Al Gore Resurfaces for the DSCC…(Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee)

The other day I was contemplating doing a post wondering what Al Gore was thinking about the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting’s indefensible actions on May 31. My thoughts were that Gore must be reflecting on how his own party was disenfranchising voters, which probably be painful for him. I remembered his stirring speeches on the media and the Bush Administration’s trashing of the Constitution that he did in cooperation with MoveOn and felt he surely would disapprove just on an intellectual level as well.

Today I got a letter marked with “Vice President Al Gore” at the top left. Inside, with the same title on the letterhead, was a two-page missive detailing the horrors of the Bush Administration. There was also a little brochure:

Continue reading

Is Obama an “Honorable” Candidate?

A few nights ago over at Talk Left, Big Tent Democrat, who is an even-handed Obama supporter, made a passing comment to the effect that Obama had acted honorably wih regard to the delegate selection rules:

…when I criticize the delegate selection rules and the outcome of the pledged delegate process and the MI/FL fiasco I am in no way criticizing Barack Obama as he has done exactly what he was supposed to do. I tip my hat to him. He has behaved honorably throughout the process in that he is trying to win the nomination. My critique is of the process and the organization that organized the nomination process and made the disastrous and rule breaking decisions regarding FL/MI.

This comment resulted in an outpouring of comments disagreeing with this characterization of Obama’s actions.

Here are some examples:

Probably the best overall summaries:

Calling his principal opponent divisive and polarizing is not honorable. Trashing previous Democratic administrations is neither honorable nor wise politics. Trashing the occupation of another of his opponents is not honorable. Blatantly introducing the race card is not honorable. Refusing to allow re-votes to facilitate voter participation is not honorable. Flooding caucus sites with goon squads is not honorable. Smiling while his supporters boo his principle opponent is not honorable. Making rude gestures in reference to his principle opponent is not honorable. Boasting that he received more delegates than his opponent after his opponent had a higher popular turnout is not honorable. Refusing an unmoderated debate is not honorable. Removing his name from the ballot to taint a sure victory by his principle opponent is not honorable.Since the McGovern Commission rules changed the method of selecting nominees, Barrack Obama has run the filthiest, tackiest most dishonorable primary campaign of any Democrat in my memory.


It wouldn’t bother as much if he wasn’t running as the champion of the exact opposite of everything he says he is. Time after time after time, he’s said he’s running a clean campaign, a different sort of campaign, when anyone who has half a brain would see that he’s running the usual, Chicago-style dirty campaign. During the debates, when he talked about taking the high road, I just kept thinking, “Harry and Louise mailer, ‘she’s desperate to win’; ‘she’ll say and do anything to win’; etc.”It’s the same hypocritical attitude he takes about his vaunted three years of community service and time in the state senate, living in the shadows of Rezko’s slums. It’s the fact that every time he gets called out on something inconsistent, he blames a staff member, or he pushed the wrong button, or he voted “present” as a strategy even though he was not told to. It’s voting for a bad bill, then going on the record saying he didn’t mean to vote for it, knowing his vote still stands. It’s lying about passing a bill he did not pass. It’s lying outright about the whole NAFTA meetings thing while bashing Clinton for doing something he did (that she did not do). It’s trashing Bill Clinton’s legacy. It’s praising Reagan and Bush. It’s accusing the Clintons of racism. I dunno, I don’t find it honorable to be where you are only because you are standing on the bodies of all those folks you climbed over to get there.

On FL and MI

FL and MI? He has stonewalled at EVERY turn on that. How his people railroaded caucuses??

… Not only did Obama appear on Florida TV campaign ads and not just once ore twice, don’t you know? He also gave a press conference in Florida which is most def. against the rules of not compaigning – AFAIR he shrugged it oh so cutely off his shoulder at the time.

Use of racism

His using the race card…He distorted things that Clinton and her supporter’s said, turning honest racism-hating people into Clinton hater’s.

In order to get the nomination Did the Clinton campaign push Wright early? Or did they push Rezko hard early? Or did they anything like that at all? No. But what did the “honorable” Obama do? He showed the kind of candidate he is when he used racism as a wedge issue in order to get the black voters away from the Clintons. The Obama campaign turned Bill and Hillary Clinton into racists. There was nothing honorable about that. It was a disgrace And I will never forgive him for it…But that alone wasn’t enough for Obama in order to get the nom. He had to make sure the most popular Dem president we have had in decades “disappeared” from his line-up of admirable American presidents as well. And then he trashed Bill Clinton’s legacy. But good. Needless to say, I will never forgive him for that either. And thruout this probess Obama blocked revotes and as of now disenfranchise millions of voters. What is so honorable about that?

On his “different” sort of campaign:

The hypocrisy of trumpeting a “clean campaign,” a different campaign but all the while running the usual Chicago-style campaign.

(Post quoting a McCain adviser) Senior Adviser to McCain last week said about Obama’s campaigning: “We have all become familiar with Senator Obama’s new brand of politics. First, you demand civility from your opponent, then you attack him, distort his record and send out surrogates to question his integrity. It is called hypocrisy, and it is the oldest kind of politics there is.”

Touting his 3 years of community service and time in the IL Senate, while Rezko made money of his slums…

IMHO, one does not have to do dishonorable things directly to be dishonorable. To countenance such conduct in subordinates or turn a blind eye is even worse in my view, than when a person is honest enough to do their own dirty work.

The actions of his followers/his own disrespect:

And he has led many into also being dishonorable — many former friends as well as family who were who were huge fans of Bill Clinton but turned on a dime with the disgusting race-baiting of him by Obama’s campaign. I am shocked that so many people I loved and respected could be so disloyal in an instant.
…his flippant reference to the Bataan death march–comparing the long primary campaign (when was this? in March or April ?!!) was awful and that it shows an appalling lack of sensitivity and judgment when it comes to history. The Bataan death march was a wartime atrocity after all. (See my post on this subject, from where the Memorial March actually happens.)

(At a caucus) The women on the Hillary side were stunned and my poor mother, OMG, she will never go to a caucus again. She loves Hillary so I convinced her to go (despite her being quite ill) to the caucus for Hillary. The Obamabots were so rude to her. She is a senior and every a senior or woman brought up issues that concerned them the were treated with total disrespect.

Controlling outside groups’ money:

It’s not just 527s under discussion. Stoller points out that they’re encouraging non-funding of independent groups including VoteVets–a group focused on helping out vets as they are considered “inside the Beltway” and “Obama has created a number of significant infrastructure pieces through his campaign, displacing traditional groups the way he promised he would by signaling the end of the old politics of division and partisanship,” and therefore to be cut out of the process.

And my own additions:

Snubbing Hillary on the Senate floor.

His condescending comment at the debate when he said she was “likeable enough” as his body language indicated dismissal (head down, wouldn’t look at her.

Giving her the “street” finger and then doing his “brush off” act.

And this final comment, which really hits home:


And it’s the LYING that will get him in the end. A must read is The Truth VS. Barack Obama (Full Version)
which details the claims (lies), the evidence, counter claims, rebuttals and and the ultimate failure of those arguments. WITH SOURCES.

A few examples of the lies and false history–see the entire piece to understand the magnitude of what is going on:

CHARGE 1 – “The March on Selma got me born.”

CHARGE 2 – “My father was just a simple, impoverished goat herder.”

CHARGE 3 – “My father believed in the ‘power of the people’. I believe in the ‘power of the people’.”

CHARGE 11 – “I lived in Indonesia. I have more foreign experience than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain.”

CHARGE 12 – “My foreign travels and life experience better qualify me to address our nation’s closest Allies.”

CHARGE 15 – “I was an underprivileged youth.”

CHARGE 20 – Oops, “I ‘misvoted’ a couple times in the Illinois State House.”


THE FINAL VERDICT?? No honor here…However, arrogance, ambition, and sleight-of-hand, in great abundance.

Call the DNC TOLL-FREE–They Are Taking Comments…Here’s What I Told Them…

I just got off the line with the DNC. A very sweet woman named Lisa Burgess took my comments…I could hear her typing in the background. (The number is at the end of this post.)

Several times during my polite, but very intense tirade on the DNC and this primary season, she told me that she could “really understand.” I think she must be “really understanding” a lot these days…

I first took apart the DNC for their handling of MI and FL and explained that I believed Obama was being “enabled.” I said he was a big boy and had taken his name of the MI ballot by his own decision and that he had held a press event and had ads spilling into FL–it was HE that BROKE THE RULES. I said that the party was disenfranchising voters to fix things for HIM!

I told her that that the party was at fault for not vetting him, but that he was ALSO at fault for not following his own statement about how he wasn’t going to run. I faulted him on his EGO that allowed himself to be “massaged” into running (I was being kind).

I told her that this seemed to be a personal vendetta against the Clintons. I told her I was a woman pushing 60 who had lived through it all and was being INSULTED by Obama and the media’s misogyny…Obama’s snide looks and his wife’s snotty comments about the Clinton marriage were ticking me off. I said I had never heard Obama call off his supporters holding sexist signs at the recent JJ Dinner in NC. Where was his leadership on that? I asked where the party was on statements made by the media that were sexist?

I said that Kerry’s influence on all this was a giveaway–the man who wouldn’t fight for the votes in OH in 2004 and left Edwards out there hanging. I said that I had been an Edwards supporter and that I knew the party had gone corporate and that Clinton and Obama were on that page…and it was sad that Edwards was drummed out of the race.

Then I got to the subject of a “unity” ticket. I said Obama didn’t deserve to be on the ticket if Clinton were the nominee because he would drag her down! His associations with Wright and Ayers would be the lightning rod of the campaign…FOX and YouTube were already doing their thing…

I also told her that the party was OUT-OF-TOUCH and if they shoved this guy at me, I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR HIM. This would be the first time I would not vote because 1) I was sick of enabling the party’s stupidity especially if it failed to seat MI and FL as is (no “splitting votes” to further enable Obama) and 2) it was my way of protesting and I didn’t feel compelled to vote for a machine that had insulted my intelligence.

Then I said that the “enabling” of Obama via endorsement by delegates every time he got in trouble was the stupidest thing I had ever seen, that I thought these people were INSANE and inept.

I told her, that in contrast, I was REALITY-BASED!

My final salvo was that I was about to “de-register” from the party and that there was no more money coming from me. Dean et al had proven to be a huge disappointment and the Democratic Party was no longer “my party.”


The very pleasant Lisa sighed one more time, muttered she “really understood” and wished me a good day.

I wished her a good day, too.

And fingers crossed that it WILL be a good day in IN and NC for the me and the “reality based” among us!



Let Me Tell You About Bill Richardson and “RICHARDSON’S RULES”…

On Thursday night (April 24) Bill Richardson and James Carville were on The Larry King Show (video). Richardson ran through all the little memes about Hillary Clinton that we’ve come to know and love recently, including comments about her the silly demand for debates, the outrageous demands to count the votes in Florida and Michigan, and her “negative” campaign.

At about minute 5:00 of the above-linked video, Richardson brought up the subject of Florida and Michigan. “All of a sudden” the Clinton campaign was bringing these states up and heck “we all agreed” not to run in their primaries. Well, we all know that the Clinton campaign has been on the trail of Florida and Michigan for weeks (Carville reminded Richardson that the Clinton campaign had proposed paying for a re-vote) and that not everyone agreed to take their name off the ballot in Michigan. As for Florida, Obama held a press conference and ran ads in neighboring states that reached Florida market, which, Richardson forgot, broke the RULES.

Richardson is very upset that we are even THINKING about Florida and Michigan, but, of course, he’s operating from the book of “Richardson’s Rules” which seems to favor disenfranchising the voice of the people.

“Richardson’s Rules” were in effect about a year or so ago when proponents of a spaceport (read: pork for Richard Branson) was being sold heavily here in Southern New Mexico. (It was sold again for a vote that took place this past Tuesday on a tax in Sierra County, and, unfortunately, it passed). At the time of the first vote here in Dona Ana County, Richardson pulled out all the stops, including addressing a school assembly where students were a captive audience and which their parents (potential voters) were invited to attend.

What about the citizens who wanted to hear what Richardson was saying who were NOT students or parents and who showed up at the school? Well, they WERE NOT ALLOWED IN…in fact, law enforcement was present to make sure there wasn’t any trouble.

Back when I was teaching, it would have been considered unthinkable to allow a politician to appear on school time to push his agenda, especially without an opposing view and especially with the public barred from attending!

So, we see that Richardson doesn’t want New Mexican citizens allowed into what should be public appearances, nor does he want the voters of Florida or Michigan to vote. Those are Richardson’s Rules. Do I want to see him on a ticket in November? NO THANKS!

On top of that, his comments about Clinton’s supposed negativity were just the usual Richardson hypocrisy.

Way back in October 2007, Richardson was still a candidate and was upset about negativity then, too. In a report filed on CNN’s website dated October 30, 2007 (Richardson: No More Negative Campaigning), he said:

To all the Democratic candidates, let’s stay positive,” Richardson said. “Let’s get rid of all this negative stuff that I’m seeing.”Richardson then singled out Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and former Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, for their critical remarks of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York.

“I’ve become very concerned about the negative tone of the campaign,” he said. “I think that Senators Obama and Edwards should concentrate on the issues and not on attacking Sen. Clinton.”

“The differences on the issues should be highlighted, but personal attacks I believe should not take place,” he said.

In recent days, Obama and Edwards have spoken out against Clinton’s decision to accept contributions from lobbyists. Richardson defended Clinton and reiterated that calling her “integrity into question,” was unnecessary and “personally negative.”

That, of course, was before he decided to stab the Clintons in the back and not only endorse Obama, but also talk badly about them.

Changing an endorsement is not the problem, but usually, politicians don’t go to the lengths Richardson has gone recently in his attacks on the Clintons. Oh, but that must be another of Richardson’s Rules–“Acting with class is NOT required.”

Note: to post a comment, return to HOME, and post to the comment there.

Is Jimmy Carter Letting Democratic Voters Down??

On Monday (April 14) I caught a brief comment by Jimmy Carter about the Nepal elections on the BBC World Service. Carter, who was in Nepal to monitor the polling, said that whatever problems occurred had “paled” compared to the overall success of the vote. (Unfortunately, the audio report is no longer available.)

In a report issued on April 15 entitled Trip Report by Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter to Nepal: April 6-14, 2008, Carter wrote in great detail about all the efforts made to ensure a free and fair election.

We have maintained a staff of long-term election observers for more than fifteen months. They have visited all 75 districts and had an opportunity to become familiar with the entire nation and its various and conflicting political factions.

After our arrival from Atlanta, we joined Dr. John Hardman and began receiving extensive briefings from former U.S Ambassador Peter Burleigh, David Pottie, Darren Nance, Sarah Levit-Shore, and others. Most of our 60 international observers, from 21 nations, had been deployed to the more remote areas by helicopter, all-terrain vehicles, and by foot. My co-chairman was Dr. Surakiart Sathirathai, former deputy prime minister of Thailand, who was a key partner and essential to the mission’s success. Our team was joined by international observers from the European Union, Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL), and by several thousand domestic observers. …

On election day we visited as many polling sites as possible in the valley that surrounds Kathmandu and found the election commission’s procedures were being largely followed. There were long and separate lines of men and women in a celebratory mood, the total turnout being above 60 percent. Despite some problems, our observers throughout the nation found the same situation among a total of 400 sites visited. Ballot boxes were required to be delivered to 75 central locations for counting, and we observed a number of these procedures.

Impressive, no?

But how does this square with Carter’s silence on the Florida and Michigan primary situation?? Well, he hasn’t been TOTALLY silent, because in early April he tossed out a tantalizing hint as to whom he supported while in Nigeria:

Former President Carter hints at Obama support

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Carter wouldn’t quite say it, but he left little doubt this week about whom he’d like to see in the White House next year.

Speaking to local reporters Wednesday on a trip to Nigeria, the former Democratic president noted that Barack Obama had won his home state of Georgia and his hometown of Plains.

“My children and their spouses are pro-Obama. My grandchildren are also pro-Obama,” he said at a news conference, according to the Nigerian newspaper This Day. “As a superdelegate, I would not disclose who I am rooting for, but I leave you to make that guess.”

Carter’s spokeswoman confirmed the remarks.

Now, of course, Carter offers a perfectly good reason to support Obama since the latter won the Georgia contest; Carter can justifiably claim that he is supporting the will of the voters in his home state.

But that support does NOT explain why he has been silent on the issue of the voters of Michigan and Florida being disenfranchised. Isn’t it ironic that a man who has dedicated himself to monitoring 70 elections has nothing to say about what’s been going on during his own party’s primary season?

This is the same man who, along with the late Gerald Ford, headed a blue-ribbon commission following the 2000 election and followed up in September 2004 with a Washington Post op-ed entitled Still Seeking a Fair Florida Vote in which he pointed out that many of the elements of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 which resulted from the commission findings were not being carried out either because of funding shortfalls or political games.

The question is, why has Jimmy Carter chosen to remain silent now, while Florida (and Michigan) voters are AGAIN being given short-shrift? Why is Carter not publicly calling for these votes to be counted?

It certainly is within his rights to choose to support Obama…but it seems that this support is TRUMPING the rights of voters in Florida and Michigan.

While it is inspiring to read about the care and planning that the Carter Center has expended on the voting process in Nepal, why can’t Democratic voters expect the same attention? Doesn’t voting in Florida and Michigan carry as much value as a vote in Nepal?? Is Jimmy Carter letting us down?