Kucinich says Hillary stole the election in NH.

Paul Bramscher,

maybe you should consider voting for the only candidate in the race who has ever authored legislation on single transferable voting: BARACK OBAMA.

http://fairvote.org/?page=1755

Natone,

get real.

Obama lost by 3 points in New Hampshire. Clinton lost by 9 in Iowa. Richardson's 5% in New Hampshire votes will most likely go to Obama in future run-offs. People voting for Edwards and Kucinich should be aware of what they're really purchasing with their vote. Today John Kerry endorsed Barack Obama and the Culinary Workers Union endorsed Barack Obama in Nevada. Obama still has the momentum. He has proved Hillary is not inevitable and that she will have to fight for every vote. Young voters today, unlike previous generations of young voters, are making a huge difference.

"Within the Democratic caucus, over 46,000 young people participated, and young voters comprised 22% of all caucus-goers. According to entrance polls by CNN, 57% of those 17-29 year old caucus goers stood up to caucus for Barack Obama. Tonight, they drove his campaign to victory."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/4/15520/78965

"Judge Him By His Laws"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

"Obama Forged Political Mettle In Illinois Capitol"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_pf.html

"In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd" (Graphic of Illinois Legislation)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.htm

Students OUGHT be getting involved right now. We Baby Boomers are reaching our retirement years and they're the ones who are going to be replacing us in the workplace when we're gone. We're counting on them to pick up the banner that we dropped so long ago in our disillusionment during the Nixon years.

Young people, I applaud your involvement, your caring and your activism. You have a lot to lose if things continue unabated as they have been. You're in college or about to graduate and take our places in the workforce and you'll be saddled with unbelievably ridiculous loan debt that will take you probably half of your working life to pay off. Finding a decent job that will help you pay those high student loans is going to be a long and difficult haul as jobs dry up, disappear and go overseas to cheaper labor markets. Buying a home will be painfully difficult as creditors put greater scrutiny on borrowers. Gassing up your car to take the long commute to your workplace is going to be a painful exercise as gas prices continue to skyrocket out of control. Mass transit is disappearing as taxpayers refuse to pay for it any longer, feeling overly burdened already by levy after levy that taxes their property.

In short, you're not going to have an easy time of it, and in a way, I blame my generation for all of your ills. We went from left wing activists for social justice to greed-is-good Reaganists to warmongering Bushites, saddling you, our children and grandchildren, with the burden along the way. I don't know how this happened, how our generation went from one extreme to the other, but the end result is what we have today, and I'm deeply sorry that our generation so badly screwed it for you. But now's your chance to step up to the plate and show that you care about our future and to do the right thing and return this country to its rightful owners, WE THE PEOPLE.

Thank you, students, for showing that you care, for turning out in record numbers in this primary season, for working so hard using both old fashioned shoe leather and the latest technology to gain new voters and new activists for social justice. Thank you for your voices, your enthusiasm, for your hard work and the work you'll be doing all campaign season long. You have restored my faith again in our country's young people, who have long been at the forefront of social change. As an aging Baby Boomer who is retiring in a few years after a long career, I welcome your willingness to work for change, for hope, for peace and for a new beginning to this new century. You'll make my future as a retired person and your futures as young career people much brighter by your actions. You've restored my hope.

THANK YOU!

Much will depend on how effectively these young voters can immunize themselves against the witches brew of propaganda and patriotism being prepared for them. I wish them much luck.

Keene NH, home of Keene State College (a part of the U of NH system) went for Hillary. The "youth" vote didn't materialize for Obama as much as they'd hoped. Some it it, gasp, might even have gone to Edwards!

I'd believe the thesis of this article more if I saw evidence of third party activity and a massive call for Range or IRV.

So far as I can see, the youth of today will be making the same mistakes that the Boomers made. They'll fall for the same sets of platitudes, feel-good promises and rhetoric by Democrats strong on smiles and weak on substance.

They won't realize the error of their ways until they've voted in a few bad apples, and then they'll be jaded middle-aged progressives in 20 years reading about a new set of youth making the same naive decisions. Repeat.

Fighting for democracy is a job, not a hobby. Showing up even at every election is NOT enough. I sincerely hope all those young people who went to the Iowa caucuses or voted in the NH primary would stay engaged. If the attitude is that I did my part and so it's time to go back to my iPod, then it is not progress.

If they would look and question they can see things are mostly worse than they thought.

It's only the beginning. Only time will tell.

The young folks in college appear to be engaged, and I'm glad for that. We similarly need to engage the young folks who are not in college. In fact, the ones not in college have even more good reasons (such as health care) to vote liberal than do the full-time students. I'm just afraid many of them don't know it.

Do people write this same article every four years. Or just recycle it, change a few names and call it a short day at work.

I know I heard a ton of this before the 2004 general election. One of the ways Kerry was going to kick Dubya's rear was that there were lots of young voters who were going to come out and support him.

They did to an extent, but they didn't swing the election. And that's because the people who write this stuff only see what they want to see. What they missed in 2004 was that lots of the new young voters appearing on the voter rolls were the children of right-wing fundamentalists. And that the Republicans had been doing their own voter organizing and registration work amongst their own base.

These articles usually start with a pre-determined conviction, then cherry pick a few facts to support it. If you are on the left and you see lots of young people on campuses supporting your cause, then it easy to think that this is the entire world. Its not.

And, surprise, surprise, every four years there are ALWAYS young voters who are coming of age and voting and participating in politics for the first time. And even more surprising, even fundamentalists manage to have sex and produce their own children who also come of age and start to participate in politics.

"Fighting for democracy is a job, not a hobby"

The question is, where can I get a paycheck for doing this. :) If I can pay my rent with it, it can be my job. If I can't pay my rent with it, then it has to be a hobby ... because since I ain't no trust-fund baby, there's got to be something like a 'job' in my life that does pay the rent.

"I blame my generation for all of your ills. We went from left wing activists for social justice to greed-is-good Reaganists to warmongering Bushites,"

As usual, anyone who tries to write about millions of people and act like they are all identical is completely full of it. I'm a boomer too, and I don't find it difficult at all to find people my age who never would have dreamed of becoming a 'greed-is-good Reaganists' or a 'warmongering Bushite.' I know I sure as hell didn't.

I'm sorry, but whatever numbers I've seen just reinforce the fact that young people as a whole don't vote in great numbers. If they did, candidates would approach them more. But in terms of getting elected, i.e. votes, young people are your worst bet and a waste of campaign resources.

"Young Voters Are Reshaping the Political Map and Politicians Are Listening"

Largely because of the Internet. The next step is to have binding internet referendums to let the people decide instead of Big Money corporations and banks of the oligarchy.

From the way the young are backing Obama they should get informed before choosing a candidate. Obama is the most unqualified of either party he is all talk and no substance but all the young are hearing is CHANGE yet Obama ssys nothing about how he will change anything he has no plan just talk.Obama has an EGO Hillary has an IQ that the difference. Do you want an intelligent president or another lite weight in Obama?

The youth of America are Republican. Potential Democrats have been being aborted by the millions over the past 30 years, and dead fetuses cannot vote.

Which is why, for all their talk, smart Republicans are NEVER going to move to ban abortion. It kills those who would vote against them.

Edwards isn't taking their money, if you don't believe me, go to -
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008

This is what they say -

"Edwards is maintaining his steady fundraising pace behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, though he has announced that he will be accepting $10 million in public funding-and is encouraging the others to do the same. At the end of the 3rd Quarter, Edwards had $30.3 million, which means he will easily reach the $35 million his campaign originally said he'd need to bring in to be competitive in the early primaries. The former North Carolina senator has vowed not to accept money from registered lobbyists or PACs and only had minimal debt to re-pay after his 2004 campaign."

Can you say "public funding" Doug? I knew you could!

You know doug, I like the idea of young people getting involved, but let's see if we can all share the same facts. You don't get to make yours up. Both Obama and Clinton have already sold out to the
Corporate-Military-Media-Industrial-Complex, and don't represent any REAL CHANGE!

We don't need a woman, a black man, a white man, a uniter, a smooth talker or a negotiater as president, what WE NEED is a FIGHTER, and Edwards is a fighter. He has been knocking the chip off the shoulder of corporate America since he got out of law school, and they're afraid to get in the ring with him or even talk about it.

The only way to take power from these bastards is to beat it out of them, and that is what John Edwards is all about!
VOTE EDWARDS '08

"Candidates are not required to reveal the identities of "bundlers" — people who collect contributions from many individuals — and disclosure records range from inadequate to spotty to nonexistent. The best, but still inadequate, disclosure comes from Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, who have provided the identities of their big bundlers and the amounts but only within broad ranges. Ms. Clinton, for instance, lists 311 "Hillraisers" who have brought in at least $100,000 each — but with no indication of how much each is responsible for. Mr. Obama is slightly more specific; he lists "bundlers" within the ranges of $50,000 to $100,000; $100,000 to $200,000; and $200,000 and up."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901416.html

"While Edwards and Republicans Mitt Romney, Giuliani, John McCain and Fred Thompson are providing no specific information on how much their bundlers or other fundraisers have actually raised (Giuliani has disclosed those who have either pledged or raisedat least $50,000), each of them has provided a substantial list of bundlers or fundraisers. Each has also indicated that some fundraisers were expected to produce tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of dollars. There is no reason to suspect that these campaigns are any less reliant on their fundraisers than Clinton and Obama."

http://www.citizen.org/documents/IndustryCoding.pdf

http://www.whitehouseforsale.org

Add up the bundlers and the second biggest contributor to the Edwards campaign is Fortress Investment Group.

Top Contributors to Edwards Campaign

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008

#2 Contributor

Fortress Investment Group

"The hedge fund that employed John Edwards markedly expanded its subprime lending business while he worked there, becoming a major player in the high-risk mortgage sector Edwards has pilloried in his presidential campaign."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002277_pf.html

Dennis Kucinich: "In answer to your questions about why I didn't support former Senator John Edwards on the second ballot in Iowa: I have serious concerns about his connections to a Wall Street hedge fund, Fortress Investment Group. While attacking others for accepting campaign money from Washington lobbyists, he is up to his ears in money from Wall Street special interests.

He made half a million dollars in a single year for attending a few meetings for Fortress and has invested a substantial part of his own personal wealth in the hedge fund whose portfolios are responsible for sub-prime predatory lending practices, Medicare privatization, and an entire range of corporate sharp dealings that are driving the middle class into poverty."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×3969318

"Of all the new rules passed in Congress's recent ethics overhauls, the most sweeping is a barely debated provision in a Senate bill passed Thursday night that could alter one of the most time-honored campaign fund-raising practices in Washington.

Rushing to complete its promised reform bill, the Senate adopted a measure that, for the first time, would require registered lobbyists to disclose not only the limited money they can donate to candidates personally but also the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars they raise from clients and friends and deliver as sheaves of checks — a tradition known as bundling."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/20/us/politics/20ethics.html

"Senator Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat who was tapped by leaders to oversee ethics overhaul, said the legislation would "ensure that committees aren't slipping in earmarks in the dead of night."

After overcoming resistance inside his own party, Mr. Obama pushed for a provision requiring, for the first time, disclosure by lobbyists who bundle political contributions of more than $15,000 in six months.

"My argument was that it was worth it for us to try to be aggressive on this front, particularly since we were just coming into power," Mr. Obama said, adding that he wished the rules could be enforced by an outside group. "I do think that the public would have more confidence in the process if we had an independent enforcement mechanism."

The legislation is designed to limit the social interaction between lobbyists and lawmakers, making it more difficult for them to get together at sporting events, parties at national political conventions and other social activities.

The bill also deprives former members of Congress who now work as lobbyists of some of the privileges that critics say give them an advantage in pushing legislation. The measure revokes floor privileges to former lawmakers who are lobbying, and denies them access to the House and Senate gyms, other exercise facilities and members-only parking.

Also tucked into the 107-page measure are several Senate procedural changes intended to curb a practice that has become more common in recent years: adding surprise, last-minute provisions to bills."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/03/washington/03lobby.html

"Republicans who would bring a third Bush term" i beg your pardon? Bush is an idiot; granted the pickings for the republican side are slim - very slim in fact and it is unlikely that Ron Paul receive the nomination, but if he did that would be great, all the other guys are kooks. I also like Obama - so we'll see what happens....

"Bought'n'paid for" and "Barack Obama" - Kinda rhymes doesn't it Doug.
It should, tis true!
And Hillary Too!
VOTE EDWARDS '08 FOR A WORLD OF CHANGE!

US Corporate Elite Fear Candidate Edwards
By Kevin Drawbaugh
Reuters
Check out the article over at TruthOut -
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011108T.shtml

"Bought'n'paid for" and "Barack Obama" - Kinda rhymes doesn't it Doug?
It should, tis true!
And Hillary Too!
VOTE EDWARDS '08 for a WORLD OF CHANGE!

John Edwards is not in the pocket of Wall Street, but Obama and Clinton are, period.

Here is the list of top contributors to Obama -
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008

And here is the list for Hillary -
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008

Now, you look at that list and tell me who is bought and paid for by Wall Street. They dont fear Obama and Hillary, they own them!

But they do fear John Edwards! Here is another link to the article, read it this time Doug!

US Corporate Elite Fear Candidate Edwards
By Kevin Drawbaugh
Reuters
Check out the article over at TruthOut -
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011108T.shtml

http://www.trafford.com/07-2440

Dear Sirs and Mesdames,
This subject, in my mind, is the most immediate most urgent and serious matter confronting the Human Race. Despite the fact that many great minds, philosophers, politicians, academics and economists, have all created eminent careers based on their knowledge and understanding of how free enterprise, national economies and the human race interact, they have all failed to admit the obvious. It is glaringly obvious that we have large swathes of the human race that do not have access to money; it is that simple.
Therefore we need a system of economy that literally accommodates the needs and aspirations of every human being. A system that will not rely on taxing others' in order to provide all the multifarious forms of infrastructures, as well as our human and social obligations. A system of taxation in which the haves are continually being pressured to claw back those taxes from the have-nots. We must face the fact, once and for all; this system can never provide all human needs and infrastructures.
We have allowed right-wing ideology to dictate the terms and even if or when large swathes of populations may be fed and housed or have health needs addressed. We tolerate the fact that we have millions of working poor who will never earn enough to meet all of life's basic costs. Many of these are struggling to raise families the bedrock of our future. Those who work lead the most precarious of lives.
Precarious, because their work and income has become the plaything of corporate power, which moves production to lower waged economies. This makes the executives and the shareholders richer but at the cost of the misery they leave behind. Wages go down, but not prices, or costs of living, and the formerly free "social wage entitlements" are removed.
This is the "rationalized" world directed by Corporate Power and implemented by our Governments, the world of "user pays".
Take it or suffer the consequences. The Government calls this "work choices". Hear the Corporate applause? The consequences are total destitution for some; they could buy none of life's essential services.
Complete and total destitution for many unless they work, no shelter, no food, no health care, and no education, none of life's necessities.
So we need a system, which provides equal opportunity and care for all, overlaid with free enterprise. At the same time we can put in place a fair and equitable industrial relations system that eliminates employer employee antagonisms.
Our democracy is in serious trouble. Rich people and corporations channel funds into political parties in order to achieve their own commercial or ideological ends cleverly bypassing democratic inputs. It is happening in all democracies but that does not make it "worlds best practice" or "right". We can correct that quite easily. We make so-called free trade agreements under which corporations are exempted from government regulation that control workers rights, pay and working conditions. Is this democracy, is this really necessary, should corporations have such unbridled power, where will it end?
Introduction of The Universal Economy will immediately and substantially impact and improve such questions as Poverty, provision of universal education, health care, pensions, unemployment, housing and all public infrastructure (roads bridges schools hospitals etc). None of this will require the imposition of taxation.
The concept of The Universal Economy will be easy to introduce, because it benefits everyone, everyone will want it to work. It will be hardest to implement in third world nations, not impossible, just slower to implement. It will kick start economies wherever it is introduced.
This is a concept for the twenty-first century. Put to one side traditional thought processes and embedded conventions see only the greater-good and benefit of mankind then you will support this enterprise with the open heart and mind it deserves. Adopt this concept for the good of humanity.
Give your support, not money.

Yours Faithfully, THOMAS W ADAMS.