Look no further then this week to see what is kindly described as a "bad week" for John McCain. I mean, really, the poor man is not only making huge blunders, he can't even get the media to follow him around. And then the campaign whines about how the media loves Obama, and I kid you not, puts out a youtube video whining about all the coverage Obama is getting.
In order to keep you up to date with all of the McCain gaffs and blunders, we are now using Digg for some of our posts (it is almost a full time job to post the mistakes McCain has been making), which means that we will be able to update you more then once a day on national and local news.
When you go to read the stories which have been posted via Digg you will be taken to the original site of the story, make sure to come back to our site to view more stories. As always, you can leave a comment on any story, whether it is a Digg or original post.
Ok, now I am off to find some more stories to Digg for you : )
John McCain was supposed to hold a press event on a LA oil rig today in support of offshore drilling. The event was called off because of a oil spill in the gulf, basically undercutting McCain's argument of how safe offshore drilling is (even though the spill was due to two boats colliding).
Mainstream media covers up for one of the presidential candidates fundamental lack of understanding of the timeline involving the surge and the Iraqi Awakening - hint- it isn't Obama.
When things go bad for the GOP, they really go bad, case in point, Dean Andal, candidate for CA CD11 currently held by our very own Jerry McNerney (who beat out Pombo in 2006). Seems that Andal just can't get enough of his fellow Republicans to donate to this campaign, and he raised only $190,000 during the last reporting period.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This afternoon the National Republican Senatorial Committee announced it raised $13.5 million dollars for tonight's "The 2008 President's Dinner." The $13.5 million is the largest amount raised by the NRSC in five years.
The joint fundraising event for the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and President George W. Bush's final "The President's Dinner" raised $21.5 million dollars total.
Does it surprise anyone at all the the GOP can't figure out what is going on with their fundraising? Or that they have to resort to lies in order to make a bad situation look better? Sound familiar?
This is just standard operating procedure for the GOP: First they can't raise much money, then they lie about what they do raise. Tsk, tsk, once again caught.
The GOP candidate with all of the "experience" in foreign policy, the candidate that wants YOU to trust him with the security of this country, can't keep his mouth shut when it comes to Obama's upcoming trip to Iraq.
"I believe that either today or tomorrow -- and I'm not privy to his schedule -- Sen. Obama will be landing in Iraq with some other senators" who make up a congressional delegation, McCain said at a Republican fund-raiser.
If it is true that Obama is going to Iraq this weekend, it is a very serious mistake for McCain to have disclosed it publically. Even for run-of-the-mill CODELs the military gives guidance like, "Please strongly discourage Congressional offices from issuing press releases prior to their trips which mention their intent to travel to the AOR and/or the dates of that travel or their scheduled meetings. Such releases are a serious compromise to OPSEC." If Obama is going to Iraq this weekend, I can not begin to imagine how much this is complicating the security planning for the trip.
And McCain wants America to believe that he is best suited to protect us? The next time someone tells you that they don't think Obama has enough experience, show them this article and ask them if they think McCain is qualified to be a city council member let alone president.
I am outraged, whether on purpose or just a slip, McCain has put Obama, the delegation and our soldiers directly in harms way, McCain didn't have the common sense to keep his mouth quiet, and this from a man who would be president.
For those of you out there (you know who you are) that think McCain's military experiecene somehow qualifies him to be president, well, you just saw McCain in action.
Shame on McCain, and I hope that Obama, the other congressional leaders traveling with him, and our soldiers are not exposed to any increased danger or harm because of McCain.
Over and over and over the Repuglicans lie, they lie about everything, but most recently their lies are about oil. It is one thing to make a mistake, it is another to continually repeat lies because that is all you have. Enter the Repuglican (no typo, since Repuglilcans can't get the word "Democratic Party out of their mouth they are Repugnent to me, thus "Repuglican").
There are three bold faced lies the Repuglicans are telling, and well, if they can't, or won't, tell the truth, one has to wonder why. Why do they lie? Because they have nothing else to fall back on, because the truth doesn't help them and because as a group the Repuglicans are just the most dishonest political party our nation has ever seen.
So, what are these lies? Here they are for you in their glory, repeatd by McSame's campaign, repeated by the Bush administration, repeated by Repuglicans who hope you aren't smart enough to know the truth.
In a Tuesday speech delivered before an audience of oil executives, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) pushed to overturn the federal ban on offshore oil drilling. McCain claimed drilling is so 'safe' that 'not even Hurricane Katrina and Rita could cause significant spillage from battered rigs off the coasts of New Orleans and Houston.'
China is drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida. This one is a doozy started by none other then Tricky Dick Cheney, and has been repeated by other Repuglicans over and over and over, even though they know there is NO truth to this statement.
The bottom line is that the Repuglican party can't tell the truth if it bit them in their rear. And that is not just a national issue, look at what local Repuglican candidate Pat Waite does when he can't get any endorsements, he lies about them. Though, to his credit, he corrected the lie, and he even posted a comment on our blog.
Sorry Pat, but the fact that your website posted and left the offending lie about the Mercury endorsement up for months speaks volumes, especially since you didn't make the correction until you were called on it. Oh, and just so you know, it was "noticed" long before it was reported, and as the days, weeks and months went by without any correction by you, it was then pointed out.
Whether the issue is local or national we can count on the Repuglican party to spread lies because the truth is something they avoid at all costs.
America deserves better, our local government deserves better, and come November the nation is going to send some truth to the Repuglican party.
In an interview with the Washington Times, McCain's top economic adviser Phil Gramm tells America to suck it up and stop complaining about the economy:
"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," he said, noting that growth has held up at about 1 percent despite all the publicity over losing jobs to India, China, illegal immigration, housing and credit problems and record oil prices. "We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet."
"We have sort of become a nation of whiners," he said. "You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline" despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said.
Yes, that stress you are feeling is all in your head. The fact that you can't pay your mortgage, can't afford to eat, can't put gas in your car, can't afford medical care, all of that is in your head and will you please stop whining about it.
And while McBush is trying to "distance" himself from his TOP economic adviser, we only have to check the words McSame has uttered himself:
Got it? All in your head, you are to blame, and for the last time, stop WHINING!
Why doesn't it surprise me that local GOP candidates have to resort to outright lies when they list their endorsements? Pat Waite, GOP candidate for San Jose District 8 is no exception. In his list of endorsements, at the very top is this little gem:
Endorsements
(Titles and affiliations of each individual are provided for identification purposes only)
"Pat Waite is a retired vice president of Seagate Technology with a strong background in finance. He'd love to tackle the city's budget deficit, and he has solid experience on boards, such as Catholic Charities. He's a good candidate." - SJ Mercury News, May 23, 2008.
And what is even worse is that the Mercury's verbiage about Waite CONTINUED after "He's a good candidate, but unlikely to be a bridge builder on the council." So Waite does not just make a claim of the Mercury endorsement, he twists their words and implies that there is nothing more after candidate.
Rose Herrera stands out. An Air Force veteran, businesswoman and longtime school and community volunteer, she has a common-sense approach to city challenges. With support from a wide political spectrum, she could build coalitions and bridge political divides, a talent this council needs. We recommend her for the Evergreen area in the June 3 primary.
When someone runs for office and claims they have ethics, it helps if one's actions support those claims. Clearly in Waite's case that is all they are - claims - because his actions demonstrate to the voters of District 8 that he is dishonest. If Waite can't run an honest campaign he does not deserve to be elected to office.
Oh, and removing the offense AFTER it is pointed out isn't honest either, it is what you might call "getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar." (and we have the screen shot of the offense saved). Oh, and even worse would be the claim that Waite had no idea the endorsement was listed. How is someone who can't even monitor the claims of their own website qualified to serve as a councilperson?
Shame on Waite for his dishonesty, and the voters of District 8 deserve far better then someone who has to resort to lies in order to appear to have support they don't have.
Of course, the local GOP has to resort to lies and dishonesty given how only one of their candidates in the June primary even made it into the November runoff. Worse for Republicans, their District 2 candidate failed to make the runoff when Democrat Jackie Adams won second place. Adams had withdrawn from the race in March, and has thrown her full support behind District 2 front runner Ash Kalra.
If you know someone in District 8 make sure you tell them about Waite's dishonest and deceitful actions.
Oh, and one would hope that the Mercury News would call Waite out on his dishonesty.
John McCain thinks that Social Security is a disgrace, and he is going to fix it, just like Bush has fixed so many of our problems. Did I hear a gasp out there ; )
Under the present setup, because we've mortgaged our children's futures, you will not have Social Security benefits that present-day retirees have unless we fix it. And Americans have got to understand that. Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today.And that's a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace, and it's gotta be fixed.
Of course he also favors privatization (guess he doesn't watch the stock market),
Without privatization, I don't see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits. [CSPAN, 11/18/2004]
And then he states, today, that all things are on the table to fix Social Security, except "all things on the table" must mean something I do not understand because in the same interview, a few minutes later he takes things off the table:
During an interview with the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) contradicted himself in a matter of minutes regarding Social Security. When asked how he would "fix Social Security," McCain first said, "You've got to say look, everything is on the table." But then, minutes later, when asked if he favored "raising the cap," McCain said, "No." He then criticized Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for previously saying that raising the cap is "one possible option."
The warnings have rumbled for decades: Just wait till the baby boomers retire. If you think there are strains on Social Security and Medicare now, brace yourselves for the implosion as the boomers start heading out to pasture. With the first of that generation now doing just that, we should be seeing the dust cloud soon, right?
Actually, if you've bought into the following myths about the bust the baby boom is supposed to usher in, you may be surprised
The article goes on to state the myths as well as the reality of what the situation really is, maybe McCain can take a few minutes on his weekend (he doesn't "campaign" on the weekend) and read a bit on the real issues with Social Security.
Time to education McBush on the state of the union, and work all the harder to elect Obama.
Larry Craig and David Vitter - "two United States Senators implicated in extramarital sexual activity" - have named themselves as co-sponsors of S.J. Res. 43, the Marriage Protection Amendment. If passed, the bill would amend the Constitution to declare that marriage "shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman."
who was arrested June 11, 2007 on charges of lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airport terminal, is co-sponsoring the amendment along with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).
Craig, who entered a guilty plea to a reduced charge of disorderly conduct, was detained and charged for attempting to engage in sexual activity with a male undercover police officer. His arrest and plea became public two months later. At that time, Craig attempted to withdraw his plea and enter a new plea of not guilty. To date, his efforts have been denied by the courts.
In July of 2007, Vitter was identified as a client of a prostitution firm owned by the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey, commonly known as The DC Madam.
SAN FRANCISCO — Reagan has his highways. Lincoln has his memorial. Washington has the capital (and a state, too). But President Bush may soon be the sole president to have a memorial named after him that you can contribute to from the bathroom.
From the Department of Damned-With-Faint-Praise, a group going by the regal-sounding name of the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco is planning to ask voters here to change the name of a prize-winning water treatment plant on the shoreline to the George W. Bush Sewage Plant.
If this qualifies for the November ballot in San Francisco, it will almost certainly pass, and we can all take pride in knowing that our state has provided Bush with a tribute second to none.
I have had enough of the disingenuous right wing gong after Michelle Obama for her statement on America. Obama had stated that for the first time in her adult life she was proud of America, and the right wing has taken that statement , twisted it, claimed Obama is not a patriot and worse.
I wonder what they will say about McCain who basically has stated the same thing, over and over and over:
Not that we have heard John McCain admit he was not "in love" with our nation before he became a POW, can we just drop this whole issue? What a waste of time when our nation is undergoing some of the worst problems we have ever faced. Of course if you are a Republican calling attention to the mess you created won't help, thus you have to "create" something for your lemmings to grab hold of and play with while their economic situation becomes worse and worse under the Bush administration.
Shame on the GOP for pushing this issue, it came back to bite you.
Obama is hitting the airwaves, and he hit a home run in my opinion. Here is the new ad that is airing in what used to be considered GOP strongholds:
Where is the aid airing? Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia.
If you haven't yet sent a donation to Obama, please take a moment to do so now, and it does not matter how much you send, $5, 10, whatever you can will help us to win the White House and save our nation.
There is clear evidence that McCain is not aware that his previous remarks on issues can easily be found on video and posted online for anyone to view. Today's example of McCain's complete lack of honesty with voters has to do with Social Security.
On Friday McCain held a "Town Hall" meeting (which was stacked with GOP activists and a handful of independents and Democrats), in which he was asked about privatizing Social Security. Here is the exchange:
Amherst Democratic activist John Mendolusky engaged McCain in a sharp but respectful exchange over Social Security reform.
"You stated you are in favor of private accounts which really is privatization of Social Security," Mendolusky began.
"Why would you have workers risk their nest eggs on the roulette wheels of Wall Street?"
"I am not for quote 'privatization of Social Security.' I never have been, never will be. That is a great buzzword for an attack," McCain shot back.
Watch for yourself what McCain said on Friday:
McCain doesn't even know his OWN POSITION on Social Security, here is what he has said in the past:
March 3, 2008 (yes, but a FEW months ago), from the WSJ:
On Social Security, the Arizona senator says he still backs a system of private retirement accounts that President Bush pushed unsuccessfully, and disowned details of a Social Security proposal on his campaign Web site.
And watch what McCain said in 2004:
Make sure you direct people to this post when they say they are considering voting for John McCain, ask them if we can really afford to elect someone to office who DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHERE THEY STAND ON AN ISSUE AS IMPORTANT AS SOCIAL SECURITY!
We can't afford to elect a man who will continue the policies of Bush for another four years. Do your part, spread the truth about McCain, using his own words to show that he is out of touch with America.
McCain is now claiming that he is different then Bush, however when asked this question on Meet the Press in June of 2005, he states that he agrees with Bush far more then he disagrees. Is this really what America wants? A third Bush term? Watch McCain for yourself, and help our Democratic candidate, Obama, by sending this link far and wide.
Four more years of war? Four more years of the Bush economic policies? Four more years of all the things that are slowly destroying our nation?
Don't get mad, get active! Do all you can to show America that McCain is not independent, he is tied at the hip to Bush.
Yesterday Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment against George W. Bush. To no surprise, most of the media ignored this act, and some have been misrepresenting the articles as a "resolution." You can read the story here and see the articles here.
Should Bush and Cheney be impeached? YES, there is little doubt that they have broken laws, lied to our nation, to the world, and, well, the list is endless. Will these articles of impeachment get very far? Don't hold your breath, but at some point, maybe not now, but in the future, Bush will be held accountable for his acts against our nation. Stay tuned.
McCAIN: Anyone who knows the facts on the ground say that.
Q: If it's working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that's not too important. What's important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That's all fine.
It doesn't matter if our troops don't come home? Yes, we have troops in Germany, Japan and other nations, however our soldiers are able to move freely about in those nations. In Iraq our troops are targets, they are blown up, they are attacked, and even one death is too many. Are we in Iraq forever? Shouldn't that matter? McCain doesn't think it matters how long our troops are in Iraq. I think it matters, and I would wager that a majority of Americans also think it matters.
And of course we continue to hear how McCain isn't running for a third Bush term, yet there are those pesky little things like "facts" that get in the way of McCain trying to make himself appear as something he is not. Watch this GREAT MoveOn video to see the truth:
Tell me, please, how McCain is different in any way from Bush. He isn't, and we need to make sure America knows it as well.
Ok, I just had to post (and comment) on a press conference held Friday by three of the four losers in San Jose City Council District 2. I wanted to link to the article, however the Mercury does not seem to have updated their "Internal Affairs" column, so here is the story, in full:
Defeat is hard, but worse if victor didn't even try
Losing hurts. But sometimes, you just have to move on and vow to do better next time. Otherwise, you run the risk of looking silly.
Three losing candidates for the San Jose City Council District 2 seat called a hastily prepared press conference last week (at 11:55 a.m.) in front of City Hall.
The team of would-be-power brokers - Ted Scarlett, Ram Singh and Bui Thang - wanted to speak out about what they called an "unfair" election. The word "conspiracy" was even tossed out a few times.
The gist? Scarlett, Singh and Thang, but mostly Scarlett, believe last week's election was "tainted" and that voters were "misled."
Scarlett claims that since Jacquelyn Adams' name stayed on the ballot, even though she had dropped out of the race, the election results should be tossed.
"I want the election declared void," he said, "for the fairness to the voters, in an attempt to try and restore faith in our election process."
Ash Kalra came in first, and Adams - who didn't drop out in time for her name to be removed from the ballot - came in second, barely ahead of Singh. Adams later put out a release saying she'd voted for Kalra and has no plans to get back into the race.
Scarlett, who placed fourth, plans to take his case to the city's elections commission and anyone else who will listen. "This is just another sad chapter in the history of the city of San Jose," he said.
Why don't we take a look at the vote total (as of Friday, June 6)
Kalra has 4,667 votes, Adams has 2,066, together giving them 6,733 votes. Given that both Kalra and Adams are Dems, and that it is a safe bet that most, if not all of those who voted for Adams would vote for Kalra, we can safely guess that had Adams NOT been on the ballot Kalra would have received the 50 plus 1 percent he needed to avoid a runoff. (Adams, as the article cites, voted for Kalra).
Singh, Scarlett, Rice-Sanchez and Thang TOGETHER pulled 4,314 votes, not even enough to beat Kalra's total. Singh, Scarlett and Rice-Sanchez are Reps who don't seem to understand how to win elections, nor do they have any support from District 2 residents. Kalra has the support of every community leader, neighborhood group and organization in D2. Singh boasts the support of one vocal person who shall remain nameless. Scarlett has no endorsements, and Rice-Sanchez has a few supporters who went to high school with him (he graduated four years ago).
If anything, Kalra was the one most hurt by Adams remaining on the ballot, as he would have most likely garnered the 50 plus one needed to avoid a runoff in November.
Once again our local Reps look like fools and have no clue about fiscal responsibility. If we were to throw out the election from last Tuesday and hold a "special" election without Adams' name on the ballot, the city would have to fork up over $100,000. The results would ultimately be the same, Kalra would come in first, with the Reps lagging far behind.
Advice to Scarlett: What is sad is how little support you drew in this election, and a do over isn't going to change the fact that you will still lose.
Now that our primary is over, I thought it might be fun to go over some of the local races and take a look at why our Democrats fare so well in elections. First of all we are very lucky as Democrats to have such great candidates, and as the results of the primary show, the voters know how wonderful our office seekers are as well.
In San Jose we had three contested city council races, districts 2, 8 and 10. In district two there were five active candidates and one person who was still on the ballot but had suspended her campaign. Out of the five active candidates, only one was a Democrat, Ash Kalra, and he placed first with 40 percent of the vote. Now comes the interesting part : )
Second place went to.......... Jackie Adams (though barely as of this post she is ahead by 12 votes), another good Democrat. What is interesting here is that Jackie suspended her campaign for personal reasons, and did nothing by way of campaigning, not one thing, yet she ended up in second place, ahead of every Rep who was running. One of the Reps, Ram Singh, actively campaigned, but in his case no amount of campaigning was going to change the fact that he was one of the worse candidates ever to run for office (the very worst being Hon Lien).
Ram Singh, while informed on water issues, had little to no knowledge of any other city issues, procedures or pressing problems. Rumor has it that when Singh was asked about a current land deal in which Lew Wolff would build a soccer stadium in exchange for San Jose rezoning industrial land in Edenvale to housing, Singh reportedly had no knowledge of this issue. Hint to Singh: Read the Mercury once in a while.
According to the San Jose City Attorney, if Jackie Adams remains in second place her name must be on the ballot in November, which means that Kalra will most likely be our D2 city council person! Good job Ash, you worked hard, the voters love you, the Mercury endorsed you and we are looking forward to your leadership on the San Jose City Council.
District 8 is a bit more complicated, however once again Dems rule the results. There were two strong Dems in this race, Craig Mann and Rose Herrera. Mann was our endorsed candidate and he came in third. Rose Herrera came in first, and Pat Waite, a Rep, came in second after spending $60,000 of his own money.
Given that the runoff will be in November, and given that the combined vote total for Mann and Herrera are well above Waite's numbers, I expect to see yet another good Dem elected to San Jose's City Council.
Who is Pat Waite? Well he has been involved in many local organizations, mostly religious, not one city commission, no other elected office, no experience in working with city government, basically someone with a whole lot of money and time looking for a way to inject their agenda in San Jose.
I realize that I didn't touch the Supervisor races, and will take a look at those in a future post, but the bottom line there is that we have runoffs that feature ALL Dems! Not one of the Reps running was able to muster enough votes to even get into the runoff.
I find it hard to believe that McBush somehow hasn't figured out that people will check what he says. Today there are three good examples of just how out of touch McBush is, all presented for your viewing pleasure.
Ooopsssss, seems he didn't read the news today from Iraq:
today AP reported, ''Another suicide bomber driving a police vehicle struck Iraqi commandos earlier Thursday in Mosul, killing three of them and wounding nine other people, according to battalion commander Capt. Aziz Latif.''
''Sen. Obama has been to Iraq once -- a little over two years ago he went and he has never seized the opportunity except in a hearing to meet with Gen. [David] Petraeus,'' McCain said at a campaign event in Reno, Nevada. ''My friends, this is about leadership and learning.''
In his new book, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan charges that the Bush administration manipulated information in a ''propaganda'' campaign before the Iraq war, making the faulty claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Asked about the book today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) defended the administration’s actions in the run-up to the war, suggesting there was no manipulation involved.
McBush seems to not be experienced enough to know what is going on the world, whether it be the past or present. Make sure to save these tidbits with your friends, make sure that Americans know exactly who McBush is, we can't afford another four years of the nightmare we have lived for the last eight.
There are a number of stories "breaking" today, including a tell all book by Scott McClellan, a McBush adviser being caught lobbying Congress on behalf of financial corporations, and a new poll on gay marriage in CA. Get ready, get set, GO (to the story of your choice):
And I recommend TalkLeft as a good blog to read covering the Clinton campaign from a rational perspective, particularly this post.
And I linked to a great post by Erica Barnett that cites dozens of examples of media misogyny in this post on my personal blog.
Finally, Morra Aarons-Mele over at BlogHer has written a couple of great posts lately about how everyone seems much freer to talk about sexism now that they've counted Hillary out and about how some Obama supporters are making the strategic error of being so vicious they are turning off not only Hillary supporters, but those that aren't as rabidly pro-Obama as they are. In my digerati-laden world I can tell you this last one is true. In the rarified halls of twitter, for example, Obama supporters who are normally rational geeks are behaving like schoolyard bullies.
If/When Clinton loses it will be by a slim margin and after having accomplished some pretty amazing vote tallies in some pretty important states.
I have to agree with the folks who are very worried about the Obama camp under-valuing that and underestimating the passion of Clinton supporters. Everyone talks about the risk of alienating Obama voters should the nomination somehow manage to land in Clinton's lap.
We should also be talking about the risk of alienating Clinton voters should anyone act too dismissive of what she and her supporters accomplished.
I truly believe that most Democrats who turned out for the primaries will, in the end, turn out in the general election and stay Democratic. Especially once they get to know McCain a little better, and as more than that old guy with a sense of humor who goes on the Daily Show.
But why risk it? Eyes on the prize, people. As Hillary says in her Op-ed:
But no matter what happens in this primary, I am committed to unifying this party. Ultimately, what Sen. Obama and I share is so much greater than our differences. And I know that if we come together, as a party and a people, there is no challenge we cannot meet, no barrier we cannot break and no dream we cannot realize.
Can't believe I forgot to post this here last week.
Starting 9 months ago my company, BlogHer, worked with our community of thousands of (mostly) women bloggers to develop a series of non-partisan, policy questions that wanted every presidential candidate to answer if they wanted to earn our votes. We called it the BlogHer Voter Manifesto.
And for 6 months, none of them bit.
We were offering to give them the questions in advance, hell they're public on our web site. We were offering to send a BlogHer rep from their own side of the aisle to do the interview and ask the questions. We were offering to show up wherever and whenever the candidates preferred.
Not a bite.
Some of them offered spouses. Or asked us to promote their online site sections for women. We got a little discouraged, but we asked our community...well, would that be enough. Should we stop there. The community overwhelmingly said "wouldn't mind hearing from spouses, but we definitely do NOT want you to stop badgering the candidates to answer our questions."
So, we didn't. we kept reminding the ever-dwindling number of candidates that our community now reaches over 9 million unique visitors a month. That's a lot. By anyone's measure.
Power to the people! It was bloggers of every ideological stripe, and most of them NOT political bloggers and political junkies, who helped shape these questions.
Some have said the questions are too simple, not visionary enough. But I think it's a pretty clear indication that regular people just want to know what the candidates are going to DO about what they say they believe in,
We hope McCain and Clinton will soon follow.
In the meantime we also did get an exclusive audio itnerview with McCain campaign chair (and former HP CEO) Carly Fiorina, which you can listen to here.
The other day Bush addressed the Israeli parliament and stated, ""that negotiating with 'terrorists and radicals' such as Iran was 'the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.'" This remark was clearly aimed at Obama, and of course John McBush jumped right on the bandwagon and repeated this inflammatory remark.
First, let us define appeasement, "giving in to demands of an aggressor in order to avoid war." Appeasement is NOT entering into discussions with nations or their leaders. It appears that the far right does not understand the definition of appeasement, nor do they even keep tabs on what their own GOP White House is doing.
Let us hear from James A. Baker, a former Secretary of State to the first Bush:
Then, why not hear how the right defends their pathetic position (and proves the point that they know nothing of what they talk, they merely repeat talking points):
The bottom line is that the GOP has little to offer this country except for empty words and actions that benefit the wealthy as well as destroy our nation's reputation throughout the world. The best they offer us in November is more of the same, McBush, and if you have any doubt, watch this video and cringe:
Yes, one can be both a Democrat and a Catholic, though there are some people who would like to deem anyone who is a Catholic Democrat a "Nazi." Yes, there are some Catholics who seem to think that the Democratic party is the party of death. Funny thing is that most of these "comments" from Catholics are in response to ..... a MASS that is being held this Saturday in San Jose, at St. Joseph's Cathedral, 80 South Market, 7:15 a.m. You can also read about Catholic Democrats at: CatholicDemocrats.org.
This mass is sponsored by the California Catholic Democrats - by sponsored I refer to organizing the mass, getting the church, asking Father Jon Pedigo to celebrate the mass, handing out flyers and taking care of the details involved with holding a mass.
A website called "California Catholic Daily" has posted a story about the mass, and while the story itself is not too extreme, the comments are unbelievable. Remember, the comments I am reposting here are posted to this "Catholic" website. These people call themselves Christians, though there is little Christianity in their comments:
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 6:52 AM By sfcatholic Who is surprised here. Those in the Church have serious ties to the Nazi (oops I mean Demoncratic ) party. Yes, it is wrong, but we have seen little in any kind of "oversite" from Church leadership and we Catholics are "on our own". It is disgusting.
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 7:44 AM By William C. Meredith This is a political rally in support of an agenda against the teaching of the Church and should NOT be allowed by the Bishop in the Cathedral, or any parish church.
Let me just state what this mass is not sponsored by the bishop. The mass offered at the request of Catholic members of the Democratic Party. The decision to offer the mass was a pastoral response to a request to have a mass preceding the conference. The mass is not an endorsement of any kind; it is merely a mass for Catholics who are attending the Democratic Convention.
Now, back to these "Christian" comments:
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 8:30 AM By Laurette Elsberry A special Mass for the Party of Death! Given the far left social agenda of the "peace and justice" faction of Catholic clergy, this is not surprising. Also considering that no Democrat can be elected to a legislative position UNLESS he or she espouses abortion, a Mass for pro-abort politicians in a Cathedral is not unusual. It happens in Sacramento quite often.
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 1:37 PM By Carlos M They ought to call themselves the Demon-crats! They are certainly following satan's way!
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 3:22 PM By Elizabeth These people are not 'REAL CATHOLICS'. I don't mean to be unacharitable....... But, if I were the Holy Father they would be EX-COMMUNICATED in a NEW YORK MINUTE!!!!! End of STORY.............
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 7:35 PM By Miguel What a crock! The Dems are so shameless they will use the illusion of their christianity to get elected to continue the murderess attack on children in the womb! They hide their real agenda and the press never calls them out. It has to be satan's grand design. There is no other logical explanation.
Once again, yes, you can be a Catholic Democrat. I am, and I know there are many, many more of us out there.
All eyes are on the Presidential primaries, but this year also is shaping up as a good one for Democrats to solidify majorities in the House and Senate. We'll talk more about the House later, but I wanted to pass along the latest exciting news in the Senate. The first good news is that Democrats only have to defend 12 seats, while Republicans have 21 seats up for grabs.
One of the Republican seats is in Virginia, where Democrat Mark Warner is very popular and is almost certain to turn Virginia further blue. The Governor and one Senator are already Democrats in that changing state. Two more open seats, in New Mexico and Colorado, are leaning towards the Democrats, with cousins and current Congressmen Tom (NM) and Mark (Col) Udall leading the way.
Incumbent Republicans in New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Oregon are all facing serious challengers, with John Sununu of NH trailing heavily behind former Governor Jeanne Shaheen. In Minnesota, the path is cleared for Al Franken to win the nomination to face Norm Coleman. And in Oregon, Gordon Smith is facing a serious challenge from state House Speaker Jeff Merkley.
Already, that list would mark 6 Democratic pick-ups. Other states, including Alaska, where Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich has announced his intention to run against corrupt GOP dinosaur Ted Stevens, are also going to be in play. Senator John Cornyn of Texas is even facing low ratings in opinion polls.
The best news of all is how Republicans have failed to find candidates to run against Democrats in South Dakota and Arkansas. That frees up Democratic resources to focus on the states mentioned above. The only Democratic seat in danger at this point is in Louisiana, where Mary Landrieu has squeaked by twice before.
All in all, 2008 is shaping up to be a monumental year for Democrats in the Senate. To follow these races and more, go to dscc.org/races.
The year was 2004. My daughter was just a few months old and, since her birth, I had been on fulltime caregiving duty as a stay-at-home dad. Months of little sleep, hours of isolation in the nursery and too much time in front of the television watching DNA testing on "Maury" had taken its toll.
Knowing of my interest in Democratic politics, a friend sent me a note asking me to attend a kickoff for the 2004 "Call to Action" sponsored by the Santa Clara County Democratic Party. My partner, Jim - supportive of my need for greater adult interaction - offered to watch our baby so I could attend this grassroots, community-organizing event designed to ensure a Democratic victory in the November election.
Quietly strolling into the room packed with grassroots Democratic activists, I felt right at home with these like-minded Democrats who shared my passions for good government and reasonable public policy that would improve the quality of life for working families. Almost instantly, I knew that attending this community-wide"Call to Action" was, in fact, a personal call to action that was likely leading me to a brand new world.
Within a few short months, inspired by my new friends with the local Democratic Party, I founded a new Democratic club - the Silicon Valley LGBT Democratic Club. Later that year, with my infant daughter in tow, I organized a weekend bus trip of 80 gays and lesbians traveling to Reno, Nevada to help Senator John Kerry's efforts in this nearby battleground state. Despite the 2004 loss that had driven my interest in local Democratic politics, I was now a valued part of the local Democratic coalition.
In 2004, little did I know that attending that first "Call to Action" would later lead to being chosen for the 2006 Madge Overhouse "Volunteer of the Year" Award, to be elected one of the leaders of the LGBT Caucus of the California Democratic Party or even to my own 2006 bid for elected public office.
On Saturday morning, I attended the first 2008 "Call to Action" and was once again inspired by the boundless energy of so many fellow Democrats determined to win back the White House. No longer a stranger as I was now among so many friends, I couldn't help but wonder what new faces in the crowd might be one of our newest Democratic leaders or a future candidate for public office.
As I know so well, the collective "Call to Action" can also be a personal call to action that will forever change your life. I urge you to attend a future meeting of the 2008 "Call to Action" and join me and so many of your Democratic neighbors in working collectively to take back the White House!
People are just a bit too squeamish about "negative" campaigning and "attack" ads for my taste Seriously, I think everyone needs to get a grip.
I forget now if it was on Twitter, or on BlogHer, or on someone's own blog, but I recently saw a discussion where someone was incensed over what she perceived to be Hillary Clinton's negative campaigning.
And we all know there are lots of discussions going on about how Hillary should drop out because it will just perpetuate all of this fighting between the Democrats instead of focusing on the real issue of beating John McCain.
I myself have been extremely annoyed by the rather arrogant and, I think, subtly sexist tone Obama is taking every chance he gets.
But when I think more about it I really have to say: we all need to check our overreactions at the door and ask ourselves: Exactly what horrible, terrible, vicious attacking are we talking about?
That "phone call at 3AM" Hillary ad that has some people so steamed? Harmless. Doesn't say a word about her opponent. Harps on her experience as she's been doing for months and months.
Obama's comments about Hillary getting "desperate" and lashing out when she's "feeling down". Ok, I agree with Jon Stewart, seems like he'd be a dickish boyfriend, but this is an old political put-down...think Ronald Reagan and "There You Go Again."
Both of them having their staffs get worked up in a lather over comments from various opposing campaign workers and supporters? Getting campaign workers and supporters to step down, resign, back off, apologize?
I don't know. They're both doing it. And none of it, frankly, seems incredibly awful.
It's OK for Hillary to question Obama's experience, and for her to imply that he's all hat, no cattle. All inspiration, no perspiration. Even if you think it sounds a bit patronizing. Yes, I do think she'd be taking the same tack with anyone else who was 15 years her junior and had a similar resume.
It's OK for Obama to question Hillary's electability, "establishment" position and reputation as a polarizing figure. Even if you think he's basically spouting Republican talking points. He'd be talking about change no matter who he was running against.
I actually do not buy the media talking point that this race has been or is getting ever-more nasty. It actually hasn't...at least as far as I've paid attention. And for all you political junkies out there who are obsessed with every single detail of this race: I may pay less attention than you do, but I pay closer attention than about 99% of the electorate. So I'm betting that if I haven't noticed any actual egregious nastiness, then most other voters haven't either.
We don't need to perpetuate this Republican and Mainstream Media talking point that having Obama and Hillary continue to run is bad for the Democrats. I don't buy it.
We do need to stop expecting this to be a tea party and let the candidates make their damn case.
So, let me have it. What are the examples of campaigning that you think are incredibly nasty? Educate me.
