Official Tennessee GOP Blog Smearing Michelle Obama

On their official blog "Paid for by the Tennessee Republican Party," the GOP has apparently decided it's OK to slander and smear a presidential candidates wife and spew racist rhetoric.

Here are some excerpts:

"Are we in for a long, hot summer of temper tantrums from Tennessee Democrats and Barack Obama supporters whining “racism” and “bigotry” every time their likely presidential nominee is the target of a little criticism and dissent?"

"Michelle Obama revealed her belief that America is less than the great country of freedom and opportunity that it is..."

"To welcome Mrs. Obama to Nashville and Tennessee, we asked a few Tennesseans to take a few moments to tell her what makes them proud of their country. Viewers will find their statements stand in stark contrast to two incidents in February when Mrs. Obama announced that for “the first time in my adult life” she was proud of America."

What's wrong with these? If you can't tell, you might want to consider moving to Tennessee and joining these racist fascists. Oh, and aside from that, they're misquoting her. She said "really proud," not "proud." She didn't say she hadn't been proud. And by the way, the Tennessee GOP needs to know, most Americans feel the same way. We've been proud before, but now we're really proud and it's not because of their racist flag waving rhetoric, it's because of Barack Obama and his plans for open government, participatory democracy, transparency in process and his message of hope.

Progress

I've always wanted to post this. It's my favorite photo of Obama from the primaries.
Credit is probably NYT or something - if you know, comment and I'll edit.

Sick Macrophotography

From Discerning Brute's continually fabulous blog.

This is amazing.... And so American.
If this doesn't change your eating habits, you're hopeless!

Clinton the Duck Killer

Wow - I hope this seals the deal for anyone who wasn't sure yet. She's now bragging about killing ducks... "People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are. " Sen. Clinton today in Indiana.

Compare this with Sen. Obama (From Yahoo News, January 16, 2008):

"What about animal rights?" a woman shouted out during the candidate's town hall meeting outside Las Vegas Wednesday after he discussed issues that relate more to humans, like war, health care and the economy.

Obama responded that he cares about animal rights very much, "not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog." He said he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and has been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society.

"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other," he said. "And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals."

Obama has a nuanced and interesting perspective - seeming to be open to the idea that certain truths require serious action. Again, I'm just contrasting this with Hillary bragging about duck hunting...

I mean, in this passage he's essentially talking about a potential "condition of liberty" for animals - that's revolutionary in American politics. Hopefully this won't become a wedge issue in PA....

Quote from "The Audacity of Hope":

"It has not always been the pragmatist, the voice of reason, or the force of compromise, that has created the conditions for liberty," he writes about the antislavery movement of the 19th century. "Knowing this, I can't summarily dismiss those possessed of similar certainty today--the antiabortion activist ... the animal rights activist who raids a laboratory--no matter how deeply I disagree with their views. I am robbed even of the certainty of uncertainty--for sometimes absolute truths may well be absolute.

Of the people, for the people....

Caucusing in Washington State

Obama Supporters

Clinton Supporters

Why A Vote for Hillary is a Vote for McCain

I don't want to write this post.

If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee for President, a Republican will win in November 2008. All those things that Nader was accused of? Running only for himself, being a vanity candidate? Hillary has become those things.

Obama's movement is not just passionate, it's diverse. It's literally made up of young, old, black, white, democrat, independent and republican. As a candidate, he would sweep the nation - as a democrat he would lead with progressive values while assuaging the concerns of the conservatives - and convincing them why they should support his ideas.

Hillary's presidential bid will be nothing but sleaze attacks, scandal revelations and drama - and it will end with a Republican in the White House. I wish this weren't true, but it is. She'll beat all those attacks, you say? Yes, she will, but in November, she won't have my vote - and she won't have the vote of the 70% of progressives who voted for Obama in the MoveOn.org election. She won't have the young vote (they just won't show up). She won't have the black vote, they'll be so angry at her for destroying Obama's chance. The Republicans and Independents will turn out in record numbers to vote against her, and she will lose.

Oh, and one more thing. If Hillary is the nominee, Nader will run again. Why? Because she's a pro-war candidate.

And those are just facts.

Clinton Lies to NH voters, Claims "Victory" in Florida

And what did we learn from the results in the beauty contest?

If you're a low income white woman over 60, you'll likely be voting for Clinton. If you're anyone else, you'll vote for Obama. So why did she get more votes in Florida?

The majority of voters in the "primary" were OVER 60 years old.

Case closed. Florida doesn't matter.

Oh, and the lying?

"COURTING VOTERS in Iowa and New Hampshire, last August Sen. Hillary Clinton signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in the Michigan or Florida Democratic primaries. She participated in both primaries and is campaigning in Florida. Which proves, again, that Hillary Clinton is a liar."

read more...

Clinton Supports Bush's War

Very recent evidence of Clinton's support for the war:


From the State of the Union last night:

"When Bush proclaimed, “Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among terrorists there is no doubt,” Clinton sprang to her feet in applause but Obama remained firmly seated. The president’s line divided most of the Democratic audience, with nearly half standing to applaud and the other half sitting in stony silence."

read more...

What were the Clintons thinking?

It's become quite clear that the Clinton strategy was (and is) to try and marginalize Barack Obama as a niche candidate who would only interest black voters.

I can't understand why the Clintons would take this approach. It's very disturbing and isn't the kind of behavior we want from our president. It's so out of step with the America we hope for - and feels like a Bush tactic.

Hillary and McGovern, 1968 and 2008

Here are some differences:

In 1968 the democratic party was split into four factions.
1. Unions & The Party Establishment in big cities (Pres. Johnson, then Hubert Humphrey)
2. Anti-War students and intellectuals (Eugene McCarthy)
3. Catholic & African-Americans (Robert Kennedy)
4. Southern White Democrats (George Wallace, Independent)

40 years later....

In 2008, the party is looking like this:
1. Anti-war, young whites, African-Americans, educated whites, independents, republicans, college students, insurgent unions. (Barack Obama)
2. Party Establishment Unions, older white women. (Hillary Clinton)
3. Anti-war, white male, labor. (John Edwards)

In 1968, after Robert Kennedy's death, the anti-war votes were split between George McGovern and Eugene McCarthy. Kennedy's supporters did not back McGovern after his death because of the bitter and angry campaign they had waged against one another during the primaries.

It seems that our situation today is similar. Hillary is Humphrey. Obama is McGovern/Kennedy and John Edwards is McCarthy. The only difference is, this time the McGovern/Kennedy and McCarthy supporters are mostly aligned and have a good relationship. What we can hope for is that in the end Obama and Edwards will be in a position to help one another, rather than fighting in such a way that Hillary wins.

It was the supporters of Kennedy, McCarthy and McGovern that directed the McGovern-Fraser Commission to ensure that the caucuses and primaries and the people choose the nominee, not the party power brokers. Now, wouldn't it be ironic if Hillary Clinton, who worked for George McGoverns presidential campaign in 72, ended up fighting against the spirit of the McGovern-Fraser Commission?

Clinton & Romney are the Dynasty candidates

As I said when he spoke at the Bush library, it's clear that the Bush family has chosen Mitt Romney to succeed W on the throne. Liz Cheney joining his campaign confirms this...

And there's no need to explain the ways in which a 3rd Clinton presidency would be dynastic...

Obama & Ted Kennedy

Time's Mark Halperin and ABC news are suggesting that Ted Kennedy is about to endorse Barack Obama for president. That would be a serious victory for his candidacy.

Get some sleep Bill....

I just heard Sen. Clinton blame Bill's insanity on "sleep deprivation."

(From the post South Carolina Face the Nation interview.)

Obama Rising

No matter how the Clintons spin it, the truth is Obama has been on a constant rise - every day, every week he does better and polls better. This is true in each state and also true nationally:

Getting Ready for Super Tuesday here in New York

Senator Dodd is Fired UP and Ready to GO!

So, Why doesn't Obama get behind Dodd on this?


"He will use any and all legislative tools at his disposal, including a filibuster to prevent this bill form becoming law," said Colleen Flanagan, a spokesperson for the Senator. "He is ready to go. He was fired up about this yesterday. It is something that he is very passionate about."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/24/feingold-i-really-do-di_n_83053.html

Hillary & Wal-Mart?

Yep:

"Mrs. Clinton was a director of Wal-Mart from 1986 to 1992."

Blogging The Way to Super Tuesday in New York City

So far, I haven't seen one advertisement for or against candidates here in New York City.

The only contact I've had with campaigns is seeing Obama supporters canvassing at my subway station regularly. I've also seen them in the subway station registering voters before the New York deadline.

In Brooklyn, Manhattan and Harlem the Obama campaign is very active on the ground and seems to have majority support.

UPDATE: I did just see a locally sponsered get out the vote campaign asking viewers to "register to vote". This is strange because you can't register to vote in the primary any more...it's too late in NYC.

Why Hillary Lost Nevada & Why She'll Loose the Election.

The polls just before the Nevada caucus showed Clinton with a 6-10 point lead. She was supposed to win by a large margin. For many months, Hillary was winning by 20 points. Obama closed that gap and practically tied her.

"The Las Vegas Review-Journal survey gave Clinton a 41 percent to 32 percent lead over Obama, with John Edwards at 14 percent. A Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll had a closer race, 42 percent to 37 percent, with Edwards at 12 percent."

Obama is slowly and surely building momentum. If everything continues as it has - and even if Obama "looses" in every state (gets one less delegate than Hillary) - he will still win the nomination. John Edwards will not be giving his delegates to Hillary, he'll give them to Obama and that will make him the nominee.

Clintonian Plagiarism

Why does the Clinton campaign get away with stealing every campaign slogan that Barack Obama comes up with?

Obama: It's time for change!
Clinton: I'm the candidate for change! Ready for Change! Change, me, change, me!

Obama: Yes we can!
Clinton surrogate: "Yes she can! Why I'm endorsing Hillary."