased.”

    Still, exit polls suggest that gender was a net positive for Clinton, forming a strong base that enabled her to get as far as she did because of rock-solid support from middle-aged white women, many of whom entered the work force in the 1960s and 1970s and identified strongly with her struggle for advancement.


  83. Oh, and I just want to say, explicitly, ‘thank you’ to you, Admin.

    You are, for sure, getting the word out and this site is, was and will remain a seminal beacon in the Clinton supporters’ bookmark list. And all of that is due to your own hard work and thoughtfulness.

    Thank you.

    Without you and Big Pink, our movement would be drastically reduced or even non-existent. It would be like culture’s progress without the development of the wheel.

    We all owe you a debt for that and it will not be forgotten, what you have done and are doing.

  84. Has anyone been to TM today. It is absolutely groce. There are bots talking dirty about Bambi and Hillary on the plane ride. It is disgusting. I wonder how Taylor feels now about her new bloggers, they are a sad bunch. Go look and get a barf bag while you do it!

  85. I just got off the phone with a reporter from the NY Times who called me seeking some info on the videos which I have been doing.

    Fantastic. The reporter literally called me while I was typing up the last post.

    I won’t say who it is yet because I don’t want to hurt their story (i.e., I don’t want someone to kill the story) but hopefully this can aid us in our cause.

    The person said they may call me back for fact checking. We’ll see how it goes.

    Anything that helps spread the message I’m for, whether it involves me, Big Pink, No Quarter, PUMA, JustSayNoDeal or whatever.

    The tide is turning, my friends.

    I can still here idiotic Toobin on CNN on the final days of the primaries saying that the numbers of HRC supporters who wouldn’t be coming into the fold were small and they were just middle aged women, or some such Toobin-speak.

    Hey Jeff: The WaPo, LAT and NYT is on the white courtesy phone for you.

    We, the majority of the party who voted for Clinton, are very real, very motivated and we’re not going anywhere and we’re not backing Ofraudma.

    Toobin, and all other Harvard Law grads, take note.

  86. Paul F. Villarreal (AKA Universal) Says:

    June 27th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
    Oh, and I just want to say, explicitly, ‘thank you’ to you, Admin.

    You are, for sure, getting the word out and this site is, was and will remain a seminal beacon in the Clinton supporters’ bookmark list. And all of that is due to your own hard work and thoughtfulness.

    Thank you.

    Without you and Big Pink, our movement would be drastically reduced or even non-existent. It would be like culture’s progress without the development of the wheel.

    We all owe you a debt for that and it will not be forgotten, what you have done and are doing.

    I wholeheartedly agree. I have been referring my friends to this site

    Thank you

  87. I suggest all of you watch Sarah Palin(Alaska governor)’s interview on CNBC. It’s the first time I saw this lady. She is absolutely terrific, very straightforward, no B.S.

    I sincerely hope McCain will pick her as V.P. I have no doubt she’ll be able to help McCain especially in light of the energy crisis we’re in. Oil prices are shooting to $143, democrats in congress are doing nothing. This will be a dream wedge issue if mccain is smart. Sarah Palin is the perfect surrogate to advocate for energy independence. She will help Mccain attract lots of Hillary’s female supporters in the end.

  88. Larry Johnson’s latest piece on ‘no quarter’.

    Let’s admit the reality–Keith Olbermann stinks. But I am not talking about an appalling lack of personal hygiene. Instead, it is his appalling hypocrisy. After spending most of the last year rebuking Hillary Clinton as a candidate who “would do anything” to win, he is now conspicuously silent as he reports on Barack Obama pandering to special interests and surrendering political positions previously considered immovable and sacrosanct.

    Glenn Greenwald offers a clever and devastating analysis of Olbermann’s malady with respect to FISA:

    On January 31 of this year, Keith Olbermann donned his most serious face and most indignant voice tone to rail against George Bush for supporting telecom immunity and revisions to FISA. In a 10-minute “Special Comment,” the MSNBC star condemned Bush for wanting to “retroactively immunize corporate criminals,” and said that telecom immnity is “an ex post facto law, which would clear the phone giants from responsibility for their systematic, aggressive and blatant collaboration with [Bush’s] illegal and unjustified spying on Americans under this flimsy guise of looking for any terrorists who are stupid enough to make a collect call or send a mass email.”

    Olbermann added that telecom amnesty was a “shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of Fascism — the merged efforts of government and corporations that answer to no government.” Noting the numerous telecom lobbyists connected to the Bush administration, Olbermann said:
    This is no longer just a farce in which protecting telecoms is dressed up as protecting us from terrorists conference cells. Now it begins to look like the bureaucrats of the Third Reich, trying to protect the Krupp family, the industrial giants, re-writing the laws of Germany for their benefit.

    . . . .Last night, Olbermann invited Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter onto his show to discuss Obama’s support for the FISA and telecom amnesty bill (video of the segment is here ). There wasn’t a syllable uttered about “immunizing corporate criminals” or “textbook examples of Fascism” or the Third Reich. There wasn’t a word of rational criticism of the bill either. Instead, the two media stars jointly hailed Obama’s bravery and strength — as evidenced by his “standing up to the left” in order to support this important centrist FISA compromise . . . .

    Leave aside the fact that Jonathan Alter, desperate to defend Obama, doesn’t have the slightest idea of what he’s talking about. How can a bill which increases the President’s authority to eavesdrop with no warrants over the current FISA law possibly be described as a restoration of the Fourth Amendment? That would be like describing a new law banning anti-war speech as a restoration of the First Amendment.

    As Jim Dempsey and Marty Lederman both note, not even the nation’s most foremost FISA experts really know the full extent to which this bill allows new warrantless spying. Obviously, Jonathan Alter has no idea what he’s saying, but nonetheless decrees that this bill — now that Obama supports it — restores the Fourth Amendment. Those are the Orwellian lengths to which people like Olbermann and Alter are apparently willing to go in order to offer their blind devotion to Barack Obama.

    Greenwald’s complete post (click here) is worth your time. And Olbermann? Well, he apparently is two ketchup packets shy of pitching a fit and is under extreme emotional distress as he comes to grip with the reality that he is not in the running to replace Timmy Russert. Poor Keith. Looks like he is auditioning to be the propaganda minister for a Brack Obama reign. If suspending critical thinking and indulging in hyperbole are requisite skills then Olbermann has the job nailed.

  89. This is the first of a series of articles to be written on a lengthy exposé published in the Boston Globe entitled “Grim Proving Ground for Obama’s Housing Policy.” The 27 JUN 2008 investigative report is required reading for all No Quarter users. The editorial board of No Quarter finds the evidence cited in Binyamin Appelbaum’s article very compelling, and we will attempt to unpack it in a series of short essays to be published this weekend.

    If Antoin “Tony” Rezko is Barack Obama’s slumlord patron from Chicago’s South Side, Cecil Butler is Rezko’s West Side counterpart. I quote:

    Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers – including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko – collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama’s campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama’s own accounting.

    One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.

    Similar to Rezko, Cecil Butler is a developer who profited from the privatization of low income, public housing in Chicago during the 1990s. Butler is also not coincidentally a major supporter of Barack Obama whose low income tenements were ultimately seized by the government for multiple building code violations.

  90. Paul and Kostner, I had not either been over to TM, but curiosity got me and I wanted to see what the bots were saying about the Unity Tour today. I have to say for the little I read before I got out was that it was pretty disgusting. BTW, most of them were just as nasty about Hillary after the UnityTour as before, so much for Unity Howard!

  91. Admin, I am really disappointed with Hillary. I wish she had not gone overboard supporting BO. Honestly I feel disappointed and deceived. I wish she just kept quiet. I feel her integrity is compromised with today’s rally.

  92. Hi. I’ve been kept from posting for the past week or so, first some connection problems, then some family ones.

    So allow this re-introduction my with my usual aplomb.

    They – the Keith Olbermanns and Nancy Pelosis of this world, remain nothing but a bunch of hideous cunts.

    Unity = Never.

  93. Jen the Michigander Says:

    June 27th, 2008 at 1:43 am
    Think of it this way… Let’s say Hillary pulls off an August coup and somehow manages to win the Dem nomination. Wonderful, but she can’t win the GE without support from at least some Obamabots. The party will have to unify for real then, and she’ll have two months to pull it off. So isn’t it better if she starts reaching out to the bHo supporters now? Yeah, it’s painful for us to watch. But it would be political suicide for her to tell those people to F off. She has to play nice right now. That’s what the Unity rally is all about. I don’t expect she’ll be doing many more of these things, but it’s necessary for her to go through the motions once in awhile and make it look like she’s putting forth some effort to bring the Dems together. She cannot publicly support the PUMA/Just Say No Deal movement, but I am sure she is aware that we exist and I’ve noticed she hasn’t done anything to stop us.

    No, I don’t believe for a minute that Hillary truly wants bHo to be our next president. She has to say it, but she doesn’t have to mean it. I haven’t yet heard her say it in a manner that convinces me she *does* mean it. I also don’t believe for a minute that she trusts Bambi as far as she can throw him. She’s like an atheist who’s being forced to go to church– she’ll bow her head along with the congregation so as not to offend them, but she ain’t feeling the spirit.

    As for Bwack, with his massive persecution complex, does anyone believe he trusts the Clintons and wants them around his campaign? He wants Hill’s donors’ $$$ and he wants her supporters to vote for him, but he doesn’t want to share the stage with Hillary or with Bill. He’ll toss them under the bus. I expect they know they’re gonna get tossed under that bus. Hillary and Bill are extraordinarily intelligent. They know what’s going on. They know what they have to do. I don’t enjoy watching it right now, but I trust their judgment.

    Well said!

  94. though if Hillary is to obtain the nomination in Aug, it has to be seen as legitimate and justified or else the fracture within the party will widen.

    So, basically, Obama has to be so damaged by whatever scandal comes out about him that no one, not even the Bots would think he can win anymore.

  95. Is this it for the unity tour? Are there any more? Please, Please, say there are no more.

    I did not watch it. Just reading what is on this site.


  96. Kostner,
    The mangled mess that is BO’s Chicago record will ultimately be capsulized by republicans, who live for such shit.

    In fact, it’s the ONLY thing they know how to do.

    But it will forever baffle me why Hill’s camp didn’t paint him as the sellout he is.

  97. blue democrat,

    I think mccain is a terrible campaigner. he seems so reluctant to unleash heavy artillary against bambi. I mean, bambi has lots of hideous things he can capitalize on, i don’t know why he has given bambi a pass so far?

    mccain is not very sharp, unfortunately.

  98. hi everyone its friday!
    well what a day it has been for our girl hillary, you got to admit she
    has alot of strength. i was so mad inside seeing our former first lady
    get treated like that, off to the side with her hads folded being bo

    everyone we must make it our first objective to pay off her debt
    so she does not have to rely on bo.

    lets all stick with the plan of a money bomb on fourth of july.
    she will be so suprised and thankfull.

    admin said hillary is talking to us in code, we must listen to her carefully
    and de code what she wants us to hear.

    if you noticed how quickly she left the stage he went one way she
    went the other, seemed like alot of supporters were there for her.

    i think she knows who we are, and inside she feels she is not alone,
    i bet you any money bill was talking up a storm of how mr obama
    was treating her today. i look for him to be very casual about

    i still feel hillary has a plan do any of you think like i do?

    ithink the more we call her supperdelegates and her money money
    people to talk to other donors and delegates to support her we
    could have a chance? they do not seem to like bo at all, they
    know his polices suck and he can not deliver the white house and
    that is their goal am i right? so we got to keep putting the buzz in
    their ears. they know we are here and not going anywhere.

    remember this is only june, if the media stars to wake up
    from there drunken obama hangover and we get the word out
    anything can happen. mr patrick fitzgerald seems to be on a mission
    he surley does not want to be replaced. so he racing against the
    clock. we got to help too.

    any suggestions? my friends

    we are in this to win this! lets get ready to rumble!

  99. It’s still a long way off from November, McCain is probably just waiting until September before he unleashes the real campaign.

    NObama in NOvember.

  100. birdgal (sorry for the delay in responding – i locked myself outta the house, couldn’t find my car keys, couldn’t remember the phone number of the renovator who has the other set of keys – yadayadayada)
    Anyway, IMHO the Undems and DNC are set on destroying her so why should she worry about their wrath?

    Confloyd, what did you predict? “I predicted that as soon as I heard about the Rezko thing.”I’m confused.

    Rgb; ‘Hill is thinking of her future..’ She HAS no future with the undems.

  101. ru099tuu,

    i rejected the premises that clinton has to rely on bambi to pay off her debt. The truth is both of them want to have a mutual benefit in terms of hauling in money. bambi’s internet well seems to be tapped out, he needs clinton big donors’ deep pockets badly since he forgoes the public financing. Clinton may also want bambi’s big donors’ money to pay off her debt. I really don’t think the big donors on either side want to give out though. Too much resentment.

    btw, i’m looking at todays Rasmussen KY poll. it strikes me this poll mirrors the exit poll very closely. 1/3 of democrats will back Mccain.

    John McCain still has a comfortable lead over Barack Obama in Kentucky despite the fact that the race has become closer by nine points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the Bluegrass State finds McCain up 51% to 35%.

    Last month, the Republican nominee led 57% to 32% before Obama clinched the Democratic nomination.

    McCain has a decisive 57% to 28% advantage among men in Kentucky, but only leads the Democrat by four points among women in the state. He earns support from 79% of Republicans and a third of Kentucky’s Democrats Obama only attracts half (50%) of Kentucky Democrats and trails by eleven among unaffiliated voters.

  102. John McCain blasts Jimmy Carter as ‘lousy president’

    Don’t you hate it when old Navy guys just can’t get along? John McCain took a swipe at Jimmy Carter the other day in an interview, with the transcript getting posted over at the Las Vegas Sun earlier today. As the folks at CNN’s Politicker point out, it’s not just a gratuitous political shot, since McCain has been trying to tie Obama to Carter, generally considered by the right (and quite a few centrists) to have been an ineffectual president.

    But the comments are a bit jarring. McCain was asked by interviewer Jon Ralston, a Nevada political observer and blogger, about Yucca Mountain and nuclear waste and Carter’s decision to end reprocessing, which McCain held up as a possible solution to the nuke waste problem.

    “Q: You know why he did that then? “A: Yes, because Carter was a lousy president …. This is the same guy who kissed Brezhnev ….”

  103. Clintondem99, think of it as a hostage situation. Don’t get angry with the hostage, get angry with the hostage taker. The hostage wants to break free but also make a clean getaway. 🙂

    Free Hillary!

  104. i can’t believe these bots.

    In the true communist spirit, Comrade Obama’s mindless minions are attacking anti-Obama blogs in a coordinated effort to silence any criticism of the hollow one. These Obama sycophants are using Google’s anti-spam mechanism to shut down blogs that expose Obama as the manipulative liar and smooth political con-man he truly is.

    In an effort to silence any criticism of their candidate, some very confused Obama supporters have been reporting our sites as “spam blogs”. Numerous reports to Google results in the site being locked down until further review. This has happened to numerous sites already as reported on the “Hillary or Bust” web site.

    Google must examine their anti-spam practices and policies so this type of activity can be stopped immediately. Any system that is this vulnerable to sabotage is in dire need of a major overhaul. Google must remedy this situation quickly or risk accusations of collusion.

    To the juvenile, sandal licking Obamaphiles doing this; know that you can never shut these blogs down permanently; you demonstrate that a vote for Obama is a vote for turning us into the Marxist States of America.

    The Lizard will fight on !!!

  105. I’m too tired but there were some good numbers quoted from a recent poll (gallup?). They polled Hillary supporters in April and again just now.

    McCain’s support was holding steady — 24%/23% iirc.
    Undecided had gone down some.
    Obama was up some, but I don’t know where his increase came from, as there were not enough breaking undecideds to account for it.

    Of course they headlined it something positive for Obama without mentioning the McCain solidarity.

  106. I’m not angry with Hillary. I wish, she did not have to play this awful and degrading game. With each passing day, and hearing reports of the bots behavior, solidifies my position that I am doing the right thing, by leaving the democratic ? party. This is a sad time in America. It is unbelievable, that this fraud and crook, has made it so far. What is wrong with people?

    Basil: no worries. I locked myself out of my bedroom, the other day, with two cats inside the room. So, I know, how that feels.

  107. admin,

    I get what you mean – “think of it as a hostage situation” – but what’s the ransom? And is there any escape?


  108. kostner,

    We COULD do the same thing and spam the bots . .


    birdgal – wouldn’t have been so time-consuming if i didn’t live in such a rural area. luckily my closest neighbor came to the rescue and drove me to the contractor’s house.

    Seeing internet pics of HRC with HIM were very depressing. It felt like the final nail had been hammered into the coffin. :-

  109. Neither the main stream media nor the Democratic Party nor even the Obama campaign itself has come to terms with the damage Obama’s tactics have done to our Party. The damage was facilitated by the media and the big blogs.

    Obama’s first task was controlling the media. Politicalcenter writes:

    Taking their cue from totalitarian regimes, Obama developed his own propaganda arm which spewed facts and figures to the media and made false claims designed to keep controversial issues dealing with the candidate off of the main stream media. At the same time, Obama attacked in merciless ways those who voiced opposition on various Internet systems and sources, including the media who dared to question him, and has now stopped debates in favor of tuning his message against McCain again with the help of completely compliant media.

    Consider that there’s a growing movement of determined progressives who are committed to Obama’s defeat. Our swelling numbers and strength of purpose are actually pretty shocking when you stop and think about it. The PUMA movement isn’t bitter or small; it’s radical and revolutionary: This is how parties are born and die. You are living history. SusanUnPC writes:

    Hundreds of thousands of Hillary Clinton supporters will NEVER vote for Barack Obama. And a great many will vote for John McCain simply because they believe he is qualified to be president, and that Barack Obama is NOT qualified or experienced enough — and we’re worried sick about such a teleprompter-dependent neophyte being handed the toughest job in the world.

    In addition to Obama’s race-baiting and thuggish tactics, Anglachel suggests that Obama’s problem is the illegitimacy of his nomination:

    The increasing rejection of Obama by voters is a measure of his declining legitimacy. People who once thought they would gladly vote for him, like me, are now implacably opposed to him. He is no longer legitimate in our eyes…Participating in and profiting from the media hatred of the Clintons, throwing out accusations of racism to try to forestall criticism and inflate AA vote counts, encouraging people to be “Obamacans” not Democrats, the “Democrat for a Day” strategy, engaging in intimidation and threats to extract caucus votes, aggressively trying to monopolize money specifically to silence alternative voices, and treating voters who do not choose him first with contempt.

    As Anglachel writes, there are several million of us who feel that Obama’s nomination is illegitimate, that his tactics are counter to our values as progressives, and that he is not the unity figure he claims to be. Indeed, Obama wears two masks: at one moment he gives high-minded speeches, at the next he is accusing Bill Clinton, a beloved former president, of racism.

    As progressives, we are repulsed by the totalitarian nature of Obama’s candidacy — creating a cult of personality, the venom espoused by his adherents, the delegate stealing — tactics that are repugnant to the many who have spent a lifetime working for democracy and social justice.

    Almost four years ago at DailyKos, DemFromCT wrote about Bush in ways which seem even more fitting for Obama today:

    I was intrigued to hear some of the theories on the talking heads shows; it’s culture issues, not class economic issues. Kerry’s reality-based, Bush is not. Bush has run for four years to select and indoctrinate those who believe him and everyone else is against him.

    During this primary season, Obama’s campaign used the big blogs as instruments to indoctrinate progressives and silence the opposition. Take the strike of DailyKos, for example. Imagine that this had happened at a progressive company: a group of women and men complain to management about rampant sexism and abuse. The manager, Kos in this case, regardless of his own agenda, would investigate and set limits on abusive language and behavior. Instead Kos, the proprietor of the biggest liberal blog, in a moment of unbelievable arrogance, calls their strike “laughable.” Feminism, justice, and respect are thrown out in favor of one candidate.

    Politicalcenter continues:

    The propaganda process was carefully managed turning everything damaging to Obama into racist or irrelevant issues. These included blatant refusals to print or to discuss clearly relevant issues to claims that any discussion was racism. Obama did not care about the truth. Only the message.

    From this vantage point, Obama’s continual attacks on Hillary Clinton supporters were continually repeated through numerous MSM channels with little or no questioning and constant support for the Obama view of the truth. Obama thereby created the most one-sided message system ever developed in US politics.

    The PUMA movement is the classic liberal fight against injustice. The ancestors to Just Say No Deal PUMAs are the abolitionists, the suffragettes, the labor movement, and the civil rights movement. We’re not bound to a particular party or a candidate. We’re joined together by our values. John Kennedy famously defined liberalism as:

    not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man’s ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.

    Based on our progressive values, we reject Obama’s use of race-baiting and sexism as political tools — although ignored by the press and perpetuated by bloggers — we have documented it and are emboldened by these injustices:

    Indeed, to this day, the Democrats have continued to use racism wherever they turn. From the Wright controversy, where Dean called the coverage racist, to the war against Geraldine Ferraro claiming that she is a racist, Obama has turned the tables dramatically against free speech and toward some other place that we dare not go or discuss.

    Our movement faces ridicule and obstacles but is born out of our principles, and we will not be silenced. We believe that Obama’s defeat will strengthen the progressive cause long-term, we vote our conscience and we will not be bullied into supporting a candidate and movement who consistently violates the progressive tenets that include free thought and expression.

    Riverdaughter perfectly expresses the progressive’s rational to reject to Obama. She writes:

    Time is not going to heal this wound. Oh, I take that back. If I wake up on Nov. 5 to find that Barack Obama, the inexperienced, untested, unvetted, lightweight candidate who we counted on you to stop, if I find that he is NOT my president, I will finally be over it. If the man who called me a racist because I thought he was unready does not take the oath in January, I will be satisfied. If all the people he threw under the bus, the old, poor, working class, Appalachians, woman, latinos, asians, gay and Muslims find that the Democratic Party is now genuinely shocked and chastened for screwing us over as well as any Republican would have done, then we will have exercised our power.

  110. Paul F. Villareal wrote:

    [Obama is] not only NOT a ‘change’ but even more of a typical politician than most.

    Exactly. Amen, brother. This is what’s so galling to me about Obama: he is one of the most cunning and craven politicians in the recent history of the Democratic party. The guy is a stuffed suit with a toothy grin, camera-ready smile, great speaking voice, and completely devoid of new ideas. Where are the new ideas?!? Where’s the real change?!? He’s just dusted off the standard Democratic policy platform and adds nothing of substance.

  111. Never forget this quote:

    “I am confident I will get her votes if I’m the nominee. It’s not clear she would get the votes I got if she were the nominee.” ~ Barack Obama, February 1, 2008

  112. El Bohemio
    Publicado el 06-27-2008

    Sen. Reid & Speaker Pelosi – Nothing More Than Liars & Hypocrites
    Hector M. Barajas
    Communications Director, California Republican Party

    “The Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid and the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi should be ashamed of themselves. They owe President Bush, Senator McCain, and our Latino community an apology.

    “While speaking last night at the National Association of Latino Elected Officials Conference, the Democratic leadership criticized President Bush and Sen. John McCain for failing to pass an immigration reform bill through Congress in 2007. While demagoguing immigration raids, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi tried to portray themselves as the saviors of Latinos. These types of baseless attacks have shown Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi to be nothing more than liars and hypocrites who will say anything to score a few political points whether they have the facts on their side or not.

    “Senator McCain has a long record of taking action on issues important to Latinos, including immigration reform, education, healthcare, and our military. While Sen. McCain has reached across the aisle to work on issues important to America, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi are once again playing politics to obscure their own records of failure in their leadership positions.

    “Sen. McCain has an immigration bill that bore his name, what about Sen. Reid or Speaker Pelosi?

    “Indeed, following the 2007 debates on the issue we have heard very little concerning immigration from the House or the Senate. Earlier this year, it was Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi who noted ‘that with a full congressional agenda and the general election on November 4th, there will be no room or time in 2008 to debate a pathway to legalization for the 12 million undocumented that currently live in our nation.’ Not exactly a profile in leadership.

    “The Democrats have failed to provide, let alone debate, immigration reform and if anything their deceit and lack of action has contributed to the continued deportation, raids, and family separation that plague many of our Latino communities. Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi’s willful neglect of the immigration issue, and their use of it as a wedge issue for Latinos now, is hypocritical, cowardly, and dishonest.

    “The Democrats have attacked Bush on what he has done for Latinos. But in the eight years that President Bush as been in office he has placed more people of color in positions of power than any other president in our entire United States history. The first Latino Attorney General, the first Latina Immigrant Treasurer, the second Latina Treasurer, the first Latino Secretary of Commerce, the first African American Secretary of State, the first female National Security Advisor, the first African American female Secretary of State, the first African American Secretary of Education and the first Asian American Secretary of Labor, and the first Asian American appointed to a President’s cabinet – this is action and accomplishment. What have the Democrats done?

    “The Democrat leadership has failed to take responsibility for their lack of leadership and their unwillingness to tackle the tough issues.

    “Latinos are not ignorant, nor should we be taken as fools. The Democrats have for too long taken this constituency for granted and Republicans have for too long remained silent.

    “No more. Latinos have a voice and it is time that we received answers for this type of patronizing and dishonesty from the leaders of the Democratic Party.”

    Univision: “There Will Be No Immigration Reform in 2008”

    “”… los líderes del legislativo dijeron el viernes que ante una apretada agenda legislativa y los comicios generales del 4 de noviembre, no habrá espacio ni tiempo en 2008 para debatir una vía de legalización para los 12 millones de indocumentados que viven en el país.”

    Translation: “… the congressional leaders stated Friday that with a full congressional agenda and the general election on November 4th, there will be no room or time in 2008 to debate a pathway to legalization for the 12 million undocumented that currently live in our nation.”

    “Creo que será muy difícil lograr una reforma migratoria integral -que reúna componentes de seguridad y una vía hacia la residencia permanente- en 2008″, dijo Reid,….”

    Translation: ” ‘I believe it will be very difficult to achieve a comprehensive immigration reform plan- the brings together the components of security and a pathway toward legalization- in 2008″, stated Reid,….” (“No Habrá Reforma Migratoria En 2008, Univision, 1/25/08)

    Democrats Block Immigration Reform Compromise – Appease Labor Unions

    “Conversely, Republicans fear that Senate Democrats, while appearing conciliatory, at heart want to bock passage of a Senate bill so that the GOP will be forced in this year’s congressional campaigns to defend the much more conservative bill that the House approved in December.” “The proximate cause of this week’s breakdown was a series of unusually procedural demands by Reid.” “Some Democrats may be cooling on the bill because of growing criticism of it from the AFL-CIO, which strongly opposes the measure’s provisions for a guest worker program.” (Ronald Brownstein, “Immigrant Bill Snared By Web Of Suspicion,” The Los Angeles Times, 4/8/06)

    [Democrats] Did Not Want To Expose Rank-And-File Democrats To Votes”

    As Bush blames Reid, so did Frist, Cornyn, and Spector, who said, “It’s not gone forward because there’s a political advantage for Democrats not to have an immigration bill.” Ted Kennedy, “who had seemed more eager than the Nevadan all week to find a compromise, declined several chance to offer a strong defense on his party’s leader.”

    Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and other opponents expressed frustration that Reid’s tactics meant they were unable to gain votes on proposals to toughen enforcement or to leave immigration policy unchanged until the border had been made secure. Republicans as a whole, including those who favored the immigration bill, decided in advance they would cast protest votes to emphasize their opposition to Reid’s maneuvering.

    “Democrats, meanwhile, had their own divisions, principally between Kennedy and others who favored negotiating a compromise and those who were more reluctant.

    “In private as well as public, Reid and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who heads the party’s campaign effort, said they did not want to expose rank-and-file Democrats to votes that would force them to choose between border security and immigrant rights, only to wind up with legislation that would be eviscerated in future negotiations with the House. (“Bush Blames Reid On Immigration Bill,” Associated Press, 4/9/06)

    “The Negotiation Almost Came Undone Because Reid Blocked Amendments”

    “At least now it’s out in the open. There was a hint of it last year when then-Minority Leader Harry Reid nearly put the kibosh on the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill. The negotiation almost came undone because Reid blocked amendments. Organized labor was pleased since it looked as if it would avoid the one element of reform that gives it the jitters: guest workers. And while Latinos were angry, Reid and Co. convinced them that it was Republicans who did them wrong – just in time for the 2006 elections.” (Ruben Navarrette, “Democratic Roadblock To Immigration Reform,” San Diego Union Tribune, 6/13/07)

    “The Villian In This Drama”: Democrat Leader Harry Reid

    “Who killed immigration reform? The autopsy shows it was Senate Democrats. It’s tempting to put a pox on both parties. But it wouldn’t be fair. Republicans were tireless in search of comprehensive, and bipartisan, reform. Sen. John McCain of Arizona joined with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to draft the guest-worker legislation, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter made that legislation central to what his committee sent to the full Senate. Sens. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and Sam Brownback of Kansas were vocal in their support. Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska offered a helpful compromise. And Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist showed leadership by reaching out to the other side. Too bad you can’t say the same for Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who was the villain in this drama.”

    “A deal was at hand that would have offered legal status to some illegal immigrants. It would have made the GOP seem more Latino-friendly, but it would also have infuriated organized labor, which opposes something that was in the mix: guest workers. After the Senate Judiciary Committee put out a guest-worker bill, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney issued a statement saying: “Guest-workers programs are a bad idea and harm all workers.” That did it. Senate Democrats sided with labor, and sold out Latinos. The deal came undone because Reid refused to allow the legislation to go through the amendment process.” (Ruben Navarrette, “The Democrats Sell Out Latinos,” San Diego Union Tribune 4/12/06)

  113. The pelosi/reid congress’ record is absolutely horrible. It’s a pure do-nothing congress. The only laws they passed such as FISA, Iraq funding bills were exactly what right wingers were asking for.

  114. From ‘The Confluence’.

    PUMAs are coming on! Let’s get this un-party started.
    Posted on June 27, 2008 by riverdaughter
    Whoo-Hoo! What a Friday! Let’s not wait until the evening to have a PUMA Cocktail Party. Let’s start now. Diane, our Mistress of Mischief, at JustSayNoDeal.com has sent the following schedule of events:


    Interview with MAWM! Neil Cavuto, FOX NEWS- 4:15pm

    MSNBC – INTERVIEW 4:30pm






    Diane sas she is fielding calls from the media in Japan and Germany as well. Hot damn! The Viral has gone Global!

    Conflucians, this primary season has been strange and tumultuous. The outcome is still, as yet, uncertain and we are very serious about our cause. We can not support or vote for Barack Obama because he is an unready candidate and the way in which he was selected by the DNC cancelled out the millions of voters in the bigger Democratic and Swing States where Clinton won decisively. We suspect that the fix was in since last year when the RBC penalized Florida and Michigan with a 100% loss of their delegates and in spite of what James Roosevelt, co-chairman of the RBC, says, we do not believe the outcome on May 31 was fair or within the rules. What we want is a fair and transparent convention where Hillary Clinton can make her case to the superdelegates and if we don’t get it, we will take our votes and walk.

    So, there’s the serious part. And we are sticking with it.

    Now, as to the means? Well, PUMAs, let’s leave that up to our oh so fertile imaginations.

    Cue the music:

  115. And people want us, to vote for the democrats? They have done NOTHING. Wait, the stimulus package was bipartisan. They have done everything, that Bush has wanted them to do, and they say McCain is Bush’s 3rd term. I don’t think so. I wonder, what the White House has on the democratic leadership? It’s the only thing that makes any sense.

  116. Kostner,
    McCain won’t have to go after BO, the Republican party – and their allies in the media – will do it for him.

  117. Anti-Obama online
    CNN.Com Video ^ | Added On June 27, 2008 | CNN.Com

    Posted on Saturday, June 28, 2008 12:13:15 AM by F15Eagle

    Hillary Clinton supporters with anti-Obama Web sites are rallying together online. CNN’s Abbi Tatton reports.

    (Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com …

  118. I love it that the PUMA movement is getting some MSM attention. I hope many, many more people sign up.

    So Hillary’s money people aren’t crazy about He Who Walks Behind The Rows? VERY good news. Reading the various pro-Hillary sites on the Net, one gets the impression that this is a movement of ordinary folks. It’s great to know that there are rich and powerful people who feel the same way we do.

    Patrick Fitzgerald… Let’s pray that he has all the evidence he needs to indict bHo and that this thing moves FAST.

    The Unity rally… Didn’t see it. Wasn’t home at the time. Hopefully Hillary won’t have to do another event of this ilk anytime soon. Surely, she has stuff to do in the Senate? From what I heard from people who did watch it, Hillary upstaged Bwack (no surprise there), so he probably won’t want her stealing his thunder again. He really does seem to have lost much of the charisma that he had back in the early months of this campaign. More and more, he either stammers out semi-coherent responses to questions or else he’s on the defensive. I am also noticing more negative stories about him in the media. It’s about time!

  119. No wonder Ellen of Emily’s List losing its clout. Remember hearing from my neice who worked the HRC campaign in Iowa about the ever-present impressive Ellen. For her to not stick with HRC against the voracious attacks from BHO camp is mind-boggling. When women like Ellen can’t hang tough keeping their loyalty, alliances and organizations in HRC corner – then they should lose their clout. BTW – Thanks to Ted Danson, Mary Steenbergen and Ron Howard in Iowa and beyond. Truer friends can’t be found to Hill and Bill.

  120. yep unity heck no!!! and Unity crap

    when i got home today i seen hillary on tv..with that lying thug fraud it made me sick to my stomach i turned it off.
    they want that flip flopper whimp..than having a real smart lady in there
    and hell of a politican,

  121. Another Obama kool-ade drinker facing a tough race….

    Now it’s Murphy facing challenge
    Print This Article

    The U.S. House freshman, an Iraq vet, is a GOP target. Opponent Tom Manion lost a son in the war last year.
    By Larry King

    Inquirer Staff Writer

    In 2006, Patrick Murphy was the wet-eared political greenhorn running earnestly for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    While many respected the young lawyer’s military service in Iraq, few thought Murphy could oust a well-known freshman Republican whose party long had dominated Pennsylvania’s Eighth Congressional District.

    Two years after Murphy’s paper-thin upset of Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick, the tables have turned.

    Murphy, 34, now finds himself the favored freshman incumbent under attack by a political novice also linked, indelibly, to the Iraq war.

    Tom Manion, 54, a Marine-turned-pharmaceutical-executive, was sadly dragged into the limelight last year when his son, Marine First Lt. Travis Manion, was killed in action in Iraq. Announcing his candidacy in January, Manion said his son had “given me a wake-up call that my service to this country is not over.”

    His challenge to Murphy has the makings of a fascinating race in Bucks County, a district that could be a bellwether for moderate swing districts around the country.

    “I think it’s going to be a tough election,” Murphy said in a telephone interview, acknowledging that Republican strategists had targeted his seat. “But I will not be outworked, [and] I have a record that I am very proud of.”

    Manion already has raised eyebrows with his fund-raising prowess, raking in more than $400,000 in the first quarter of 2008. He also has assembled a team of political operatives who have handled pivotal races elsewhere.

    “I have an old saying that money talks, and early money shouts,” said Charlie Gerow, a Republican strategist in Harrisburg. The GOP’s hopes of a Manion win “are one reason you’re seeing the A-team involved with him.”

    Still, Manion – a Johnson & Johnson executive who recently retired as a Marine Reserve colonel – casts himself as an outsider fed up with what he sees as partisan gridlock in Washington.

    “People really feel that Washington is broken,” he said in an interview at his Doylestown home. “People see that I’m not a politician, [but] if we want to make a difference we have to step out and be a part of it.”

    Both candidates say the economy is apt to be in the forefront of voters’ minds, yet no issue divides them more starkly than Iraq.

    Murphy’s 2003 tour in Baghdad left him disillusioned and angry with the Bush administration’s tactics there. He has emerged as a prominent congressional advocate for a scheduled withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and a renewed focus on Afghanistan and al-Qaeda.

    “Al-Qaeda has been able to reconstitute themselves so that they’re just as strong today as they were on 9/11,” Murphy said, “because we’re still bogged down refereeing a civil war in Iraq at a cost of $3 trillion to the American taxpayer.”

    Manion’s son had supported the troop surge when a sniper killed him near Fallujah in April 2007. Manion has acknowledged that mistakes have been made in conducting the war, but he opposes withdrawing before Iraq is stable enough to be self-governed. He said military leaders should be trusted to determine the timing and level of troop withdrawals.

    “You can’t let your enemy know what your plan is,” he said. “There are enormous consequences if we leave without stabilizing the area.”

    The troop surge is accomplishing that, Manion said. “Now we need to push on the diplomatic front to make sure the Iraqi government pulls it together and begins to govern themselves. We need to work with them and make sure they start covering some of the costs of what is happening over there.”

    In interviews, Manion makes little mention of President Bush, but says he looks forward to running with John McCain “because he is a big supporter of the surge.”

    Manion’s political quest is considered an uphill march on several counts.

    Foremost is Murphy’s incumbency. The name recognition, financial clout, and other political resources of office-holders have made Capitol Hill one of America’s most stable workplaces. More than 90 percent of incumbent candidates are reelected.

    Despite Manion’s fund-raising, for instance, Murphy’s campaign had about four times as much money on hand.

    Voter registration in the Eighth District continues to shift toward Democrats. This spring, the number of registered Democrats surpassed registered Republicans in Bucks County for the first time in 30 years.

    The district also includes Democrat-dominated slivers of Northeast Philadelphia and the Montgomery County townships of Abington, Upper Dublin and Upper Moreland.

    There are about 8,000 more Democrats than Republicans among the district’s nearly 462,000 voters. About 14 percent of the voters are registered with neither party.

    By comparison, Republicans held a 28,000-voter advantage in Bucks County in 2006.

    Republicans already have encountered rough sledding this year in some traditional strongholds. Three House special elections in Illinois, Mississippi and Louisiana went to Democrats – all in districts that Bush carried in 2004 by double-digit margins.

    “If you want to unseat an incumbent congressman, even a freshman, you’ve got to have a couple of things happen,” said G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College. “You have to have a set of issues that work, or you need something really unsavory about your opponent. I don’t see either here.”

    When Franklin and Marshall polled voters before the 2006 election, those in Southeastern Pennsylvania were more strongly against the war than those in other areas of the state, Madonna said.

    “Fitzpatrick would still be in his seat if it weren’t for the war,” Madonna said. “But I think it’s more about the economy now, and that helps Democrats more than Republicans.”

    Manion’s supporters note that even in a horrible political year – and with Gov. Rendell at the top of the 2006 ballot – Murphy won by only 1,518 votes, fewer than 1 percent.

    And in a county where Sen. Barack Obama – with Murphy his most prominent surrogate – lost miserably to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the presidential primary, the GOP hopes to make a play for independents and blue-collar Democrats.

    “The Democrats in Bucks County are not Obama Democrats. They’re Clinton-Casey-Rendell Democrats,” Gerow said.

    Manion’s story will resonate with these voters, Gerow said. “He has a good business background. He understands the economy and what needs to be done to get it moving again. He’s a nontraditional candidate, and that is a plus.”

    Democratic political consultant Larry Ceisler agreed that McCain could do well in Bucks County, boosting Manion’s prospects. “But I’d still rather say I’m with the party that supported Obama than to say I’m with the party of George Bush.”

    Whether Murphy hangs on or history repeats with a Manion upset, the campaign won’t be tame.

    Said Ken Spain, a national Republican spokesman: “It’s a sleeper race that could really catch fire at the end.”


  122. Kostner: the following highlights from an obscure study clearly indicate how the plan for Obama’s candidacy evolved from Dean’s 2003-2004 primary campaign. It should also be obvious that Dean’s stamp is clearly imprinted on Obama’s campaign, a fulfillment of Dean’s dream towards what Donna Brazile referred to on May 6, 2008, as a “new coalition”—it is grounded in the plan.

    Please note that the study says nothing about how to actually win an election, just how to manipulate voters and the mass media.

    The Plan

    #1: Influentials

    The “ten percent of the U.S. population who engage in two-step-flow, or tell their neighbors ‘what to buy, what politicians to support, where to vacation’.”
    Engaged in “making a political contribution to a candidate or political party, reading political email; forwarding it on, visiting a political web log, participating in a political chat room or visiting a news site for political information.”
    “A far larger percentage of them than the public at large is concerned that interest groups wield too much influence in the political process.”#2: Web influentials
    “Democratic outsiders, not sponsored by major political parties, or traditional Democratic interest groups.”
    Develop “new forms of participatory political advertising, which can influence [and] shape press coverage and voter perceptions of political candidates.” Note: Asked in question format, the rest of the “plan” makes it clear this is the goal.
    Individuals committed to the whole, with “social capital, or enhanced connections between people and groups.”
    “[O]nline innovators sought to inform and activate their members, and bring them together in the real world.”#3: Small donor campaign contributions
    Build campaign around “contributions given by small donors, whose help you also rely on for grassroots organization.”
    “All fundraising involves dialogue.”#4: Candidate
    “[E]ssentially no national name recognition.”
    Personality for public office.
    Able to “handle the stress of a frontrunner presidential campaign.”
    Prepared for the “problems” that would be encountered in the “world of traditional presidential level campaigning” and able to “balance” “obligations on the ground, in the air, the real world of campaigning.”#5: Funding
    “Financial support from a broad network of small donors would draw press attention that would develop campaign momentum that would mean ever increasing funding.”
    Replace the “large Democratic contributors” with “small ones.”
    527 political action committees: “Such groups can raise unlimited amounts of money from domestic donors, as long as they do not specifically advocate the election of a particular candidate.” Can recruit activists.#6: Change the media landscape, create a movement
    “[S]et the public policy agenda.”
    Create a new culture “which will be better because it will contain more variety in unity—it will be a tapestry in which more strands have been woven together. .. not just plain talk, but action … with greater numbers of young people” participating in politics.
    Web “personalization and interactivity” as opposed to DNC “party unity” and “inclusiveness”.
    “[A]ccelerated primary schedule” to “produce a single strong party candidate for the presidency an unprecedented eight months before the election.”
    Use “Web networks to create cyberflora fostering information exchange and public debate.”
    Draw on and disseminate “arguments and positions relating to political change, using serious and frivolous symbolic languages—making the case to their audiences that change can be both creative and patriotic.”
    Create a “mainstream press echo chamber.”
    Get “liberal commentators” on board.
    Create “talk radio echo chamber” that will lead to opportunities for press coverage.
    Create a “web echo chamber.”
    Combine the “possibilities for experimentation and grassroots participation which arise due to Internet availability with experienced ground organization” with training and “centralized management.”

    (Source: Rezko Watch)

  123. 1) All that the 25 yr olds offered Hillary for her fights for Roe v Wade was, “Eff the OLD bitch, we like this cute hip guy.”
    It is time to turn that issue over to these young hip chicks.
    2) A vote for McCain is not spite; it’s cleaning house.
    3) Obama policies vs Clinton policies: Obama only has one–his own opportunistic advancement. Lies are not policy.

Comments are closed.