Every man is not so much a workman in the world as he is a suggestion of that he should be. Men walk as prophecies of the next age.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Every election cycle we see candidates moving towards the middle. Some call this ‘flip flopping’.
In the past 40 years Democrats have won the White House three times. Two out of three times was by Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton was a master at moving towards the middle. Many now say that Obama is following Clintons’ lead. All our Democratic nominees would have followed Bill Clintons lead and moved towards the middle to win the GE. This is what CNN has to say about the ‘flip flop’ GE:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/07/03/schneider.flip.flop.primary.cnn
We do have one politician that no matter what the polls say, no matter what the people want…he stays the course. I say, “Flip flop Mr. Bush. The majority of the country does not agree with you.” Even Jesse Helms who was one of the most conservative in Congress worked with Madeline Albright on AIDS in Africa. He ‘flip flopped’.
Am I disappointed in some of the stands Obama has on the issues? Of course I am. Do I know that Obama will not be with me on 100% of the issues? Of course I do.
Read More »STEVEN SIMON is Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. From 1994 to 1999, he served on the National Security Council in positions including Senior Director for Transnational Threats.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080501faessay87305/steven-simon/the-price-of-the-surge.html
***********************
The reduced level of violence, still far short of the needs of both Iraqis and Americans, leaves the situation fragile and dependent on the presence of U.S. forces. Even with that presence, relative stability may not last. Without political progress, the U.S. risks getting bogged down in Iraq for a long time to come, with serious consequences for its interests in other parts of the world.
http://www.usip.org/pubs/usipeace_briefings/2008/0406_iraq_surge.html
**********************
The future of Iraq belongs to the Iraqis. The improved security conditions resulting in part from the surge of 2007 have given the Iraqis an opportuÂnity to choose a better way. In the last week, several major pieces of legislation have been passed by the Iraqi parliament: accountability and justice, provinÂcial powers, and amnesty law.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/hl1068.cfm
******************
Many factors account for the reduction in violence: the surge in some cases benefited from, in others encouraged, and in the remainder produced, a series of politico-military shifts affecting the Sunni and Shiite communities. But there is little doubt that U.S. field commanders displayed sophistication and knowledge of local dynamics without precedent during a conflict characterised from the outset by U.S. policy misguided in its assumptions and flawed in its execution. A conceptual revolution within the military leadership gave U.S. forces the ability to carry out new policies and take advantage of new dynamics. Had they remained mired in past conceptions, propitious evolutions on the ground notwithstanding, the situation today would be far bleaker.
Forces combating the U.S. have been weakened but not vanquished. The insurgency has been cut down to more manageable size and, after believing victory was within reach, now appears eager for negotiations with the U.S. Still, what remains is an enduring source of violence and instability that could be revived should political progress lag or the Sons of Iraq experiment falter. Even al-Qaeda in Iraq cannot be decisively defeated through U.S. military means alone. While the organisation has been significantly weakened and its operational capacity severely degraded, its deep pockets, fluid structure and ideological appeal to many young Iraqis mean it will not be irrevocably vanquished. The only lasting solution is a state that extends its intelligence and coercive apparatus throughout its territory, while offering credible alternatives and socio-economic opportunities to younger generations.
In the U.S., much of the debate has focused on whether to maintain or withdraw troops. But this puts the question the wrong way, and spawns misguided answers. The issue, rather, should be whether the U.S. is pursuing a policy that, by laying the foundations of legitimate, functional institutions and rules of the game, will minimise the costs to itself, the Iraqi people and regional stability of a withdrawal that sooner or later must occur â€" or whether it is simply postponing a scenario of Iraq’s collapse into a failed and fragmented state, protracted and multilayered violence, as well as increased foreign meddling.
*********************
Either way - the concensus is - it is not time to move - we need to get out of Iraq and I am sure we will. It's complicated and is not going to be an easy process. But for the sake of the Iraqi people and the U.S. - it's time we stand down - whether it takes 16 months or 24 months.
The priority is to start on day one 2009 to move towards immediately getting our troops out of combat.
That I am sure we as democrats is one thing we all can agree on.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
David Hardt, YDA President
Young Democrats of America
http://whYDA.org
Dear Young Democrat,
On this Fourth of July, whether you are a student a month into a much needed summer with no classes, a young worker excited to have a long weekend to celebrate with friends, or a young family looking forward to fireworks with the kids, you might notice that this year's patriotic celebrations have a little extra hope and optimism attached to them. You see, this year the Fourth of July falls exactly four months before Election Day 2008.
Already, 2008 has proven to be the year of the young voter as a Young Voter Revolution sweeps the country. During many of the primaries and caucuses young voter turnout doubled, tripled - and in some cases - quadrupled compared to the numbers we saw in 2004. Even in deep red states like Georgia, Louisiana, and Tennessee, more young voters cast ballots for Democrats than Republicans.
Why are you voting for Democrats this November?
Tell your story at http://www.whYDA.org
The opportunity our generation has to sweep Democrats into office up and down the ballot in every state in the nation is unprecedented. Turning this opportunity into a reality, however, will take a lot of hard work. We need to do everything we can to convince our friends and family to vote for Democrats come November. With everyone gathering together to celebrate our nation's independence, I can't think of a better weekend to get started.
That is why YDA picked this holiday weekend to unveil our newest project. A web site designed to encourage a community of young voters to share why they are voting for Democrats and why they think others should as well. We call it whYDA.org (get it?), and in order for this to be an effective community building and persuasion tool, we need you to visit and tell your story.
Why are you voting for Democrats this November?
Tell your story at http://www.whYDA.org
Read More »
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/washington/03fisa.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
PLEAESE READ THIS.........
"The co-host of a recent top-dollar fundraiser for Sen. John McCain oversaw the payment of roughly $1.7 million to a Colombian paramilitary group that is today designated a terrorist organization by the United States.
Carl H. Lindner Jr., the billionaire Cincinnati businessman, was CEO of Chiquita Brands International from 1984 to 2001, and remained on the company's board of directors until May 2002. Beginning under his tenure, Chiquita executives paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (known by the Spanish acronym AUC), which is described by George Washington University's National Security Archive as an "illegal right-wing anti-guerrilla group tied to many of the country's most notorious civilian massacres."
****************
Is this why McCain had to hurry on down to Colombia today?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/02/mccain-fundraiser-oversaw_n_110354.html
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000002909053
Dole Faces Fight in North Carolina Senate Race
By Marie Horrigan, CQ Staff
North Carolina Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole holds the edge in her bid this year for a second term. But fluctuating polls over the month and a half since state Sen. Kay Hagan won the May 6 Democratic primary have raised questions about how solid and secure Dole is in her status as the favorite.
"Hagan defeated four primary opponents with 60 percent of the vote, a strong showing that boosted her into a statistical tie with Dole in a poll taken shortly thereafter. A more recent survey released June 18 showed Dole with a more substantial cushion, but her 48 percent to 38 percent in that poll did not suggest that the contest is out of reach for the longshot challenger."
*******************
We want to send Dole back to Kansas!!!
Obama is soon to be attacked on many fronts by the likely chop shops. We need to tune up talking!
The NRA:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/nra-gathering-ammo-agains_n_110106.html
Black Republicans:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/black-republicans-launch_n_110042.html
Swiftboaters:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/mccain-uses-swift-boat-ve_n_110003.html
This stuff is pretty important to me...thoughts?
Ok, I hear the MSM talking about the working class.
Ah yes - I am going to bring it up.
Why is it that so much value is extended the working class voter and what they want in a president? Not to say - our vote has no value and our issues should be minimized, but what is at the heart of some working class voters expections?
It almost seems as though the voice of one part of the working class vote is more of an emotional decision than one based on issues.
Just pick one issue - and let's compare candidates and use that as our baseline.
Why would a "working class" voter - pick a republican president time and time again - when that party stands against everything the working family believes in?
Mistake of the republicans is that they don't believe in the anxiety issues of the working class.
How do they intend to hold accountable corporations for their decisions made when choosing our healthcare benefits?
How do they intend to address the economic crisis so that the working class feels some relief? By offering us the solution of off shore drilling to lower gas prices?
I think McCain and the rest of the repubs are in a tight spot.
I want my working class friends to be open to change that the democratic party offers in our candidate - Barack Obama.
Think about the housing crisis, the cost of healthcare premiums, the rise in food costs, the gas prices, the civil unions issues, the right to choose issues, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and how those war fronts will affect our sons and daughters.
I want to trust that my working class friends (like me) are not just voting out of emotion and voting based on the true issues that affect us day to day.
Can I trust you?
Can I count on your judgement to make the right decision for POTUS?
The stakes are too high - we can't afford to keep making the same mistakes.
"McCain’s overarching reform—altering the tax code to begin weaning the public off of employer-provided health coverage, currently the bedrock of the U.S. health insurance system. His plan would give workers the option of leaving their employers’ plans and getting a federal tax credit—$2500 for individuals and $5000 for families—to buy their own insurance in the commercial market. Leaving aside the merits of a plan that could eventually lead to the demise of our employer-based system, a question: How would McCain pay for that tax credit?
Now here comes the confusion. The AP ran a somewhat muddled story that said: To pay for the tax credit, McCain would eliminate the tax exemption for people whose employers pay a portion of their coverage, raising an estimated $3.6 trillion in revenues, [McCain adviser] Holtz-Eakin said. Companies that provide coverage to workers still would get tax breaks.
McCain would also cut costs by limiting health care lawsuits.
McCain means that if your boss pays for part of your health insurance, you will begin to pay taxes on some part of it, the way people pay taxes on employer-provided life insurance already. Apparently, the insurance would be counted as income subject to income taxes.
Meanwhile, would employers—who now can deduct health-insurance costs as a business expense—still get to do that, as the AP reported? Or not, as The New York Times suggested yesterday. The Times reported that Holtz-Eakin said the government would save that $3.6 trillion over the next decade by eliminating the tax break that currently goes to encourage employer-based health coverage. That sounds like eliminating the the tax break that employers currently get."
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/mccains_healthcare_muddle.php
McCain: "I Always Favored [The] Closing Of Guantanamo Bay." During a press conference in Boston, Massachusetts, John McCain said, "As you know I always favored [the] closing of Guantanamo Bay and I still think that we ought to do that." [McCain Press Availability in Boston, Massachusetts, 6/12/08]
FACT: McCain Said He "Doesn't Think Necessarily" That The U.S. Should Close Guantanamo. During an interview on NBC's Meet the Press, Tim Russert asked John McCain about the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and said directly, "Should we close it?" McCain replied, "I don't think necessarily. But I think the important thing is it's not the facility at Guantanamo, it's the adjudication of the cases of the prisoners who have been held there without trial or without any adjudication of their cases." [NBC, "Meet the Press," 6/19/05]
FACT: McCain Voted For A Sense Of The Senate To Keep Detainees At Guantanamo Bay Prison. McCain voted in favor of a McConnell amendment would "express the sense of the Senate that detainees housed at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, including senior members of al Qaeda, should not be released into the United States, or transferred to facilities in the United States." [Senate Vote # 259, 7/19/07] McCain Said "I Would Declare That We Would Close Guantanamo Bay And Move Those Prisoners To Fort Leavenworth." The Florida Times-Union reported that McCain said, "I would, as president of the United States, declare we will never torture another person who is in our custody. I would declare that we would close Guantanamo Bay and move those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas." [Florida Times-Union, 5/16/08]
FACT: McCain Voted for the Graham Amendment to Deny Habeas Corpus to Non-Citizens Held at Guantanamo Bay. John McCain voted for the Graham substitute amendment to the Graham amendment that would deny non-citizens held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, habeas corpus access to U.S. civilian courts to contest their detention or conviction. It required the Defense secretary to submit a report to Congress detailing security procedures at Guantanamo Bay, particularly Combatant Status Review Tribunals and Administrative Review Boards. [Vote #319, 11/10/2005, Adopted 49-42: R 44-4; D 5-37]
FACT: McCain Voted To Fund $36 Million Prison At Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In 2005, there was an up or down vote to delete $36 million from the bill's appropriation for military construction earmarked to pay for the construction of a new maximum security prison at Guantanamo, Cuba. McCain voted no. [Senate Vote #93, 4/13/05]From CNN:
Can you believe he went there?
Lieberman stated that the terrorist will "test" the new POTUS early in 2009.
What is the world is wrong with this man? He needs his head examined - for real.
As Biff would say: GOOD LUCK TO US ALL!!
What we need to focus on is - our platform.
Helping those Democrats that need it.
Victory is ours - but we will have to work for it.
Lets Go Dems.
I have created a group for people like myself who would like to be proactive in attempting to stop an a conflict with Iran. I am hoping we could exchange ideas on things we can do to stop this confict including making people aware that the battlefields are being readied for this war now.
We will also be exchanging news and developments.
No moderation in this group. All are welcome.
Let's do something before it's too late!
http://www.democrats.org/page/group/StopaWarWithIran
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/18/03541/2524
The Federal Marriage Amendment is back — with Vitter’s and Craig’s support.
Just this week, a group of Republican senators re-introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution, which, as we know, would ban gay marriage. And once again, the language is pretty straightforward:
Section 1. This article may be cited as the `Marriage Protection Amendment’.
Section 2. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.’.
COSPONSORS(9), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date) Sen Allard, Wayne [CO] - 6/25/2008 Sen Brownback, Sam [KS] - 6/25/2008 Sen Craig, Larry E. [ID] - 6/25/2008 Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY] - 6/26/2008 Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] - 6/25/2008 Sen Roberts, Pat [KS] - 6/25/2008 Sen Shelby, Richard C. [AL] - 6/25/2008 Sen Thune, John [SD] - 6/25/2008 Sen Vitter, David [LA] - 6/25/2008
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16020.html
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.j.res.00043:
Elizabeth Dole needs to be sent home. We are just the people to do it. I will be blogging in as many North Carolina newspapers as I can tomorrow. Any help will be appreciated.
Here is Kay Hagen's website.
http://www.kayhagan.com/home
Posts