Sounds good. Top 1% has 60% of the wealth. The disparity hasn't been greater since the Great Depression. One big happy family.

The Wisdom of the Peoples of America is a composit of many experiences. God has and always will bless this nation.

The Peoples of America are a resilient folk, although we debate our varied beliefs, Together We Stand.

Ironically, the Peoples of this great nation remind me of growing up in Palatka, Fl. where we had varied debates and differences, however, an outsider would never have known. We stood as One on that issue.

You know what I mean, you and your siblings could battle one another, but that old boy from crosstown knew not to meddle. Like it or not, We are Family in America.

Now the time has come to stand as One and remove the evil elements from the Control of our great nation. As I see it, the Wisdom of Barak Obama and Dr. Ron Paul will restore the Dignity and Compassion of America and other Nations.

Change is inevitable among the minds of such a graceful People. The next Generation is Now.

Dr.Ron Paul and Barak Obama along with many of the other exceptional patriots, with the blessings of the People, will lead this Nation into the next millineum with the highest of Honor and Integrity.

Obama got Kucinich's support.

Why? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

YES WE CAN. The bottom-up approach to change--Obama is right about that. In fact, it may not matter what his platform is if he gets a trainload of people active again.

I'll probably vote Green in the end of course, but would prefer Obama to Clinton as the DLC candidate. But clearly not everyone here agrees apparently.

MoveOn? I quit a long time ago. They are irrelevant. Or so it seems to me. The way they manipulated their members' vote is despicable.

Someone On The Right Anne Coulter Feels Good About

Coulter on Fox (Jan 31): likes Clinton because "she's more conservative than McCain." Do Caroline & Uncle Ted--Have All The "Stones?"

It's easy to see why the 1% who Love! U.S. politics just as it is, would ditto the nasty, autocratic, combative, ad hominem "code" rhetoric of Bill Clinton. But, we're not all , beer-drinking, macho bullies in this country. You'd have thought (or at least I did) our so-called "leaders" would have the "stones," if not the self-respect to object. But, looks like the Kennedys, alone, may have felt obliged to tell the truth (about Ted's former friends, the Clintons).

The Combative Clintons dominate every former democratic institution and whip up militancy & conflict everywhere they go, probably incurably. The aggressive zealotry they model is a disservice to their base as well, in that it turns so much of the public off. They manipulated long honored primary tradition by "dis-ing" the rules unilaterally, and won't hesitate a minute, to force these ad hoc changes down our throat no matter if they take the party down with them. Their ugly smear campaigns discredited/eliminated several strong candidates from the race selecting Obama --who they thought would be easier to beat/bully/compromise and smear--

It's so much easier to complain about our democratic congress rather than object to the strident Hillary, matriarch of that congress, who dictates the rules none of her poor subordinates dare dispute, or might favor independently, that is, without her approval. It's Hillary's congress which almost invariably, gives George Bush the "heads up" no matter the usual faux "protests." And while Hillary dominates congress, it's Bill, Champion of the One-Percent, the New World Order (takeover by the elites), still leading the choir for his hasty, ill conceived global initiatives (NAFTA, WTO, et al). The 1% who rule the World Economic Forum at Davos Switzerland are all about indecent, inordinate, entitlements incommensurate by any measure, moral OR!! Economic.

It's pathetic that among those who profess to stand for and love democracy-- so few have the Guts To Take These Dictators On, and instead, stand by quietly and watch them violate the spectrum of progressive values our once advanced society prided itself on. And my posts focus on Hill & Bill so much! because they did the heavy lifting for George Bush, pushed our country closer than we've ever been to a dictatorship & tore apart our party from within.

I oughta mention that a (VERY!!) small handful of the media HAVE tried to be heard with respect to Clinton on ISSUES & POLICIES (and not the good old "Boys Will Be Boys") misadventures with Monica. And…well, I'm pleased to report a few of those (not all) still have their jobs. And I have my fingers crossed America finds itself worthy of being viewed again, as the Progressive Leader of the Free World. Some may think it's not major but there's a super-substantive difference between Clinton & Obama—with the Clintons' as criteria, we can T-R-U-S-T Obama with the farm.

Actually, if the race were between Hillary and McCain I am going to vote for McCain. Let me tell you why, I sort of like the way having a Rep. right-wing nut administration has energized the progressives. With Hillary it will be business as usual but in the guise of a left-leaning gov. That is more dangerous to me than having McCain as pres. who happens to be a more admirable person to me than Hillary. I may not agree with him on a lot of things, but he scores big points with me on the anti-torture thing. Hillary, she'll fold on that one instead of risk seeming weak. I don't think she really cares, she's so calculating.

I have read that hundreds of thousands of Americans have moved to Canada in the past TWO YEARS. More than ever before. Move On indeed....
I have the feeling the smart progressives have already given up and left this country.

Obama and Hillary are both in bed with the Rich Jews-the Israel Lobby. I do not expect an end to the war from either of them. They are both corporate hacks. Maybe with them things will get a little better than under Bush or McCain..but is 'a little better' that all we can ask for of America anymore?

I no longer have the heart to vote for the 'least worst' and I think that is what most people here are saying...yes it is great that Obama is black and Hillary is a woman..on the other hand..combine them and what do we have ...a Connie Rice? This is not progress....it is just corporate window dressing...

I am waiting to see what Michael Moore says-he is the only 'leader' I have any faith in anymore. He said vote for the Dems. and we did-voted them in the Senate-and what good has it done? Same old war...same old corporate crap....
What do you say Mike? Green? Revolution?

Ouch Moveon...ouch.

lj329. Sensible post. I also agree on your take about Edwards. He's a good man. We haven't, heard the last of him.

Moveon is functioning within the context of the real political landscape in the U.S. By asking the membership to endorse one of the two remaining viable Democratic candidates and then putting its energy into getting that person the nomination, Moveon then gains some influence with the candidate. The membership's priorities can get more consideration than if we all remained ideologically pure and refused to support anyone who does not conform to all of our concerns at the outset.

By voting third party at this time, we would be enabling and solidifying the takeover of our government by far-right extremists. If we have not already passed the point of no return, I fear that we are in great danger of a slide into facist dictatorship (with an over-lay of democratic forms with no real substance) if we do not turn things around now.

I am supporting Barack Obama. His personal charisma has energized people who have not participated in politics before (such as my 3 young-adult children and my low-income, African American neighbors). His platform does not come close to my ideal. If it did, he would not be a viable candidate in these times, in our system as it is. However, I believe that many of his positions are vastly superior to those of any of the republicans who will gain the Whitehouse if ALL of us (center-left all the way to far left) don't close ranks and shut them out. And I believe that if we do so through an organization like Moveon, we can magnify the strength of our voice in policy decisions (much as the religious right did with the republican party).

I believe that John Edwards withdrew from the race when he did because of these considerations. Now, on top of admiring many of his positions, I admire his willingness to put the well-being of the country above his personal ambitions.

LET'S JOIN TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THE RIGHT DOES NOT KEEP CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY. SUPPORT OBAMA NOW. SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IN NOVEMBER.

I took this from: http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf
That is the America we believe in. That is the America we are fighting for. That is the America we will build together – one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and JUSTICE FOR ALL.

Okay. Bend-over-crats with trembling chins, lead by Pelosi, where is the justice for war criminal bush? Exactly why is he not head accountable for numerous impeachable offenses? That is why I will not vote for a Bend-over-crat. Not until they act on their so-called CREED.

Wow! You folks have some tremendous opinions and personal concerns as well as ideas. At the end of the day we are supposedly voting for the person that we feel will most likely serve the best interest of America as well as consider some our personal concerns once he takes The Office Of President Of The United States.

As you well know, this person will not please all of us, however he may, with the help of the Congress and House, be able to address some of our personal concerns. We all further know that the Integrity of the voting process in America is in serious trouble. The Will of the People may not be granted as demonstrated in the past two elections.

Peronally I like Obama as well as Ron Paul. Here is an idea for your consideration: Ron Paul/President----Barak Obama/ Vice President or Barak Obama/President-----Ron Paul/Vice President. With this combination I believe the People of America and the World will be honestly served.

I believe that the time for Change in America has truly arrived. With these two candidates working cohesively, we shall see Change in America as well as the World. I also believe that the Cabinet and Counselors of the team if carefully chosen, will work to rectify many of the ills that have been imposed on the people by this current Administration.

Remember, many of you will have died and gone on in a short while, you are leaving the debts, laws, and many other challenges for future generations. Let us make a choice for Change, because status quo has left America in an uncertain condition.

As you express your many different opinions and concerns, remember, this is the blessing of being apart of this Democratic Society. God Bless The Peoples Of America in their diversity.

If you vote for Gravel to be the nominie for president, it does not have any bearing on the general election. However, it does send a message, that there are those that are looking for REAL change, not the same old. If there is a strong enough support for him, maybe the Democrats will get a message of what is expected of them. Although doubtful. They don't seem to be working for the people anyway.

Their full name being "Move On to betraying the people as usual".

That "the anti-war base will never forgive the Democrats" is naive. If they want to avenge themselves, then MoveOn should have endorsed McCain or Romney, uhh. As it is, we are merely back to the same old Hillary bashing that people indulge in to justify their own shameful failures to do anything themselves in the past six years.

The USAhad already been led into a revenge-based war, as erroneous and false at its rationale was, first bombing the uninhabited mountains of Afghanistan, then WMD's in Iraq. As you might remember, the words of the howling opportunist were "You're either with us or against us" . That was accompanied with all manner of intimidations and very real coercions.

Blaming it all on Hillary but not Obama is trite as he has simply eventually avoided voting for someone else's war. He has done little to oppose it and his "I don't oppose all wars" was his own pathetic version of pandering to political expediency in Washinton and the polictically correct elsewhere in the country. Perhaps he is only actually running on a leash held by his Neocon controllers anyway?

Surprising, though, that MoveOn had come up with this endorsement in perhaps LESS THAN 24 HOURS FROM POLLING ITS MEMBERS. I don't know what that really means and someone should investigate it!!!

Its disappointing, though, that an anti-war organization should accept and endorse such duplicitous drivel as BO's "the crucible of the sword" and "I don't oppose all wars" never mind his intentionally offensively derisory reference to Jesus' Sermon on the Mount as "...a passage that is so radical that it is doubtful whether our own Defense Department would survive its application" !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPUe6T8RVXs

As much as such words are also found in Buddhist, Hindu and Daoist and even Islamic and Jewish religions, it is the central text of the Christian bible and their enlightened leader's core statements regarding his philosophy of peace, tolerance and service to others. Obama has insolently repudiated that for the sake of military service for whatever reason his country chooses. Thus "I don't oppose all wars" really IS his philosophy and intention.

That is more in common with a budding "first emperor" as China sadly experienced some 2,300 years ago ref. "Qin Shi Huang"). He too had humble beginnings and suffered some oppression at first. He was also a legalist and cold-blooded ruthless manipulator who cost the lives of millions in his "unifying" China. Don't forget that Obama is like France's Sarkosy, another Neocon (Austrian) and he is also not deeply rooted in American culture.

I can't believe it. Move On does not support Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader, 2 people who seem sincere in there belief that our political system is not a cynical joke.

Oh, forget it. I can believe it. I forgot that Move On is just another lousy, sell out, establishment front group for suppporting the Democratic Party. It is for the status quo. It supports the party that escalated the Vietnam war and killed millions of people. It refuses to see that the Democratic Party is not part of the solution.
Move On should not be supported.

Chunga's Revenge you can surly see that there is only 1 real chance that the people will have a friend in the executive branch of the government.

Sorry here's a softer version of the video I showed you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONFPcnGtem4&feature=related

once again we have been given the choice of Tweedle dee and tweedledumb..brought to you by way of the DLC and their corporate sponsors.
Moveon is just contributing to that shell game..as they hand you a nickle and the other hands you a dime..on the other side,really the same side, the Repoobs have a senile old man that can't remember his positions from week to week. what is the real strategy here..I heard that A Coulter is endorsing Hillary..now there could be some strange bedfellows..tune in next week...for more exciting news on stupid tuesday when your favorate and mine spin the corporate lines about who's on first..abbott or costello?

"Please explain more clearly what in the world is a "libertarian socialist"? This sounds as contradictory as a violent pacifist or ferile domestication."

Noam Chomsky describes himself as a libertarian socialist.

"Libertarian socialism is a group of political philosophies that aim to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies – a society in which all violent or coercive institutions would be dissolved, and in their place every person would have free, equal access to tools of information and production, or a society in which such coercive institutions and hierarchies were drastically reduced in scope."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialist

What a pitiful state of affairs.

Bush wants a $150 billion economic stimulus package, while Exxon/Chevron let the big cat (not Osama) out of the bag -- record profits in the past year, enough to fill every gas tank in the USA four times over. The Bush association with big oil is old hat, just like the Carlyle/Cheney/Halliburton/Saud connection. And well, yes, forget about 9/11 and the preempted turned holocaust attack on Iraq. And nothing was done because, even after the first whisper of fraud was heard and Conyers thought it might be a good idea to investigate, nobody ever intended to impeach. Maybe McKinney, Kucinich, Feingold, had the right idea, but they didn't have the support they needed to follow through.

But Obama!

Obama has clearly stated that impeachment is a waste of time. We know Hillary wouldn't consider it. No courageous Republicans to step to the plate. So here we have a mongrel selection of politicians, not statesmen, politicians, who have each deliberately failed to uphold the oath which they pledged to take office under -- that being, to UPHOLD the Constitution of the United States of America. These people, these so called presidential hopefuls, have the temerity to consider themselves presidential material? And we have the stupidity to jeer them on? Have we gotten what we deserve and have we completely lost our senses as a result?

Integrity is a thing of the past. Cynthia McKinney, one of the few Congressional leaders with the courage of her convictions, is portrayed by the Fourth Estate as crazy, but the people who really are crazy are, well, presidents, vice presidents, secretary of states, and so on.

There is no more America. Through decades of failed leadership America has been slowly dismantled. Today, only the bones remain. It's going to take more than debate in cyberspace to restore this baby country to the potential greatness our Founding Fathers envisioned when they designed our Constitution. As long as we continue to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear toward the obvious, our leadership will be commensurate with our ambivalence.

Clinton, Obama, Romney, McCain -- what's the difference, really? The Clinton/Bush association is frightening. Obama will never make it past the eighth pole -- the strangest name America's ever voted in as president is Eisenhower. Romney couldn't even handle the little blue state of Massachusetts. And McCain, well, he's still a Vietnam vet fighting another war. As the saying goes, shake them up in a bag and they all come out the same. They say never to wager on a horse you don't like, but I'd place a pari-mutuel on a donkey named Clinton.

Poxonyou--

Please explain more clearly what in the world is a "libertarian socialist"? This sounds as contradictory as a violent pacifist or ferile domestication.

@hyehopes February 2nd, 2008 6:06 pm

Her name is Samantha Power. No "s" added at the end.

I also think ANCA's decision to back Barack Obama this early on is shortsighted.

Think "President Clinton" before you vote Hellary...

Well, it would appear the question du jour is whether to Obama, or not to Obama...

You know it was slimy slick Willy who asked the nation whether we would be willing "to roll the dice" on nominating Barack. Given the alternative of voting for his wife, I think that's as close to an endorsement of him as we're likely to get from Billy boy.

So, Let's roll...

Or, of course, if you want to vote Green, then vote Green. I'll be considering Nader if he throws in. Vote for anyone except those Repug ghouls, or Hillary.

"Yes We Can,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35tI-8TaKmU

This is very slick... the power of Obama is that he can inspire this sort of project and the energy that people give to hopes, whatever constraints or limitations he has, well, none of the other MSM candidates are going to have anything like this, or say anything like this or generate this sort of energy...

Check out the video!

In my opinion, we don't live in a progressive society. So with Obama's MoveOn endorsement, and a recent (though questionably conducted) survey calling him the most liberal Senator based on his 2007 voting record, can anyone actually think he has a snowball's chance in hell of being elected in the general election. Just imagine what the right wing smear machine will do to him. Hillary has already been vetted, and can sling with the best of them. Our only hope for a Democrat in the White House is now Hillary Clinton. The demonization of her is appalling, especially considering she and Obama voted pretty much the same in 2007.

To those who say they can only live with themselves if they vote a 3d party candidate...too bad we have to live with your lousy principles. Vote Green, we end up Red..and the Earth turns Brown.

At least with the Democrats, we have some chance at some moderate, if not progressive, judicial, environmental, social, and economic policy. Think "President McCain" before you vote 3d party.

I admit I don't know anything about Samantha Powers. I read a letter supposedly written by Obama in which he seems to side with the Israelis and defends their right to protect themselves but doesn't condemn the occupation. Obviously, I am not well informed but that is what the letter stated and it was posted on CD.

I think we will disagree about how good Obama is. I can tell you this, I would prefer him over Hillary or McCain but then I'd be engaging in Dweedl-dee-ism and lesseroftwoevilism respectively.

I also realize that although my perspective is shared by perhaps as many as 50% of the bloggers at CD, it is at best shared by only 1% of the US electorate. If I'm right on that one, the fact that we aren't won over to Obama will not hurt your candidate much at all. Good luck!

I think Move on knows that those are the only candidates who have a chance against the Republicans and who come close to Move ons ideology. That is probably why they only had those two choices. With that said I do think there should have been an option to not endorse either of them.

Tailcap this is is in response to your claims.....

1) How can you say that? Obama has hired Samantha Powers to join his foreign policy team (something that drove Zionists up the wall recently ) do you know who she is??? I suggest you read about it before you blatantly attack him on the issue of the Israeli Occupation. Powers is a renown Genocide scholar and has written an amazing book called "A Problem From Hell." He is a supporter of the Palestinians (more than anyone other popular figure running)and has been quoted a as being a supporter. Although, obviously it's not something he touts (in fact he often hides that fact) because as you and many others know AIPAC and the other 29 powerful pro-Israeli lobbyist organizations would decapitate his campaign. This is a smart move on his part.

2)I agree there are too many bend over-crats, but if you go back a few years you will notice that there was one Democrat that stood up to the military ambitions of Bush-Cheney. Obama. He voted against the war in the beginning. He made the right judgment, unlike Hillary Clinton and many others.

3)Obama mentioned he will leave troops to protect the embassy and civilians there. However he will not invade Iran he has even come out and supported talks with those "rogue" nations which Hillary and McCain would love to bomb to non-existence.

So the question is this: WHO is the best candidate who can win the election. Obviously none of them are perfect, or else we would all be thoroughly pleased on the left. BUT Obama is truly someone else. And there is something to say about the recent surge of support Obama has been given by many liberals and moderates and even some independents and republican converts. He brings good people together and brings new ideas to the old game of politics. He caries with him a sense of hope that has attracted many people to his campaign. SO I believe if we can rally around him, as many others have, than it is possible to take that sense of hope which has inspired so many of us and make some fundemental changes in our country. Changes we desperately need.

The Moveon endorsement process was flawed in my opinion.

I received a MoveOn endorsement ballot. There were only two choices Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. There was no option for "none of the above", nor was there a place for a write in! The web page was designed so that it would not let you submit a vote unless you chose one of the two. I decided not to vote.

I sent MoveOn an email to complain. I also pointed out that John Edwards had suspended his campaign, not dropped out, so he should have been on the MoveOn ballot.

Everything the repugs did they did with the Bend-over-crats standing idly by and doing nothing. They could have stopped the war by not funding it for example. They could have impeached the war criminal bush. Just look at their sell-out leader Pelosi (impeachment off the table) abdicating her duty to uphold the constitution. There you have your Bend-over-crats. Enough said.

Obama will leave tens of thousands in Iraq to prop up the colonial puppet government. He is bellicose against Iran. He supports the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians and occupation of their lands. Sounds like Republican-lite to me.

I know that no matter which Republican we get be it O'Billary or McCain the wars will continue. And that's the truth.

You want to vote for Gravel who has absolutely no chance or Nadar...then do so and we will have another Republican in the white house. Everyone needs to wake up and realize the stakes at hand here. War, torture, secret prisons, stripping of habeas corpus, recession, worker mistreatment, a massive health care crises etc etc. We CANNOT allow another Republican to take the presidency or we will surly have more of the same. Now Im voting for and going to help Obama because I feel he is the least corrupted and can truly bring about some good changes. So get out there and make sure they don't take the White House AGAIN.

Stiv Whitman February 2nd, 2008 3:59 pm

Easy or not you entered. Some (my self included) have accused the MSM of controlling the election by controlling access, being a propaganda organ and avoiding many issues. For example at a recent debate the question asked was whether or not the surge has worked instead of how soon the troops should be brought home. As if finally succeeding at brutalizing the Iraqis into submission was somehow a justification for an illegal invasion/war/occupation.

I have realized that the people who refused to back Kucinich in the Dim party and the Repugs that rejected Ron Paul are as responsible as the MSM. The MSM are guilty indeed, however that does absolve the millions of idiots who will vote for McCain or O'Billary.

A lie must be swallowed for it to work. Millions will swallow hook, line and sinker. When we get our stinker president the American people collectively will be the ones that are really responsible.

Go Greens/3rd party

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:bnaD1QWNqjkJ:www.gravel2008.us/issues+mike+gravel&hl=en&ct=clnk&c...

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:bnaD1QWNqjkJ:www.gravel2008.us/issues+mike+gravel&hl=en&ct=clnk&c...

Paul Bramscher wrote: "...the way out is easier now, if the bottom falls out. It's like rappelling down a great mountain face with a bad rope."

Yes, well, it may be that the height we dangle from--whether we cut the rope or take a chance on a hoist up on a frayed one--the height is catastrophic in either case. It's rather foggy and the distance to the bottom is not obvious.

A lot of chess games end in a draw. But the ones that aren't close quickly end in resignation.

So much for analogies. The last two elections were 'stolen' and the ruling elite running the media ran the show. They will have who they want. Personally, I have great difficulty entering into these discussions as if they mattered. Obama is better on some issues than the other MSM candidates, granted. But it will be a BAU until circumstances demand change and people get into the streets and rattle some cages. Obama got one thing right: change comes from below...

Like so many others I too couldn't vote without picking one or the other, I tried. I stopped donating to Move-On when I found out they gave Bill Nelson, 68k for his 06' election, after he voted FOR closure on Alito! I also found the timing of this 'Poll' suspect. I sent them a comment, saying one subtract one Hillary vote, I for the first time in my life went to the Green Party web page, and I think I found a home!!They have monthly meetings, and are running 85 candidates! I wish we could get Edwards on top of C.McKinney for President! The Greens would not only be right on the issues, but they'd have a Nationally known candidate and a Black/Women!

No one is ever wasting their vote, if their voting FOR something! The people who 'hold their nose' to vote like Dem/Sheepel, for what ever garbage the party decides to nominate (no matter how bad) are going to keep getting what they deserve! Corporate/Centrist/War-monger candiadates!!

Below was my post to and article about Robert Kennedy's endorsement of Hillary.

All, the Kennedy's had to say about Hillary, was nonsense! I live in Upstate NY, the rabid Repug. was so bad, it was a cake-walk for Hillary! She's a horrible Senator! At least for her constituents. Unresponsive, doesn't read Bills before voting on them, Doesn't respond to e-mails or phone calls, doesn't campaign for Dems. in Upstate, No Town-Hall meetings for her!
If you were in the military, would you think the General's wife has the experience to lead you into battle?

As for Barack I haven't heard anything about WHAT HE STANDS FOR! Why he's runnnig? Other then a whole lot of RHETORIC; "HOPE", "CHANGE"; hoping for a change (is his depends dirty?)
According to Krugman, Obama is RIGHT of Hillary, on economic issues. He supports Nuclear Power. And his advisors are for "high healthcare costs' as good for the economy, another hated "Sicko", and a third that had been an advisor to B.Clinton, wants to 'privatize Social Security'. Is that what his 'Private Retirement Accounts' are really about, and why he's getting LOTS of Wall St. backing?

Neither one of them are talking about rolling back NAFTA, Both want to give our tax $ to Insurance Co. COE's, so their 'bean-counters' can deny what your docter recommends! How about strengthing the laws against Employer's that hire persons who have no right to work in this country? Like every other civilized Nation does (including South American countries)! Look into it, you'll find out I'm right. We can't go there and work, or even live, without jumping thru hoops! I hate one-way streets!!!

Without Edwards, the ONLY Progressive, born into a working class family, self made man, with real ideas, and principles, the ONLY choice is between:
Black Man vs white Women
Where's the Beef, Issues, Positions?

The fact that Gravel is polling at 1% is telling. Seeing as a candidate's worth in the good old US of A is inversely proportional to her/his worth (Nader under 5%) tells me Gravel is probably the best candidate out there while admitting I don't know much about him. I still hope Nader jumps in because he will raise a lot good issues and he's a household name.

Most Bend-over-crats aren't supporting Gravel. People get the leaders they deserve and almost half the voting population will vote Republican. The rest will go to O'billary. Oh crap!

What is everyone's damn problem?

Ohh, Kucinich is out of the race *sob*

Maybe Ron Paul *questionable*

Cynthia McKinney *ehh...*

Let's wait for Ralph! *perennial scapegoat*

How about you vote for the best candidate, who is actually in the Democratic primary RIGHT NOW.

MIKE GRAVEL.

Vote for Gravel on Super Tuesday, and tell everyone you know to do the same. Send a message to the mediocre Democratic establishment.

poxonyou,

I too most subscribe to libertarian socialism; progressive being a more convenient label. However, it amazes me that someone who USED to protest against injustice will now vote for someone so into Wall Street's pockets. Too bad, it sounds like your lost.

When I vote for third party candidates, I am preparing for the future. And don't get me misunderstood; voting is somewhat useless, now, but it could elect somebody with radical ideas if the people understood that they have the ability to take back the power before the eventual slide into complete totalitarianism. Soon, our society will collapse, and a TRUE police state will crush dissent like never before seen. The underground will be the only place for survival of thought. That underground needs to be united now, and many like yourself are needed.

The two party system is nothing but stagnation, regression, and suppression. Any support for it is tantamount to the advancement of the police super state.

Good luck.

Is Obama going to grant LEONARD PELTIER executive clemency like Bill Clinton didn't?

www.leonardpeltier.net

So true. What has changed since 2000 and paper-trail-less voting machines and butterfly ballots? The Bend-over-crats have had 8 yrs to do something. Please inform me anybody if anything has been done or are we just as vulnerable to a Diebold-assisted, Supreme Court-certified, stolen election as we were last time.

Moveon is fake Corporate Sewage

We just need to keep another "Republican" out of the White House. McCain seems the current front runner, and his background is, quite simply, appalling. Then we have a Baptist preacher, and a Mormon. This means, basically, voting for whatever Democratic candidate is ultimately nominated. And no, none of them are perfect. I happen to prefer Obama because, of those remaining contenders, he seems the least bent. Edwards is unfortunately out of the race. Billary is worse than most, and anyone who thinks she wouldn't be a "two for the price of one" deal is asleep. Voting for a minor party candidate is throwing away your vote. (Might Gore have won in 2000 if not for the votes thrown away on Nader?) Given the recent performance of the "Democratically controlled" Congress, it's kinda hard to be optimistic for the future. Just keep on keepin' on.

scroller,

Note that "clean energy" like "clean coal" is not CO2 free. A process can emit many tons a minute of CO2 and still be considered perfectly clean, because even at this late a date CO2 is still not regulated in any way. That statement you quoted was so vague (what the hell would a "clean technologies workforce" be?) is so vague it is meaningless.

We hear a lot about mt. top removal in the Appalachians, but more people should know what is happening to Obama's Illinois - where subsidence from underground longwall mining is destroying some of the most productive farmland in the world - possibly forever.

Scroller good post, but tell me who are you advocating??

honestly, what a bunch of wankers and whiners. it seems that we are forgetting that it really doesn't matter who endorses whom and who actually gets the primary nomination - in the big picture - but that we must all rally around whomever it is in order to wrest power from the idiot murderers that lead us know.

if you were all my children, i'd tell you to stop whining and look for something positive in the situation. it's a way of life and it works! give it a try.

As far as I'm concerned MoveOn can do just that Move On! Barak is running on a slogan. About the only time I hear him actually talk about an issue and Not make a production number out of it is when he's actually debating. And this thing about hammering Clintons first vote for the war. Well it wasn't her fist vote alone that propelled Bush to go forward. When ever he gets trapped on an issue, drivers license for Illegals for example, which I happen to like Hillarys logic on that, he defers back to her vote on the war! He's a rethug in disguise, always living in the past!

"Oldbadgertoo", you ask: "When did Obama disown capital punishment?"

Answer: In 1996.
From an article in the UK Guardian: "'Do you support capital punishment?' asked the questionnaire. 'No' was the firm reply of Barack Obama, seeking a seat in the Illinois state senate in 1996 (although it is now being claimed that the 'No' was not filled in by Obama himself but by one of his staff.)"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/humanrights/story/0,,2237535,00.html

You ask: "When did he promise to obey the NPT and decomission nukes?"

Answer: Oct. 2, 2007.
"US Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama on Tuesday called for the elimination of all the world's nuclear weapons, and pledged to thrash out agreements, face-to-face with sworn US foes ... 'Here's what I'll say as president: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons' ... adding that under his presidency, the United States would adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMH3KOPld1Icwb8F80eoKib2OWrg

You ask: "When did he promise to spend money on combatting climate change"

Answer: On his campaign website, barackobama.com. Click "Issues", then "Energy and Environment". There is listed:
-Invest $150 billion over 10 years in clean energy.
--double energy research and development funding
--invest in a skilled clean technologies workforce
--convert our manufacturing centers into clean technology leaders
and more.

You ask: "When did he commit to dragging the American poor (quite often black, but not as privileged or acceptable to the white middle class as him) out of their despair and promising them an equal share of the national wealth - and health?"

Answer: his campaign website, "Issues" then "Poverty" where among other specifics Obama pledges to "Create a Living Wage"; also to refund the first $500 of the payroll tax paid by low-end earners. At the same time, Obama has called for raising the income ceiling on the payroll tax. It is clear where he is going with this--ending the regressive nature of this "tax the poor" systemic structure. Contrast Hillary Clinton is opposed to raising the salary ceiling for payroll tax, at least according to campaign literature from the Clinton campaign in Nevada which attacked Obama on this specific point. There is more than this, but these are "small" but real reforms which would make life slightly less cruel for millions of Americans. Perhaps of interest also may be this earlier analysis of the candidates' economic views which concluded that Clinton is a "welfare liberal" and Obama a "weak social democrat"
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/26/4279/67260

I love the way the debate rages on. As if it mattered.

It is obvious that the next president is being selected for us. We have no say in the process. If you are a progressive and you are still supporting the Democrats you are being foolish.

I love all the crazy comments here. I consider myself a libertarian socialist, and the only government I respect is the Swedish government, but I've really had enough of the Republicans and am willing to vote for Obama. He is nowhere near perfect, but this "democracy" is screwed up to the point a great candidate will likely never have a chance. If we want change, it isn't going to happen by supporting a 3rd party candidate that doesn't have a shot in hell of winning.

Change happens outside out government, and what we need is an atmosphere that helps empower progressive and radical change. That happened during the Clinton years because 1) liberals became disillusioned with Democrats. When the Republicans rule, people believe if only the Democrats were in power, all would be good with the world. Only when Democrats are in power do people realize there's little hope of real progressive change through the electoral process in the US, then they join or make organizations, stage protests, etc.

2) Those who aren't disillusioned believe Democrats will listen to them if pressure is placed on them from outside. They know Republicans don't care what they think, so what's the point of holding a protest to convince Bush, or any Republican, to be more environmentally friendly in some way. They know there's 0% chance he will care. They aren't his voting base anyway.

3) Clinton was more international, which made many people see the world in a new light, not just one of America vs the rest of the world. We saw that the problems were interconnected, and people in other countries faced similar problems with their government. We felt united because the leaders we opposed were united. During the Bush years, people in other countries not only hated Bush, but they lost respect for Americans. How could we elect this guy twice? Why did we support the war in Iraq, and not fight harder to stop it since?

I became politically active during the anti-corporate-globalization movement. I attended two major protests, one against the IMF and World Bank and one against the FTAA. I really miss those days. Revolution felt imminent to many of us, as protests continuously grew in numbers and internationally. Friends I had who didn't care about politics started talking about radical issues and wanted to participate in future protests. That all disappeared. Everyone just hates Bush and his war and his problems.

Gravel is the best of the bunch. I have yet to hear that he has dropped out. Why was he not part of the debate? No need to answer, as we all know the reasons.

Good grief. So MoveOn likes threats to bomb Pakistan and a bellicose attitude to Iran? When did Obama disown capital punishment? When did he promise to obey the NPT and decomission nukes? When did he promise to spend money on combatting climate change, not continuing to beef up the world's most horrific terror machine, the US's obscene military, ever? When did he commit to dragging the American poor (quite often black, but not as privileged or acceptable to the white middle class as him) out of their despair and promising them an equal share of the national wealth - and health? And what about his cosying up to Israel and implicit pledge to continue the frightful injustice against Palestinians? They are endorsing this slickly marketed opportunist ready to sell out on every point of principle to appease the corporate oligarchs and buy power? Shame on them. They don't even have the excuse of being young, ignorant and deprived of reason by US pop culture.

Looks like it is time for progressives to move on from Move On as they become another front organization for the disgusting DLC.

octotroph: 1/28/08 The NYT's. William Kristol, "Desperate Husband" in this op-ed piece, Kristol denigrates the Clintons, intertwining them nicely, then states, regarding the dem's, "and in choosing Obama, they can nominate a more electable candidate."
That is a lie. W/ the obvious motive of marginalizing the candidate most likely to defeat muck-cain. simplistic, insulting.
Just vulgar in it's baldness.

I don't know how many people MoveOn allowed to vote in this sham, but by their numbers, Obama led the final tally 70.4% to 29.6%, and added together, that equals 100%. Now, I know that I was not the only one who refused to participate in this, so how many actually voted, and how many refused to participate? Was that really a supermajority of members, or just a supermajority of returned ballots?

I'm with Karita Hummer, ChangeB42Late, peoplefirst and a lot of others. I received my ballot, looked at it, and deleted it. A MoveOn endorsement might have meant something when we still had progressives in the race. While I would prefer Obama over Clinton, I just couldn't see being a part of rubber-stamping a choice made for us BEFORE Super Tuesday by the CMMICC (Corporate-Media-Military-Industrial-Congressional-Complex).
I am so freaking pissed, I could chew nails!

We've got loooong months to go before the national convention. What we think now and say here, what the vote is on Tuesday, what events transpire between now and then may change many minds. We must all hold tight to thoughtful consideration and slowness to react to swiftboat-type smears. Question what you read and hear. I suspect we won't know for certain about which of these two candidates will be the party nominee until the convention. For what it's worth, my mother, who has stunning moments of precognition has been insisting that it will be a Clinton/Obama ticket that will win big. She also predicts that Clinton will be a great president. The trick is that Mom started saying this in the spring of 2006. Would you have considered a Clinton/Obama ticket as possible in 2006? I couldn't. And now... ha! We will see.

OMG! I didn't read the Kristol article but I can say if Kristol is applauding Barak, that sure makes my vote stronger for Hillary.

One thing's sure, anyone wants a Republican in the White House reading this thread is stoked.

Because the only one that can beat mccain is Hillary Clinton.

Maybe that is why William Kristol was slamming her yesterday and applauding Barak....

Re this previous post:

"People who are saying 'No I will not vote for Obama, I Wanted Kucinich' are like people who are offered a $50,000 a year job and say 'Nope, I want $100,000 a year or I won't work.' "

Real cute, Rudyjo. So you are comparing people who are desperately trying to turn this country around and save lives to greedheads who only want more money? That is ridiculous.

I'll tell you right now how I handled Move On when I received their announcement of a vote to endorse between Clinton and Obama.

I sent them a scathing email for wanting to endorse either of those warmongers, and then tossed all their emails into the spam folder where they can keep company with the hucksters that try to steal credit card info and sell penile implants, and of course, the Democrats. They will never be welcome in my email box again.

Some of us will not choose "the evil of two lessers" (Ralph Nader quote) when the life of this planet is at stake.

Focus the Nation has been going on all week around the country. At the campus in my town, two women from West Virginia whose town has been ravaged by mountain-top removal (for coal extraction) were the speakers. Their families have cancer, they're harassed, they live in a science fiction town. Barack Obama a huge proponent of expanded coal and was the premiere senator to sponsor a bill for implementing liquid coal. Since then, he has called very recently for a relaxing of mining regulations (!). Ugh--in what universe is this a progressive agenda? This is ethnocide and he is well aware of what is going on in Appalachia. I wouldn't mind if people voted for him if they still acknowledged they'd have to really push him on these things. But people don't. They just fall for empty pledges of "Change" and "hope." It's like a Simpsons episode, you know when the mayor has a meeting and everyone looks at him blank-faced, and then he says a hook and everyone is all happy?

I, too, wrote MoveOn and asked why they did not support Edwards or Kucinich when their support could have mattered and given them leverage when they needed it, or why couldn't they get behind the Greens, if they were indeed looking for a progressive agenda. I also asked if health care and climate change are their top platforms why would they endorse someone whose policies are decidedly to the right of his opponents? I am not a Clinton fan, but if you check out her policies, esp. health care, hers are the more progressive of the two...Obama's votes since being in U.S. Senate are lockstep with Clinton's and he has also become pretty beholden to companies in his short while there.

I don't know how I will vote...I would definitely take a Clinton Administration over a Bush one anyday, or either of the Democrats over McCain or Romney...I want the Greens and others to break through to the mainstream, but I also want to ensure the R's do not get in. Democrats are better and more persuaded on progressive issues; with climate change, we can't afford to idle. However, no matter who gets in, we do need to build a movement. Someone said the other day, and it was the most heartening thing I have heard in awhile, that some of the most progressive movements and bills passed were under Nixon...not because of Nixon but because of the people....we need to become more powerful than our government.

I think people really need to read up up Obama a little more - review his 2004 DNC Keynote Speech, his book "The Audacity of Hope", and read this piece from Chicago activist Paul Street:

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16349

Generally, the Chicago activists who worked with Obama have been fairly dismayed with Obama's direction since joining the Senate. I would not expect any real change, particularly in US foreign policy, under Obama.

Will an Obama presidency have ANY benefits? Well, the Clinton presidency was pretty bad too, but at least we had a little breathing room, and in my town we had a growing third party movement - the New Party, the Labor Party USA, the Greens - even the old Socialist Party USA was attracting new members - we pushed hard, and almost won, a living wage ordinance (defeated, sadly, by our county councils two black members). But globally, the anti-global capitalist movement was growing in leaps and bounds - culminating in Seattle in 1999, Goteborg, Genova, Quebec City, then the world Social Forum Movement.

All these things have since fallen into complete disarray or dormancy - the result of utterly devastated morale and burnout under Bush, particularly since 2003.

So, an Obama presidency might give street level organizers a breather to regroup and reorganize - but then again, a Clinton Presidency or even McCain presidency might do that too.

But please, none of this "place at the table stuff" - we aren't in nearly a sufficient position of strength to sit down at any table with them yet. If we do, it will only lead to total compromise and sell-out. Our place remains in the streets and in the local organizing centers and union halls.

No, we've had a 150-200 years of Obamas, and look where it's led us. It's time to move on, and I don't mean MoveOn.

Look folks, there is no ideal 100% liberal progressive candidate out there who is electable in todays world. The reality is that Obama is the closest your going to get. So let's stop the bickering and back this guy, or you'll see another Jerk Dubya clone for 4-8 years.

And to think McCain just doesn't get it. He still supports the war in Iraq!

In chess, there's the concept of sacrifice -- and there are several nuances. I say let the country have a few more terms of Bushism if we can't have real opposition. I sincerely believe the way out is easier now, if the bottom falls out. It's like rappelling down a great mountain face with a bad rope. We're within jumping distance, and face two choices:

(a) Cut the line and jump, risk breaking a leg.
(b) Or let a weak partner at the top pull us up on our frayed rope, which may snap at any point -- perhaps further up, causing greater damage.

I say jump.

I think Obama is an excellent choice. While Hillary is OK, I fear too much backlash from the right and too many people that think someone not named Bush or Clinton should be in the White House. Obama is inspiring America's youth, who are poised to really make a difference in this campaign. Our youth are ready to claim the future for their own. I'm going to do everything in my power to get Obama elected.

Foamweapon: You have to draw the line somewhere, but for 6 figures you will sell out for
something you don't believe in? I guess that's what most politicans send up doing. I would
rather see Edwards or Kucinich, but unfortunatly it isn't going to happen. I know that in a
way I'm selling out, but the country just can't take another 4 or 8 years of a republican in
office. There is a time when taking the lesser of two evils is better than doing nothing.
I have a notion that Obama is more liberal than he let's show, to be elected by the mainstream
public, he has stayed closer to the middle. Hopefully if he is elected, over time he will
move more to the left.

I quit moveon.org when I realized it was just a shill for the DLC. This merely confirms it.
As for me, I will not for either Hillary or Obama. As long as the Democrats give me war hawks for candiates, then I don't care who wins. Hillary will keep us in Iraq and is not hestitant to nuke Iran. Remember that.
Now is the time for Democrats to abandon blind party loyalty--and find a 3rd party choice or just not vote for President at all in 2008. Vote for state and local elections but boycott the Presidential race if there is no third party with a peace platform.

I will vote for Obama in the NY Primary, and I will vote Green in the General election in Nov.

I agree with everything scroller wrote.

There are 4 good reasons to vote from Obama, and not Clinton. Clinton represents no hope for progressives, whereas at least with Obama there is some hope that we would get a place at the table.

I'm voting for Obama in Bangkok on Tuesday (Democrats Abroad, first ever primary!)

The boys' club as anointed one of its own! Surprise! Surprise! Instead of waiting for the outcome of Super Tuesday, they decided to try and rig the outcome - how Bushie of them! We shall see. I have a feeling that MoveOn.org will be moving on in the near future and hopefully retire.

I've always been skeptical of MoveOn - I am still waiting for them to call the Iraq war a crime, rather than a "mistake".

Well, moveon.org did not include Mike Gravel in their poll either. Isn't the owner of moveon.org a billionaire? There are no real progressive candidates left except Mike Gravel. I refuse to vote for people who have "nukes" still left as an option to use pre-emptively.

I too was an Edwards backer. I still think he was the only
Democrat with a chance of winning in Nov. I'll vote for
Obama if he is the Dem left standing, I might even hold
my nose and vote for Hillery, but only because I promised
God I'd never vote for another Republican after living
through these years of Bush. (no I didn't vote for THAT Rep.) I'm well aware that my vote probably will not mean
dick because I live in Texas, which went Republican 65/35
in 2004, right in the middle of Red Neck Central. These
"good ole boys" just aint gonna vote for no woman or
(let me be politically correct) black man.

It isnt even "Super Tuesday" and already the "powers that be" have decided . By marginalizing, first Dennis Kucinich , then John Edwards , we are left with Hillary and Obama . Endorsemens by political families and PAC's this early in the season are ridiculous and shift the attention from the War in Iraq . Neither candidate is likely to bring the troops home anytime soon and Corporate America will continue business as usual . But why should I be surprised ?

Tailcap. Thanks, we'll see if my 6:16 comment gets posted.

Goodmama, I'm with you on the equality issue, but I think in this case that people are using Hillary rather than Clinton because it avoids any possible confusion with Clinton, as in Bill. I truly believe there is no disrespect here, but a desire for clarity with the 2 Clintons on the scene. But I could be wrong ...

ABC=Anybody But Clinton

[and anybody but a republican]

Obama is the best shot for change, BUT he needs to grow some balls and i am working on it.

I spent 20 minutes on the phone this AM with John who was answering phones at THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN

I phoned because of this letter Obama sent to the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad.

1.23.2008

Dear Ambassador Khalilzad,

I understand that today the U.N. Security Council met regarding the situation in Gaza, and that a resolution or statement could be forthcoming from the Council in short order.

I urge you to ensure that the Security Council issue no statement and pass no resolution on this matter that does not fully condemn the rocket assault Hamas has been conducting on civilians in Southern Israel for over two years.

All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families. However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this. Gaza is governed by Hamas, which is a terrorist organization sworn to Israel's destruction, and Israeli civilians are being bombarded by rockets on an almost daily basis. That is unacceptable and Israel has a right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians.

The Security Council should clearly and unequivocally condemn the rocket attacks against Israel, and should make clear that Israel has the right to defend itself against such actions. If it cannot bring itself to make these common sense points, I urge you to ensure that it does not speak at all.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator

THE FACTS ARE THAT THE UN SAYS:

Israel is allowing only 41% of Gaza's food requirements
Israel grants only 1 in 7 patients access to urgent treatment outside Gaza
Israel denies medication and hospital supplies to Gaza

Israel is not allowing enough fuel to treat and pump clean water in Gaza
Israel's cruelty has caused more than 70 deaths of untreated Gaza patients since June

BARACK OBAMA SAYS: "We have to understand why Israel is forced (sic) to do this"

I am a Christian of the Beatitudes-[NOT of the INSTITUTION!] and I say:

Denying food to 1.5 million civilians is a crime and morally and ethically repugnant.

Denying medicine to sick and dying people is a crime and morally and ethically repugnant.

Israel's actions are collective punishment; a crime and morally and ethically repugnant.

Why are the 'leaders' in the USA who claim to be Christian silent?-

yeah, i know: the Israel Lobby, but the only way to counter them is with THE TRUTH

Christians believe God is LOVE and "Love is not the starving of whole populations. Love is not the bombardment of open cities. Love is not killing......Our manifesto is the Sermon on the Mount, which means that we will try to be peacemakers." -Dorothy Day

Denying food, medicine and other essential supplies is despicable and does nothing to harm fighters or the Hamas government in Gaza.

It only harms civilians, one half of whom are children.

Presidential candidates are way more sensitive to criticism than elected leaders.

WE the people truly can change the future and an engaged citizenry is what a democracy is suppose to be about.

Your call has the potential to make Palestinian rights an issue; and that is THE WAY to TIKKUN: which is Hebrew for HEAL, MEND and TRANSFORM the world.

Jimmy Carter said the Israeli Palestinian conflict is THE ISSUE ALL the candidates should address and we the people must rise up and make them do the right thing.

PLEASE CALL THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN for leaders MUST be led

(866) 675-2008
Choose option 6,

then talk to a volunteer and ask Obama to lead the way to equal human rights and justice which is the only way Israel will ever have security and the only hope of deflating the righteous anger in the Arab world over USA two face foreign policy.

e
http://www.wearewideawake.org/

Rudyjo: "People who are saying 'No I will not vote for Obama, I Wanted Kucinich' are like people who are offered a $50,000 a year job and say 'Nope, I want $100,000 a year or I won't work.' Sure $100,000 is nice, but $50,000 is better than nothing."

That describes me EXACTLY. I'm a programmer who believes no large corporation is worth making software for, they'd have to pay me over 6 figures... so now I literally make pennies (below-poverty?) doing random crap on the internet.

You have to draw the line somewhere. I will not vote for Obama or Hillary. Both want to increase defense spending. I also won't work for some tech company, that if successful, will just get bought out by some large corporation. My last employer was bought by a large media company... so all the work I did for my former employer, the "Corporate Media" now owns. I hate that!

Just like I hate Obama taking support from "progressives" just so he could get "bought out" by the highest bidder. Working at my former employer and working to support someone like Obama are both eventually counter-productive. People need to take a stand.

Work independently, vote independently and think independently... that's the way people should do things.

Okay, let me have.
yea, I got that but my comment got posted a little later with no changes

foamweapons February 1st, 2008 7:38 pm
I really admire people that are willing to suffer (take pennies) for their convictions.

When enough people stop engaging in Dweedle-Dee-ism perhaps a 3rd party will become feasible. We may have to pay the price by getting a repug elected but maybe that disaster (like Katrina with weak dikes) will at least get them to realize that with the lesseroftwoevilism you still get stuck with evil.

I want to punish the Dims for not impeaching Bush and stopping the war. They have really shown their true colors. The only way I can punish them is by not voting for them. Time to put away the carrot and take out the stick.

An endorsement from MoveOn does not impress me. They lost me with their tactics some time back. You cannot forget the Petraeus ad that smacked of Karl Rove type mentality. "If you can't beat them, join them" has never been my battle cry.

On the other hand, my target issue in this campaign is ending the Iraq War. I feel that Obama is the most likely of the candidates to make that a priority.

Hillary is too allied with the AIPAC lobby to allow her to do that.

Bravo McCandless, it is really shameful how the media and the bandwagon effect have turned so many heads from Hillary Clinton who would be the most intelligent and competent president we have had in a hundred years-including Woodrow Wilson. Moreover, it is sad that a turnout of 16.5% of Moveon.com's reputed 1.7 million membership should be seen as an accurate barometer. That makes about 11.6% of Moveon.com's membership that have given Obama its endorsement. Moveon.com is alienating a committed portion of their membership.

Disgusting!!!!!You have destroyed whatever effectiveness you might have had after the voting public has made its choice through the primaries. The halfwit on your staff that made this stupid decision should be fired. Cancel my membership as of now. Any further garbage from you will be directed to Spam.

Dang workreno - That was a real bummer. I was expecting Paris Hilton at the beach.

Well, is anyone out there beside me wondering how much the Republicans worked to get Edwards out of the picture? I think they rejoiced that he is not there, as in fact I think he was more electible than Clinton and Obama. (By the way, could you all use Clinton's LAST name? Why is it that a woman gets called by her first name, like a child, when the rest get called by their last names? It's a subtle but effective sexist way of diminishing her, and even though I am not fan of Clinton's I still think she deserves the same respect as the rest.) Anyhow, I think it is all a set up.

And here is a question for you:

WHERE IS AL GORE?

Oh, yeah, remember him, the inconvenient guy? Wny is he not endorsing someone, why didn't he a long time ago, especially with so many folks STILL poised to write him in. HE could have endorsed someone from the start and showed some positive action, but he hasn't and I wonder about that. He is a good man with lots of influence and I am disappointed that he has not, that I know of, said ANYTHING.

Like others here, I was disappointed that MoveOn only made Clinton and Obama the possible choices--doing just what the big media does and excluding everyone else. This is not democracy. It is hard to be a voter and to try to learn about the candidates and vote one's conscience when so much is distorted and so many voices are muted in the election "game." Question is, with all of the frustrations felt by us on this blog and the folks out there in the US of A, what are we Non-Republicans to do? WE need to unite, and yet we also need to change the system so we can have a more genuinely democratic process. I guess it's back to the smaller elections, the local and state ones.

I too was struck by the missing "none of the above" in the moveon ballot. as of today, I am no longer a "member" of moveon. Does anybody there actually understand the word democracy?
anybody know of any true progressive organizations that function as moveon?

"Black men would need to be recruited to act as front men in the sterilization programs directed at black communities."

Margret Sanger (early supporter of eugenics)

I thought they were asking about Osama ;)

Obama for pres

Russ Feingold for vp

Edwards for Attorney General

listen to Paris:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC8Zrtah1AQ