Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Election 2008

Can Obama Turn the Democratic Party Upside Down with the Biggest Voter Mobilization Drive in History?

By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet. Posted August 4, 2008.


Thousands of grassroots organizers will lead an effort to register millions of new voters and build momentum for political reform.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Barack Obama's presidential campaign is seeking to register "millions" of new voters immediately after the Democratic Convention, according to top campaign officials who say the effort is one facet of a "capacity-building" effort this summer that includes extensively training thousands of campaign workers as community organizers.

The voter registration effort is part of a broader strategy to not just elect Obama, but also to alter the political landscape by shifting power from Washington to the grassroots, the officials say, to cultivate a base for significant political reforms. The campaign sees its training and voter registration efforts as the cornerstone of building a new progressive movement like the rise of conservatism during Ronald Reagan's presidency.

"We need everybody in this party to get behind this effort to turn out thousands and thousands of volunteers in every single state in the country, to hit the streets and go register millions of new people that weekend alone," said Steve Hildebrand, Obama's deputy campaign manager, speaking at the recent Netroots Nation conference. "It's not about whether or not we will get Barack Obama elected. It is about whether or not we will have a progressive majority in this country for decades to come."

Last week, the campaign and the Democratic National Committee announced it would commit $20 million to "engaging and mobilizing" Hispanic voters in an effort that will include "voter mobilization, voter registration, online organizing, community outreach and paid advertising" and "also include Camp Obama trainings around the country."

"We expect our demographic to turn out at 80 percent," said Jason Green, the campaign's national voter registration director. "We are all about cultivating leadership."

The plan to train thousands of new community organizers and register millions of new voters is not business as usual for Democratic presidential campaigns, which for years have been run as top-down operations with little input from the grassroots. Instead, the campaign is seeking to blend the best aspects of community organizing, which stresses relationship building, with established, nuts-and-bolts voter outreach tactics to win.

A handful of experts who have worked in these dimensions of campaigns said the Obama plan realized a longtime hope of community groups to have a real role in presidential campaigns. However, those same people -- who did not want to be named -- questioned whether the Obama campaign had "the experience to do it right." Some longtime Democratic Party campaigners agreed. As one voter outreach expert put it, before listing many things that his group took years to master, "I want to believe."

Neither Hildebrand nor the other campaign officials who divulged their grassroots strategy at the Netroots conference replied to requests for follow-up interviews. However, as the deputy campaign manager concluded his talk, he said there were very good reasons why the campaign's strategy could work in 2008: the public wants real change; its candidate is charismatic; the campaign has the money -- and the volunteers -- to make it work.

"If we don't use this opportunity, if we don't do this right, shame on us," Hildebrand said, "because we will never have it as good as we have it right now."

The Obama campaign also has a track record of winning in 2008's primaries using this same strategy, which it is now institutionalizing for November's election.

Exhibit A: South Carolina

"They said the way you used to win down here is you pay off the ministers, you pay off the state senators and the state reps, and you have some chicken dinners," said Jeremy Bird, the campaign's South Carolina field director during the primary, recounting the thinking he found among local Democrats when setting up shop in March 2007. "That didn't jibe with our candidate's message, or his bio, or anything that he said since he started to run for president or started running for the state senate."

Bird, who joined Hildebrand and others at the forum for bloggers and independent media, exemplified the Obama campaign's new ethos.

Bird began by telling his story -- which echoed the campaign's narrative. He grew up in Missouri in a fundamentalist Southern Baptist family and got involved in community organizing after graduate school in Boston. In 2004, he worked for Howard Dean's presidential campaign, and then for the Democratic National Committee, and after the election for organized labor. After reading one of Obama's books and relating to his work as a voting rights activist after law school, Bird joined the campaign. He arrived in South Carolina in March 2007 with little more than some videos and his acumen as a community organizer.

Instead of courting the local political establishment, Bird said he sought out community leaders and held "thousands of one-on-one meetings," where he would show a video and then listen to their concerns. The meetings typically lasted 45 minutes or more -- a long time for a top staffer of a national political campaign to spend with anyone. The most responsive leaders were then asked to host local gatherings, Bird said, where they introduced the candidate and campaign to their community.

"We asked them to support us and bring their social networks and hold house meetings," he said. "In those meetings, we were testing our first contact's leadership, and then we asked people to be team leaders."

Bird said he divided the state into neighborhoods and created teams for every five to 10 precincts. He said he rejected "the old precinct captain model" in which one person would be in charge of a candidate's operation, because Obama did not have enough supporters in every precinct. Bird then asked the teams how they could be helped by the statewide campaign. By the 2008 state primary day, Bird said Obama had 283 neighborhood teams and more than 10,000 volunteers working across South Carolina.

Obama won South Carolina's January Democratic primary with 55 percent of the vote -- a stunning margin. Hillary Clinton had 27 percent, and John Edwards had 18 percent.

"I was a skeptic of Jeremy and his crew in South Carolina, and whether he could build enough capacity to get us across the finish line," Hildebrand said, explaining that he has worked on campaigns for 22 years but never put as much trust and responsibility in the hands of local organizers. "I quickly lost that skepticism, and I saw the numbers that they were creating."

"It wasn't about identifying voters," Hildebrand said. "It was about building capacity to have the resources to do our persuasion and to turn out the vote. I give Jeremy and his team a tremendous amount of credit for building this field model and implementing this in a way that a state like South Carolina has never seen before. ... Every state is a field state if you know how to organize the field."

After the primaries, Bird said the national campaign interviewed 200 field organizers from all the states to assess and fortify the process for the rest of the campaign.

"The top lesson was, training and empowering people made the biggest difference," he said. "This wasn't just making phone calls and (telling volunteers that) you are going to make a lot of them. It's 'We are going to train you in a quality way from the second you come into our office ... in how to become a real leader.'"

The Training

Green, a recent Yale Law School graduate -- whose father was a minister "who preached a message of change" -- is now Obama's national voter registration director. He worked in Nevada during the primary and caucus season. Green said the campaign knew it would not succeed unless it cultivated real ties with supporters.

"If our organizers who are paid in our states made phone calls all day, we would not get it done," he said, explaining why the campaign turned to tactics used by local organizers. "We do it by building relationships. We rely on telling people's stories to create more connections. We listen more than we talk. In organizing, it is important to take the time to hear what people have to say, about the campaign, about politics generally."

The campaign says it does not ignore the nuts-and-bolt tactics of any contest -- voter contact, recruiting volunteers, boosting visibility, expanding the electorate -- and benchmarks to reach those goals. But what it also does -- and this has been noticed with some degree of bewilderment by the national press and more experienced Democratic Party workers -- is put an extraordinary emphasis on training its staff to tell their own stories, and to listen to others, especially the very people they are seeking to reach.

Numerous press accounts describe Obama training sessions where volunteers tell their personal stories, as if it were a political Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. Experienced party activists who have attended these sessions have complained they were frustrated that the campaign did not give them more tools to be effective. But top Obama staffers like Hildebrand said empowering people at the grassroots level has created a more committed campaign, with tangible results in the primary states.

"They believe this is real. They don't believe it is a game. They believe they can get it done," he said. "This was a welcomed opportunity for so many of us to get involved in -- when you have a candidate that really believed in building this from the ground up."

Bird said the primary season had several important lessons. Foremost was the value of training. That was followed by "working close to the ground," or opening many local campaign offices, he said. Next was focusing on volunteer leadership and developing teams "because when you have people who are out there in teams, you see they come together in a way that precinct captains, on his or her own, aren't able to do."

"The fourth thing was to integrate the technology to support this," he said. "The fact that when you sign up on our e-mail list, you are automatically on our voter file, and we can follow up with you and know when you signed up and what you are interested in. ... On Election Day in South Carolina, we had an unprecedented number of cell phone numbers, people that had opted in, that we were able to text and remind people to vote. And they were able to text back in (when they voted)."

Bird said the campaign rejected a long-standing political campaign assumption that saw meeting strict goals and developing grassroots relationships as opposing values, because the community-building component was ephemeral while the benchmarks like meeting voter registration targets were concrete. Both of these approaches were needed, he said, so volunteers would take ownership over meeting the campaign's goals.

What is clear is that Obama's approach has attracted some very committed workers.

"I was looking for a place where there was an effort to get change from the top down and the bottom up at the same time," said Joy Cushman, who volunteered in South Carolina, where she went to house parties, held one-to-one meetings with local leaders, and met Bird. She, too, was on the Netroots Nation panel.

At first glance, Cushman is an unlikely an Obama supporter. She grew up in rural Maine and became involved in politics through her church, where she advocated for conservative issues such as school prayer. She then went on to work on affordable housing and other issues affecting low-income communities in Massachusetts. That brought her to the Obama campaign -- after she realized that grassroots power and new political leadership were both necessary to change the status quo.

"I saw that Jeremy recognized, and the organizers recognized, that the awakening it takes for people to take on the responsibility for really being citizens is not something that happens at a mass level," she said. "It is something that happens one living room at a time, one kitchen table at a time, and this campaign was investing in that effort."

Obama's Organizing School

It was striking to see Cushman and Bird -- who grew up in socially conservative homes -- as examples of the campaign's best and brightest organizers. Indeed, many of the campaign's local organizing tactics have long been used by the religious right.

"I am a child of the conservative movement," Cushman said. "The brilliance of the church was we were organizing on abortion and prayer in schools, and it wasn't just focused on Washington, it was focused on our local community. They realized for everyday people to be involved, the issues need to connect with our values, and we need to have a very local way, and a meaningful way, to get involved at the local level that isn't just forwarding e-mails to our Congress people in Washington."

Obama's deputy campaign manager agreed. "Why does Barack Obama at times admire Ronald Reagan?" Hildebrand asked. "Because he built a movement -- not because of his policies. Don't ever criticize him for that. It is because Ronald Reagan built a movement. That's what we will do. That's what we are doing."

In April, Caroline Kennedy e-mailed Obama supporters, saying the campaign would train a new generation of grassroots leaders this summer. A "fellows" program would take 30 hours a week for six weeks. Thirty-six hundred applicants were accepted, said Cushman, who was asked to help develop the program. The training started in June.

"Over three days in early June, we trained them how to be authentic leaders themselves and share their story," Cushman said. "We train them how to build relationships, how to do one-on-one conversations with people, how to lead house meetings, how to do voter registration, because we have a 50-state voter registration project."

First, the fellows were given voter registration goals, Cushman said. Her team in Georgia -- where she was assigned -- registered 1,200 new voters. The next goal was holding house meetings. Two weeks later, on June 28, the campaign held more than 4,000 such sessions across the country, she said, to "do what used to be truly American, which is sit and talk about what do we want for ourselves, our country, and what is our responsibility."

"The fellows aren't just college students looking for something to do over the summer," Cushman said. "They are teachers and airline pilots and firefighters and people who have decided that they are willing to take the risk and make sacrifices to change the country."

Cushman said people she meets often say the last time Democrats saw anything like the campaign's grassroots effort was during the civil rights movement a half-century ago. And it is a page from that very era -- an unprecedented national voter registration drive immediately following the Democratic Convention -- that the campaign hopes will be the key to victory in November and an ensuing groundswell for political reform.

Millions of New Voters

Green, the campaign's national voter registration director, said the campaign knows an estimated 60 million Americans are eligible to vote but are not registered. States such as Nevada, where George W. Bush beat John Kerry by 21,500 votes in 2004, has 390,000 eligible but unregistered voters. The task, Green said, is to reach out to potential voters in conventional and unconventional ways. That means finding them anywhere in their communities, such as at bus stops, shopping centers, social service organizations, senior centers, naturalization ceremonies, campuses and concerts, as well as house parties.

"We know that our targeted group is very transient," he said, referring to the fact that lower-income people, students and young people move often, which complicates the voter registration process in states that require specific forms of documentation to register.

"The night Barack accepts the nomination, we will have house parties," Green said. "We will ask those people to register voters on the next few days."

"We saw through the 2008 primaries that we had voter registration opportunities that never existed to us in this party," Hildebrand said. "We learned through experience ... that our efforts on the ground to register voters was really, really important."

Those listening to the Obama campaign officials speak at Netroots Nation included longtime Democrats and others who work in voter registration organizations. One party official was skeptical that the campaign would be able to find millions of new voters on Labor Day Weekend, which follows the Democratic Convention, and subsequently turn out these new voters come Election Day. Another feared that the campaign, despite its talk about the importance of grassroots, would siphon volunteers who were badly needed for down-ballot state legislature and municipal races. Those officials said early reviews of Obama's training and outreach efforts were frustrating, with predictable errors on voter registration forms and a reluctance to ask more seasoned campaigners for advice -- despite all the talk of listening to local leaders.

Another voter registration expert predicted that mistakes on the voter registration forms -- an inevitable part of any voter drive -- would be used by the Republican Party to accuse the Obama campaign of voter registration fraud, just as the GOP has repeatedly attacked voter registration efforts by groups like ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) in recent years. It was one thing for a nonprofit group to make these kinds of mistakes, the expert said, but more politically volatile when a presidential campaign errs.

"They have the infrastructure to reach a million voters," said a voter registration researcher. "But do they have the infrastructure to reach a million disenfranchised voters who would not register otherwise?"

Efforts to contact these Obama campaign officials after the Netroots Nation conference to discuss these points were unsuccessful. The campaign aides at the conference did not discuss "quality control" issues, which established voter registration groups say are critical.

But Hildebrand said the planned voter registration drive was intended not just to benefit the Obama campaign, but to help elect Democrats at every level, especially in state legislatures where the majority would redraw congressional district boundaries in 2009. And since Obama became the presumptive Democratic nominee, his campaign and the national party's operations have been merging, as evidenced by the DNC's announcement last week that it would spend $20 million to engage Hispanic voters.

Hildebrand said the training of community organizers and the voter registration effort was necessary not just to elect Obama, but to deliver on an agenda of political change.

"We can't be so single-minded that this is about Barack Obama, because it is not," he said. "It is about the American people and the principles that are important to us. Whether or not we will get health care passed; whether or not we will stop the war in Iraq; whether or not we are going to build an education system that we can be more proud of. There are a lot of things that we as progressives hold fundamentally dear, and if this is about a game, we are not being all that successful -- and neither is our opposition. But if it is about a movement that can fundamentally change the way we do business in this country at every single level, then we will be successful."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, election08, presidential politics, obama campaign, political reform

Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of "What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election," with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Obama
Posted by: Dboy on Aug 4, 2008 1:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The voter registration effort is part of a broader strategy to not just elect Obama, but also to alter the political landscape by shifting power from Washington to the grassroots,

Um no, it IS just about electing Obama. After that, they spray a few gallons of RoundUp on the grass roots to kill that off until they are needed again in four years. Funny how they want to "shift power from Washington"...only after the primaries are over. Give me a freakin' break. There are a few lone wolves in Congress who continually speak up for the American people, but they are only allowed to speak so that the "serious people" have a chance to go take a toilet break. The American people no longer have representation in government. After this election, it's back to the raping and pillaging.

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obama Posted by: richholland
» FISA, NAFTA, border fence... Posted by: Zenobia
» RE: Obama Posted by: Lincoln fan
» sexy woman seeking sex Posted by: kissrosalove013
Organize Your Candidate ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Aug 4, 2008 1:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's Time for Obama to Get Tough

From what I'm seeing Obama is fading and the likelihood of all those voters showing up is diminishing by the day. Obama is offering nothing new and backtracks towards business as usual every time he gets a chance ...

Obama is no longer the candidate of change.

He continues his homage to the financial industry even after it is clear they are pulling the biggest heist in history and leaving tax payers the bill.

He has kissed AIPACs ass and believes we need a bigger military! I guess 750 bases overseas aren't enough and that we need all those Cold War weapons.

His healthcare proposal is weak and I don't see a plan or even hear rhetoric about a real progressive tax program that would reverse the tax windfall or close the loopholes that the corporations and the very rich now enjoy.

What about his positions on trade and the the Employee Free Choice Act?

Americans will wake up to the fact that Obama is just not who they think he is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Organize Your Candidate ... Posted by: richholland
» What's Hugh's problem with Trolls? Posted by: Moore Hognutz
» RE: Organize Your Candidate ... Posted by: rleslie66
Obama supporters can mobilize all they want but he won't win without Hillary on the ticket.
Posted by: HughScott on Aug 4, 2008 2:17 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's an old Chinese saying that goes, "Keep your friends close, your enemies closer." Face it, folks. The Clintons are no fans of Barrack Obama. You can bet your bank account they're planning another run for the White House in 2012 -- against President McCain.

Already one pundit has agreed with my premise, NBC's Andrea Mitchell, who suggested the Judas strategy on "Meet The Press" Sunday. The question is, would Hillary and Bill deliberately undermine Barrack's ongoing campaign?

Maybe not. But for sure, they won't do the vigorous campaigning that's needed to help Barrack win over the millions of white women that supported Senator Clinton, many of whom are statistically stealth bigots. Never forget, after all, it was Hillary's campaign team, not McCain's, that first played the race card by calling Obama an "elitist."

On April 16, 2008, the Los Angeles Times published an article by David K. Shipler titled, "The Resonance of Racism." In his op-ed piece, Shipler wrote, "'Elitist' is another word for 'arrogant,' which is another word for 'uppity' -- that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves."

I have been voting in presidential elections since 1956 and this is the first time in my memory a candidate (Obama) has been called "arrogant" -- a quintessential quality of anyone seeking to become the most powerful leader on Earth, including Senator McCain.

I also was raised in the Deep South (Texas, Louisiana and Florida) by liberal white parents who taught me never to say "nigger." Even writing the word for this comment makes me feel queasy. But let's talk straight what both Democrats (i.e. the Clintons) and Republicans have done and are doing now when they call Obama elitist and arrogant. They are saying through easily understood code-words that he's an "uppity nigger" -- a term I heard thousands of times during my childhood. For closet racists to suggest other otherwise shows they think tolerant Americans are either stupid or inconsequential.

Because of the current GOP smear campaign against Obama, I added another reason to defeat McCain in November on my new nonprofit Web site, www.UnfitMcCain.com, as follows:

McCain promised in February not run a negative campaign. Then, five months later, rather than discuss important issues like high energy prices and rising unemployment, McCain and his handlers unleashed a scurrilous attack on Barack Obama's character, such as labeling him "arrogant" -- a substitute for "uppity" with racial overtones.

Another reason on UnfitMcCain.com's home page summarizes my investigation of "Songbird" McCain's behavior as a POW in North Vietnam. The facts-check shows that he distorted his so-called "heroic" war record and exploited it for political gain. Part of the information is based on my recent communications with a former POW.

If, after visiting UnfitMcCain.com, you agree with my findings and love America, please tell your friends and family about my Web site.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran, lifelong registered Republican and former McCain supporter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Racism against Kerry Posted by: Zenobia
» John F. Obama? Posted by: edgar1
» RE: acism against Kerry Posted by: Bibsisis
Rid AlterNet of pot-stirring GOP trolls.
Posted by: HughScott on Aug 4, 2008 2:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AlterNet's post comment page says, "We also ask our readers to refrain from responding to posts by people who only want to derail the conversation with conservative talking points. Please report these comments; do not respond."

I suggest before reporting pot-stirring GOP trolls, we respond to their remarks with the title "Unworthy of comment" -- or "U.C." for short. In the comment text box, to save time, enter "Ditto."

By the way, try commenting on conservative blogs. If you're liberal or progressive, they will ban you in a heartbeat!

Never forget who the enemy is, folks. It ain't Barack Obama or the Democratic Party. Our foe is the rightwing GOP whose operatives (trolls) have been infecting AlterNet threads with contemptuous abandon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Rid AlterNet of book-peddlers Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Fraud at the Polls
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 4, 2008 3:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a certainty: In order for Barack Obama to have so much as a slender chance of winning this thing in November, the Democrats will have to register at least two million people.

The GOP stole the last two presidential elections by disenfranchising thousands of black people in Florida (2000) and Ohio (2004). They plan on doing it again in 2008. Count on it.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Coming of Age In The Sixties

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fraud at the Polls Posted by: opmoc
» RE: Fraud at the Polls Posted by: Lincoln fan
Dixie strategy
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Aug 4, 2008 3:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While Obama diddles in S.C., FL, GA, VA with "hope" of victory in those states, let me remind him that he is losing white and working family members votes by the minute. This guy simply does not understand that you cannot please everyone. This is a pissed off nation and it begs for a response to 28 years of neoconservative horseshit commencing with Reagan/Bush that has evolved to the most cravenly despotic tyranny in free world history. What the hell is he waiting for? Or is he scared shitless that if he speaks he will get killed. He is not the answer to anything this nation faces, nor is McCain and that is one fucked up reality to digest in 2008!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 50-state strategy Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Dixie strategy Posted by: djnoll
Empowerment
Posted by: robchapman on Aug 4, 2008 3:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barack Obama has spent his life's work in devising ways to empower the average citizen and to making the system work for the benefit of the masses.

Voting is the essential and basic step toward this goal.

If the Democratic Party becomes the vehicle through which the American public reconnects with the political system and begin to hold officials and malefactors accountable, then Obama will have served a noble and historic purpose.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: mpowerment Posted by: VZEQICVA
Historic Or Ego
Posted by: thebeerdoctor on Aug 4, 2008 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had a conversation with a senior black man who told me that much of Senator Obama's support was skin deep. "The white people who say they are with him", he instructed, "will be so until it gets time for the voting booth. The only way Obama can beat McCain is to have Hillary Clinton on the ticket. Black people are only 13% of the country. Obama needs the older white women to win. Hillary is his best chance to get their votes."
I thought about this, and despite the vehement objections of rabid Obama supporters (who seem to be becoming less enthusiastic as the campaign drags on), the old black man maybe correct. Obama has moved to the right (the news calls it the center) on most positions, so that Mrs. Clinton and the candidate on the same political page. A united Democratic party may be their best hope to win, especially now when it has been made clear that the McCain campaign is all about foaming up enough xenophobic paranoia (of whatever stripe) to make the voter vote against Obama, rather than a positive vote for McCain.
My old black friend also said that change has nothing to do with issues, that either candidate will protect the status quo. But the symbolism of a dark skin man and a woman in the White House? That is history. Only Senator Obama's ego could prevent him from seizing this opportunity.
I thought about this. Considering how his candidacy has changed positions for the sake of expediency, he just might pick Mrs. Clinton. Some of his supporters will loudly complain, but Obama will probably say something about his earlier criticisms of Senator Clinton as being misconstrued, in the light of "overheated rhetoric".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Historic Or Ego Posted by: VZEQICVA
Obama Volunteer, Working for US
Posted by: Purple Girl on Aug 4, 2008 4:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I volunteered for the Obama campaign in June.
I had voted for Kucinich in the Defuncted MI primary.Mainly for his populice message and Outrage & committment to hold this admin Legally responsilbe for their crimes.
Once the clinton machine was able to knock him out of the race- I put my full support behind Sen Obama. rhetorical Question - how is it when th eother candidates ran out of cash they quit, and why is she the only one crying for Debt relief? Realizing Now I was Suckered by th eClintons throughout the '90's and that Hillary is still a Neo Con Repug- disguised in a blue pantsuit- I will NOT contribute any money towards her Bill- she should have quit like all the rest, she would have saved herself the money & embarassment of becoming so desperate!even if Obama loses (of it is stolen again in Nov)Clinton will never get my Vote, She reeks the of Corp Stench which has ruined our country!
But it is neither Kucinich Nor Obama I am working for...It is US, It is my daughter and all the other kids who have Now been born into debt- about $16,000 in the hole with their first breath- not to mention born into a country I no longer recognize as the "land of the Free" America I was born into.
But I realize that liberal Dems can not successful wage this 'Revolution' alone, so I have been reaching out & talking politics with my White, middle age, religious Family & Friends and discussing all the things we have been told we do not agree on- We agree on a Lot. And trying to show it is not "Others' we need to fear & hate- Just those who tell US we should.
I for One miss the Old dictomy of the Real Dems/Real Republican debates on isses which concern every American- Not what concerns the Corps. Those old 'Fiscal Responsible', 'Small Gov't', Limited international interference were formidable Foes, but now seem like long lost old friends.
It is not just Repub's who have sold this country out- there are many cloaked in Blue who are just as much Corp operatives. It's time we work together to regain the America we were given and Promised!


Obama/Hagel '08

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fixers 2, Voters 0
Posted by: lorenbliss on Aug 4, 2008 4:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I cannot but admire the enthusiasm of Obama's campaigners -- Obama's vote for FISA and his new admission of support for offshore drilling (and thus his endorsement of the Oil Barony) not withstanding -- the fact remains that no voter registration campaign on earth can overcome the electronic tyranny of Diebold and the judicial tyranny of a corrupt Supreme Court. For those with short memories, the latter was demonstrated by ouster of President Gore in 2000, while the former was proven by the election thievery of 2004. Moreover, the anti-democracy forces are stronger now than they were four years ago: Bush has a total lock on the court, and the Congressional Democrats themselves just sabotaged an attempt to require verifiable ballots next November. Hence -- at least as far as I am concerned -- the entire election is a charade. I will vote, of course -- I will not dishonor those (including my ancestors) who literally shed their blood for voting rights. I will probably -- unless by some radical magick there's a viable socialist candidate on the ballot -- even vote for Obama. But I will expect nothing save more of what this country has methodically dealt people at my socioeconomic level ever since Big Business slew the New Deal: worsening impoverishment, more disappointment and further embitterment. My one joy is the fact I am old enough I will probably not live long enough to see the United States reduced to Slavecamp Nation and the Earth to a Global Gas Chamber.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Slavecamp Nation Posted by: Dboy
» Capacity Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Slavecamp Nation Posted by: lorenbliss
His votes will be disqualified
Posted by: citizenjoe on Aug 4, 2008 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Too bad the Republican Jim Crow voting machine will find as many ways to throw-out Obama's voters as Obama can find voters to register. And the repulsive Democrats will do nothing about it because they (rightly) fear to reveal that there is no more democracy in the USA than in Pakistan or Indonesia. Does anyone believe we have one citizen one vote or that we have not become totalitarian and an Empire? The Roman Empire had relatively free speech too- so what.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is Winnable
Posted by: Urstrly on Aug 4, 2008 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's understanding of community organizing put him head and shoulders above the other Democratic candidates, and there's no reason why it can't carry him to victory in November.

The one piece of organizing that isn't in place, though, is response to the inevitable dirty tricks the Republicans will visit on voting lists and polling places as the election draws near. They are desperate, because they know they don't have the votes.

It's been estimated that Obama must win by a ten percent margin to protect against the shenanigans. If you're a lawyer, you can volunteer your services to help contest the inevitable challenges. But any voter can register other voters, and it's especially important in states like New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, and Missouri that progressives get involved. That's why I think Obama will pick VA governor Tim Kaine or NM governor Janet Napolitano or maybe Missouri's Sen. Claire McCaskill as a running mate. They're from swing states, and they don't have nearly as much baggage as Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Kaine is anti-choice Posted by: Zenobia
» RE: This is Winnable Posted by: edgar1
If you think Obama is going to get a bigger voting turnout in his favor, THINK AGAIN !
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 4, 2008 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In "red" states and even strong "red" areas of those "blue" states, despite polls showing Obama gaining, there are ongoing efforts by Big Gun (NRA), Big Religion, and the rest of the social rightwing fundie groups to bolster the turnout for Mccain. As a matter of fact, talk to most gun toters and bible thumpers and they'll blindly "worship" Mccain despite the severe economic blows dealt to them. They'll overlook the fact that Mccain angered the NRA more often than not and that up until recently Mccain would draw the line on religious bigots such as Pat Robertson and Jerry FARTwell. As long as Obama continues to take economic issues and even other issues such as the environment, civil rights/liberties and freedom, and product/consumer/worker safety issues off the table, he can count on LOSING and more likely going down in FLAMES perhaps to the point of not only losing as many as 50 states but making Walter Mondale and even George Mcgovern look like they were in close elections. And STOP blaming us Nader voters. Nader is a perfect symptom of everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party. The Democrats, not Nader, allowed themselves to be RAPED by the rightwing !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

STAY HOME!
Posted by: Godfather89 on Aug 4, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do not vote for either, because, I Obama will win without your vote, he as well as mccain care about the electoral vote. Your vote is worthless. He and john mccain are both two sides of the same coin they have the same monetary policy and beliefs in the war. Does it really matter who wins? Join RON PAUL's Revolution, he is the real change amongst the fabricated change these two "candidates" have.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Make your choice!!!
Posted by: jstepp590 on Aug 4, 2008 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we go again, liberals so busy fighting each other, negative with no solutions offered, denigrating Obama (who is at least trying to do something) that we can't get anything done and become our own worst enemies. If this keeps up the Democratic party will fall apart (again) and we will have McBush for another 4-8 yrs. Is that what everyone here is trying to do? Sounds like it reading some of these posts.

Do you think that in every team everyone agrees? That families always see eye to eye? What I'm reading here is a lot of neg from a bunch of ideological losers with an overblown sense of their own self importance and an overly simplistic world view. That would be fine if I at least saw enough sense for these differences to be set aside long enough to win the contest but I'm not even seeing that!

You can say what you want about Republicans but for whatever reason you care to mention they stick together to win. We have all seen the results of that for 8yrs! Enough already.

Obama moved to the center to win the election? Well duh! In case you haven't noticed not everyone in the country believes in the left agenda. There are a lot of conservative views out there (which aren't too different from the liberal view) that have been left behind by the stupidity, greed and arrogance of the Republicans. He needs those votes to help win. He is doing what he has to to win. Without victory there will be no power. Without power there will be no change.

Is anyone confused or not understand that formula? Or are you getting mad because I'm speaking truth and you don't like being talked to this way, like some petulant child? Tough! Pride is a sin, and a weakness.

So, you don't agree with some of his "new" viewpoints. Fine, understandable because they are not perfect any more than the world we live in is perfect. What they are, however, is the best chance we have of moving our country closer to the views we share. Not all of them, not all the way, but closer. These things do not happen overnight.

The alternative is McBush.

Everyone here needs to make a choice. Do we want to win with Obama as the only candidate with a realistic hope of winning or do we enjoy Republican misrule? Make your choice and then live it. If you can't do that then at least show respect to everyone here who is actively working towards the changes we all know need to happen by not negging out others. This site is about change, about progressive values and a lot of the supporters here are supporters the Democratic Party will need.

Make your choice. Are you the Republicans best supporters or are you liberal progressive Democrats? Winner, losers or whiners? The choice is yours. There is no in between, and elections, like football games, are won by inches.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Make your choice!!! Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Make your choice!!! Posted by: jstepp590
Hope For Indiana
Posted by: mishawaka on Aug 4, 2008 7:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I have told many people here, 2008 is more than a light year beyond 2004 when it comes to the presidential campaign. In 2004, we could not even get Kerry/Edwards yard signs. Now, in 2008, we still do not have yard signs but we have Obama organizers on the ground throughout our area.

Our local Democratic headquarters is also the regional headquarters for the "Campaign for Change", handling six counties in northern Indiana. The goal, just for our county, is 12,000 new registrations by October 6th. We already enjoy a Democratic majority in our county; the Obama registration effort will only increase that. Our job is to educate the new voters about everyone BUT Obama. The Obama staff will be following up with the people they register about Barack and his platform, but we (as the local Democratic Party) need to educate and inform these new voters about the choices they face locally.

I do not know if Obama will actually win Indiana. However, the fact that he is trying is incredibly impressive. Although I did not expect this level of activity here, one reason I supported Obama was the promise of a 50 state campaign. No more "swing state" B.S.! The length of the primary worried me that he may not have time to truly implement a nationwide campaign, but the campaign seems to have truly hit the ground running.

As Democrats, I think we need to keep our eye on the big picture. The important thing this November is to WIN. After eight years of George Bush, we need a change. Even if you have to hold your nose, vote for Obama. Better yet, vote a straight Democratic ticket. Volunteer at your local office or do what I advised some of my liberal friends to do. Go to the state Secretary of State's website, print off some voter registration forms and go door to door. That way you can register new voters without worry of any conflicts of conscience. We cannot succumb to the old Democratic circular firing squad. Let Obama get into office and THEN we can bitch. There really is no other way to go.

McCain=Bush. Bob Barr? And, I'm sorry, Ron Paul's revolution is over. I am not sure it even got started. Except for a few zealots with yard signs, his message never seemed to make it to the ballot box. The guy got less than 10% in his home state of Texas! Now I read comments about the "Ron Paul revolution"? Ron Paul went back to the House of Representatives. His race is run.

If you have been awake for the past eight years, you know in your heart what needs to be done this November. If you still cannot bring yourself to vote for or work for Obama, then please do not get in our way. We can get together and talk after November 4th.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Indiana and Ron Paul Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» I miss Ron Paul. Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Indiana and Ron Paul Posted by: mishawaka
» RE: Indiana and Ron Paul Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Hope For Indiana Posted by: jstepp590
Right
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Aug 4, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL, well considering the only other choice is "McSame" he probably will because Lord knows we cant take for years of McSame.

JT
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NO SUBSTANCE
Posted by: edgeofnowhere on Aug 4, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Inspiring to read about all these hopeful folks getting out and drumming up support for Obama. However, his message has no substance. He is not all that different from the McCain crowd. More war, more military, no universal health care, no radical change in the economic structure of our country --- in short, nothing radical at all -- just the vague hint of a "promise" of change. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich actually proposed radical and substantive changes that are necessary for our survival as a nation, but they were quickly marginalized. The democrats are using the fear of a McCain presidency to boost Obama, but unless Obama iterates some substantive policy changes, what's the point? No matter how hard they try to get out the vote, many are disgusted with Obama's cave in to the war machine and to the FISA bill, not to mention his lack of support for impeachment of the criminals now in office. Many will simply stay home, and many others will be voting for third party candidates or writing in Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich. Obama had the opportunity to truly electrify the nations' voters, but he chose to go with the DNC line. Special interests are winning the day. One can only hope (faint though it may be) that the American People, that oft maligned mass of mindless consumers, will stand up and take to the streets to demand the change that is needed to take back the country from the bankers and the warmongers. Hey, maybe pigs really can fly!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: NO SUBSTANCE Posted by: jstepp590
» RE: NO SUBSTANCE Posted by: edgeofnowhere
» RE: NO SUBSTANCE Posted by: jstepp590
» RE: NO SUBSTANCE Posted by: mgmyers79
» RE: NO SUBSTANCE Posted by: jstepp590
Imperialism with a black face- Pt. 1
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 4, 2008 12:39 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq.”
- Barack Obama

Obama’s handlers and supporters place considerable emphasis on the claim that the junior senator from Illinois has voiced a “consistent position against the war” and (by extension) the Middle East. The assertion has some technical accuracy; Obama has publicly questioned the Bush administration’s case for war since the fall of 2002. But serious scrutiny of his “antiwar position” shows that the supposedly “pragmatic” and “non-ideological” Obama speaks in deferential accord with the doctrine of empire. In Obama’s carefully crafted rhetoric, Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL) has been a “strategic blunder” on the part of an essentially benevolent nation state. Given his presidential ambitions, it is unthinkable for him to acknowledge the invasion’s status as a great international transgression that is consistent with the United States’ long record of imperial criminality. It is equally unimaginable for him to acknowledge that the war expressed Washington’s drive to deepen its control of strategic petroleum resources—an ambition in direct opposition to the alleged U.S. goals of encouraging Iraqi freedom and exporting democracy.

In a recent address designed to display his foreign policy bona fides, Obama showed his continuing willingness to take seriously the claim that OIL was an effort to “impose democracy” on Iraq, even faulting the Bush administration for acting in Iraq on the basis of unrealistic “dreams of democracy and hopes for a perfect government” (Obama, “A Way Forward in Iraq,” speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs [CCGA], November 22, 2006).

Consistent with his denial and embrace of Washington’s imperial ambitions, Obama has refused to join genuinely anti-war forces in calling for a rapid and thorough withdrawal of troops and an end to the occupation of Iraq. In a critical November 2005 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Obama rejected Rep. John Murtha’s (D-PA) call for a rapid redeployment and any notion of a timetable for withdrawal. Obama’s call for “a pragmatic solution to the real war we’re facing in Iraq” included repeated references to the need to “defeat” the “insurgency”—a goal that means continuation of the war.

Obama’s November speech to the CCGA advocates a vaguely timed Iraq “scenario” in which “U.S. forces” might remain in the occupied state for an “extended period of time.” Obama advances a “reduced but active [U.S. military] presence” that “protects logistical supply points” and “American enclaves like the Green Zone” (site of one of the largest and most heavily militarized “embassies” in history) while “sending a clear message to hostile countries like Iran and Syria that we intend to remain a key player in the region.” U.S. troops “remaining in Iraq” will “act as rapid reaction forces to respond to emergencies and go after terrorists.” This is part of what Obama meant when he told a fawning David Brooks that, “the U.S. may have no choice but to slog it out in Iraq.”

At one point in his CCGA oration, Obama had the audacity to say the following in support of his claim that U.S. citizens support “victory” in Iraq: “The American people have been extraordinarily resolved. They have seen their sons and daughters killed or wounded in the streets of Fallujah.”

This was a spine-chilling selection of locales. Fallujah was the site for a colossal U.S. war atrocity. Crimes included the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the targeting of ambulances and hospitals, and the practical leveling of an entire city—in April and November 2004. The town was designated for destruction as an example of the awesome state terror promised to those who dared to resist U.S. power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Imperialism with a black face- Pt. 2
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 4, 2008 12:40 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not surprisingly, Fallujah is a leading symbol of U.S. imperialism in the Arab and Muslim worlds. It is a deeply provocative and insulting place for Obama to choose to highlight American sacrifice and “resolve” in the occupation of Iraq.

It gets worse. Obama has repeatedly voted to spend billions on the illegal invasion since his arrival in the U.S. Senate. He inveighs against the “Tom Hayden wing of the Democratic Party” and has told congressional Democrats they would be “playing chicken with the troops” if they dared to actually (imagine) de-fund the Cheney-Bush “war.”

He voted to confirm as Secretary of State (of all things) the mendacious war criminal Condaleeza Rice, who played a critical role in advancing the preposterous Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) claims Bush used to invade Iraq.

He distanced himself from fellow Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin when Durbin faced vicious right-wing attacks after daring to tell some basic truths about U.S. torture practices in Iraq.

Obama has repeatedly and absurdly claimed that the illegal invasion was launched with the “best of democratic intentions.”

He praises U.S. military personnel for their “unquestioning” “service” in Iraq and (despite numerous U.S. atrocities there) for “doing everything we could ever ask of them.”

His belated calls for withdrawal are hedged by numerous statements indicating that an Obama White House would maintain a significant military presence in and around Iraq for an indefinite period of time. And Obama has refused to support taking a reckless (possibly even nuclear) U.S. military assault on Iran off the table of acceptable U.S. foreign policy options.

Barack Obama reacts to the world's response to imperialism in precisely the same way as his counterparts; he proposes more war. Obama wants to add almost one-hundred thousand new troops to the U.S. military, to alleviate the shortage of manpower that Iraq attrition has wrought. In his speech to the Woodrow Wilson Center, Obama gave away their destination: Waziristan. Obama wants a more aggressive approach to the so-called "war on terror," to take "the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan."

So what we have in Barack Obama is an alternative War Party, planning an alternative War. He has told us so, and we should believe him. He is no peace candidate, and goes out of his way to prove it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OCTOBER SURPRISE
Posted by: Moore Hognutz on Aug 4, 2008 12:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SENATOR MCMUFFIN HAS A BIG BIG STROKE, CAN'T WALK, CAN'T TALK, CAN'T VOTE....

November Surpise
He wins anyway.

This election is not, for many people, about Katrina, Iraq, the economy, the environment, our pathetically dumbed down education... it is only and completely about race. Deal with it or we all die soon.

McMuffin could win. He's white and he's stupid. Hordes of enthusiastic Americans went for that dazzling combination in 2000 and 2004, some voting republican, some democrat....

Stupid white men is what we know -- a clever white woman or a brilliant black man is just much too strange.

Get off your jellies and deal with it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: OCTOBER SURPRISE Posted by: willymack
» RE: OCTOBER SURPRISE Posted by: jstepp590
OBAMA'S PRO-WAR RECORD- Pt. 1
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 4, 2008 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then there’s the matter of his actual policy and political record. If Obama is such (as many “progressives” seem to need to believe) an “antiwar” candidate, why has he offered so much substantive policy support to the criminal occupation and the broader imperial “war on terror” of which Bush says O.I.F. is a part? Here are some highlights from a summary of Obama’s U.S. Senate voting record:

“1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars...Roll call 2”

“2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).”

“2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture... man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.”

“4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte's prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107”

“4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 ”

“7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .”

“9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.”

“10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .”

“11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .”

“12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. ”

“5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .”

“5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .”


“6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .”

“6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA'S PRO-WAR RECORD- Pt. 2
Posted by: chlamor on Aug 4, 2008 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought our troops home. Roll Call 181 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.”

“6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .

9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 ”

“9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .”

“11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .”

“12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush's policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 ”

“Obama's voting record in 2007 establishes that he continues to be pro-war. On March 28, 2007 and March 29th, 2007, he voted for cloture and passage of a bill designed to give Bush over $120 billion to continue the occupation for years to come (with a suspendable time table) and inclusive of funding that could be used to launch a war with Iran. Roll calls 117 and 126 ...Obama's record shows a minimum of 20 major pro-war votes…”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: OBAMA VOTES FOR WAR Posted by: edgeofnowhere
None Are More Enslaved, Than Those Who Falsely Believe They Are Free!
Posted by: Mr. Terrific on Aug 4, 2008 1:04 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Dixie strategy
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Aug 4, 2008 3:42 AM
While Obama diddles in S.C., FL, GA, VA with "hope" of victory in those states, let me remind him that he is losing white and working family members votes by the minute. This guy simply does not understand that you cannot please everyone."

Frankly I am not sure where you are going with this. As a black male with a brain, I have no intention whatsoever of voting for Obama. So it would seem he is also losing "black and working family members votes by the minute," as well.

He has courted AIPAC, the Multi-national Corporations, Multi-national Pharmaceuticals, Multi-national Agribusiness, and the vaunted Christian Conversatives aka Christian Right aka Christian Zionists.

He lastly has Neo-Cons wrapped all around him along with those hidden powerstructures i.e, the International Bankers {Rothschilds, Warburgs, Shiffs, Rockefellers} and the like.

Most Americans young and old are gullible and extremely ignorant of the power that exists behind the puppets.

The "Federal" Reserve is neither Federal or even governmentally owned and controlled. This government politely asks them to control themselves.

Official Government Faq: Federal Reserve

The Truth: The Federal Reserve System

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws."
Mayer Amschel Rothschild, International Banker

“Money is a new form of slavery, and distinguishable from the old simply by the fact that it is impersonal, that there is no human relation between master and slave.”
Leo Tolstoy

“None are more enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
Goethe

“’The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again...

Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit’.”
Sir Josiah Stamp Director, Bank of England 1928-1941
(reputed to be the 2nd richest man in Britain at the time)

Terrific

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Registering voters for Obama--we've got to do it
Posted by: RuthS on Aug 4, 2008 1:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We in Democrats Abroad are joining in an intensified effort to find and register the hundreds of thousands of eligible overseas voters who have not managed to vote in previous federal elections.

One part of that effort launched today--a video about voting abroad featuring London-resident Gwyneth Paltrow:

Where On Earth Will You Vote? -- please click on it, enjoy it, and pass it on.

Members of the military serving in Afghanistand and Iraq, businesspeople on overseas assignments, students doing a year abroad, teachers, aid workers--we come in many shapes and colors, but we all, as US citizens, have the right to vote.

With a lot of effort by thousands of our Democrats Abroad members, we will bring home the overseas vote for Obama!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Polls Shift To McCain
Posted by: theVRWCwhodatesLiberals on Aug 4, 2008 1:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe in 2012

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We also ask our readers to refrain from responding to posts
Posted by: gto on Aug 4, 2008 2:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
with best regards

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just a test
Posted by: gto on Aug 4, 2008 2:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Report this comment

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why We Need to Rally Around Obama: For the Greater Good, For the People
Posted by: sofla100 on Aug 4, 2008 3:33 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Progressives and on the Left, we do need to rally behind Obama. Yes, I know about FISA, AIPAC and Free Trade. And, oh by the way, (on the Left) please, no Green pipe dreams, that's just a ticket for more Republican rule.

In defense of Obama, I think his strategists realize he has to take part of the South to win. He can take California and New York, but a loss in Texas and Florida, along with much of the South and the West, dooms him. In the end, if he doesn't play to the middle, his strategists figure he won't win as he won't scoop out enough support especially in the South. The problem is, that along the way, he risks becoming an "empty suit," and alienates too much support on the Left. Now, things like AIPAC and free trade, he has to support this or the campaign checks stop coming. FISA support is to help prevent him from being the mark of the "military man" McCain.

So, in the end, this is all a definite strategy for Obama. In office, I believe his progressive and liberal roots will still emerge. And again, yes, yes, we do need to support him. Thinking about a McCain victory should make you shutter. Just imagine a year or two from now as American F-16's take off from "permanent bases" in Iraq to bomb "suspected terrorist" bases in Iran. Just imagine even more millions without health insurance or basic medical care. It goes on and on. And , if it weren't true, just imagine where we would all be today if Gore, instead of the fool, had become President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More voters than he'll know what to do with
Posted by: PGR88 on Aug 4, 2008 6:47 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is from Chicago - so don't worry he knows the game - he'll have the dead, illegal immigrants and the criminally insane voting early and often! Speak TRUTH to POWER! Shazzam!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I came here for a sugar daddy who likes to spoil me
Posted by: kissrosalove013 on Aug 4, 2008 9:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
========================*****************************I came here for a sugar daddy who likes to spoil me, a young sexy and hot woman. i also created an account CuteNPetite on the Sugar Daddy seeking place http://www.Sugarmatchmaker.com "recently. you may want to check out my hot photos there*******************

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Richard
Posted by: kcwriter on Aug 4, 2008 11:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the registrations and voters in the world are meaningless if their votes aren't counted. I submit that the problem the Democrats have is not that they don't have enough votes but that they've won both of the last two presidential elections only their votes weren't counted or they were switched electronically or nullified. If you can't prevent the Republicans from stealing the election it doesn't matter how many voters go to the polls. Just look at Ohio from 2004 and the exit polls and the final tallies.
Florida in 2000 with all the voters thrown off the voter lists. As for 2008, what about all the voters who have already been thrown off the rolls in various states around the country for this coming election.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ichard Posted by: jstepp590
What Obama's community organizing experience really means
Posted by: jmaki on Aug 6, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Obama's organizing experience and how it is influencing his campaign is one of the untold stories of the campaign season. I recently wrote a piece on Obama and what community organizing really means. Here's the link

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

EXCELLENCES
Posted by: EXCELLENCES on Aug 11, 2008 8:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a letter for all who wish to go beyond party to see USA strive!

August 11, 2008

Dear David Plouffe:

For starters, the communities at-large are in dire need, and they supports political change, advancement, and trusts. Candidate President Barack Obama, can you offer a bi-partisan olive branch of change that we can be raised through asking a proposed Vice President Michael Bloomberg, an economic, crisis management bi-partisan czar drafted to serve his country and address the 21ST Century crises of the energy and economy to aid in actualizing the advancement of this great nation through a central coalition that will calling for change. A coalition guided through the character, wisdom and commitment of a proposed Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a person quite familiar with the abilities, style, and character of Michael Bloomberg? The great city of New York was his dressing room of challenge!

This sort of administrative led coalition would head of thirty- two (32) months of congressional gridlock by interacting with a counterpart coalition and impact immediate change to expedite crises national management. These leaders can do it through their leading a coalition our well qualified government experts forward to dissolve the Great American Crisis. We can design, develop, and implement a New Big Deal of Change that can guide the United States of America into the 21ST Century.

We need an eternal community, political and national healing; hindsight would be detrimental. We can continue to be as we are the living progressive example of a nation of advancement and change for the world to see. We do have a fail proof government. What can we do for our country beyond party lines for One Nation under God to heal the further heal the scares of the United States of America? The people desire nothing less than – an honorable, respectful, national leadership of change. May we all seek and hail "God Bless America!" 7577

E. RayEdward Walker, Community at-large for Obama 2008
Ernest RayEdward Walker

EXCELLENCES

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement