Democrashield.com


PUMA = GOP Dirty Tricks
June 27, 2008, 4:13 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Scandal | Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

In the past month, Hillary Clinton dropped out of the Democratic Primary, endorsed Barack Obama and has begun campaigning to get him elected the next President of the United States.

Yet since then, a number of groups have popped up claiming to be made up of of Hillary supporters, yet pledging to do everything they can to defeat Barack Obama.

This doesn’t make any sense. If you were a Hillary supporter, you believe in things like providing more Americans health care, ending the war, fixing the economy, solving global warming, restoring America’s military strength and reputation abroad, etc. On these issues, Clinton and Obama’s positions are nearly identical; defeating Obama would mean electing McCain, who represents the same failed policies that we Democrats have been fighting since 2001.

Yet, these supposed Hillary supporters–for some reason–would rather see a President McCain than a President Obama. They love their candidate enough where they can’t bring themselves to vote for the candidate who defeated her, yet they don’t love her enough to follow her lead and support Barack Obama.

Well, that’s because the founders of these groups aren’t Hillary supporters; they’re not even Democrats. Take Darragh Murphy, the founder of PUMA PAC. Rumproast did some digging on Murphy, and turned up some interesting facts:

Darragh…describes herself as a lifelong Democrat who thinks Obama is an “illegal candidate” and invites others to join her who have been “disheartened, discouraged, or disgusted by the actions and inactions, the divisiveness and discriminations of the Democratic party, the press, the mainstream blogs, and many political leaders.”

Now, if you search for Darragh Murphy in the FEC database, this is what you find:

MURPHY, DARRAGH C.
CARLISLE VALLEY, MA 01741
HOMEMAKER

MCCAIN, JOHN S.
VIA MCCAIN 2000 INC
02/28/2000 500.00 20990076175

Yeah, that’s right. This supposed lifelong Democrat’s only political contribution in the FEC’s database is a $500 donation to John McCain in 2000.

Rumproast published her response:

Thank you as well for reminding me that I DID EVERYTHING I COULD in 2000 to prevent GEORGE BUSH from becoming the Republican nominee, including donating money to McCain’s campaign and voting for him in the Republican primary here in Massachusetts because I was confident that my hero, AL GORE, would win the primary for the Democrats.

I then went on to vote for Al in November of course. And WE ALL know how THAT turned out.

Now, if you were a lifelong Democrat who thought Al Gore was going to win 2000, why would you bother getting involved in the GOP primary? Why would you donate $500–a sizable sum–just for the sake of sinking a potential nominee for the other party?

Plus, in 2000, McCain was seen as far bigger threat to the Democrats than George Bush–Bush was a little-known Governor from Texas, while McCain was, at the time, known for being a reform-minded moderate and a Vietnam war hero to boot.

Also note that Murphy didn’t give a penny to her “hero” Al Gore–not in the primary, and not in the general, not at any time.

Also, note that she says she voted for McCain in the primary–last time I checked, Massachusetts has a closed primary. You have to either be a registered Republican or not registered with any party to vote–now, why wouldn’t a self-described “lifelong Democrat” be registered as a Democrat?

Face it, Darragh Murphy’s story doesn’t hold up. The facts say she’s a diehard McCain supporter, manipulating people’s emotions to trick disaffected Democrats into voting against their beliefs. The vast majority of groups like PUMA–supposedly made up of Hillary supporters who are refusing to support Obama–are nothing but GOP dirty tricks.

Unfortunately for them, we Democrats are too smart to fall for GOP manipulations; the quicker these Republican phonies are exposed, the easier it will be to bring everyone together to defeat John McCain and to end George Bush’s failed policies.

3 Comments


A Place Called Unity
June 27, 2008, 11:36 AM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Media, Progressives | Tags: , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map (From FiveThirtyEight): Obama 319.9 EV ; McCain 218.1 EV

The Washington Post reports:

Obama and Clinton will travel to the town of Unity, N.H. — which gave each candidate 107 votes in its January primary — this morning for their first public appearance together.

[...]

Yet both campaigns said that the planning of the Unity event has been smooth, with Mo Elleithee, a Clinton spokesman, and Kim Molstre, a scheduler, handling much of the back-and-forth on behalf of the shuttered campaign.

Donors said they have found similar signs of progress. Kirk Wagar, a top Florida fundraiser for Obama, said that he has “been shocked at how quickly a lot of my friends who were helping Senator Clinton have come on board” and that “I would like to think our folks would have gone as quickly, but I don’t know that.”

He added: “It’s been a lot less bumpy than I expected.”

Longtime Clinton fundraiser Robert Zimmerman also said he has seen progress over the past few weeks.

“Look, you don’t achieve energy and excitement through a press release or a sound bite or a rally. It takes time,” he said. “I have never seen a candidate work as hard as Hillary has to build unity.”

Zimmerman said that he has spoken with Obama advisers and that he thinks they are sincere in their desire to see him and others join the campaign.

“I think they’re clearly making efforts,” he said. “From my discussions, they are very committed to including the Clinton fundraisers. It’s funny: The stakes are so high, and the choice is so clear, that it’s now beyond partisan politics. It’s really about changing the direction of the country. Everyone is really pulling together. Every day, I see new examples of that.

“Everyone has checked their egos at the door.”

Our nation stands at a crossroads. Either we will go right and continue the failed policies of George W. Bush and his Republican Party, or we will go left and usher in a new era of change in progress in this great country of ours.

Changing the future of a nation isn’t easy. We’re going to need all the help we can get–we’re going to need every change-minded, conscientious American working hard to get this done. America is hungry for change, and the first stop down the road to fixing this great country of ours is right in Unity, New Hampshire.

You can watch the event live on CSPAN.

Comments Off


SCOTUS Overturns DC Gun Ban (UPDATED)
June 26, 2008, 2:10 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Government, Progressives, Rights, The District | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map (from FiveThirtyEight):  Obama 342.6 EV ; McCain 195.4 EV

ABC reports:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the District of Columbia cannot ban a citizen from keeping a handgun at home, throwing out one of the nation’s strictest gun control laws.

Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to keep and carry a gun. The decision will affect gun control laws across the country.

“We hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violated the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.”

Personally, I agree with the ruling–the second amendment is part of the Constutituon, and it guarantees individual American citizens the right to own firearms.  Of course–like with many of our constitutional rights–we accept reasonable limits on that right, but the basic constitutional guarantee cannot be denied.

Of course, I hope the Supreme Court is as willing to uphold all our other constitutional rights as they are willing to uphold this one.  The Bush administration and their Republican cronies have taken away a lot of rights I and millions of other Americans want to see restored.

UPDATE: TPM reports that both Obama and McCain agree with the SCOTUS ruling, though on different grounds. McCain tries to clumsily shoehorn an attack on Obama into his response, while Obama talks about the importance of upholding all of our constitutional rights.

McCain:

Today’s decision is a landmark victory for Second Amendment freedom in the United States. For this first time in the history of our Republic, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was and is an individual right as intended by our Founding Fathers. I applaud this decision as well as the overturning of the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns and limitations on the ability to use firearms for self-defense.

Unlike Senator Obama, who refused to join me in signing a bipartisan amicus brief, I was pleased to express my support and call for the ruling issued today. Today’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller makes clear that other municipalities like Chicago that have banned handguns have infringed on the constitutional rights of Americans. Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly.

This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant in defense of our freedoms. But today, the Supreme Court ended forever the specious argument that the Second Amendment did not confer an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Obama:

I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today’s ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.

As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today’s decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.

Comments Off


Setting The Record Straight
June 24, 2008, 12:46 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Government, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map: Obama: 340.3 EV ; McCain: 197.7 EV

The McCain campaign is spinning hard and fast on Obama turning down the public financing system, and the media is—unfortunately—helping them along.

Most egregiously, the media is ignoring the fact that John McCain–during the primary–knowingly broke campaign finance laws. Here’s the short of it–McCain opted into public financing, tried to back out of public financing, was told by the (Republican-appointed) chairman of the FEC that he couldn’t back out, then broke the public financing spending limit with full knowledge that he was still bound by law to that limit. The DNC already filed a complaint with the FEC over this, and just today they filed a lawsuit over McCain’s apparent lawbreaking.

Second—and let’s be perfectly clear about this—Obama never pledged to take public financing. At no point during the campaign did he say he definitely would. John Wilson at The Huffington Post has a rundown of what Obama has said about his intentions regarding public financing–here’s part of it:

1. Even in February 2007, before Obama’s massive fundraising became evident, Obama’s staffers were explicit in stating that public financing in the general election was an “option” and not a commitment.

2. The March 2, 2007 New York Times reported Obama’s campaign saying that he would “aggressively pursue an agreement.”

So from the very beginning, the Obama campaign stated over and over again that public financing in general election would require an extensive agreement that went beyond merely having both parties accept the funding.

3. In response to a November 2007 questionnaire to the Midwest Democracy Network and Common Cause, Obama wrote: “My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election….If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

[Emphases Added]

Obama wanted to work out an agreement with the Republican nominee that would involve both candidates taking public financing as well as setting and following a variety of other spending and fundraising guidelines. Unfortunately, McCain wasn’t interested in pursuing an agreement, and thus Obama’s plan to implement strict guidelines fell apart.

Let’s look at this from another angle. Let’s say the United States comes up with a preliminary plan in regards to North Korea–In exchange for North Korea dismantling their nuclear program, we would provide them with foreign aid. Now, let’s say that North Korea has no interest in negotiating and no interest in holding up their end of the bargain–in fact, instead of ending their nuclear program, they step it up. In that case, would we be required to give them the aid we promised?

Of course not, because our action was based on the other side meeting certain conditions that they refused to even consider. Thus, we’re not obligated to give them what we pledged, since it was conditional.

In this case, McCain had no interest in following Obama’s proposed guidelines. And that’s fine—he has the right to run his campaign however he wants, as long as it’s inside the law. But Obama’s plan was conditional–if McCain doesn’t want to hold up his end, he can’t expect Obama to do the same.

I can understand why John McCain and the Republicans are making an issue out of this–in all likelihood, Obama is going to raise huge amounts of money from his people-powered campaign, while McCain’s big-donor-based fundraising has left him coming up short. But just because it’s understandable doesn’t mean it’s right, and it doesn’t erase the GOP’s hypocricy–their candidate freely broke campaign finance laws, and now they’re dishonestly hitting their opponent for ‘breaking’ a ‘promise’ he never actually made.

Comments Off


Oil! (UPDATED)
June 18, 2008, 7:24 PM
Filed under: Conservatives, Economics, Government | Tags: , , , , ,

Today’s electoral map: Obama: 332.8 EV ; McCain: 205.2 EV

Let’s talk about ANWR, which has become the latest Republican MacGuffin. They say that, if we approved drilling there, we could drive down the price of gas almost instantly.

Well, sorry to say, but once again the Republicans are lying to us. Let me tell you why.

ANWR stands for the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. What does that mean? Well, it means there’s nothing up there. There’s no infrastructure–no roads, no bridges, no electricity, no plumbing, no nothing; it’s barren tundra in the middle of nowhere in Alaska. Even if Congress passed a bill today authorizing drilling in ANWR, it would take years–the most conservative estimates say 5 years–before we could even start getting oil out of the ground.

Not only that, but it’ll take even more years for the oil companies in ANWR to reach peak drilling capacity., meaning that we’d have to wait anywhere from 5 to 10 years before the oil companies got any significant amount of oil out of ANWR.

But just how much oil is in ANWR, anyway? Well, according to conservatives like Jonah Goldberg, ANWR’s promise is 10 billion barrels. Sounds like a lot, right? Well, it turns out that the United States uses 20.73 million barrels a day. Do some math–10 billion divided by 20.73 million means that ANWR will give us enough oil to power the United States for 482 days, or 15 months. That’s right–ANWR only has enough oil to power the United States for a year and three months (and that’s assuming our oil consumption doesn’t increase between now and then.)

Not only that, but part of the problem is refining capacity–since 1985, the United States has only increased it’s refining capacity by 1.7 million barrels a day. In a country that uses 20.73 million barrels per day, that isn’t a lot of growth, especially when you consider that our oil consumption has increased exponentially since 1985. Remember, oil pulled up out of the ground is useless until it’s refined, and if we don’t have the capacity to refine more oil, it doesn’t matter how much drilling we approve.

Finally, there’s no guarantee any company drilling in ANWR will sell that oil to the United States. We can’t force them to sell us their oil unless we nationalize the Alaskan drilling operation. Short of such a drastic step, there’s always a chance another customer could come along and buy our ANWR oil right out from under us.

Look, drilling in ANWR is a band-aid solution pushed by politicians hoping to get big fat checks from Big Oil sometime before November. With the time and money we’d waste getting 15 months of oil out of ANWR, we could invest in renewable energy that will free us from our dependence on foreign oil and all oil, period. Tired of paying huge prices at the pump? Then tell the politicians in Washington to invest your tax dollars in renewable energy, because in the time we’d waste getting the first drop of oil out of ANWR, we could, instead, make the pumps themselves a thing of the past.

UPDATED: The NRDC gives us this graph:

DDay at Hullabaloo has this to say:

With the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, you’re talking about dropping the price of a barrel of oil between $0.50 and $2 over a 30-year time horizon when the price has gone up $100 since the beginning of the Bush Presidency. It’s the same for drilling offshore.

And Environmentalist at Daily Kos brings us this:

Between 1999 and 2007, the number of drilling permits issued for development of public lands increased by more than 361%. And did you see your gasoline costs drop? How about your electricity costs? Propane? natural gas? Uh…no. There is absolutely no correlation between the industrialization of public lands and the price of fossil fuels.

[Emphases Added]

UPDATE II: I used Goldberg’s estimation of how much oil was in ANWR because it was a gross overestimation; people who actually know what they’re talking about have found that there’s far less oil in ANWR than 10 billion barrels:

In all three ANWR resource cases, ANWR crude oil production begins in 2018 and grows during most of the projection period before production begins to decline. In the mean oil resource case, ANWR oil production peaks at 780,000 barrels per day in 2027. The low- resource-case production peaks at 510,000 barrels per day in 2028, while the high- resource-case production peaks at 1,450,000 barrels per day in 2028. Cumulative oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR from 2018 through 2030 amounts to 2.6 billion barrels in the mean resource case, 1.9 billion barrels in the low resource case, and 4.3 billion barrels in the high resource case.

I gave conservatives the benefit of the doubt in terms of how much oil is in ANWR for the purpose of my calculations, but keep in mind that the actual amount of oil there isn’t anywhere near their gross overestimations.

Comments Off


Changing The Map
June 17, 2008, 8:54 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Media, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map: Obama 317.2 EV ; McCain 220.8 EV

And Electoral Vote has nearly the same numbers: Obama with 317 EV and McCain with 221.

Currently, Obama is winning all the states John Kerry won in 2004 (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DC, MI, IL, WI, MN, CA, WA & OR) as well as Ohio, Missouri, Colorado and New Mexico.

Ohio is no longer close–two recent polls show Obama with leads of at least 9%. Currently– depending on who you ask–Virginia is either a tie or gives a slight edge to Obama. Nevada is also a dead heat.

What we’re seeing here is Barack Obama delivering on his promise to change the electoral map.  Of course, a lot can–and will–change between now and November, but the fact that Obama has such a strong lead this early on is telling–at the same time in 2004, Electoral Vote showed Kerry losing to Bush 258 to 276 (the eventual result was 251 to 286).

I’m not going to be putting any champagne on ice anytime soon, but I will be prepared to work hard to get Barack Obama elected President.  We know it can happen–we see that the map can be changed.  And hopefully revelations like these will end the media’s myopic focus on last election’s swing states once and for all.

Comments Off


John McCain’s (Continuing) Lobbyist Problem (UPDATED)
June 15, 2008, 11:27 AM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Corruption, Progressives, Scandal, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Public Campaign Action Fund has released a new report on John McCain.

And the findings aren’t pretty:

One hundred and eighteen lobbyists aiding McCain’s campaign have received $496 million in lobbying contracts from domestic clients since 1998.McCain has received $1.2 million from lobbyists, their spouses, and their firm’s political action committees, and his 70 lobbyist-bundlers have raised at least $4.15 million for him so far.McCain has received more than $8.9 million from his lobbyists’ clients and their affiliated PACs.

If nothing else, this proves that John McCain is politically tone-deaf. At a time when corrupt lobbyists like Jack Abramoff are going to jail for peddling influence, buying votes and ripping off the American people, John McCain can’t help but take lobbyist money hand-over-fist and hire lobbyists to run his Presidential campaign.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama is refusing money from federal lobbyists and special interest PACs, and he’s now he’s made sure the Democratic National Committee follows the same rules.

Isn’t it time we took special interest money out of politics? Isn’t it time to start putting the people ahead of lobbyists? Isn’t it time we rejected money-hungry politicians like John McCain?

UPDATE: Then there’s this:

The McCain campaign is strongly denying the paper’s reporting that in 2005, a White House National Security Council staffer called John McCain’s Senate office to complain that [McCain campaign manager] Rick Davis’ lobbying firm was “undercutting American policy on Ukraine” by representing a Kremlin-backed politician….

The story also raises the possibility that Davis’ firm may have violated the anti-espionage Foreign Agents Registration Act, by failing to register work for Yanukovich with the U.S. government….

If the account of the NSC staffer’s call is true, it suggests McCain should have known about the work by Davis’ business — but installed him as campaign manager anyway.

[Emphasis Added]

Comments Off


Irresponsible
June 14, 2008, 10:27 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , ,

Something worth considering:

Senators John McCain and Barack Obama released their Senate financial disclosure statements on Friday, revealing that Mr. McCain and his wife had at least $225,000 in credit card debt and that Mr. Obama and his wife had put more than $200,000 into college funds for their daughters.

So John McCain–whose wife is an heir to an immense $100 million family fortune–racking up a stunning amount of credit card debt; more than most Americans make in a year.

If John McCain can’t be responsible with his own money, how can we trust him to be responsible with America’s money?

Comments Off


Progressive America
June 14, 2008, 10:18 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Today’s electoral map: Obama: 308.5 EV ; McCain: 229.5 EV

NBC News and The Wall Street Journal have been asking Americans one fundamental question:

In thinking about the next president that we’ll be electing, which of the following two statements comes closer to your point of view? (IF “BOTH,” ASK:) I understand that you feel that they are both important, but if you had to choose the ONE statement that comes closer to your point of view, which would you choose?

Statement A: This is a time to have a president who will focus on progress and help move America forward.

Statement B: This is a time to have a president who will focus on protecting what has made America great.

Obviously, answer A represents a progressive viewpoint, while answer B represents a conservative viewpoint.

Here’s the interesting part–in November, 2007, the responses to this question were split nearly 50-50. In March 2008, the split was 57% for statement A and just 39% for statement B.

Today, 59% of respondents pick the progressive option, while only 37% choose the conservative option.

I don’t need to tell you which candidate in this election represents change, and which candidate represents tradition. But at this point, America is tired of the tradition the GOP is trying to sell us–the tradition of a failed foreign policy, fiscal mismanagement, corruption, disastrous economic policies; a tradition of greed, a tradition of failure.

It’s no wonder America is ready for change. And this year, they know exactly which candidate is going to give it to them.

Comments Off


Tim Russert, Dead at 58
June 13, 2008, 2:44 PM
Filed under: Breaking, Media | Tags: , , ,

The New York Times is reporting that journalist Tim Russert passed away earlier this afternoon.  He was 58 years old.

The New York Post reports that Russert suffered a heart attack and collapsed at NBC’s Washington bureau.

More from the Post:

Russert, who rose from the inside world of politics where he was former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo’s press secretary and one-time chief of staff to the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, was able to successfully cross over to political journalism and rise to become one of its leading lights.

In his role as host of the seminal Sunday morning political program “Meet the Press” – which he took over in 1991 – he became renowned for his hard-nosed interviews where he frequently cor

[...]

In 2008, Time Magazine named him one of the world’s 100 most influential people.

Goodbye, Tim.

Comments Off


For A Commenter
June 11, 2008, 7:29 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Corruption, IOKIYAR, Scandal, Senate | Tags: , , , , , ,

For a commenter of mine who seems to think the McCain campaign has shed their lobbyist problem:

“We don’t need any lectures from a campaign that waited fifteen months to purge the lobbyists from their staff, and only did so because they said it was a ‘perception problem. It’s too bad their campaign is still rife with lobbyist influence and doesn’t see a similar ‘perception problem’ with the man currently running their own vice presidential selection process, a prominent DC lobbyist whose firm has represented Exxon and a top Enron executive, or their campaign chair and John McCain’s top economic adviser Carly Fiorina, who presided over thousands of layoffs at Hewlett Packard while receiving a $21 million severance package and $650,000 in mortgage assistance,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

Comments Off


McCain: Bringing Our Troops Home “Not Too Important”
June 11, 2008, 7:18 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Iraq, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Or, at least that’s what he told the Today Show this morning:

Q: A lot of people now say the surge is working.

McCAIN: Anyone who knows the facts on the ground say that.

Q: If it’s working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?

McCAIN: No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine.

Yes, Senator, bringing our troops home does matter–we’ve sacrificed far too many lives and have far too little progress to show for it.

The Iraqi government knows that, under Bush and McCain, our troops would remain in Iraq indefinitely.  I mean, McCain is referencing Japan, Germany and Korea, where American troops have been for decades (of course, without the massively high casualties we’ve experienced in Iraq).

It’s been over five years since we went into Iraq, and ever since the Iraqi government has used American soldiers as a crutch. It’s time that they step up, secure their own country and negotiate political reconciliation. Something has to change–there’s no question that our current policy isn’t working, and that following McCan’s plan to continue those policies until something magically changes is a fallacy.

So yes, Senator, American casualties matter.  And that’s exactly why bringing our troops home matters–so America doesn’t lose any more of it’s sons or daughters following the same failed policies George Bush implemented.

Thankfully, earlier today the Obama campaign responded to this ridiculous statement:

On an Obama campaign conference call with reporters just now, prominent Obama supporter John Kerry unleashed blistering criticism of McCain over the comments.

Speaking of military families, Kerry said: “To them it’s the most important thing in the world when they come home.”

Kerry also cast the comments as proof that McCain is befuddled about the situation our military finds itself in. “Our generals have made it crystal clear that we cannot sustain our forces in Iraq at this level,” he said.

“Senator McCain, it is important when they come home,” Kerry concluded. “It is important when we can revitalize our military.”

Comments Off


Killing (More) Republican Talking Points
June 10, 2008, 7:31 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Economics, Government, House, Media, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate, Terrorism | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map: Obama: 271.9 ; McCain: 266.1

It seems that Oklahoma Congressman Dan Boren (D) is a more than a bit gullible–today he said he wouldn’t endorse Barack Obama, despite being a fellow Democrat, because Obama is “the most liberal Senator.“

The right wing loves to throw that “most liberal Senator” charge at Obama, but where did that talking point originate?

Well, it came from one magazine–the National Journal–ranking Senators based on a small selection of votes. And, not surprisingly, the National Journal’s rankings have more than a few problems.

First, they ranked Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’a voting records, but not John McCain’s. Why? Well, because McCain is the most absent Senator in Congress, so he didn’t make enough votes to even qualify for a ranking. Funny how the National Journal is willing to talk about Obama for being “the most liberal” but they’re not willing to talk about McCain for being “the most absent.”

If “the most liberal Senator” canard sounds familiar to you, it’s because the National Journal gave John Kerry the exact same rating in 2004. Funny how that worked out–in two successive Presidential campaigns, the National Journal just so happened to name both Democratic candidates as the most liberal as they were running for President.

Not only that, but the National Journal admitted that the system they used to rank John Kerry was flawed–of course, they were only willing to say so after Kerry’s ideology became a moot point. If they used a flawed methodology before, why should any of us believe that they’re not using another flawed methodology this time around? I mean, let’s be reasonable here–what’s more likely, that both John Kerry and Barack Obama somehow became the most liberal Senators as soon as they started running for President, or that the National Journal is using a flawed methodology to smear Democratic Presidential candidates?

And what did the National Journal consider “liberal” votes? Well, implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, providing more children with health insurance, providing federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and maintaining a federal minimum wage. All of those things were Democratic initiatives, yes, but they also had wide public support–some of them were supported by as much as 80% of Americans.

Now, how did Congressman Boren vote on these supposedly “liberal” issues? You guessed it–Boren voted to implement the 9/11 commission recommendations, voted to raise the minimum wage, voted for federally-funded stem cell research and voted to expand SCHIP. On these “liberal” issues, Borens voting record is exactly the same as Barack Obama’s.

Congressman Boren, you have the right to support whoever you want this Presidential election. But don’t justify your choice by parroting debunked right-wing smears, especially when those same smears could very well backfire on you.

As for the rest of us, let’s put this “most liberal Senator” talking point to bed, once and for all.

Comments Off


50-State Strategy
June 8, 2008, 12:33 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , ,

Today’s Electoral Map: Obama: 274.4 EV ; McCain: 263.6 EV.

Barack Obama–in following the strategy that turned him from the dark horse underdog into the Democratic Presidential nominee–is putting in place a 50-state strategy:

Senator Barack Obama’s general election plan calls for broadening the electoral map by challenging Senator John McCain in typically Republican states — from North Carolina to Missouri to Montana — as Mr. Obama seeks to take advantage of voter turnout operations built in nearly 50 states in the long Democratic nomination battle, aides said.

On Monday, Mr. Obama will travel to North Carolina — a state that has not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in 32 years — to start a two-week tour of speeches, town hall forums and other appearances intended to highlight differences with Mr. McCain on the economy. From there, he heads to Missouri, which last voted for a Democrat in 1996. His first campaign swing after securing the Democratic presidential nomination last week was to Virginia, which last voted Democratic in 1964.

[...]

Mr. Obama’s a 17-day economic tour, starting Monday, comes as polls suggest acute public anxiety about the economy, fueled by a new wave of bad news, including a surge in the unemployment rate and a record rise in the cost of oil.

The economic push is intended to highlight the distinctions between Democratic and Republican proposals on health care, jobs, energy prices, education and taxes. Mr. Obama is expected to deliver a series of policy speeches and visit voters in small towns and rural areas.

While Mr. Obama’s economic tour will take him through several states where he registered strong performances in the primary season, including Iowa and Wisconsin, he will also visit other general election battleground states where he lost primaries by substantial margins, including Ohio.

Democrats lose because we cede too much ground to the Republicans; we write off entire states for years on end, focusing on a tiny handful of media-anointed ’swing states.’  Problem is, Republicans usually have better organizations in those states, and they usually have enough money to out-organize and out-campaign us.  Thus, you see Presidential election hinge on a tiny margin of victory in a state like Ohio.

Obama is changing the game in two ways–first, by abandoning the old model of fundraising, reliant on bundlers and wealthy donors, the Obama campaign has used the internet to collect unprecedented sums of money through small donations from regular Americans.  By harnessing the power of the internet and small donors in a way that top-down Republican campaigns can’t, the GOP’s traditional fundraising advantage evaporates.

Second, he’s competing everywhere.  The point of the 50-state strategy isn’t necessarily to win places like Utah or Idaho; the point is to make the Republicans spread themselves thin by having them compete in places they wouldn’t normally have to spend any money or effort.  It’s a ‘death by 1000 cuts’ strategy aimed at sapping them of their resources, so they’re less competitive in closer states.  In addition, the 50-state strategy is supposed to make roads in states that Democrats could win if they just tried, like Colorado and Virginia this cycle.

The point is, you can’t win if you never show up to play in the first place.  The myopic focus on media-proclaimed ’swing states’ has lost Democrats elections time and time again.  Right now, the American people are hungry for change, but they won’t vote for us if we never show up on their doorsteps and ask them to.  The 50-state strategy won us both houses of Congress in 2006, bringing us victories in states we never would have believed we’d win.  This time around, it’s going to change the electoral map–possibly for good.

Comments Off


McCain Surrogate: McCain Will Be Just Like Bush
June 8, 2008, 12:19 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Government, Media, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In his widely-panned speech on Tuesday, John McCain struggled to refute the charge that, if elected, he will continue the policies of George W. Bush.

Unfortunately–like much of the McCain campaign–it seems like that speech was just so much hot air.  When asked today whether McCain would represent an extension or enhancement of Bush’s policies, McCain surrogate Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) responded “Yeah, absolutely.”

From Think Progress:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me bring Senator Graham back in on this because you brought up two. You said the tax policy and the health care policy were essentially, Senator Graham, John McCain is calling for an extension or maybe enhancement of the Bush policies.

GRAHAM: Yeah, absolutely.

America doesn’t need four more years of this.

1 Comment


Game On
June 7, 2008, 12:38 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Corruption, Economics, Environment, Government, Governors, House, International, Iraq, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

We are all Democrats.

We are all on the same team, now.

Today, Biden supporters, Kucinich supporters, Richardson supporters, Dodd supporters, Vilsack supporters, Gravel supporters, Edwards supporters and Clinton supporters are now all Obama supporters

We all believe in fixing our economy, in ending this war, in providing health care to all, in taking care of our veterans, in ending global warming, in creating new jobs, in restoring our constitution and fixing this great country of ours.

As Hillary Clinton said today, the stakes are too high. John McCain supports in the same policies, the same ideas, the same disastrous decisions that George W. Bush does. John McCain stands with George Bush and wants to make George Bush’s policies permanent. America cannot afford a third Bush term; America cannot afford John McCain.

Today, the real fight begins. It’s Barack Obama vs. John McCain, fighting for nothing less than the future of this great country of ours.

We’re united. We’re ready. Republicans, you better be prepared–millions of Americans are ready to send Barack Obama to the White House, and we’re going to stop at nothing to ensure that your deathgrip on this beautiful country of ours comes to an end, once and for all.

All together now: Barack Obama for President!

All together now: Yes We Can!

Game on.

2 Comments


Clinton Concession Speech Live Blog (UPDATED CONTINUOUSLY)
June 7, 2008, 11:03 AM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Live Blog, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , ,

It’s 12:00 Eastern time, and the Senator hasn’t left her house in DC’s Embassy Row. She’s due to speak any minute at the National Building Museum (which is in the neighborhood I used to live in before I moved to Virginia).

As soon as Clinton begins speaking, I’ll be live-blogging her results.

UPDATE: MSNBC is carrying footage of the Senator’s motorcade parked outside her house. Watching that reminds me of 2004, when the news networks carried footage–shot from a helicopter–of John Kerry driving to Boston’s Faneuil Hall to concede the election.

I was in college at the time, and I watched that on the televisions in our student union while coming back from an early class. It was devastating–that the campaign I poured so much of myself into had lost. In that sense, I can sympathize with Clinton supporters and how they must be feeling today–we’re all Democrats, we’ve all felt the sting of defeat. That throwback to 2004 reminds us that we’re all on the same side, that we’ve all suffered the same devastation of watching the country we love suffer at the hands of the Republicans.

Clinton still hasn’t left her home in Northwest DC; as soon as she does, I’ll have more for you.

UPDATE II: 12:26 PM EST:

The Clinton motorcade is going down Massachusetts Avenue and should reach the National Building Museum soon.

UPDATE III: 12:39 PM EST:

MSNBC is reporting that Clinton has arrived at the National Building Museum and will begin speaking soon.

UPDATE IV: 12:43 PM EST:

Bill and Hillary have entered the hall and have been announced; they’re greeting the enthusiastic crowd before heading to the stage.

UPDATE V: 12:45 PM EST:

Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Diane Rodham are all standing on the stage.

Now Clinton has taken the podium and is thanking the crowd.

It begins:

Well, this isn’t exactly the party I planned, but I sure like the company.

And I want to start today by saying how grateful I am to all of you, to everyone who poured your hearts and hopes into this campaign, who drove for miles and lined the streets, who scrimped and saved to raise money, who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who debated and emailed and contributed, who invested so much.

To the moms and dads who came to our events, who lifted their children on their shoulders and whispered in their ears ’see, you can be anything you want to be.’ To the young people, like 13-year-old Ann Riddle from Ohio who had been saving for 2 years to go to Disneyworld, who used those savings to travel to PA with her mom. To all those women in their 80’s and 90’s, born before women could vote, who cast their votes for our campaign

I told you before about an 80-year-old woman who asked her daughter to bring an absentee ballot to her hospice so she could vote; she passed away, and thus her vote couldn’t count; her husband, who hadn’t voted in 20 years, cast a vote for me in her stead.

My commitment to you and the progress we seek is unyielding. You have touched me with the stories of your joys and sorrows, and you have humbled me with your commitment to your country.

UPDATE VI: 12:51 PM EST:

18 million of you, from all walks of life, have supported me. And I will continue to stand strong with you every time and place I can. The dreams we share are worth fighting for. We fought for the single mom with a daughter, for the woman who asked me ‘what will you do to make sure I have health care,’ we fought for the man in the Marine Corps t-shirt who said ‘please make sure to take care of my buddies over there, and the please make sure you take care of me.’ We fought for everyone who has felt invisible these past years.

Public service is about solving people’s problems and helping people reach their dreams. You will always find me on the front lines of democracy, fighting.

The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand, is to take our every, our passion, our strength, to help elect Barack Obama the next President of the United States [some people in the crowd are booing, most are cheering].

Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him. [more assorted boos, mostly cheering]

I ask all of you to join me working hard for Barack Obama. I have served in the Senate with him for 4 years, I have been in this campaign with him for 16 months, I’ve been in 22 debates with him, I’ve seen his strength, determination, grace.

He has dedicated himself to ensuring the dream is realized. He has inspired so many to become involved in the democratic process and invest in their future. I started this race to making sure we had a President who put us back on the path to peace, prosperity and progress. And that’s what we’re going to do when we ensure that Barack Obama walks into the doors of the oval office on January 20, 2009.

This has been a tough fight, but the Democratic Party is a family and it’s time to come together around the ideals we share, the values we cherish and the country we love. Today, our paths have merged, and we’re heading to the same destination–united and more ready than ever to turn our country around. So much is at stake. We want an economy that lifts all people and ensures our prosperity is shared. We all want health care that is universal, high-quality and affordable. I will fight until every single American is ensured, no exceptions & no exclusions.

We all want an America defined by deep and meaningful equality, from civil rights to labor rights, from women’s rights to gay rights, from ending discrimination to promoting unionization. We all want to restore America’s standing in the world, to end the war in Iraq, to join with our allies to fight poverty, genocide, global warming, etc.

I have been involved in politics for nearly four decades, and our country has voted ten times for President. Democrats won only three of those times, and the man who won two of those elections is with us today. We made tremendous progress in the ’90’s–just think how much more progress we could have made in the past 40 years if we had a Democratic President, think of all the progress we could have made in the past 7 years. Imagine how much we could have achieved if we just had a Democrat in the White House; we cannot let this moment slip away. WE have come too far and accomplished too much.

Some will say we can’t do it, but as long as America has existed, it has been the American way to reject ‘can’t do’ claims. It has been this belief, this optimism that Senator Obama and I share, and that has inspired millions of our supporters to make their voices heard. Today I am standing with Senator Obama to say ‘Yes We Can,’ and that together we will work–we’ll have to work heard–to achieve universal healthcare. But the day we live in an America where nobody goes without health insurance will be the day we live in a stronger America, which is why we have to elect Barack Obama president.

We will have to work hard, but the day we live in an America where the a middle class is thriving again, we will live in a stronger America, which is why we must help elect Barack Obama our President . We’ll have to wok hard to foster the innovations that will make us energy independent, but in the day we live in an America fueled by alternative energy we will live in a stronger America and that is why we must help elect Barack Obama our President. We will have to work hard to bring our troops home, but the day we live in an America where we are as loyal t our troops as they have been to us, we will live in a stronger America and that is why we must help elect Barack Obama our President.

This election is a turning point. It is critical that we all understand what our choice really is. Will we go forward together, or will we stall and slip backwards? Think of how much progress we’ve made. When we got started, people asked ‘can a woman really serve as commander-in-chief?’ Well, I think we answered that one. And ‘could an African-American really be our President?’ and Barack Obama has answered that one. Together, Senator Obama and I Achieved milestones essential to our progress as a nation, part of our duty to form a more perfect union.

When I was asked what it means to be a woman running for President, I said I was proud to be a woman but I was running because I thought I would make the best President. Like millions of women, I know there are barriers and biases out there, often unconscious. I want to build an America that embraces the potential of all of us. I ran as a daughter who benefited from opportunities my mother never dreamed of. I ran as a mother worries about my daughter’s future. We must make sure women and men alike understand the struggles of their grandmothers and their mothers, and that women enjoy equal opportunities, equal pay and equal respect.

There are no acceptable limits and there are no acceptable biases. From now on, it will be unremarkable for a woman to win primary state victories, unremarkable to have a woman in a close race to be our nominee, unremarkable to think a woman can be President of the United States, and that is truly remarkable.

To those who are disappointed that we couldn’t go all the way, especially the young people, it would break my heart if, in falling short of my goal, I in any way discouraged any of you from following yours. Work hard, and when you stumble, keep faith, and when you’re knocked down get right back up and never listen to anyone who says you can’t or shouldn’t go on. As we gather here today, in this historic, magnificent building, the 50th woman to leave this earth is orbiting overhead. IF we can blast 50 women into space, we can someday launch a woman into the White House.

And though we haven’t shattered that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you it has 18 million cracks in it, and the light is shining through like never before, filling us with the hope that the path will be easier next time. Think of the suffragists, the abolitionists, the civil rights heroes and foot soldiers, who worked and gave their lives to make progress. Because of them, I grew up taking for granted that women could vote, and because of them my daughter took for granted that children of all colors could go to school together.

Because of them and you, children of all colors can grow up taking for granted that women and African Americans can run for President. When a woman becomes President, all of you will know that, because of your passion and hard work, you have helped pave the way for that day. When you hear people say ‘if only’ or ‘what if,’ don’t go there–every moment spent looking backwards keeps us from moving forward.

Life is too short, time is too precious, the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been. We have to work together for what still can be, and that’s why I will work to ensure Barack Obama will become our next President, and I hope and pray all of you will join me.

Thank you to my supporters, my family, my friends, and to my extraordinary staff and volunteers, thank you for working those long, hard hours for dropping everything, leaving work or school, traveling to places you never been, and thanks to your families because your sacrifice was theirs too. All of you were there for me every step of the way. We’re here for each other–none of us go it alone. The changes we seek are changes we can only accomplish together. Our rights are individual, but our lives, freedoms and happiness are best advanced when we work together, as we join forces with Senator Obama and his campaign. We will make history, we sill stand united for the values we hold dear, the vision of progress we share, and there’s nothing more American than that.

The challenges we faced in the campaign were nothing compared to the challenged millions of Americans face every day. So I will count my blessings and go back to do what I was doing long before the cameras showed up–working to make sure everyone has the opportunities I did, the chance to reach their potential.

I will do it with nothing but optimism and confidence for the days ahead. This is now our time, to do all that we can to make sure that, n this election, we add another Democratic President to that very small list of the past 40 years and that we take back our country and once again move toward the future. Thank you, God bless you and God bless America.

End.

1 Comment


BREAKING: Hillary Clinton Dropping Out Friday
June 4, 2008, 5:43 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , ,

According to ABC:

Sen. Hillary Clinton said this afternoon on a conference call with supporters that she will appear alongside her supporters on Friday and drop out of the presidential race, Democratic sources tell ABC News’ Kate Snow.

There is a lot of work left to be done, particularly in unifying the Democratic Party; the divisions that this primary has created–and that the Clinton campaign has, at times, exploited–have to be healed before November.

Hillary Clinton’s political future depends on how she drops out and what she does from here.  If she follows through with her promise to do everything she can to get a Democrat in the White House, I don’t doubt for a second that the junior Senator from New York will have a long, bright political future ahead of her.

Nonetheless, this is a bittersweet end to a historic Presidential campaign.

Comments Off


Meet Your Democratic Nominee
June 3, 2008, 6:13 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Right now, Barack Obama is only 10 delegates away from the nomination, and the polls haven’t even closed in MT and SD.

Barack Obama will be the 2008 Democratic Presidential nominee.

Finally.

Racism has long been an ugly stain on the pages of American history.  Africans were brought here as slaves long before the United States of America became an independent nation.  Slavery proved to be so problematic that even our Founding Fathers themselves couldn’t hope to resolve it–thus, for nearly a hundred years after the founding of our great country, slavery was an American institution.

Slavery sparked the Civil War, a conflict so massive, based on such deep divisions that it threatened the very existence of the United States.  Pitting brother against brother, that war would lead to the liberation of America’s slaves at the cost of over 600,000 lives.

For a century after their liberation, blacks in America faced discrimination, bigotry, segregation, lynchings and other forms of racial violence.  Living under the oppression of Jim Crow, African Americans were equal to their fellow Americans in law only.  It would take a massive national movement, made up of Americans from all races and backgrounds, to put Jim Crow to rest once and for all–a movement who would lose many of it’s supporters in the process of guaranteeing freedom and equality for all Americans.  Even now, four decades after that historic movement, racism and bigotry still remain ugly threads woven throughout the thread of Americana.

Now, Barack Obama isn’t magic.  If we are lucky enough to have him as our next President, he will not singlehandedly heal America’s racial wounds.  But it is what he represents that could very well begin a much-needed healing process.  What he represents is hope–hope that new generations of Americans can put the bigotry of the past behind them.  Hope that we can put our differences aside and work together for the good of the country we love.  Hope that–as a great man once said–this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal’

Nobody can deny that Barack Obama has broken down barriers. But, I would be remiss if I gave no praise to his opponent, Hillary Clinton.  Women in America have faced discrimination and bigotry all their own–they were not given the right to vote until the early 20th century, and the latter half of that century gave birth to their own movement for liberation and equality.

Just as African-Americans were shut out of the halls of power in America, so too were America’s women.  Hillary Clinton got the closest to the Presidency of any woman in American history–for this, she should be celebrated.  She has broken down walls, yet there is still a barrier to be broken there, as well–a glass ceiling that holds down an entire class of American citizen.  And when the day comes that America inaugurates it’s first woman President, that person will have Hillary Clinton to thank most of all.

The wounds of injustice run deep in America, but we have spent centuries moving toward a more perfect union.  Today, our nation has taken one giant leap toward the formation of that union; my only regret is that we could not have done more to advance the cause of liberty and equality in this beautiful country of ours.

Sleep well, America–you’ve done well for yourself tonight.

Comments Off


When Darkness Turns To Light (UPDATED)
June 3, 2008, 1:18 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Media, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , ,

It ends tonight,

It ends tonight:

AP tally: Obama clinches Democratic nomination

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday after a grueling marathon, based on an Associated Press tally of convention delegates, becoming the first black candidate ever to lead his party into a fall campaign for the White House.

Will Clinton concede? Who knows. The Clinton campaign is in disarray, sending out mixed signals all over the place–some of her own people are saying she’ll drop out, while others are saying she won’t. Nobody knows the real story, but it doesn’t matter–Obama is the Democratic nominee, and we need to do everything we can to get him into the White House.

It’s too late to fight; it ends tonight.

UPDATE: Then there’s this:

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede Tuesday night that Barack Obama has the delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, campaign officials said, effectively ending her bid to be the nation’s first female president.

The former first lady was not ready to formally suspend or end her race in a speech Tuesday night in New York City. But if Obama get to the magic number of delegates, 2,118, she was prepared to acknowledge that milestone, according to aides who declined to be identified.

That’s a pretty nuanced position to take, and it’s far short of conceding, dropping out, or even suspending her campaign. The big question is, where does she go from here? Does she continue trying to win delegates over, or is she going to exit, stage left? Until tonight, we won’t know…

UPDATE II: And also this:

Sen. Hillary Clinton is poised to deliver a message Tuesday “that she will do whatever it takes” to put a Democrat in the White House — a message that Sen. Barack Obama insiders say indicates she would accept an offer to be Obama’s running mate if asked.

“In her speech tomorrow night, she will convey the message that first and foremost she is committed to Democrats winning in November and will do whatever she’s asked to do,” said a close friend and adviser of the New York senator and former first lady, who speaks with her regularly and is privy to her deliberations.

“She will do whatever it takes to bring the party together to win and whatever is asked of her to make sure the Republicans are defeated.”

That message has been conveyed to the Obama campaign via informal channels, according to Obama insiders who said the message is a signal that she would be willing to serve as Obama’s vice president.

Noted without comment.

UPDATE III: Maybe not tonight, but soon.

A knowledgeable source in the Clinton campaign says that Hillary Clinton will suspend her campaign either tomorrow night or Thursday morning.

Comments Off


Good News & Bad News
June 3, 2008, 8:04 AM
Filed under: Breaking, Government, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , ,

The good news: Ted Kennedy successfully underwent surgery to remove his malignant brain tumor yesterday:

An operation to remove a malignant tumor from Sen. Edward Kennedy’s brain was successful, and the Democrat should suffer no permanent damage from the procedure, his surgeon reported Monday.

The patient himself expressed satisfaction.

“I feel like a million bucks,” Kennedy said after the surgery, according to a family spokesperson. “I think I’ll do that again tomorrow.”

Kennedy’s doctor’s statement focused on the 3½-hour operation, which was performed at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina. “I am pleased to report that Sen. Kennedy’s surgery was successful and accomplished our goals,” Dr. Allan Friedman said in a written statement issued after the procedure.

“Sen. Kennedy was awake during the resection, and should therefore experience no permanent neurological effects from the surgery.”

Friedman called the resection “just the first step” in Kennedy’s treatment plan, which is to include radiation and chemotherapy

The bad news: West Virginia’s Robert Byrd was hospitalized last night:

Sen. Robert Byrd was hospitalized Monday night, a spokesman said.

The 90-year-old Democrat from West Virginia appeared lethargic when he arrived at his Senate office Monday afternoon in preparation for a vote on global warming, the spokesman said.

After the vote, he returned home, where his caregiver noticed the same symptoms, took his temperature and discovered he had a fever, the spokesman said.

Upon the recommendation of his doctor, who was reached by telephone, Byrd was taken to a hospital, where he was expected to remain overnight for observation, the spokesman said.

We wish Senator Byrd all the best, and our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family today.

Comments Off


Tomorrow Night
June 2, 2008, 3:18 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Media, Progressives, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Tomorrow is June 3rd, when South Dakota and Montana go to the polls and finish off the five-month-long Democratic Presidential primary.

Right now, every piece of news coming out of the Clinton campaign points to one undeniable conclusion–tomorrow, Hillary Clinton will end her sixteen month race for the Democratic nomination.

Right now, The Huffington Post is reporting this:

Hillary Clinton has summoned top donors and backers to attend her New York speech tomorrow night in an unusual move that is being widely interpreted to mean she plans to suspend her campaign and endorse Barack Obama.

[...]

“This has never happened before,” one donor said, referring to the personalized request by email to attend the event in New York Tuesday night.

[...]

Earlier in the day it was reported that Clinton staffers were being urged by the campaign’s finance department “to turn in their outstanding expense receipts by the end of the week,” another sign that the run at the White House was nearing an end.

In addition, Politico is reporting:

Members of Hillary Clinton’s advance staff received calls and emails this evening from headquarters summoning them to New York City Tuesday night, and telling them their roles on the campaign are ending, two Clinton staffers tell my colleague Amie Parnes.

The advance staffers — most of them now in Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana — are being given the options of going to New York for a final day Tuesday, or going home, the aides said.

Advance staff are responsible for setting up candidate appearances–if the Clinton campaign is shedding advance staff, it means they aren’t planning any campaign events anytime soon.

This has been a long time coming.  Clinton lost the nomination a long time ago.  Even under the rosiest scenarios her path to the nomination was nearly nonexistent; the resolution of Florida and Michigan netted her no real advantage over Obama.  At this point, there is little left for her to hold on to.

But we should always remember that Hillary Clinton made history.  She was the first woman to get this close to the Presidency.  She performed exceptionally well despite a hostile media, despite a Republican Party mired in gutter politics, and despite facing one of the most popular, charismatic, talented politicians in modern American history.  Nobody can deny that Hillary Clinton has continued to break down barriers for women in in this country–when America inaugurates it’s first woman President, that person will have Hillary Clinton to thank.

Hillary Clinton will always enjoy a place in the history books.  And months from now, when we’re in the heat of the Presidential election, when Hillary Clinton is one of many strong voices advocating for Barack Obama,  I think we’re going to look back at the primary and laugh at how out-of-hand it got.

I expect Clinton to make her announcement tomorrow night, after the results of Montana and South Dakota are announced.  After that, the Democratic Party’s real work will begin.

Comments Off


Killing Republican Talking Points
June 2, 2008, 2:53 PM
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Government, International, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Rememebr that right-wing talking point about Obama and “appeasement?”  Well, it turns out that–once again–Obama is right and the GOP is wrong:

An overwhelming majority of Democrats and Independents, and nearly half of Republicans, say that they agree with Barack Obama’s position that, as president, he would meet with foreign leaders both friend and foe.

A recently release Gallup Poll survey shows that 67 percent of Americans think that president-to-president diplomacy, even with countries considered hostile to America, is a good idea. The findings suggest that far from being naïve and out-of-touch on international affairs, as Sen. John McCain has asserted, Obama is reflecting the overwhelming consensus of the rest of the country.

According to the study: 79 percent of Democrats, 70 percent of Independents, and 48 percent of Republicans say it is a “good idea” for the U.S. president to meet with enemy foreign leaders. In addition, 59 percent of those surveyed (including 48 percent of Republicans) say it would be a good idea for the president to meet with the president of Iran.

Face it, diplomacy works.  Take North Korea, for instance– in the 90’s, the United States came up with an agreed framework for negotiations with North Korea. That plan set the guidelines for US-North Korean relations, and it worked exceptionally well.  But, when it became known that North Korea had implemented a uranium enrichment program, the Bush administration tossed the agreed framework out the window.

What followed was five years of brinksmanship with North Korea.  Five years of escalating tensions, during which North Korea tested several long-range missiles.  Eventually, the US-Korea standoff was resolved at the negotiating table–an agreement was forged that required North Korea to dismantle all of their nuclear facilities.  In the end, months of diplomacy accomplished what years of isolation and brinksmanship could not.

One major lesson we should learn from the Bush years is that diplomacy works–isolating and marginalizing America’s enemies only serves to radicalize and antagonize them.  The American people have seen the disastrous results of the Bush doctrine and, as this latest survey shows, we won’t hesitate to relegate it to the dustbin of history.

2 Comments