To the true PUMA party :D

I'm sure this only helps assure you that you have made the correct decision, but Rep. John Lewis is now facing primary challenges, even though he did switch his support to Obama. One challenger has even moved into Obama's old HQ.

Feel the Unity

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

this is just another abhorrent move by him--absolutely disgusting.

he's Dubya 2.0--seriously.

Welcome back to the reality-based community.

BTD at TalkLeft this a.m. has a post similar to this 'un from VastLeft, but someone pointed him to an update indicating the AP story got it wrong.

The Obama campaign's statement, reported by Ben Smith at Politico, sez groups receiving fed funds "will be required to comply with federal anti-discrimination laws in their hiring practices—including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin."

http://tinyurl.com/3pysfq

AP says the bit about "letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities" came from an anonymous "senior adviser to the campaign," but that does seem to be contradicted by the statement Smith quotes, so either the senior adviser misspoke, or the AP misunderstood.

But yes, I'm with you. And I refuse to call PUMA "People United..."
It will always be Party. Unity. My. Ass.

I strongly believe personal morality informs political thinking and, often, actions. I know it informed mine.

Even tho' I am not "churched" at this time, I believe strongly in the universal moral thinking of, say, The Golden Rule. which is hardly restricted to one theology.

But, Obama is playing at getting into the "whited sepulchre" groups, beating his breast in public and praying ostentatiously (review those campaign brochures.

Added: Matthew 23:27-- Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

"... "some ability to hire and fire based on faith."
..."-- http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2...

And there's absolutely no oversight or accountability now--if it's expanded, who's going to be inspecting thousands of Christian churches/orgs to ensure they're complying?

It's a crock, entirely. And us Jews (and Muslims and atheists and all who believe in separation) don't want our money going to organizations that make you pray to Jesus or listen to their sales pitch before they feed you.

Also--pay attention-- failed abstinence-only sex ed and foreign aid will be expanded next from Obama, i bet.

Al Sharpton's campaign for the presidency. Personally, I think it was a trial run to see if they could pull it off. I know of no reason why Obama would be running now. Just like I don't understand why he'd be making these big steps right before he actually has the nomination. Anyway, Rezko has a lot more ties to the right than to the left. Perhaps the point of the house was that they were telling him he'd be president.

For the record, I don't have an ounce of documentation on anything except the Sharpton story which the Village Voice covered and to which Sharpton copped.

just covering it up?

What does he stand for?

(Listening to excerpt from his Patriotism speech right now--and I'm still trying to figure out how deliberately deciding to not wear a flag pin now is described somehow as simply "carelessness" on his part....)

Maybe he decided he was in over his head, and is now throwing the game. I can't explain it otherwise. (well, yes, I can, but I can only hope this is the explanation).

at the computer, startling everyone here!

Excellent news!

With everything Mr. Obama's said and has been highlighting over the past few weeks, no one deserves your unendorsement more at this time.

c'mon--it's liberating. : >

From the NY Times story in whaleshaman's comment:

"Between now and November, the Obama forces are planning as many as 1,000 house parties and dozens of Christian rock concerts, gatherings of religious leaders, campus visits and telephone conference calls to bring together voters of all ages motivated by their faith to engage in politics."

Rock On!

Also, I love how the Times story gets reaction from all sides...except liberals and others concerned about the erosion of the separation of church and state...those who think this is a bad idea.

I guess for the MCM and the Obama campaign, we don't exist.

Obama wrote it there for all to see that he favors Bush's faith-based initiatives--right along with the arguments for privatizing social programs.

and has been since the beginning. Which is the change he was referring to, I think: changing the dems to reps too. I'm sorry your hopes were dashed, VL, but he's not the genuine article. This is what has bothered me since I first heard of him, his pre-packaged slickness which sure looked like it was targeted at the R's--especially when I McLaughlin or one of the other shouting heads saying he would be great to attract R's since there was no slavery in his background and so race would not come into it, there wouldn't be victim stuff. I thought then that they really meant liberal ideas wouldn't come into it.

Even my genius brother fell for it, and is still falling.

The candidate you never wanted
At a price too high to pay
Progressives have been given
Much cause to walk away

(but to walk where, exactly? the roads have been privatized...)

++++

Imagine having your campaign contributions go to support this abomination.

the way i figure it, i still four months to summon the courage to actually VOTE for the capitulating coward. and i've been voting for some pretty sorry-ass democrats down here in the south the last 35 years, so it's not like i'm the squeamish sort.

i may end up voting for him, but i've got more respect for my fellow voters to actually ASK them to consider voting for obama.

p.s. john lewis' primary challenger has bad check charges - his check to get his lexus hood ornament and other trim gold plated bounced. talk about a diametrically opposed sense of values- it's the saint vs. the gangsta. more thuggin' for obama.

"Friends don't let friends vote Republican" but it's not too late to lean on the DNC to have a fair, open and transparent convention.

I *knew* you're be the first to come around. Your support was even cooler than tepid. Admit it. Now that Obama has layered that last straw on your back, who are madder at? Him or the DNC?

And what do you want to do about it? (We're with you all the way)
Come together at The Confluence

Oh, man, Obama really *is* in trouble. Well, what did Kos expect? Look at who was backing Obama all this time. They never really liked Pelosi, Reid and Brazile in the first place. And as for Dean, they simply can't see straight. There's nothing Dean can do that they will not worship.

But pulling a maxxed out donation? You've got to be pretty pissed to do that.

Come together at The Confluence

Is the idea to use progressives to secure the nomination, and then once in office, jettison the progressives and govern in such a way to draw together a new coalition?

I cant' see the math ultimately adding up unless that's the end goal. Maybe I need some physics to square this one.

Yes, there are some and they tend to get a lot of attention on Fox. But the rest of us aren't ready to take that step and may never be. We like to have the McCain Dems in our coalition because there is strength in numbers but early on we came to a clear understanding that we will vote our conscience in November.

BUT, vastleft, what if we don't have to choose between the evil of two lessers? What if we can still turn things around right now?

Come together at The Confluence

I have no doubt about it. I saw it coming when I was a Kossack last year. He *had* to tack right in order to appeal to the Republicans he needs to win. And now that he's lost a good many of the Clinton voters, he has to pursue the right more. It's almost self-sustaining. The more he goes right, the more of his base he loses, the more he has to go right. That's why I could never glom onto him. His campaign was not rooted in a set of core Democratic values so he felt free to pitch them as soon as he knew he no longer needed them.

He's on that proverbial slippery slope and now his most ardent supporters are starting to see what he really is. The question is, do they hate Clinton more than they despise the Messiah for tricking them?

Come together at The Confluence

have the ability to switch back should you see a glimmer of "hope." Anywho, it's pretty crazy how BO's campaign is airing all of these changes in his stance on issues. It's almost like he *wants* to get these equivocations aired as quickly as possible so that people will become innured to his political gyrations. It would be fun to see a before and after picture - BOs stances before he announced his candidacy and after...Denver?...

I'm sure someone's already done this.

BTW, go PUMAs!

We have discovered that there are a lot of PO'd people out there who will not vote for Obama. Murphy got 35000 registrants in the first day PUMApac was up. The more people know that there are people like them, the safer they will feel to resist the UNITY emotional blackmail. That's the first thing.
Then we demand a fair, open and transparent convention where Clinton is allowed to maker her case to the superdelegates. By the time the convention rolls around, the supers will be aware of the major discontent out there over Obama.
Concomittantly, we use mass action online campaigns to pay off Clinton's campaign debt so she's not forced to look like she's supporting him.
That's just a start. The idea is to be completely reasonable. Who could argue against a fair, open and transparent election where Clinton gets to make her case? What *I'm* aiming for is a brokered convention.
In two months, it may seem like a good idea.

Come together at The Confluence

Alegre's Corner has a good clearinghouse of SD contact info, to keep the pressure on, if you'd be interested VL.

And I would just kill the Gore or Edwards ideas. They didn't make it through the primaries, so they are not options that would just piss off both Clinton AND Obama people, instead of either/or.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

MoveOn.org has a petition to defend Wesley Clark:
http://pol.moveon.org/clark/

MoveOn.org's Chosen One "rejects" Wesley Clark's statement. Just like he rejected defending MoveOn during the flap about its unacceptable rhyming of "Petraeus."

Oh, well.

We IMO are left with basically three choices

1. Vote for McCain
2. Vote for Obama
3. Or Vote for neither McCain or Obama (3rd. party, write-in or blank top of ticket.)

I'm currently going with option #3. Obama (and the Democratic Party) is promoting what I consider Republican agendas that I strongly disapprove of. A vote for Obama IMO is the same as giving my consent to the Democratic Party adopting what I previously considered Republican objectives. I do not approve and the only way that they will pay attention is if I withhold my vote. The party has proven to me that they really don't care what I think as long I am willing to vote for the so called "lesser of two evils." Well I've come to the conclusion that voting for Democrats who are will to promote a Republican agenda is not in fact the lesser of two evils. Maybe the greater evil is backing a party a that manipulates the American public into thinking voting for them will change the agenda when the agenda will not really change.

that way, I won't have to whack you over the head when we meet in August... instead, we can do... you know... ;-)

hope I deleted it this time

Same article:

... supported some ability to hire and fire based on faith.

I mean, what next? Hiring and firing based on your membership in the Obama movement?

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

I've seen it happen. If the public makes enough noise, withholds enough money, threatens enough action, they will come around. they might need to save face if they pledged their votes to Obama. So, if the pressure gets intense enough, they will look for some new video or gaffe to play up to enoromous proportions in order to give themselves cover but they *will* cave eventually.

Come together at The Confluence

night - would they support opening the convention floor up and counting all the Florida votes, giving Clinton her Michigan delegates and letting the uncommitted Michigan delegates vote as they choose to ensure that Clinton supporters backed Barack in November? To a one, they said no.

The Obama supporters I've talked to, are genuinely convinced that they don't need any Clinton voters to win and they dont' want them either - well, except to the extent that on some level they recognize they do need them to win. What they say isn't terribly rational. They seem to have fantasies of huge clouds of young voters raining down on the polls and voting in unprecedented numbers and lifting out nation to a new height of enlightenment - leaving behind the racist and partisan bigotries of middle aged women (who are apparently responsible for the racism in this nation - don't ask me for a clarification) and hippies.

Misogyny is the glue that holds Obama's camp together. Guys who don't want to vote for a chick, can vote for the black guy and keep their progressive credential in order and their misogyny under wraps. They know she's a better candidate. I think they're afraid that sex will never be fun again if a chick is running the White House. But I could be wrong about that.

1.) In the real world when one of the cabinet members crosses the line, there comees all kinds of protests for his head. One last gaffe is all it takes to nail his coffin shut. When the noise starts to get covered in the media, then the president or VP comes out and makes a "full confidence" speech and the person under fire says they serve at the "pleasure of the president". A week later, they have some internal meeting where the guys in charge say "the management would like to make a few changes" and the guy resigns.
2.) School board meetings- School board decides not to add any more courtesy bussing routes and that's final, end of story, we're not budging. At the next board meeting, 300 parents show up to highjack the microphone for 4 hours staight ticking off all of the safety reasons you've heard of, and some you haven't, and the board reverses itself. Not only does it reverse itself but it decides to bus *ALL* children regardless of how close they live to the school. I have seen this work on multiple occasions. Politicians who like the prestige and power and popularity of being an elected official are always trying to appease the voter. Obama wouldn't be where he is today if that were not true. it was the rabid Obamaphiles and teenaged Obamaphiles who talked their parents into voting for him. But they did it because he was popular with what they saw was the voters. If that should change, they will abandon him and the Obama campaign knows this. That's why they want so badly to end the primary season quickly, declare unity and make the convention a pro forma process. He's got to hold the public off for 2 months and hope that once they see the SDs aren't changing their minds, that everyone will fall in line. I think the more noise we make the better. I want it to crescendo in the first or second week of August. Now, there's a good possibility that people will be on vacation but a good many of them will be at home this year due to high gas prices. And they may be listening to the radio or watching the news.
Or seeing a lot of pink PUMA bumper stickers...
Come together at The Confluence

Auntie Meme (and anyone else)

The link in whaleshaman's post now goes to a different story. Odd. Try this, or try googling "Obama Courts Evangelicals" - you'll get the original story, which includes references to Xtian rock.

I hadn't even thought about the fact that campaign contributions might be going to fund Xtian rock. An abomination indeed. Thank Jeebus I haven't given and will never give one cent to the Obama campaign. WWJLT...What Would Jesus Listen to? I highly doubt Xtian rock would have been his music of choice.

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/view...

This just got published on ZNet, great article.

(I was going to post it on DU, but... decided against it, since it would most certainly get locked. Don't you love censorship... *sigh*.)

Jan 07--and totally prescient-- Obama's Audacious Deference

Let's not let this meme develop.

Obama is running to the right, clearly.

(The hope and unity shtick was running to the center, how anyone ever confused him with a liberal or progressive was a fool)

There's no clothespin required over here. :)

The Daley/Axelerod coupe d'parti politique has essentially hijacked the Democratic party apparatus as a means of putting this cycle's Chosen One in the White House. At this moment the real Democratic party - at least the one we've known for the last 60 years - is defunct, on hiatus; perhaps permanently. Money did all the talking. Had Hilary ended the primary season $22 M in the black along with the 18M in popular vote, she would have been the nominee. But being $22 M in debt was the death knell. Obama et al sold us a line of BS while Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer, Dean, Kerry, Kennedy, Daschle, Brazile et al sold them the 'Democratic bus' for a tall line of credit. Those who don't get on board, as we have seen, are thrown beneath it. Those on board have their hands way out. But if Obama loses the GE this busload of merry pranksters will find themselves on a real bummer of a trip, as their 12-wheeler careens off the cliff. They have no plans for that eventuality. McCain may take up residence at the White House, but the real story will be the subsequent concurrent reclamation and resurrection of the REAL Democratic Party. This election is as much about what is the Democratic Party going to be for the next 60 years, as it is about who will be sitting in the White House for the next 4 years. As of now the REAL Democratic Party still remains our best hope. Unfortunately, and ironically enough - if Obama wins, all hope will be lost. PUMA's got it right there. vastleft too. (Lambert, where art thou?) Voting for McCain may be an abhorrent thought. But permanently losing the REAL Democratic Party may be a loss we can never recover from. Without their vehicle and the White House, the Obamites will be morally and financially bankrupt. A righteously resurgent Democratic Party led by righteously resurgent REAL Democrats can keep McCain in check, expand control in 2010, then retake the White House in 2012. Stop the Obamites now, or lose our parti politique - and who knows what else? - for an entire generation.

I've been wondering what happens if the Obama-ites lose and it seems to me that the losing branch of the Democratic party, which has put all it's stock in Obama, will finally have lost all credibility.

It's like a whole bunch of losers got together and decided to prove all their problems were because of Bill Clinton, and if they could just force Clinton out, they'd be triumphant - or something like that.

I've heard both Kerry and Gore's loss blamed on Bill not participating and participating respectively repeatedly. And vice versa. Although what Clinton had to do with the campaign decisions each made is beyond me - I mean, it's not like Kerry isn't the one who decided not to challenge Ohio with a boatload of money in his bank account.

Voting for McCain is an evil act and expecting anything good to come out of it is a kind of utopianism.

Don't vote for president, vote for Cynthia McKinney if you agree with her or another 3rd party candidate who you can agree with but McCain? No fuckin way.