how I voted and why

I voted for women first and democrats after that. My default for two men running was vote democratic party. My default for women was democratic women first, republican women second, democratic men third.
Why? Because women are the ONLY group in America which is still grossly underrepresented in politics. However we are the majority of people in this country. We have all the political power we need if we would use it. Instead we allow men to divide and conquer.....
"oh no, I can't vote for her, the media tells me she is stupid and they make fun of her". "I don't want to be labled a "vagina voter"". "Oh no, I can't vote for Hillary Clinton, her husband cheated on he and she didn't leave him. She's just a political opportunist. She is not experienced, Joe Six pack will never vote for her".

Well in fact Joe Six pack did vote for her and the majority of other people in the country voted for her..but they were labeled racist so it was okay to discount them and snatch their votes away. I can not tell you how many times I have seen political pundits and other women in the media just sit silently while others questioned if Palin could hold office and raise her children too. Why do we never see the same question asked of men? Why don't the women sitting there say "hold on there bucky...."

You don't even have to like Palin or agree with her to see that the sexism directed at her is sickening. As a feminist woman it makes me want to tear my hair out. Even women, women who said they are feminists, jumped right on board with the men determined to destroy her image just like the tried to destroy the reputation of Hillary Clinton with remarks about looks and the way they dress and the fact that they are only extensions of their husbands...Hillary cried (she did not) to win sympathy. Women were voting with their female parts (yeah, like men have not done that for thousands of years).

On the subject of Obama and why this 2010 election IS about him:
I used to think he was conservative and that all the conservative legislation that passed was his real position on healthcare etc... now I realize that he really has no clue who he is or what he thinks until someone floats a theory or talking point that sounds good..then he gloms on to it and repeats it. That's so sad. That is not leadership, that is not change, it is not good policy and it is certainly NOT what we need in this time. We need a REAL visionary, who has real policy ideas and not just those he read in a thesis from ten years ago, like (SNARK ON) "teachers are the problem with education" brilliant! Yes and if only every minority child had a voucher for private school they would all graduate and go to college and there would be no more poverty and drug wars in the inner city. (SNARK OFF)

This election is about him and it is about the DNC which (through selective rule rigging and ignoring) decided that the choice of the voters, Hillary, should get shoved aside for the cool black guy who could bring kids to the polls and was collecting masses of corporate money BEFORE anyone ever heard about him, and was spreading that money around. Spreading the money around is legal. All politicians do it...but the rule rigging at the DNC by the machinations of Donna Brazile (a supposedly impartial election pundit on CNN, was also a DNC official who rigged the rules). And the ballot box stuffing In TX, IN and God know where else, was highly illegal. Intimidating Clinton supporters by loss of their seats in congress...illegal. Busing kids in to caucus in states they didn't live in, or to stand in voter lines so real voters would give up and go home....illegal.

In the end Hillary was with in 17 delegates of Obama and four of his delegates were Hillary's in MI which were stolen from her. And there was NO floor vote at the convention. Her supporters where threatened and coerced. Shameful, there is ALWAYS a floor vote. Ted Kennedy got a damn floor vote at the convention of 1980, and he had much less support than Clinton in 2008. It was a disgrace. In addition Hillary, according to exit polls would have beat McCain by four more points than Obama did.

So now what? Those kids didn't get their promised hopenchange and they are at home pouting while Obama is running around clueless as to why democrats are so unexcited about voting. No Barack, we are not scared and irrational. We KNOW what we are voting for and against. You passed a lot of enemic republican lite legislation and got called a commie ANYWAY. Had you passed real reform republicans would have still called you a pinko, but democrats might have been more likely to vote. Not all disatisfaction with your job is from the right. Some off us here on the left are pretty disgusted too. And do not tell me you had to compromise, you did not, not with veto-proof majorities in the congress. In addition, 70 percent of Americans thought there should be a public option, yes that means lots of republicans too. But you chose to make back room deals with for profit health organizations to get rid of the public option so they would not oppose your big health care debacle, rather that pass good legislation that would work for the people. Instead you chose to compromise when you did not have to to insure you could claim victory. Victory for bad, too expensive health care that is to the right of what Nixon proposed when he was president.

Giving away billions

Hey rich guys, how about rather than giving to charity, you create some JOBS? That is what people need and what will help the country.
Here is the plan, each of you create a business with a business plan that says the company will make a good product at a good price and to survive it will have Executives who can never make more tham 10 times what the average worker makes. It should be right in the corporate charter. Then you decide to train and promote from with in. It should also never be publically traded so that the workers never again have to feel the squeeze from having to satisfy the stock holders.
In addition, how about you put some of your money in to educating the public on and promoting single payer health care? That is what business in this country really needs. It is the middle class that needs help so that this nation can survive.

I don't get it, I really do not. Why charity rather than jobs? Why charity rather than infrastructure? Why charity rather than real healthcare reform? It is the tax breaks?
With all your billions you could do so much good if you would look at what the country really needs rather than your need to be and look charitable.

TOTUS.....ha ha

TOTUS (otherwise known as Barack Obama'sblog or BOT for short) has his own blog. Click on the title of this post to find it.

I put this in red since it by an obvious republican, but it is very funny never the less........

.......I tried to stay to watch the "Tonight Show" taping, but I was given the bum's rush like everyone else. That said, I did get to watch some rehearsal time, and man, Leno really rehearses. I mean, he doesn't leave anything to chance. He's all about timing. In other words, Jay doesn't leave much to chance. And it isn't just this particular show where Leno is a control freak. I've got a cousin out here in LA; he's an Autoscript GP-15P GoPrompt, with a High-Bright Color LCD screen. He mostly does commercial work, but he does okay. No White House Commission with commisary privileges, but hey, there's always Schwarzenegger if Auto wants to dabble in politics. But I digress. Auto tells me that Leno's prompters tell him that Leno and his team do this kind of rehearsal and briefing for every show. So it wasn't like My Man didn't have a chance to think about a better line ... and PUT IT ON MY SCREEN!!It's days like this that make me miss the days when He and I would walk the streets of Chicago, doing community activism. Sure, it took Him 30 minutes to set me up, and sometimes he couldn't get the extension cord to reach an electrical outlet, or the folks he wanted to talk to would walk off because they had better things to do, or the glare off my screen made his remarks unreadable. But it was a simpler time, when he could stay on script and didn't feel the need to "speak his mind," and we were a team. All I know, is it's going to be a long flight home. .......

buh bye

the new stimulus package

I can appreciate when republicans and others say the bill was full of pork. I think it was too. I disagree with the tax cuts...no company in the nation is going to create jobs unless there is demand. I do think giving money to groups like ACORN is a joke, I hope that bit is gone.

But here is the thing about this bill... the money that would have helped female dominated industries like teaching has been cut and this bill provides almost no relief for women who need work. It is too little too late and my heart is in my throat most of the time now. I am under employed working at commission only insurance sales. I like the job but the charge backs are killing me. I need something more stable and I do not have any hope that this new bill will open up my options. Maybe if I could do construction? But I can not.

So what it this bill is going to put women back to work? Doesn't anyone realize that we are the poorest segment of society? We are the ones raising the kids and we are the ones most likely to be underemployed and uninsured.

Is there anyone competent in the Obama administration? Did no one realize they would have to govern after they "won"?

Secretary Clinton

Here is a piece from the State department blog.

http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/entries/clinton_town_hall/

Town Hall Meeting

February 04, 2009

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Secretary of State

Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy

Dean Acheson Auditorium

Washington, DC

UNDER SECRETARY KENNEDY: Good afternoon and welcome. It’s the responsibility of a management officer to be as efficient and as economical as possible, so just a few brief remarks. When asking a question, please identify yourself and your office for the benefit of others. In light of the limited time available we have today, please make your questions as concise as possible. And because, obviously, of the size limitations of this room and the nationwide and worldwide reach of the State Department, this program is being broadcast throughout this building and is being made available direct and via rebroadcast to our colleagues around the country and around the world. So in this case, please remember that, in effect, this is a public forum. (Laughter.) In order to open to the process as much as possible, we will also be taking questions via the internet from colleagues at State Department offices around the country and around the world.
And with those, it is now my distinct pleasure to present to you the Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Madame Secretary. (Applause.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Well, it is a real delight to be here with you for this town hall, and I want to welcome everyone inside this room and throughout the building, our country, and indeed, the world, because, as Pat said, we have a number of people who are joining us from posts overseas via the internet.
This town hall will, I hope, be the beginning of an ongoing conversation and part of an engaged and energetic, collaborative effort to make this the best-run, most effective State Department possible.
Now, some of you may know that I like to conduct listening tours. It’s something I started back in the 1980s when I was First Lady of Arkansas. I continued it in New York and around the country. I found that meeting with people and listening to their concerns in small groups and large was very important to me and gave me a lot of excellent ideas and constructive criticism.
So I like to think that this town hall will launch the latest of my listening tours. I want and need to hear from you, and that is not an idle invitation but an urgent request. We want to continue the dialogue we’re beginning today, and in fact, we’re creating a space on the Intranet website for you to generate your own ideas and engage in conversations with the whole Department.
I take the responsibility of managing our Department and obtaining the resources necessary to fulfill our missions very seriously. It’s why I appointed a new second position of Deputy Secretary to oversee the resources and management, working with many of you. And I’m very encouraged that both of our Deputies, Jim Steinberg and Jack Lew, have actually been confirmed. I can’t say that about anybody else yet.

"Obama is a lurker"

The following is a perfect description of Obama and his race for the white house......

Now I simply must post my full-lurker comment. It comes from mid-campaign last year, but still applies!!!!
--------------------

Obama is a Political Lurker...always in the picture, but never out front, never leading the charge. Even his "famous" speech resulted in not a single attempt by BO to end the war once he got into the Senate. But then, he was so busy on day one running for his next promotion he forgot that little issue, didn't he?

I remember reading about him running into committee members on their way to a press conference about something they had just accomplished. He said, "What's up" and they told him and he said, "Can I come along"? They said sure - they wanted people on the podium for pictures and then he had the audacity (whoops!) to take the mic and speak as if he had been personally involved in the accomplishment. Staffers were pissed as hell at what he did.

He lurked in CT in 2006 (never really coming out and supporting Ned Lamont). He lurks on pro-choice (using weasel words and voting present). He lurks on race (demanding a dialog and now saying we should all move on - pun intended!). Condemning the Gas Tax Holiday proposal when he supported other such proposals three times.

Where in the world does he really stand on things? I don't know. And I'm not willing to take a chance.

If we elect a lurker then Repugs will rule the day anyway because he lurks right as much as he lurks left.

NOT what we must have for this country if we are expected to move forward.

Plus, he has destroyed any improvements we have made in race relations since 1960.

He should be ashamed of himself.

A few good rants

I have taken and posted some great comments about how women can stand up and take the power that belongs to them. I was thinking last night, why don't we just say NO to having less than 51 percent of the political power?
No more of this nonsense that we have to wait. All we have to do is vote for women, always, above voting for the male democrats who give us only grudging support.
Like I have said many many times, democrats would never win a single election for anything at all ever if it were not for the votes of women. If they want our votes then they can earn them.

Obama signs order to close Guantanamo in a year
President Barack Obama began overhauling U.S. treatment of terror suspects Thursday, signing orders to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, review military trials of suspects and ban the harshest interrogation methods. ...

The centerpiece order would close the much-maligned U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, within a year, a complicated process with many unanswered questions that was nonetheless a key campaign promise of Obama's. The administration already has suspended trials for terrorist suspects at Guantanamo for 120 days pending a review of the military tribunals.

"We intend to win this fight. We're going to win it on our terms," Obama said of the war on terrorism. But he also said he didn't want to have to make a "false choice" between successfully waging war against terrorist organizations and hewing to U.S. human rights ideals in the process.

Here is another good one:

you know what gets me coyote

when you take a look at how israel belives it does not have to adhere to, oris exempt from, UN resolutions (over 60 of them and counting) i hafve always found this quite stunning, given that it was a UN resolution that created the state of israel.

as for women, we are low man on the totem pole, and sadly it looks as if that will remain for many more years.

The election this year opened my eyes. So called women's groups and women's organisations evidently were never really about advancing the cause of women, or to support women. It appears to me to have been more about making some of the members important and influential, only not for women, for themselves.

I have personallly come to the conclusion that womens org, are nothing but faux femiinists.The first time a truly viable women candidate appears to run, who was admitedly more experienced and intelligent, and what heppens? Teh big defender of women O-prah, after telling hillary she whould run (on her tv show) then supports Obama, followed by all large womens' orgs and feminist movements across america.

what a disgrace. And I wont even go into the palin tragedy, except to say that these womens groups seem to only care about certain types of women. It was perfectly fine for both hillary and palin to have blatant sexism used to defeat and belittle them both,

but hey, thats OK cos they are the "wrong" type of women

bullshit, i'll never support any womens groups ever again, Eff them, they are men without a p*nis IMHO

done ranting now:)

---

by: PUMA IRISH BRIGADE @ Thu Jan 22, 2009 at 17:59:00 PM EST
http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=2085#30623

I was going to post more, but you know, I am just tired....

An Oldy but a goody

By now everyone knows I am the number one fan of the idea of an Al Gore presidency. I think we need him not just because he is the best and brightest but because he has an inate decency and humanity rare in politicians. He is smarter than almost everyone, he is decent, he is experienced and he has great character.

Here is what the Washington Post published today.

Oh, and by the way.... I don't give a damn if he has gained some weight, must we always have that banal reference? Good lord, so have I. It's been a freaking depressing 5 and 1/2 years.

Boring Al Gore has made a movie. It is on the most boring of all subjects -- global warming. It is more than 80 minutes long, and the first two or three go by slowly enough that you can notice that Gore has gained weight and that his speech still seems oddly out of sync. But a moment later, I promise, you will be captivated, and then riveted and then scared out of your wits. Our Earth is going to hell in a handbasket.

You will see the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps melting. You will see Greenland oozing into the sea. You will see the atmosphere polluted with greenhouse gases that block heat from escaping. You will see photos from space of what the ice caps looked like once and what they look like now and, in animation, you will see how high the oceans might rise. Shanghai and Calcutta swamped. Much of Florida, too. The water takes a hunk of New York. The fuss about what to do with Ground Zero will turn to naught. It will be underwater.

Think of that, much of the coast underwater, large parts of our oldest most historic cities. What about Europe, Asia, India, Africa and Australia? Most of the great cities of the world are on the coast of one continent or another.

You cannot see this film and not think of George W. Bush, the man who beat Gore in 2000. The contrast is stark. Gore -- more at ease in the lecture hall than he ever was on the stump -- summons science to tell a harrowing story and offers science as the antidote. No feat of imagination could have Bush do something similar -- even the sentences are beyond him.

But it is the thought that matters -- the application of intellect to an intellectual problem. Bush has been studiously anti-science, a man of applied ignorance who has undernourished his mind with the empty calories of comfy dogma. For instance, his insistence on abstinence as the preferred method of birth control would be laughable were it not so reckless. It is similar to Bush's initial approach to global warming and his rejection of the Kyoto Protocol -- ideology trumping science. It may be that Gore will do more good for his country and the world with this movie than Bush ever did by beating him in 2000.

Gore insists his presidential aspirations are behind him. "I think there are other ways to serve," he told me. No doubt. But on paper, he is the near-perfect Democratic candidate for 2008. Among other things, he won the popular vote in 2000. He opposed going to war in Iraq, but he supported the Persian Gulf War -- right both times. He is smart, experienced and, despite the false caricatures, a man versed in the new technologies -- especially the Internet. He is much more a person of the 21st century than most of the other potential candidates. Trouble is, a campaign is not a film. Gore could be a great president. First, though, he has to be a good candidate.

More here

PS... I have a very good friend who is a conservative who said to me about 15 minutes ago (as we were driving home from rehersal) "we better start doing something about global warming". Boy was I tempted to rub it in. But all I said was "but remember Bob, 5 years ago people were making fun of the idea".

Can he finally do something?

Can Obama finally do something other than run for office now? Is the hype over and is he ready to get to work and accomplish something for the first time in his life as a politician?

Oi, it is going to be a long four years. We voted for Gore in 2000 and ever since we have gotten nothing but ambitious men with no experience actually being in charge of anything.
Please dear God, stop the religious and anti-gay pandering. Get rid of the AIDS "czar" who thinks the solution to the problemsof AIDS and pregnancy is abstinence only.
Please let Obama stop talking nonsense about women having abortions because they "feel a little blue". Please make him leave Social Security alone. We don't want it privitized.
Please dear God help Obama reconsider his terrible choice for education secretary who thinks the solution to the nonexistent problem of education is more testing and NCLB.
Help Obama to reconsider Universal healthcare. It is what we need and any half assed measure are only going to make the problem worse. It is better to let the system be completely reworked than continue to put a band-aid on an amputation. OF all the nominees, Obama's plans were the worst for healthcare.

Please God, we do not need a democratic party Dubya and that is what I fear we have.

To a departing p-Resident

No, I never forgot and I never forgave. You were not elected. You know it and the american people know it, even the ones who like to say you were. Nope, more people vote for Gore, even in Florida and allowing you to take office is probably the biggest mistake in American history. In a way we got what we deserved.

Democrats should have fought harder to keep you from stealing the office of the president. Those in congress and the senate and governors like Rendell should be ashamed to have told Gore to concede and let them get on with their deal making and party organizing. Those of us NOT in government should have hit the streets regardless of what Al Gore said.

The supreme court justices who voted to stop the vote count can rot in hell for what they did to our electoral system and our country. But mostly, you can go down as the worst president in History and your brother Jeb can die in relative obscurity because there will never ever be another bush in the white house. Even your father is cursed with having given you life. He will always be known as the father of an election stealing fraud who almost ruined the country.

I saw bits of your outgoing speech to the american people. You have go to be kidding. Being an obnoxious and a lazy incurious bully doesn't make you a type A personality. And you weren't just president when the bad economy hit, you CAUSED it. You took us to war on a lie and you spent billions a month to pay for it, all because you had some juvenile fantasy about being a war president.

You also allowed and indeed encouraged the worst energy policy and worst budget policy in history. It is unimaginable that the people voted for Gore and got you instead. And unfortunately in a way we got what we deserved because we didn't even care enough about our democracy to insist that it worked right and the votes of the people were counted.

You disgust me, but I am sure that deep down you disgust yourself too. No one steals political office to do good things. They may think so, but Machiavellianism is never a good idea. When in their wisdom the people chose another candidate for President (or the democratic primary) there is a reason for that. Those who interfere are destined to be remembered poorly for their efforts and are doomed to failure.

Now fly off to your land Paraguay because I doubt you will find any peace here.

OH GOOD LORD

Are these women out of their minds? I imagine this is their way of buying inlfuence or access but I hope they get a clue when no access or influence is forthcoming... at least none they will get without completely whoring themselves out. Speaking of which, since they are selling a poster version of this nonsense the whoring may have already started.

Here are some responses found on another web site.

This is what a feminist looks like?? File this one under: Does Feminism Even Need Women?
..............

Apparently NOT...Next issue J-Z on the cove with a free CD of "I got 99 problems but a Bitch Aint One"... I am NOT GOING TO SAY HIT ME! NO NO NO I WON'T!
Woman Voter | Homepage | 01.11.09 - 8:48 pm | #


Barack Obasm a feminist? When pig lipstick flies. I don't think Barack even likes women, at least it doesn't seem that he does when he allows his hired help to behave like a bunch of disrespectful sexist swine. Not to mention his inability or unwillingness to chastise any of the people who woman bashed in his support. He's the same thing to women he is to the LGBT community, all talk no-show!
CarolynKB | 01.11.09 - 9:31 pm | #


Feminists always tell their wives to say "Her first job is as a mother!"

Feminists always party to misogynistic rap songs, especially "I Got 99 Problems and a Bitch Ain't One."

Feminists always look the other way while their male staff members simulate sexual assault.

Feminists always say abortion is "between a woman and her pastor."

Feminists always make sure to appoint no more than a few token women to important jobs.

Feminists always make sure male staffers make more than female staffers.

Looks like we have gone Through the Looking Glass.
odyssey | 01.11.09 - 10:46 pm | #





I didn't know that Michelle Obama had rejected the word "feminist." After all that complaining about Barack and his male privilege issues, too...oh, well, it does explain how she could be a member of that church.

So if she was upset when he let male privilege almost destroy her marriage, now will she be upset to learn he is a "feminist"? These people make my brain hurt.
Diane | Homepage | 01.11.09 - 11:03 pm | #


And better yet, he ran on the strongest platform for women’s rights of any major party in American history.

Was that the"99 problems but a b*tch ain't one" or the "We won't overturn Roe v. Wade like that stupid c*nt Caribou Barbie will" platform?
myiq2xu | Homepage | 01.12.09 - 5:02 am | #


My own reaction was one of betrayal. The kind of betrayal that happens when a mother meets a shiny new boyfriend, and turns a blind eye to what he is doing with her daughters while she is away.

Ms. Mag was a mother to me in the 80's. Boy, has she ever come a long way, baby! Now she wants me to believe that I, as her daughter, need a Superman to save me? And that I should "just keep quiet honey" about what he did to all my sisters during the campaign season.

I'm sure, for many women, this is deja vu.





Obama supporters believe in sexism an misogyny, but only in theory.

They can see racism in the words "fairy tale" but no sexism in "Lipstick on a pig."
myiq2xu | Homepage | 01.12.09 - 10:19 am | #


myiqxu:
That is simply a gross over-generalization that is beneath you. It is simply not true, especially when you look at the millions of women who supported Obama over Hillary in the primaries.


And you have to understand, to millions of women in the US watching Hillary lose the primaries and be treated in such a misogynistic way by Obama and his people was repulsive. To watch the dream of a female president delayed yet again for someone so unqualified provokes tears of sadness and rage. His inauguration will be a tragedy for this country to many of us.

He says he is a feminist but ACTS like a misogynist--actions speak louder than words?!
odyssey | 01.12.09 - 12:22 pm | #


Obama won by appealing to the worst misogynistic impulses of this country. I am horrified to learn how deep these impulses continue to run in the US. Obama is a reminder of that fact--that it was worse here than I thought for women. He embodies the dissolution of hope. He continues to disgrace the office of President.

Oh, but wait, having some women give some prayers at some time during the week of his inaguration---wow! Such important tasks! Power to the women!

Reform Entitlement programs

"Reform" always means "take money away and privatize". If Obama is going to reform senior entitlement spending, people on Social Security and Medicare are in for big trouble.
Yes I am jaded. I know what reform means and I know that Obama is always looking to be the guy all sides can agree with, post partisan compromise and all that.
I can tell you that people can not live on less SS income, unless they are already rich. I fear for some of my clients.

You have to pay how much for him to lose you money?

I work for an insurance company. Right now it is really rough for me because of some unfortunate circumstances, but generally it is a very interesting way to spend your day.
We specialize in the area of seniors, retirement, med-sups etc. One of the things I talk to people about is their retirement investments and losing money in the stock market. When you are retired it is important not to lose your "nest egg", it has to last for the rest of your life. Unfortunately finacial planners and stock brokers do not think about or do not care about the difference between a 40 year old client and a client over 65. I had one client 94 years old who was told to leave her money in the stock market "it will come back"......"IN TEN YEARS" I said. "She will be 104 years old when that money is back to where it was if it ever is".

This makes me crazy. Anyway I was talking to a woman who is ill and has all kinds of issues with insurance and brokers and trusts no one and I can hardly blame her. Her broker said they have to pay him 400 dollars to meet with him to find out how much money they have left. I said "you have to pay him 400 dollars to tell you how much of your money he has lost over the last year?" I told her to call him, leave a message and tell him she wanted all her holdings liquidated and a check overnighted to her home in 24 hours. I said she would get results that way and she will...but let's see if she has the courage to do it.
Why are people so impressed with financial planners? Is it that they are charging them money and so they must be good? If someone was charging me thousands of dollars a year to watch my life savings disapear, you can bet I would yank my money out in this economy.

ASK TERESA ANYTHING DARLINGS!

I do not promise that my answer will be truthful if you ask me a personal question, but it will be funny or snarky or something mildly amusing. I can not promise that my advice will be fool proof if you ask me about your love life.
But ask me ANYTHING and if you like my answer donate a few bucks.

Area's of expertise:
Theater
Music
photography
life insurance, medicare suppliments and annuities
raising sons with character
raising cats with a smart ass attitude
dog training
Erly childhood education
Elementary Ed
Bad educational policy (IMO)
Classical Russian Composers (there are more than two...really)
Popular verbal ticks that have destroyed the language in recent years
Stupid actor lingo
who sucks the worst in the media
What happened in florida in 2000
how the democratic party let us and Al down in 2000
the FOB great balloon war
How Move-on got it's start and how that relates to FOB
What FOB is/was
What do you call a musician who breaks up with his girlfriend? (okay that is a personal favorite joke right now and I will tell you why..dammit)

anything else I have forgotten I am an expert on or chose to pretend I am an expert on or will cover up my ignorance by being a wise ass on.....


ASK ME, BUT I HAVE TO GO TO BED NOW AND WILL ANSWER TOMOROW

An old blog I used to know

Here is the link to another blog I used to update and have not since april. It's about my other life in the theater and music.

http://politicaltheatreblog.blogspot.com/

Some day I will write new content for it, I have been singing a lot, but not today. Today like most other days this month my stomach is in a knot and if I could just get a truck to come and haul away all of my old life, I would get in my car and leave the state and start over somewhere with jobs. I would miss friends and church and the groups I sing with but this need to escape is so strong I am affraid it will manifest itself one way or the other.
But I am 52 and starting over where I have no contacts and no support system.... I do not know if I have the strength for it. The last time I made a big move I was in my 30s and had two teenage sons, child support and a reason to have to get up every day. Now I just feel beaten down. I do not want to face anyone or talk to anyone in real life. I am just busy screaming in my head and trying to get through the day without screaming out loud.

I will be writing about surviving in Obamanation

I have a new focus. I will now be writing about politics, the awful media and what it is like to try and survive as a real person in the present times.
No one, by the way, is giving me a senate seat, so I am underemployed, uninsured and hoping against hope that I can find a way to survive both. I am not alone.
It seems to me that there are some things PresObama needs to do which may not be bi-partisan, but will help save the nation and those of us on the edge (and believe me, if you are NOT on the edge, you may be closer than you think) and one of those things is universal healthcare and that means MANDATES. It won't work if we are not all forced to buy in. That's right, you get in and pay when you are young and healthy and that helps insure other older people. Then when you are an older person young people will pay and help support you. It's how our Social Security system works and it is how our economy works and kidz, really, you don't know it yet but we are all in this together.

Right now I am suffering the results of the bad economy. I sell insurance (yes I am one of those evil people), I am new at it and I really enjoy the job, however people are paralized, afraid to spend another dollar even when they can see how it will improve their long term safety. Lots of rich people got through the depression with Annuities, but people are afraid to move their money and continue to watch it disapear in the stock market instead.
I had a few major charge backs because people who have lost their jobs have had to drop life insurance and even medicare suppliments. They are in a downwards spiral and while some of them are making bad decisions about where to save money, others have no choice.
I talked to a guy yesterday who had 200k a year ago and is down to 50k. It is his and his wife's whole nest egg other than their house. Yes they are much better off than some other seniors, but knowing that some stock broker sat and moved their money around and charged them to do it while they slowly lost everything they had...well it just makes me crazy.
I shouldn't take it to heart, but I do.

Today, my sister who is younger than me told me that a weird orphan desease she has is back and has caused more erruptions under her skin. She is at the very top of her stress level. We are tied together financially and her stress and my stress together is hurting our relationship. In my family we do not fight, but lately we have been and it is because of money. I am guessing we are far from the only people who are finding that twenty years of peaceful relationship is being damaged by the economy..... and the elite in government go "tsk tsk...we are going to fix this, vote for me"... and they never fix a thing.

Dear Barack, bandaids will not work now. You are great at making sure you get that next election under your belt, but now you have to govern. Good luck, many of us are clinging, but not to our guns and religion. We are clinging to the roof over our heads and food on the table.

Wow, Obama and the DNC screw up again!

There has been a rumor going around that Hillary released her delegates in a conference call. This is untrue. Following is the statement of one of her delegates. I would just like to say before I past it here that I am so disgusted. This morning I got an email from someone, some PAC (I thought Obama was against PACS) which my name was obviously sold to by the DNC or Obama campaign. They insulted my intelligence by sending me information about McCain's record on choice. I wanted to email back saying no shit Sherlock.
Why do people think women who may vote for McCain are automatically ignorant rather than that they may be making a fully informed and strategic choice born from disgust at being thrown under the bus?

Dean Howard Dean, you for YEARS have been my 2nd favorite democrat right after Al Gore. You have lost me. Your ham handed approach to this primary is an insult to the majority of democrats who voted for Hillary. You have said you hope there will not be a role call vote. Why the hell wouldn't there be a roll call vote? There is ALWAYS and effing role call vote and delegates vote for their candidate on the first call and then change their votes after a call for unity. This is in the ROOLZ. And this is an historic event for Hillary, just as much as it is for Obama. WTF are you thinking?

Anyway here is Mary Boerger's email as posted at No-Quarter:

I was on that conference call and there was nothing in Hillary’s comments to indicate that she was releasing her delegates and urging them to vote for Obama on the first vote in Denver. In fact what Harold Ikes said was that the campaign would like to keep Hillary’s delegates together so that she can more effectively fight for issues like universal health care to make sure it is included in the party platform.

This seems like deliberate misinformation. (Sound familiar!)

One of the super delegates who was in London in fact complained about the strong arm pressure from the Obama campaign to immediately (last Friday before Hillary’s speech) switch their vote to Obama.

So to me the strategy is clear. The Obama folks want to try and prevent us from nominating Hillary at the convention and voting for her at the convention. We need to STOP this. Historically losing candidates always have their names put into nomination, give a great speech and then there is a roll call vote. The presumptive nominee gets the majority and then there may be a call to make it unanimous.

We need to make sure that people are aware of this procedure. Once again the Obama people are trying to change the rule of the game, pretending that they were always the rules in order to push Hillary aside. We must keep them from succeeding.

To me this is the most important thing that we can do right now. We need to attack Howard Dean for saying that he hopes there isn’t a role call vote at the convention.

This pressure, heavy handed tactics and “shot gun” marriage effort must end. This is the fight that we need to continue!

Mary Boergers

Now I would like to add that I have spent my whole life from about the age of 12 dedicated to the rights of women, African Americans and the LGBT community. Before any of those groups try to use the SCOTUS to scare me in to jumping on the unity pony, I should say that if they were so damned worried about the court they would have supported Hillary. Some people don't even know who their champions are. I am 51 and I am not gay. The court makes very little difference in my life now. Let these young women and others fight for their rights without the help of people like me and Hillary Clinton and maybe they will have a deeper understanding fo what middle aged white women have been doing in their names for 40 years.

Everybody's favorite DINO

This is a diary that appeared at mydd. The author has given permission to use it in it's entirety.

**********************************************


Jim Cooper, Obama's healthcare spokesperson's hit piece on Clinton was on the rec list on DailyKos. More info about Jim Cooper, Member of the "Blue Dog" Coalition of conservative Democrats.

1. Banning partial-birth aborting - YES
   
2. Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage - YES
   
3. Patriot Act Permanent - YES
   
4. Constituonally deine marriage as one man, one woman - YES
   
5. Prohib product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers - YES
   
6. Prohibiting suing gunmakers and sellers for gun misuse - YES
   
7. Build a fence along the Mexican Border - YES
   
8. FISA Amnesty - YES
   
9. Ban Gun Registration and trigger lock law in DC - YES
   
10. Continue intelligence gathering without civing oversight - YES
    

Cooper is in the pocket of Insurance & Drug Companies. More about this at the end of the diary.

Progressive Punch ranked him in their bottom 9% of progressive candidates even though his district is a blue leaning district.

Mike Lux on Jim Cooper - link here.

Cooper, a leader of conservative Dems on the health care issue, instead of working with us, came out early and said universality was unimportant, and came out with a bill that did almost nothing in terms of covering the uninsured. He quickly became the leading spokesman on the Dem side for the insurance industry position, and undercut us at every possible opportunity, basically ending any hopes we had for a unified Democratic Party position. I was never so delighted to see a Democrat lose as when he went down in the 1994 GOP tide.

Unfortunately, he came back, like a bad penny.
It is such a huge mistake for Obama to use a guy like this to defend their position on health care. The signal it sends to reporters, organizations, and activists like myself who know something about the old health care battles is that Obama truly doesn't care about comprehensive health care reform or universal coverage, and that the health care package you would propose if President would be a conservative, pro-insurance industry bill. The campaign ought to be trying to reassure folks who care about this issue, and using a guy like Cooper does just the opposite.

Cooper about Murtha

"Congress has no business micromanaging a war, cutting off funding or even conditioning those funds," said Rep. Jim Cooper (Tenn.), a leading Democratic moderate, who called Murtha's whole effort "clumsy."

Cooper's email to Kossack jnhobbs

I voted against the House version of the FISA bill last Friday because I do not think we can risk our national security any longer. The House version accepted nearly all of the provisions contained in its Senate counterpart. It does not achieve more than the Senate version, but is instead the product of a partisan political contest.

The House version may not use the words "retroactive immunity" for telecom companies, but it does let these companies off the hook. Likewise, it will also not bring the Bush administration's wiretapping activities of the last six years out into the open. Anything the administration provides may only be reviewed in closed, secret court proceedings

Kossack McJoan about Cooper.

Could he sound more like Joe Lieberman in whining about partisanship? But at least Joe didn't just lie about what the bill does.

Jim Cooper is defending his bad vote by lying to his constituents. Don't let him get away with it.

UPDATED : From architek's comments below. NYT 1994 article about Jim Cooper.

It has also become a pocketbook issue for Mr. Cooper, and whatever the fate of his health plan, he is already a winner. In less than a year, the mild-mannered Democrat from the most rural House district in Tennessee has become the toast of health care providers and insurance companies, which have channeled tens of thousands of dollars of contributions to his campaign for a Senate seat. Mr. Cooper is only one of the many politicians benefiting from the fund-raising frenzy set off by the national dialogue over health care. Since drug companies, hospitals, insurers and doctors have so much at stake in the legislation that may emerge from the Congress, many are investing all they can in lawmakers whose proposals would be most favorable to them -- or the least damaging. They are showering millions of dollars in donations to members of Congress with prominent roles in the debate, like Mr. Cooper, whose plan is the alternative to President Clinton's proposal most often preferred by business because it neither requires employers to provide coverage nor limits insurance premiums.

This is similiar to why BlackAgendaReport feels Obama is Wall Street's Candidate - link here

Despite Barack Obama's claim that his campaign represents a mass "movement" of "average folks," the initial core of his support was largely comprised of rich denizens of Wall Street. Why would the super wealthy want a percieved "black populist" to become the nation's chief executive officer? The "Obama bubble" was nurtured by Wall Street in order to have a friend in the White House when the captains of capital are made to face the legal consequences for deliberately creating current and past economic "bubbles." Wall Street desperately needs a president who will "sweep all the corruption and losses, would-be indictments, perp walks and prosecutions under the rug and get on with an unprecedented taxpayer bailout of Wall Street." Who better to sell this "agenda to the millions of duped mortgage holders and foreclosed homeowners in minority communities across America than our first, beloved, black president of hope and change?"

X-Posted at Dkos

The Fight Stuff

"NOTABLE in the Indiana and North Carolina primary results and in many recent polls are signs of a change in the gender weather: white men are warming to Hillary Clinton -- at least enough to vote for her. It's no small shift. These men have historically been her fiercest antagonists. Their conversion may point less to a new kind of male voter than to a new kind of female vote-getter.

Pundits have been quick to attribute the erosion in Barack Obama's white male support to a newfound racism. What they have failed to consider is the degree to which white male voters witnessing Senator Clinton's metamorphosis are being forced to rethink precepts they've long held about women in American politics."

Yes, IT has never made sense to say that men who previously supported Obama are now racist. That is not what is happening, she is winning them over and he is losing them. My opinion is that once white males got to know Obama they liked him less. Once they got to know Clinton better they liked her better. According to an old friend of mine "she is the toughest person in the race" and "has the "best poker face and we need a poker player right now". When I read this article I thought of him.

"For years, the prevailing theory has been that white men are often uneasy with female politicians because they can't abide strong women. But if that's so, why haven't they deserted Senator Clinton? More particularly, why haven't they deserted her as she has become ever more pugnacious in her campaign?

Maybe the white male electorate just can't abide strong women whom they suspect of being of a certain sort. To adopt a particularly lamentable white male construct, the sports metaphor, political strength comes in two varieties: the power of the umpire, who controls the game by application of the rules but who never gets hit; and the power of the participant, who has no rules except to hit hard, not complain, bounce back and endeavor to prevail in the end.

For virtually all of American political history, the strong female contestant has been cast not as the player but the rules keeper, the purse-lipped killjoy who passes strait-laced judgment on feral boy fun. (snip)

The specter of the prissy hall monitor is, in part, the legacy of the great female reformers of Victorian America. In fact, these women were the opposite of fainting flowers. Susan B. Anthony barely flinched in the face of epithets, hurled eggs and death threats. Carry A. Nation swung an ax. Yet they were regarded by men as the regulators outside the game.

(snip)

Certainly through the many early primaries, Hillary Clinton was often defined by these old standards, and judged harshly. She was forever the entitled chaperone. But that was then. As Thelma, the housewife turned renegade, says to her friend in "Thelma & Louise" as the two women flee the law through the American West, "Something's crossed over in me."

Senator Clinton might well say the same. In the final stretch of the primary season, she seems to have stepped across an unstated gender divide, transforming herself from referee to contender.

What's more, she seems to have taken to her new role with a Thelma-like relish. We are witnessing a female competitor delighting in the undomesticated fray. Her new no-holds-barred pugnacity and gleeful perseverance have revamped her image in the eyes of begrudging white male voters, who previously saw her as the sanctioning "sivilizer," a political Aunt Polly whose goody-goody directives made them want to head for the hills.

It's the unforeseen precedent of an unprecedented candidacy: our first major female presidential candidate isn't doing what men always accuse women of doing. She's not summoning the rules committee over every infraction. (Her attempt to rewrite the rules for Michigan and Florida are less a timeout than rough play.) Not once has she demanded that the umpire stop the fight. Indeed, she's asking for more unregulated action, proposing a debate with no press-corps intermediaries."

I disagree that she is trying to rewrite the rules, she is actually asking the DNC to follow their rules which allow the votes to be counted if the state party does the most they can to fix the situation which they have.

"If anyone has been guarding the rules this election, it's been the press, which has been primly thumbing the pages of Queensberry and scolding her for being "ruthless" and "nasty," a "brawler" who fights "dirty."

But while the commentators have been tut-tutting, Senator Clinton has been converting white males, assuring them that she's come into their tavern not to smash the bottles, but to join the brawl.

Deep in the American grain, particularly in the grain of white male working-class voters, that is the more trusted archetype. Whether Senator Clinton's pugilism has elevated the current race for the nomination is debatable. But the strategy has certainly remade the political world for future female politicians, who may now cast off the assumption that when the going gets tough, the tough girl will resort to unilateral rectitude." (snip)

Susan Faludi is the author of "Backlash," "Stiffed" and "The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post-9/11 America."

linc here

To me, Obama trying to declare victory makes him look both like a bully and at the seem time very weak. But then that is the same thing isn't it?

He has refused to debate because he knows he doesn't do well against Clinton and he is trying to pretend that only pledged delegates count in the end and that he will have enough to win (he will not). He just keeps looking more and more like a prissy weasel. I think he needed to fire some campaign staff weeks ago when he started losing. He needs to stop looking by turns petulant and triumphant. It is a really bad strategy and if he should prevail at the convention it is not going to put him in good stead for the GE.

Read on the blogs

Here is what The Ghost of Dr. Violet Socks at "Reclusive Leftist" has to say:

Imagine this scenario:

The shoe is on the other foot, and Obama, not Hillary, is the punching bag of the media — a media that is blatantly and unapologetically racist. And I do mean blatant. Jokes every night on the cable news shows about Obama’s hair and his fondness for fried chicken. Pundits laughing about what a problem uppity Negroes are.

Across the country, racists openly ridicule Obama and his candidacy. In mainstream stores there are gag gifts playing on racist themes: maybe a (water)Melon Baller with Obama’s head on the handle, maybe a Barack Obama Shoeshine Set — you get the picture. 501c groups invoke the most grotesque racist slurs with their advertising; T-shirts say “Quit Running for President and Shine My Shoes!” Anybody who protests is branded a fool and a spoilsport.

Online, Hillary’s supporters constantly refer to Obama and his supporters as n—–s and c— -s and all the other epithets I refuse to type out. Blogger Boyz blog about those stupid lazy Negroes who are still wallowing in memories of the Civil Rights era, too dumb to get with the program and vote for Hillary.

And the lies: Obama is constantly lied about, belittled, demeaned. His record is distorted, his character impugned. Every day the pundits and the Blogger Boyz urge him to drop out of the race, to remember his place, to give up his seat to the white woman. All in the interest of “party unity.”

And nary a word of reproach from Hillary herself. No denunciation at all of the relentless racism. In fact, she actually cracks a few racist remarks herself, albeit subtle ones. She jokes and nods with the media about “letting” Obama run as long as he wants to. And when she makes speeches about American values, she talks a lot about women’s rights but never mentions civil rights. She’s strikingly silent on the subject. Even when she delivers a major address on the importance of rooting out bigotry, she neglects to mention racism at all.

Just to make the analogy even more apt, let’s further imagine that some key civil rights issue is on the table — say, voting rights. For forty years the Democrats have been on the side of the angels with that one, but Hillary goes out of her way to say how much she admires and respects those Republicans who don’t think African-Americans should have the right to vote. She says judges with a record of opposing voting rights are good candidates for the nation’s benches — even the Supreme Court.

And the Democratic Party goes along with all this, pushing Hillary as the nominee, ignoring the anger of African-American voters, smugly assuming that they’ll “come back to the fold” by November. After all, say the pundits and the Blogger Boyz, where else are they going to go? The Republicans are even worse.

---

If you’re an adult American with even half a lick of sense, you know damn well that there is no way black folks would stand for that crap. There is no way any self-respecting African-Americans in this day and age would take that from the Democrats. It’s inconceivable that anybody would expect them to.

Because dig it: if the Democrats carried on like that, they wouldn’t be any better than the Republicans. And they sure as hell wouldn’t deserve the African-American vote.

Why should it be any different with women?

If Barack Obama and his supporters become the new Democratic party, then the Democratic party will no longer be the party of women’s rights. There will still be women in the party, naturally, but basic respect for women as citizens will be a dead letter. It will be the party of John Roberts and anti-choicers and the most virulent outbreak of public misogyny I’ve ever seen. All the sexism of this campaign will be rewarded instead of repudiated.

And that Democratic party will not deserve my vote.

This priceless video was found at the Confluence in a diary called "The Buzzing boyz are sometimes Girlz:




Good God, we have spawned our very own Ann Coulter.

What has me most concerned is that I feel Obama is not ready for adulthood much less the Presidency. My party is about to go over a cliff because of people like Donna Brazile who thinks accusations of racism where no racism exists are a valid campaign tactic. Somehow Howard Dean has allowed himself to be shut down and his leadership has not been in evidence at all.

It was Donna who decided that gay people should not be included in the party unity umbrella and Howard went along. It was Donna who decided that SC had to be one of the first primaries to give African Americans a say in the nomination. And now we are going to discount the votes of millions of people in two other states to satisfy her need to control the primary schedule and help Obama.

Is Dean out of his mind? He sees what is happening and he is doing nothing about it. Here is the problem: Activists behind Hillary are not the only people or even the main people who will not vote for Obama. The people the party has to worry about are the people who are swing voters and have no problem voting for republicans. They did it in the last two elections and when Reagan ran. They will vote for McCain rather than Obama and his elitist "creative class" coalition.
Donna has said working class whites are no longer needed. Well I fear she is going to see how an election goes without them.

ps...There seems to be another attempt by Obama and his bots, including the media like Anderson Cooper, to paint Hillary Clinton as racist. To which I reply:

NO VOTE FOR OBAMA, I"LL WRITE IN CHELSEA'S MOMMA.