Good afternoon fellow Democrats.

Obama \ Clinton 2008

Yes we can!

Si se puede!

Change we can believe in!

Sen. Clinton's website.

I know you're all about healing Bob, but I do not believe that Clinton would make a good VP and further I think her appearance on the Dem ticket would be poisonous, equally to independents, moderate republicans and democrats seeking change.

So health care is off the agenda according to the other Senator from NY? Why is he lowering expectations even before this primary bloodbath is over?

One has to ask themselves what's the use of working for a Democratic Super Majority if the leadership is already saying, "No, we can't"?

FDR found a way.

If we can't have health care reform, can't leave Iraq immediately, can't reverse the FISA laws, and must nuke Iran, how is our agenda any different from McCain's?

Is there anyone in the Democratic Party willing to raise taxes on the rich to fix the damange to our country and the welfare of its people?

Draft John Edwards.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 25, 2008 at 06:24 PM
Blue:
What are you going to do if she becomes the Candidate in November?
I think that your comments about a fellow democrat are poison and why we have lost so many elections since 1980.
I'm outta' here - too much negativity directed at Democrats.

Since Schumer is one of the DLC crowd, I'd like to know if Hillary is also backtracking on healthcare, too.

Some of us still think we can; apparently others have already given up?

Good night, Dems.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on April 25, 2008 at 06:24 PM

I appreciate your concern, Blue. I have the same reservations. But the sheeple always look to the top of the ticket not the VPOTUS nominee. We can get her in the back door of the OEB and have our own Darth Clinton as opposed to Darth Cheney.

Good night fellow Democrats. Keep the Faith and keep the faith. The populist revolution has begun!

Obama Campaign Confirms Joint Fundraising Committee With The DNC

Obama spokesperson Bill Burton just confirmed to me that the campaign has set up a joint fundraising committee with the Democratic National Committee, a development that was first reported today by Mark Halperin.

The move is unusual in the sense that it's typically the sort of thing that's done once there is a nominee.

That the DNC has done this with Obama before the contest is settled reflects two realities: First, that Obama is the likely the nominee; and second, that McCain is forging ahead with the building of a campaign apparatus while the two Dems continue to pour resources into an intra-Dem contest with no immediate end in sight.

"This is an effort to be a team player and make sure we have the resources we need," Burton says.

The joint committee can raise cash in far larger chunks than candidates -- they can take in $28,500 from individuals, more than 10 times the $2,300 contribution limit for candidates.

Similar discussions are ongoing between Hillary and the DNC, but no deal has been struck yet, Halperin reports.

we've got the leadership and the candidate. will someone please break the news to Mary and James?

Obama Campaign Confirms Joint Fundraising Committee With The DNC

Obama spokesperson Bill Burton just confirmed to me that the campaign has set up a joint fundraising committee with the Democratic National Committee, a development that was first reported today by Mark Halperin.

The move is unusual in the sense that it's typically the sort of thing that's done once there is a nominee.

That the DNC has done this with Obama before the contest is settled reflects two realities: First, that Obama is the likely the nominee; and second, that McCain is forging ahead with the building of a campaign apparatus while the two Dems continue to pour resources into an intra-Dem contest with no immediate end in sight.

"This is an effort to be a team player and make sure we have the resources we need," Burton says.

The joint committee can raise cash in far larger chunks than candidates -- they can take in $28,500 from individuals, more than 10 times the $2,300 contribution limit for candidates.

Similar discussions are ongoing between Hillary and the DNC, but no deal has been struck yet, Halperin reports.

we've got the leadership and the candidate. will someone please break the news to Mary and James?

the reThugs know who the candidate is, too:

McCain Campaign: Associating Obama With Terrorists Is Fair Game
By Eric Kleefeld - April 25, 2008, 6:48PM

The McCain camp has just blasted out a statement saying that Obama's alleged "endorsement" by Hamas will "definitely be an issue in the election," an indication that McCain intends to honor his promise of a "civil" campaign more in the breach than in the observance.

McCain spokesman Brian Rogers called the supposed endorsement by Hamas, something that McCain hit Obama for earlier today, "a legitimate issue for the American people to think about," on the basis of Obama's call for negotiations with Iran.

Rogers added: "It is not only responsible to raise these critical issues in this election, but it would be the height of irresponsibility not to have this discussion with the American people."

Today's commotion was sparked by McCain's active defense of their fundraising e-mail warning that Hamas wants Obama to win the election, during a conference call today with conservative bloggers.

McCain also used the conference call to go after Obama for his past association with former Weatherman and current University of Illinois professor Bill Ayers. "Not only repudiation," McCain said, "but an apology for ever having anything to do with an unrepentant terrorist is due to the American people."

McCain's remarks prompted a response from Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan: "We want to take Senator McCain at his word that he wants to run a respectful campaign, but that is becoming increasingly difficult when he continually tries to use the politics of association and makes claims he knows not to be true to advance his campaign."

the reThugs know who the candidate is, too:

McCain Campaign: Associating Obama With Terrorists Is Fair Game
By Eric Kleefeld - April 25, 2008, 6:48PM

The McCain camp has just blasted out a statement saying that Obama's alleged "endorsement" by Hamas will "definitely be an issue in the election," an indication that McCain intends to honor his promise of a "civil" campaign more in the breach than in the observance.

McCain spokesman Brian Rogers called the supposed endorsement by Hamas, something that McCain hit Obama for earlier today, "a legitimate issue for the American people to think about," on the basis of Obama's call for negotiations with Iran.

Rogers added: "It is not only responsible to raise these critical issues in this election, but it would be the height of irresponsibility not to have this discussion with the American people."

Today's commotion was sparked by McCain's active defense of their fundraising e-mail warning that Hamas wants Obama to win the election, during a conference call today with conservative bloggers.

McCain also used the conference call to go after Obama for his past association with former Weatherman and current University of Illinois professor Bill Ayers. "Not only repudiation," McCain said, "but an apology for ever having anything to do with an unrepentant terrorist is due to the American people."

McCain's remarks prompted a response from Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan: "We want to take Senator McCain at his word that he wants to run a respectful campaign, but that is becoming increasingly difficult when he continually tries to use the politics of association and makes claims he knows not to be true to advance his campaign."

Hi

Just a hit and run as I felt Michael link desearved a repost did not get any attention and it is something I have been pounding on, with the message that "what does any of this matter when election fraud is likely to reign supreme"

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9841.html

sure glad to see repubs creating drama are gone for now

thanks for being here
We are who We have been Waiting For
The Time is Now

Evening all good Dems,

President Asshole the second is using the same bullshit leading us up to war with Iran.

Today some moron admiral announced that Iran is sending weapons across the border which are used to kill our troops and Iraqi troops.

Then they announced that American ships fired on two Iranina boats.

I predict that President Asshole is going to nuke Iran in August.

This relentless buildup to war will proceed with the same bullshit lies he used in 2002.

If we attack Iran, gasoline will rise to $8.00 a gallon overnight.

President Asshole's rich friends don't give a shit because they can afford it.

when is impeachment going to be taken seriously with our loser congress?

"dream ticket"--um, no. no freakin' way, more desperation talk from the Bilary campaign. ain't a good idea, ain't gonna happen:

KING: they did it some years back when kennedy and johnson were on the same ticket, after a strong battle.

PELOSI: that’s right.

KING: if you had your power, would you want them to run together?

PELOSI: no. i don’t think it’s a good idea.

KING: because?

PELOSI: i think that first of all, the candidate, whoever he or she may be, should choose his or her own vice presidential candidate. i think that’s appropriate. that’s where you would see the comfort level, not only how to run, but how to govern the country. there’s plenty of talent to draw upon for a good, strong ticket. i don’t think that’s a good ticket.

KING: really?

PELOSI: really.

Posted by highserenity on April 25, 2008 at 07:33 PM

bradblog

the latest info is up there and updated often.

join Election Protection and get the training so you can keep an eye on things in Nov.

i did it in 2004. it matters.

just because people don't comment, doesn't mean they don't pay attention. this has been a big issue on this blog for years. not to worry...

This blog is not working. It shows 18 messages but only 14 show up when I refresh.

This blog needs a technological upgrade in my opinion. Howard Dean has been great in his duties as Chairman and his fifty state strategy has been brilliant as well as common sense, but we need to get the best technicians or web designers or whatever to get us the best blog money can buy. The people deserve the best.

will someone please break the news to Mary and James?

Posted by fade2bluz on April 25, 2008 at 07:26 PM

IF that is true - and notice I said IF, why in the world are they wasting all of that money and time on these primary contests? If it's a foregone conculsion, why bother letting people vote? Why not just proceed to the campaign for the general election and 'go after' the neo-cons who have done so much damage to this great country?

Chavez is my kind of man. He calls bush a pendejo . I have been calling him that for months although I am polite and call him President Asshole. He also calls rice an illiterate. How did he know?

“In this century we will bury the old empire of the USA and will live with the American nation like with a brotherly nation, because over 40 million of its citizens live below the poverty line,” the Venezuelan leader said.

Chavez also said that Latin America entered the new era that was marked with the creation of a bloc of leftist forces – Argentina, Bolivia, Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Chile and Brazil.

The rhetoric between Chavez and Bush has been hostile. In response to the Bush administrations anti Chavez rhetoric (he has been called a tyrant, populist dictator and drug trafficker), Chavez once referred to U.S. President George W. Bush as a pendejo (asshole), and refers to him as Mister Danger. In a later speech, he made personal remarks regarding Condoleezza Rice, referring to her as a "complete illiterate" when it comes to comprehending Latin America. On September 20, 2006 Chávez called Bush "the devil".

After Hurricane Katrina battered the United States’ Gulf Coast in late 2005, the Chavez administration was the first foreign government to offer aid to the devastated regions. The Bush administration opted to refuse this aid. Later during the winter of 2005, various officials in the Northeastern United States signed an agreement with Venezuela to provide discounted heating oil to low income families.

More.....................

Venezuela’s Chavez plans to bury old empire of USA

Fellow Democrats:

Hillary Clinton has NOT been vetted. The Republicans are going to have a field day with her if she's the nominee.

"Morris then provided a laundry list of ethical problems associated with the former first lady:

"She took $1,000 and with the help of her friends, who Bill was helping to safeguard against inspections for the poultry industry, parlayed it in a matter of weeks on the futures market and then wouldn't release her tax returns, so nobody knew about it until after the statute of limitations was lifted.

She told a federal grand jury that she didn't work on a certain project in the Whitewater scandal, when she did, and she claimed she didn't know it by that name but another name. ...

Her brother was paid $300,000 by a drug and crack cocaine dealer, who was serving a 20 year sentence in prison and her husband pardoned him, and she claimed she had no idea her brother was representing the guy.

She arranged a party for the head of the Orthodox Jewish community in one area, and that district voted for her by 1,400 to three, whereas previously it had been Republican and the leaders of the community walked out of jail shortly after the election.

She was fined $35,000 by the Federal Elections Commission for one of the largest campaign violations on record, claiming that she didn't know that a fundraiser cost $1.2 million instead of $300,000, that enabled her to spend that extra money on her Senate campaign.""

The above excerpt is from the following website:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54153

Fellow Democrats:

This is in addition to Hillary lying about NAFTA, Bosnia, gun control and her record relative to Iraq. She's lied about EVERYTHING.

Looks like France has a President Asshole too. I heard on the news this morning that a full 2/3 of the French people hate his guts. He is a neocon. I'll bet he stole the election just like chimpenfuhrer.

HILLARY ON IRAQ AND TERRORISM

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."

Source: transcript of Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, October 10, 2002

Above excerpt copied from:

http://www.stophillary.com/lies.htm

Fellow Democrats:

Additional lies told by Hillary Clinton:

"New York Daily News

Hillary's big lie grows

Wednesday, January 31st, 2007

There she goes again. Hillary Clinton told another whopper. Actually, it's the same whopper she and her husband told before.

In Iowa last weekend, Clinton was asked about her 2002 vote to suppport the Iraq war. It's a tough question for her, given the war's unpopularity among Democrats. Moreover, her two leading opponents for the 2008 presidential nomination have crowd-pleasing positions. Former Sen. John Edwards said his vote for the war was a mistake and he regretted it, and Sen. Barack Obama opposed the war before the invasion.

So Clinton's camp sees her pro-war vote as heavy baggage. She has never denounced it or said it was wrong, but, at times, has done something worse. She has lied about the reasons for it.

Sunday in Davenport, Iowa, was one of those times. Asked about her vote by a man in front of a mostly adoring rally, Clinton trotted out the whopper. She said she was misled by President Bush about the resolution. "He said at the time he was going to the United Nations to put inspectors back into Iraq, to figure out whether they still had any WMD," she said, adding, "He took the authority that others and I gave him and he misused it."

That's very similar to how Bill Clinton defended her last year. In an interview with ABC News, he said Dems who voted for the resolution did so only to force Saddam Hussein to give up, not to use force. "They felt, frankly, let down" about the invasion, Clinton said, painting Dems as dupes of Bush.

It's a clever argument, but it's not true. It's not even within spinning distance of being true.

Here are the facts. The resolution passed the Senate on Oct. 10, 2002, by a vote of 77 to 23, with support from Clinton, Edwards and about 20 other Dems.

Its purpose was clear from its title: "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq." Opponents, including Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), voted no because they thought it meant war was inevitable.

They had good reason to worry. Bush made it clear he intended to "disarm" Iraq and the resolution gave him that authority. He could use our armed forces, Section 3 said, "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to defend America and enforce UN resolutions. Separately, an amendment requiring Security Council approval for an invasion was defeated. Clinton helped to defeat that amendment.

To hear the Clintons fudge now, you would think the invasion began the very next day. In fact, it began five months later, in March 2003. During those months, as U.S. troops massed in the Mideast, there is no record of Hillary Clinton opposing the invasion or claiming she had been misled.

Indeed, an article in The Washington Post on March 9, 2003, lamented that Congress had been mostly silent since the resolution passed. The only major exception came when Kennedy, Byrd and some House members urged Bush to let weapons inspectors finish their work. Clinton was not recorded as being part of that effort.

That the war has gone badly is a tragedy and a disaster. It is why Democrats won Congress last year. But anybody who wants to be President and commander in chief cannot play the role of victim when the going gets tough on the campaign trail. Blaming others for your own conduct and fudging history are not the right stuff for the Oval Office. Even, or especially, when your name is Clinton."

Above excerpt taken from:

http://www.stophillary.com/lies.htm

If it's a foregone conculsion[sic], ...?

Posted by marymac_memphis on April 25, 2008 at 08:55 PM

Ah, but Mary, statistically it is a "foregone conclusion"! The DNC knows that it must begin raising cash for the likely winner, so McCain doesn't get too far ahead in the cash department. That is why Hillary should knock off the negative attacks of Obama, or is she really trying to bring him down if she doesn't win the nomination.

As each day of this democratic primary passes Hillary appears more of a vindictive b****, and she needs to knock off the attacks.

And for God's sake no more debate! Each time they debate it gives the media a little more shit to throw on both of them, which makes McCain look like McClean. Jesus, enough already!!

I wonder if this will be deleted. I will not comment further.

BIG HRC FUNDRAISER DEFECTS TO OBAMA

From NBC's Chuck Todd
One of the things that both Dem campaigns are always nervous about is defectors. In particular, Clinton is more vulnerable to this problem since she's the candidate that is trailing. Well, NBC News has learned that a major fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, former Amb. to Chile Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon is leaving the campaign to join up Barack Obama's campaign. Officially dubbed a "Hillraiser," Guerra-Mondragon raised nearly $500,000 for Clinton's campaign, according to some estimates. He has been informing people inside Clintonworld this week in what's been described as some tough conversations. A formal announcement of a role for Guerra-Mondragon on Obama's national finance committee will be made next week. Guerra-Mondragon was appointed Amb. to Chile by Pres. Clinton in '94 and served until '98.

Link

I think we should write in Dr. Dean. He seems to be the one responding and attacking McCain.

In response to anne_smith questioning the foreign policy experience of Barack Obama:

Obamapedia: Does Barack Obama have enough experience to be president?

Foreign Policy

Obama's foreign policy experience includes graduating from Columbia University with a degree in political science with an emphasis on international relations. In the U.S. Senate Obama is unique among Senators in that he serves on three of the four Senate Committees dealing with foreign policy issues including the Foreign Relations; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; and Veterans' Affairs committees and is the Chair of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Relations which is responsible fore U.S. relations with European countries, the European Union, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (i.e., NATO). When comparing Obama's foreign policy experience with other candidates for President you have Democrat Joseph Biden who is Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Democrat Hillary Clinton who is a member of the Armed Services Committee and John McCain who is the Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee yet there is no Senator except for Barack Obama who serves on three of the four committees that deal with foreign policy.

Foreign Relations Committee

Obama service on the Foreign Relations committee has placed him in an unique position in that he is the Chair of the Subcommittee on European Relations and serves on the Subcommittees on African Affairs; East Asia and Pacific Affairs; and International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection. This cross-section of subcommittees places Obama in a unique position of having knowledge about Asian, African and European issues. The only other member of the Foreign Relations committee who is running for President is Democrat Joseph Biden who is Chairman of the full Foreign Relations Committee yet unlike Obama he does not serve on any of the other foreign policy committees and his experience is limited to foreign policy issues covered by the Foreign Relations Committee.

Obama has also traveled extensively in his capacity as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and has visited Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan in Asia; Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, and the Palestinian Territories in the Middle East; and Chad, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa in Africa. Obama has also co-sponsored the "Lugar-Obama Act" with Republican Senator Richard Lugar who was Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations at the time. This act was a bi-partisan effort to increase U.S. security in terms of the elimination of conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction. This legislation came out of Obama's trip with Senator Richard Lugar to Russia, the Ukraine and Azerbaijan.

Obama has also sponsored legislation such as the "Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act" which was signed into law by President Bush on December 22, 2006. Obama has co-sponsored immigration related bills related to his service on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee including the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act. His extensive foreign policy experience exceeds that of every other Presidential candidate including his trips abroad in the performance of his official duties as a member of committees dealing with foreign relation issues.

While some have criticized Obama's foreign travel claiming that he is the most traveled freshman Senator in doing so they often fail to mention that as a result of his extensive trips abroad is legislation such as the Lugar-Obama Act instead preferring to make the political connection between his travels abroad to his run for President yet others will recognize the experience he has gained as a result of his foreign trips and recognize that as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that he is expected to travel extensively and that his travels often were with the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Among the three top freshman who have received attention along with Obama in terms of foreign travel you have Barack Obama who serves on three committees dealing with foreign policy, Republican Richard Burr who serves on the Select Committee on Intelligence and Republican Tom Coburn who serves on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and it must be noted that such travel was part of an official delegation and was approved and paid for by the Senate.

Your turn, anne. :)

Side note, anne...the United States is not at war with any nation on this planet. WWII, the last war declared by Congress has been resolved, and there have been no new declarations of war by Congress since then. Even if we were at war, Hillary Clinton has no military experience whatsoever, so where does she have an advantage over Barack Obama?

Oh, for the Obama supporters here (other than Bob, I saw his reply to anne)? You think maybe you could do a little of this looking up stuff when someone asks what experience someone has, instead of just calling them names? Sheesh.

Hillary is not Bill. Some people just don't get it. Some seem to be getting it and are leaving her campaign.

She couldn't get health care passed, when that was her job as first lady. So why should I believe she will return the country to it's pre GW state?

And the others who actually pointed to links and stuff...

Btw, I"m not saying anne ISN'T a troll, I'm just saying, I think we need to stop jumping all over people the first time they say something with which we disagree..it is REALLY making me ill lately to see people I like ripping into one another and making nasty comments to people they used to be friends with.

But you all can still jump all over Bob, I like that part. (j/k, Bob!)

bbl, time with wife is important too :)

ahahahaha, I would be careful about who one casts aspertions on as draft dodgers. Friend troll Stevie, BRAGGED how he used chlorox on his arms and body to look like he had a bad rash.
Posted by PamB

Pammy, you're always bragging about that extensive file you are keeping on all of us "trolls" (I prefer the tern "Truth Speakers" but that's beside the point...), anyway, I'm sure you can easily find that post and repost it here for reference and proof of your allegation.

Right?

GregL
Don't tell GW were not at war, that would crush his ego. He likes being a war pres, decider, etc.

Iran is saying bullshit to the attack on an Iranian ship.

Iran on Friday denied media reports worldwide of the shelling the Iranian ship U.S. patrol in the Persian Gulf

Didn't the Tonkin Gulf "attack" play out the same way?

U.S. considering the possibility of military conflict with Iran, but not in the short term, said at a briefing in the Pentagon head of the Joint Committee of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen.

"When I say that we do not want to remove from the table any military options, it speaks for itself that they are ... we have been planning this a long time and I think they will still be some time in the future "- Said Mullen.

At the same time, Admiral stressed that a third conflict in the region will be very difficult for the U.S.. "But even taking into account this, I have reserves, in particular, Navy and Air Force and not only there but throughout the world. Therefore, it would be a mistake to believe that we have no combat capabilities," - admiral said.

U.S. considering the possibility of armed conflict with Iran

Fucking war mongers.

If you do a Google search for the word chlorox on this DNC sponsored site (oh Howie, how do you sleep at night???) and pretty much all one finds is PAMMY saying that about Frosty, not Frosty telling her that. Now, 1st of all, Frosty is a rather intelligent man, and knowing that, why in the world would he tell that Evil Old Rag something like that? That he did something illegal? Nawwww... that just doesn't make sense.

Now, read this comment below, posted by the Evil Old Rag in response to me telling her I had served in the military. You'll notice that not only does she cast aspersions upon the character of The Honorable Frosty but she then goes into great detail about my reasons for entering the military as well as what I did in the army. I assure you assahts, this Evil Old Rag nows nothing whatsoever about me... NOTHING!!! ... yet she has these wild notions about my reasons for enlisting in the military and job. Now I ask you, are these the words of a sane woman? NO!!!! She's suffering from some serious mental problems and I ask you to first consider a verdict of GUILTY on the charge of slander with intent to defame and then secondly, set aside that verdict based on the grounds that this poor desperate EVIL OLD~RAG is insane.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury... I rest my case.

duhhhh, you might want to check with MN Stevie on this one, before you discuss avoiding service. He admitted to pouring chlorox on his arms to produce a bad rash in order to not have to be drafted and sent to VietNam! And he sure felt superior by doing that! Some brave chickenhawk, now Rooting for our boys getting killed in a Worse lie in Iraq!

and you should not feel superior for any service you were forced into by parents! I am sure they were sick and tired of their disappointing deadbeat lard ass laying around the house, getting horrific marks in school, drinking and smoking pot, and a disgrace to the family. What kind of noble "service" did YOU perform when there was no conflict on? Did you help make sure all those taters got peeled? LOL! Save it Loser. You just open yourself up to all kinds of your low life behavior.

Posted by PamB

Iran is saying bullshit to the attack on an Iranian ship.
Posted by Johne

We understand Johnne Wad, you have every right to try and defend your team. Maybe someday they'll let you suit up and take the field. I'm sure they would just love to have you carry their water.

Btw, I"m not saying anne ISN'T a troll, I'm just saying, I think we need to stop jumping all over people the first time they say something with which we disagree..it is REALLY making me ill lately to see people I like ripping into one another and making nasty comments to people they used to be friends with.
Posted by GregL

Greg, you are asking quite a lot of these idiots. After all, attacking new comers to this blog is what they do best. One cannot expect to come on this DNC sponsored forum and have an opinion other than theirs, it's just not the way things are done on here.

Besides, chances are that Anne isn't a real person. More than likely she's a fake blogger created by Michael or one of his lackeys to try to make it appear that this DNC blog is not exclusively a Obama love fest which would be in violation of DNC rules by endorsing one candidate over another.

Fucking war mongers.
Posted by Johne

Maybe what we should do is try to avoid another war at all costs and instead send you over to negotiate an official apology for allowing US shipping in international water to be attached without provocation by Iranian gunboats.

Be sure and wear a bright white pair of white pants and a lemon yellow shirt. The shirt will go well with the piss stains in your crotch. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will appreciate your efforts.

He is a neocon. I'll bet he stole the election just like chimpenfuhrer.
Posted by Johne

Don't sweat it Johnne Weird, you're not going over to France anytime soon and at you age that essentially means never.

Besides, Sarkozy has one hottie for a wife. Man-o-man-dango have you seen this babe???!!! BTW Johnne Boy, you never mention anything about a wife, spouse or significant other... hmmmm... what's the matter, can't figure out how to blow her up?

good evening fine dems.

Has everyone left for the evening? Looks like the only thing left is an idiot troll.

For any people out there leaning republican, please look at the posts by Harpo. This is the kind of fool you will be dealing with in that party. Idiotic comments about nothing. Here are a few examples:

Besides, Sarkozy has one hottie for a wife

Be sure and wear a bright white pair of white pants and a lemon yellow shirt.

More than likely she's a fake blogger created by Michael or one of his lackeys to try to make it appear that this DNC blog is not exclusively a Obama love fest

Maybe someday they'll let you suit up and take the field. I'm sure they would just love to have you carry their water.

Is this the kind of person you would want to associate with? If not, join us Democrats.

April 25, 2008
Major Clinton fundraiser switches to Obama

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Hi Dems

nice to come on and see that after a nice evening out with friends

chicago, that is it, huh?

TG

Party Fears Racial Divide
Attacks Could Do Lasting Harm, Democrats Say
By Jonathan Weisman and Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, April 26, 2008; A01

The protracted and increasingly acrimonious fight for the Democratic presidential nomination is unnerving core constituencies -- African Americans and wealthy liberals -- who are becoming convinced that the party could suffer irreversible harm if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton maintains her sharp line of attack against Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton's solid win in the Pennsylvania primary exposed a quandary for the party. Her backers may be convinced that only she can win the white, working-class voters that the Democratic nominee will need in the general election, but many African American leaders say a Clinton nomination -- handed to her by superdelegates -- would result in a disastrous breach with black voters.

"If this party is perceived by people as having gone into a back room somewhere and brokered a nominee, that would not be good for our party," House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (S.C.), the highest ranking African American in Congress, warned yesterday. "I'm telling you, if this continues on its current course, [the damage] is going to be irreparable."

That fear, plus a more general sense that Clinton's only route to victory would be through tearing down her opponent, has led even some black Democrats who are officially neutral in the race, such as Clyburn, to speak out.

Clinton's camp has a vastly different interpretation, arguing that the most recent primary demonstrated that Democrats remain very interested in seeing the contest continue.

"Pennsylvania did the job of calming any nerves that existed," said Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson. "It showed that the big states around the country think she's the best person to be president."

But that opinion is far from unanimous. More than 70 top Clinton donors wrote their first checks to Obama in March, campaign records show. Clinton's lead among superdelegates, a collection of almost 800 party leaders and elected officials, has slipped from 106 in December to 23 now, according to an Associated Press tally.

"If you have any, any kind of loyalty to the Democratic Party, perhaps you need to rethink your strategy and bow out gracefully in order to save this party from a disastrous end in November," Rep. William Lacy Clay (Mo.), an African American Obama supporter, said in an appeal to Clinton.

Clyburn accused Clinton and her husband yesterday of marginalizing black voters and opening a rift between her campaign and an African American Democratic base that strongly backed Bill Clinton's presidency. Some surrogates in her camp are trying to render Obama unelectable against the Republican nominee so she could run for the Democratic nomination in 2012, he suggested. The discussion flared up yet again when Bill Clinton suggested this week that Obama's campaign had played "the race card" after the former president compared the candidate to Jesse Jackson after the South Carolina primary.

"We keep talking as if it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter that Obama gets 92 percent of the black vote, because since he only got 35 percent of the white vote, he's in trouble," Clyburn said. "Well, Hillary Clinton only got 8 percent of the black vote. . . . It's almost saying black people don't matter. The only thing that matters is how white people respond. And that's what bothered me. I think I matter."

The reemergence of the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., Obama's controversial former longtime pastor, in an appearance on PBS last night may only fan the dispute.

"When something is taken like a sound bite for a political purpose and put constantly over and over again, looped in the face of the public, that's not a failure to communicate," Wright said in an appearance with Bill Moyers. "Those who are doing that are communicating exactly what they want to do, which is to paint me as some sort of fanatic or as the learned journalist from the New York Times called me, a 'wackadoodle.' "

Both campaigns sought yesterday to tamp down a race controversy, appealing for Democrats to stay focused on winning back the White House.

"I never believe in irreparable breaches. I'm a big believer in reconciliation and redemption," Obama told reporters in Indianapolis. "So, look, this has been a fierce contest. I've said repeatedly: Come August, there will be a whole lot of people standing on a stage with a lot of balloons and confetti raining down on the Democratic nominee, and people are going to be excited about taking on John McCain in November."

Campaigning for Clinton in Gary, Ind., yesterday, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (Ohio), who is black, said she does not share her colleagues' concerns. "I don't think Bill and Hillary Clinton will 'do anything' to win this election," she said. "They are trying to be successful, but I disagree they will do anything or they are trying to hurt Barack Obama." She added that black voters "are not a monolith, and we recognize the importance of this election."

There are signs that the anger voiced by some African Americans is beginning to extend to the Democratic donor base. Campaign finance records released this week show that a growing number of Clinton's early supporters migrated to Obama in March, after he achieved 11 straight victories. Of those who had previously made maximum contributions to Clinton, 73 wrote their first checks to Obama in March. The reverse was not true: Of those who had made large contributions to Obama last year, none wrote checks to Clinton in March.

"I think she is destroying the Democratic Party," said New York lawyer Daniel Berger, who had backed Clinton with the maximum allowable donation of $2,300. "That there's no way for her to win this election except by destroying [Obama]. I just don't like it. So in my own little way, I'm trying to send her a message."

The message came in the form of a $2,300 contribution to Obama.

Donors are not the only ones who have made the leap. Gabriel Guerra-Mondrag�n served as an ambassador to Chile during Bill Clinton's presidency, considered himself a close friend of Sen. Clinton, and became a "Hill-raiser" by bringing in about $500,000 for her presidential bid.

But he had a fitful few weeks as the battle between Clinton and Obama turned increasingly negative. Last week, he decided he had seen enough.

"We're just bleeding each other out," Guerra-Mondrag�n said when asked why he had decided to join Obama's finance committee. "Looking at it as coldly as I can, I just don't see how Senator Clinton can overcome Senator Obama with delegates and popular votes. I want this fight to be over -- the quicker, the better."

The Obama converts include William Louis-Dreyfus. The billionaire New York financier said he had been impressed by Clinton's performance in the Senate and distressed by eight years of the Bush administration when he donated $4,600 to her campaign last August. Then, he said, he began watching the campaign more closely.

"However much one might have supported the Clintons, or one might support the usual suspects in the Democratic Party, I began to believe Obama represents a new approach. He gives off such a sense of relevance that he's sort of irresistible," Louis-Dreyfus said.

He also expressed, as did other big givers who crossed to Obama, exasperation about the tone of the Clinton campaign and frustration with the candidate herself.

"At the end of the day, all she had to do was open her mouth for me not to believe her," Louis-Dreyfus said.

Staff writers Perry Bacon Jr., traveling with Clinton, and Alec MacGillis, traveling with Obama, contributed to this report.

Contributions from PACs (by candidate)
Clinton - $547,492
McCain - $382,245
Obama - $11,487

So if you see articles claiming that Obama is not raising his money from individual contributors, blast them out of the water.

There is an opportunity to vote for change in this election. Our hope rides in that opportunity provided by Obama.

I posted this earlier. I guess the point I was trying to make was not clear.

My point is that Obama has only taken $11,487 in PAC money. The other two candidates have taken way over $300,000 each.

Obama represents a drastic change. If we (you and me) can finance candidates with $100 contributions, we can take back control of our government. We can get back to having representatives that represent our interests. THAT's what I'm talking about!!!

This is a little mean, someone with ESP posted it this morning and I sent it around with e-mails, so still have it.

Felt it appropriate at this time
It is actually somewhat equally mean to all three, but the message is clear and it is fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghITXiWQtq4

Chicago I tryed to follow the link on that you posted earlier, and clicked around on the pages looking for that particular information.
Was it all in one place? (your PAC info)

Posted by highserenity on April 25, 2008 at 11:55 PM

Hi High,
Glad to see you are here. For a while, I thought the only conversation I would have would be with the troll. My dog leaves things in the yard that make more sense than the troll does.

This is a time that we are going to see what the really respected and strong black leaders can and will do. The junior MLK's
It has become clear to me, that the republicans are so scared that from Hannity, Limbaugh to the NC RNC, the whole plan is if they can legally hit so many hot buttons enough, and over and over they can create a race riot.

I swear to God, if I hear that Wright loop one more time, I think I am going to hurt someone, and I am an old white woman.

I know the blacks are aware and doing damage control, as seen today when the 3 cops that shot the unarmed groom 50 times were declared not guilty and turned loose. The RNC was glued to the set, praying openly for a riot. They didn't get it. I saw unbelievable restraint.

These people (and their DNA) know how to play the game. Like Rosa Parks, they have/do suffer in ways most of us will never be able to comprehend.

They now have a leader at the top to set the tone.
I trust him He has worked with them for years
I am so happy for all of us.

This is their chance. They will control their fring----I hope we can control ours.

Please no one, jump on me for racism

Hi chicago, didn't I see Solja?

looks like I got here at just the right time, I almost didn't log on cause of troll that was here when I left at 4:00p.m. Just didn't want to deal anymore. The anne and obvious repubs here thing got too much for me earlier. It will get worse I am sure.

I visit McCains site frequently to see what is going on.
Have to almost feel sorry for them---they are trying to defend from both sides.
Should have heard the 19% converge after McCain blaimed Bush for Katrina Mess. It got sad to watch and I had to leave.
Lots of the actual McCain Blog regulars were trying to figure out which were really Republicans who hate McCain and which were trolls sent by Obama.
It was an easy call for me.

Highserenity,
If you go to

http://www.opensecrets.org/

select the "Who gives" tab at the top.

then select a sector (use drop down arrow, "health")

on the left, choose "top recipients"

Select the candidates name on the chart for a breakdown of the contributions they have received.

Highserenity,
Solja posted once. Not sure if he/she is still on...

And yes, I agree with Solja's post, the republicans are going to play the race card. They cannot help it. And I think they are afraid of Obama and perhaps afraid that when they do attack him, their racism will be exposed.

Oh, its late. I have to get some sleep.
See y'all tomorrow.

O.K. got it, I am on Hillary's page
where did you get the
$547,492?
Did you add up all the PACS? Can't find a total.

Geez, without detailed instruction, I would have never figured it out----thought you accidentally posted wrong link!;-//

Shit it doesn't matter, when I post the link, I will let them figure it out, and I will look smart. Website impressive looking.

they will be afraid to ask me for fear of looking dumb {smiling}

Global Warming my ass! This winter was so cold for so long that my darned squirrel grew fur like a Kodiak Bear. Now she´s starting to shed the crap all over the house.

that Squirrel has lost so much fur, its starting to look like a Bucktoothed Chihuahua with a bloated ass.

The damned Squirrel has lost so much fur that she looks like a Chihuahua with a bloated Ass. Along with that big head, its a godawful thing to look at.

Watching Bill Moyers interview Rev. Wright

Only 15 min. into it, but almost sounds like Moyers has known Wright/Associates for a long time and is supporting/endorsing Wright.

Keeping my fingers crossed.

I think Moyers set this up, too bad the ones who need to see it, won't

Looks like this blog got stuck in a freakin time warp again. Reminds me of this Hickassed town in CT where I live with my psycotic squirrel.

Looks like this blog got stuck in a freakin time warp again. Reminds me of this Hickassed town in CT where I live with my psycotic squirrel.

Looks like this blog got stuck in a freakin time warp again. Reminds me of this Hickassed town in CT where I live with my psycotic squirrel.

Krugman Speaks Volumes of Truths
by Pamela Leavey
April 25th, 2008 @ 12:34 am

Wake up and smell the coffee Democrats. I just finished reading Paul Krugman’s Friday column and he speaks volumes of truths. Volumes.

Unless we can get past our own ”self-inflicted state of confusion,” caused in part by the mixed messages sent by our purported “front-runner” Barack Obama, “there’s a very good chance” that we’ll “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this fall.”

We’ve got a real mess on our hands here, folks. That’s right, a real mess, thanks in part to the candidate who “claims to be bringing a “new politics”” and his “rhetoric that places blame for our current state equally on both parties.” It’s a mixed message and a bad one at that.

How did we end up here in this state of confusion? “This wasn’t the way things were supposed to play out.” Indeed, it wasn’t…

Mr. Obama was supposed to be a transformational figure, with an almost magical ability to transcend partisan differences and unify the nation. Once voters got to know him — and once he had eliminated Hillary Clinton’s initial financial and organizational advantage — he was supposed to sweep easily to the nomination, then march on to a huge victory in November.

Well, now he has an overwhelming money advantage and the support of much of the Democratic establishment — yet he still can’t seem to win over large blocs of Democratic voters, especially among the white working class.

As a result, he keeps losing big states. And general election polls suggest that he might well lose to John McCain.

What’s gone wrong?

We all know the routine… Per the Obamabots and Obamacans:

According to many Obama supporters, it’s all Hillary’s fault. If she hadn’t launched all those vile, negative attacks on their hero — if she had just gone away — his aura would be intact, and his mission of unifying America still on track.

But… Just “how negative has the Clinton campaign been, really?”

Yes, it ran an ad that included Osama bin Laden in a montage of crisis images that also included the Great Depression and Hurricane Katrina. To listen to some pundits, you’d think that ad was practically the same as the famous G.O.P. ad accusing Max Cleland of being weak on national security.

It wasn’t. The attacks from the Clinton campaign have been badminton compared with the hardball Republicans will play this fall. If the relatively mild rough and tumble of the Democratic fight has been enough to knock Mr. Obama off his pedestal, what hope did he ever have of staying on it through the general election?

Let me offer an alternative suggestion: maybe his transformational campaign isn’t winning over working-class voters because transformation isn’t what they’re looking for.

Krugman nails it. Rhetoric and haughty declarations won’t fix the mess that many Americans are in:

From the beginning, I wondered what Mr. Obama’s soaring rhetoric, his talk of a new politics and declarations that “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for” (waiting for to do what, exactly?) would mean to families troubled by lagging wages, insecure jobs and fear of losing health coverage. The answer, from Ohio and Pennsylvania, seems pretty clear: not much. Mrs. Clinton has been able to stay in the race, against heavy odds, largely because her no-nonsense style, her obvious interest in the wonkish details of policy, resonate with many voters in a way that Mr. Obama’s eloquence does not.

Yes, I know that there are lots of policy proposals on the Obama campaign’s Web site. But addressing the real concerns of working Americans isn’t the campaign’s central theme.

Tellingly, the Obama campaign has put far more energy into attacking Mrs. Clinton’s health care proposals than it has into promoting the idea of universal coverage.

During the closing days of the Pennsylvania primary fight, the Obama campaign ran a TV ad repeating the dishonest charge that the Clinton plan would force people to buy health insurance they can’t afford. It was as negative as any ad that Mrs. Clinton has run — but perhaps more important, it was fear-mongering aimed at people who don’t think they need insurance, rather than reassurance for families who are trying to get coverage or are afraid of losing it.

No wonder, then, that older Democrats continue to favor Mrs. Clinton.

Now that the magic is over and voters are waking up and seeing the light what are we in for now?

The question Democrats, both inside and outside the Obama campaign, should be asking themselves is this: now that the magic has dissipated, what is the campaign about? More generally, what are the Democrats for in this election?

That should be an easy question to answer. Democrats can justly portray themselves as the party of economic security, the party that created Social Security and Medicare and defended those programs against Republican attacks — and the party that can bring assured health coverage to all Americans.

They can also portray themselves as the party of prosperity: the contrast between the Clinton economy and the Bush economy is the best free advertisement that Democrats have had since Herbert Hoover.

But, Barack Obama has spent months taking pot shots at the Clinton administration, as though he’s running against Bill, not Hillary. So now what? Because:

[…] the message that Democrats are ready to continue and build on a grand tradition doesn’t mesh well with claims to be bringing a “new politics” and rhetoric that places blame for our current state equally on both parties.

There’s a way out. HILLARY.

I’m with Maya Angelou… “I am With Hillary for the Long Run.”
Sphere: Related Content

http://www.stonewalldemocratsohio.org/

Posted by Matt Ortega on April 25, 2008 at 05:40 PM

What's on your weekend agenda?

Let's see...since I'm accustom to waking up before 5 a.m. now a days, I can (if I so choose) read the previous day's blog entries.

Mowing was completed last night, so that leaves weeding the flower beds to get them ready for planting. And of course, today is "Bella Day!" Running errands (working in the big city, I now have to do it all on Sat. mornings, which I really dislike) oil change, groceries, banking.

If you think gas prices are a pain in your butt (thanks for the funny, Bold) you should drive what is
the equivalent to two NASCAR races a week! I get an oil change once a month! instead of every 4 months!

That's the price I have to pay to have employment! haha

Big political fun next weekend and that will last throughout the Spring/Summer. Breakfast with my Congressman next weekend, May 5th there is a wine tasting event in the big city sponsored by the Stonewall Democrats, May 10th is when the ODP State convention will be held and the ODP State Dinner is in June.

This gives a higher level of meaning to one of my most favorite words! (I'm easily entertained)

Multislacking!

Today's Picture

Negotiators reach tentative farm bill deal

Hillary Turns Up Heat, Threatens to 'Obliterate' Iran

mcclinton?

One for the free thinkers (and those who enjoy RF)

"The best things and best people rise out of their separateness; I'm against a homogenized society because I want the cream to rise."

or...you could read it this way:

"Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward"

Who despises the day of small things?

God uses work to develop character qualities that He plans to use at the appropriate time. In the small things we develop trustworthiness with God. The day-in and day-out grind of working life molds us and makes us into what God desires. God may still be preparing you for something far greater. For now, however, you are learning the daily lessons of small things. Pray that you will be faithful.

Time to enjoy my domain that God has blessed me with. On one's knees removing what takes over & destroys beauty is what I consider one of the most gracious gifts of all. Small things for sure.

Have a great day, everyone. Rejoice & be glad in it.

we need to get the best technicians or web designers or whatever to get us the best blog money can buy. The people deserve the best.
Posted by Orangutan on April 25, 2008 at 08:32 PM

I don't really see spending this money on upgrading the blog, more important than running that McCain ad another couple days, or opening another office in a Red state. The guys at DNC work hard to try and keep this blog running.

Posted by Kev on April 25, 2008 at 09:11 PM

I don't think using Right Wing Biased crap sites, to attack Hillary on the Democratic blog is a very smart thing to do! Why don't you stick with boosting up Obama, instead of trying to tear down Hillary?

This race has brought out some very nasty sides of people !