A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoever it is.

So there's a few people running around thinking they would rather see a president McSame than the other dem candidate. Below are a few reasons to support whomever the nominee is whether it be Obama (most likely), Clinton (less likely), or some crazy convention coup by someone like Gore (very very unlikely, but being talked about).

    Cross posted at dailykos.                                                                                                                                              Leaving For Duty    

                                                                                                                   Franz Josef Glacier and the stream of melting ice!    

                                                                                                                                     Home Foreclosure, Los Angeles    
                                                                                                    Photobucket    
                                                                                                           polar bear    
                                                                                                             us soldier    
                                                                                                             Downtown Children's center for homeless kids    
                                                                                                                                                                               america WAR iraq SOLDIER troops death funeral,american family burial funeral sadness mourning    
                                                                                                                               National Debt Clock    
More FEMA Trailers    
My Soldier
Free Healthcare logo ©2006
wow gas prices!

coal
Fallen Soldiers

So on this first day of April no tricks from me, just a shout out to the fools who wax poetic about how they'd rather see McSame in the Whitehouse if their prefered candidate doesn't secure the nomination.
You would really rather see 4 more years of this?



Display:


Wow (2.00 / 17)

I got it to work, kinda, now if I could only figure out how to get everything to the right of the page.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:07:52 AM EST

Ooops (2.00 / 3)

of course I meant left.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:28:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Discussion is a good thing.. (none / 0)

Pictures say a lot, but they can't express important details, like 'the devil is in the details' kinds of details..

Important issues require discussion and committments, not just 'hope'.


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.
by architek on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:33:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not just "Hope" (2.00 / 1)

Not even the Hope Monger himself thinks that "just hope" is all it will take.

Lots of hard work and patience and resilience, that's what we need to get through this.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:40:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Discussion is a good thing.. (2.00 / 3)

What it will take is a president that either signs or vetoes the legislation passed by what will be democratic majorities in both chambers of congress.  If you want those bills signed into law vote for the democratic nominee.  If you want those bills vetoed vote for McCain.  It's that simple.  Let's not pretend like it isn't.

Your anti Obama sentiment cuts both ways.  Either your candidate is so weak as to have been defeated by a man who only offers talk of hope and isn't capable of much else as you insinuate.  Or Obama does, in fact, have much more to offer (GOTV, fundraising, community organizing, and yes charisma.  Let's not pretend charisma is a bad thing) all of which means that you should drop that particular talking point.

A little more time spent building up Hilary instead of just leveling attacks at BO might help her fav/unfav numbers and eliminate the Hilary as McCain surrogate talking point too.  Right now the fav/unfav numbers keep plummeting and the Hilary is a McCain surrogate meme is starting to look pretty well deserved.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:29:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Discussion is a good thing.. (2.00 / 3)

I completely agree with you.

But I think the point of the diary is that even though you and I may not think Obama is really capable of handling these issues or wouldn't be as effective as Hillary, we need to bite the bullet and vote for him against McCain anyway. The stakes are too high, and McCain won't even try to fix these problems. At least an Obama administration wouldn't stand in the way of progress.

Let's say Hillary loses the nomination, we can always support her for Senate Majority Leader where she will be able to push her agenda (including health care). President Obama wouldn't stand in the way of much of her agenda, but President McCain certainly would.  


by Turnpike Kid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:54:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Exactly (2.00 / 3)

A vote for Obama is also a vote for Senator Clinton's agenda.

Chances are, after it gets out of committee, Obama's health care plan is more likely to look like Clinton's.  Would he veto that?  Fat chance.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:03:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Think about it, Clinton's plan will win (none / 0)

I think Clinton's plan will prevail.  She will either get the nomination and push her plan as president or likely gain stature in the Senate in return for her backing Obama if he gets the nomination.  If she becomes Senate majority leader, she will push her plan hard.  Either way, she will be well positioned to help push her version of the health care plan.


by nrioq on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:06:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well it goes the other way too (2.00 / 3)

Should Hillary pull out a victory, Obama peeps should support her, because the last thing we need is a president McCain.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:18:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wow (2.00 / 4)

Nice diary. Great sentiment.

kid oakland has a wonderful unity diary on the rec list over at Kos now as well.


by bookish on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:21:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The Stakes (2.00 / 6)

I don't care if it's Senator Obama or Senator Clinton. I don't care about crashing the gate, I don't care about my vote not counting. I just don't care.

If you check my posts at DailyKos and elsewhere, you know I'm a single-issue voter, really. Two, really - but no one's going to fix the deficit that's going to destroy us in 30 years XD - but one that I can vote on, that I can almost feel within my grasp.

And that is the Iraq War. I don't care about African-American rights before the Iraq War. I don't care about Women's Rights before the Iraq War.

I don't care about the 5,000 people who will lose their homes tomorrow or the 150,000 people who sleep under a bridge, who served already, before the Iraq War.

Nothing comes before the Iraq War for me.

500,000+ Civilians Have died.
4,000 of our brothers and sisters have died.
An entire generation of Arabs and Muslims have lost their fathers, their mothers and their siblings and will forever hold us responsible for what will likely go down in history as the first truly great atrocity of the 21st Century, 9/11 be damned.

3,000 people doesn't compare to an entire nation that doesn't even exist anymore.

And your rights, my rights, her rights, his rights just don't mean jack-diddly to me when someone won't even have the misfortune - the misfortune of being oppressed because they're six feet under.

500,000+ people are dead. And here we sit, arguing over food over our tables which are blessed nightly; over what piece of the pie we're going to get, when someone half way across the world won't be getting any pie; over whether or not one candidate bombs a country with more passion or intelligence....

If I woke up poor tomorrow, living under a bridge, I'd have more than they. And that's all it takes to know I'll vote for the Democratic Candidate this November.


by Sir Hadrian on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:23:27 AM EST

Re: The Stakes (2.00 / 1)

Yup, the war is my number one issue too.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:27:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Stakes (2.00 / 2)

To me it's the restoration of the Constitution.  I cannot abide the idea that these people are "fighting for our freedom" in Iraq while our government destroys that freedom here (habeas, wiretapping, retroactive immunity, politicizing the DOJ, etc.) To reinstate the Constitution we need a democrat in the White House.  Any democrat... just so long as they won't veto the efforts of our congressional majorities to make this country American again.

Without Habeas you have no right to be heard in court.  If you cannot be heard in court you cannot claim any of your other rights and liberties.

I will vote for the democratic nominee.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:19:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Stakes (none / 0)

Great comments in this thread. I'd give some mojo, but it seems that I got "tased"... So, instead you have my compliments and an IOU for mojo if I get my status back. The Stakes are higher than ever...
by power of truth on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:30:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Stakes (none / 0)

Thank you.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:00:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Highly recced (2.00 / 4)

I wish I could rec it multiple times, but sadly I can only give 1 rec/diary.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:24:00 AM EST

Re: Highly recced (2.00 / 1)

Thank you, one is enough.
Glad I finally got it to work.

Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:32:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

that supreme court building stuck out (2.00 / 6)

not to mention, if a GOP President occurs, he WILL pardon Bush and Cheney. We need a Dem to investigate those bastards and indite them when they are gone, not let them get away with it like Richard Nixon did.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:25:00 AM EST

Neither candidate will (none / 0)

pursue this.  But we need a Dem in the White House - damn straight.


by Xanthe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:17:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that supreme court building stuck out (none / 0)

Ditto, but I think Obama would pardon them for unity sake just like Ford did to Nixon....

I think they need to be impeached and future presidents shown they can't do what Bush and Cheney have done and continue to do.  Democrats need to grow a spine on this one!


by gabbie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:22:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 1)

F$#@%!!

$78,010?? oh hell no.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:25:09 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (none / 0)

yeah, we're all socialists now.  the difference is some of us admit it and are willing to pay for it and others...well, you know.


by the mollusk on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:32:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (none / 0)

But what if I think our guy just does not have what it takes and I trust the other guy to actually get the job done? This is not some grudge I developed. This is a feeling I have had since the beginning despite the fact I said in 2004 our guy would make a run. This is a feeling that this guy has yet to respond to.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:33:21 AM EST

I don't care who it is (2.00 / 3)

The dem will be better than Johnny Mac.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:35:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't care who it is (none / 0)

But you are not answering my concern. Should I ignore the way I feel? What if someone told you to jump off a bridge but you know deep down inside of you, that is not what you want to do.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:38:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Having a president McCain (2.00 / 4)

is jumping off a bridge.
As far as I'm concerned.

Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:41:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't care who it is (2.00 / 1)

I think both of them are going to disappoint me and really let me down. They're going to waffle, extend it to 16-20 months. Going to leave people there to protect KBR and all those contractors and those hired mercenaries who don't deserve our sacrifice.

I think that.

I think a lot of things and I know it doesn't matter what I think right now because a lot of people are going to die before anything good happens. January 20th is an age away to a man who serves 160 days in hell with 80 pounds or more of gear.

300 stretches to 600. 2 more tours of duty.

All I know is, if you stand for something, and I think I can trust Senator Clinton and Obama on this - then I take your word for it at least once. I'll pardon anything they do wrong in the primaries but once they get into office, if they disappoint me, I'll figure something else out.

I don't know. I'd reserve the "vote to make a stand" or don't vote to make a stand till 2012. I want to give the Democrats one last chance.

They disappointed me in 2006 and I seriously worked my ass off for Pederson in this state, to no avail and I worked my ass off as hard as I could.

Being this emotionally attached to politics and believing in things is a constant series of let downs. But every once in awhile, there's a gem.

Gotta vote. And I know voting for Senator McCain will accomplish nothing except the obvious. Another 2,000+ dead. Another 150,000 civilians gone.


by Sir Hadrian on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:43:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

your feelings are wrong (2.00 / 2)

I say this on part of my brother who would like to leave the army and Iraq


Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.
by CardBoard on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:45:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your feelings are wrong (none / 0)

How are my feelings wrong? You can't tell me my feelings are are wrong, these are my feelings of the candidates. I'm talking about the candidates here.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:05:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your feelings are wrong (2.00 / 4)

If your are implying the McCain is better than Hillary or Obama your feeling are wrong


Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.
by CardBoard on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:07:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your feelings are wrong (2.00 / 1)

I am not going to say whether your feelings are right or wrong.  They are your feelings... yours.  The trouble is your vote or your decision to not to vote affect more than just you.  

There WILL be an election in November.  Given the last 8 years, I don't think it's hard to see that elections WILL directly affect all of our lives.  In fact, voting for Bush or Nader or not voting in 2000 and again in 2004 HAS not just affected but ended around a million lives ( a million!).  No matter what you choose, it will have an effect.  

You may wish that we had an FDR to vote for.  I certainly do.  You may have a VERY strong distaste for one or both of the democratic candidates.  Again, I certainly do.  You may not think that either of the 2 will do everything or even most of what is most important to you.  Me again.  But you have to know that this election is MUCH bigger than you or me.  

Neoconservatism must be repudiated at the ballot box this fall so that the GOP is forced to change direction if they're ever to win an election again.  Don't misunderstand me.  I hope that they never win another election, but most of all neoconservatism has got to become permanent history and it must happen now.  This means a lot to me as my children are one and a half and two and a half.  I want them to grow up with the same american liberties that I have enjoyed and the 230 years worth of americans before me have enjoyed.  Neoconservatism stands in stark opposition to liberty.  Unitary executive, removal of Habeas, politicizing the DOJ, warrantless spying, a SCOTUS with an agenda, the list goes on.

 It is for this reason that I call neoconservatism the greatest threat to Jeffersonian government in our nation's entire history... worse than the Redcoats... worse than Pearl Harbor... worse than terrorism.  It is for this reason (mostly my kids) that I ask you to please vote for the democratic nominee.  We need a democrat, any democrat, in the Oval Office so that we won't have to fight a veto pen in our efforts to reinstitute the Constitution with the help of our legislative majorities.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:47:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your feelings are wrong (2.00 / 1)

One could ask what your feelings are based upon?  Chances are it's nothing more than the perceptions you've formed of McCain (and maybe Obama) from the slanted media coverage you've seen.  

IMHO, gut instincts are the worst thing to make a political decision based upon, because they are so easily manipulated by the campaigns involved.  

And honestly the media worship of McCain is astounding to me.  Every time I see him, he comes across as a prickly, unlikable old man with nothing of substance to say on any subject.  Every time I read an account of his political career which doesn't fellate him, he comes across as an egomaniac, whose one saving grace is he's so concerned with his own popularity he refuses to be a "team player" with the other Rethugs at times, and would happily sell them all down a river if he thought it were advantageous.  

I honestly don't get it, and I assume that the glow will come off as there is more attention paid on the campaign trail - just as the glow came off Guiliani.


by telephasic on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:56:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't care who it is (2.00 / 1)

Quit whining and do/vote for who you want to vote for whether you vote based on your "feelings" or based on your "brains"...its your vote.  Vote for how you best can live with yourself and your vote.


by gabbie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:24:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 2)

If you can rationally explain how McCain will "get the job done," then perhaps someone could answer your question.  But since it is just about impossible for a progressive to make that argument -- you know, because McCain's values are completely out of step with progressive values -- it's sort of hard to engage you.  

Look, you don't like Obama.  I get it.  You apparently have some vague warm fuzzy feelings about McCain.  Again, fine.  But on issues ranging from the courts, to the war, to the economy, to healthcare McCain is an absolute disaster.  In other words, he's not up for "getting the job done" in any of those areas.  Given that, I fail to see how you could possibly prefer him to either Democrat.    


by HSTruman on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:26:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (none / 0)

i have the same feeling but what can i do if hillary loses. you dont trust "O" but you dont trust Mc. Its the lesser of two evils. it sucks especially since its so close between the candidates. but when somebody loses someone else has to be the winner. and thats what it comes down to.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:45:50 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 0)

You have to make your voice heard. A loss is only a loss if you let it stand.

You begin again. You make certain your wing of the party isn't destroyed by the DFA wing.

We as Democrats must realize we are an amalgamation of so many different strokes, that it's no wonder we offend and splinter so often that we lose elections.

We can really trace this back to the Dixiecrat and Silent Majority splinter in the 60s. Since then, we've had so many different types of activism and care.

And if the Blue Collar Majority feels it's not getting represented, you do have the choice of not voting for someone you find distasteful.

Don't let my feelings get in the way of yours. I'm  not suffering to the point of death.

I feel there are other ways though. Whereas I thought John Kerry was rather establishment in 2004, I still voted for him, though it didn't matter in my leans-red like a bitch state of Arizona.

I instead just got more involved in the community, made certain I wrote letters, got involved in blogging and made sure I got my word in in every conversation possible.

Sometimes the lesser of two evils is good, sometimes there's a third way - not voting. You've got to balance that. You may even want to try a different approach and go with a euphemism - "for the greater good".

At the moment, I'm ecstatic about Senator Obama and mildly pleased with Senator Clinton. In November, even if Senator Clinton wins on Super-Delegates, I'll vote for her because I believe the greater good comes from it. I hope we pick up seats, I hope we get some decent judges back into this country...

and if anything, I hope we, just for awhile, don't look like a pathetic fucking mess on the world stage.

But I totally respect anyone's idea to not vote for Senator Obama. This is a democracy and while I will always say - think of the men and women in Iraq - I will still call you a brother or sister in arms when all's said and done.

I've said some harsh things in public, but mostly private. At the end of the day, though - we go back to the drawing board. Or something :P.


by Sir Hadrian on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:58:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (none / 0)

I'm just outside of Phoenix.  I am also excited about BO, but would vote for Hilary if she got the nomination.  

We're slowly becoming more purple that red in this state.  I just wish that we could give it a good shove to the left.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:03:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (none / 0)

Think of it this way...why are u voting for Hillary?  Then vote for which candidate is the closest to her on the things you care about.

Or, think of it as if you want Hillary to have a future in politics i.e. senate majority leader she can only be that if there is a Democratic President not if McCain is the president...

Also, McCain would set women back 20+ years bc his entire focus will be on the war and nothing domestic, which is IMO what women mostly care about, the stuff at home: education, child care, jobs, health insurance...Etc.  John McCain will not focus on that stuff.  Hillary will and Barack will...

For Hillary to succeed in her political/senate career will require a Democratic President.  Perhaps that will help you decide who to vote for if Hillary doesn't get the nomination.


by gabbie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:28:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That's understandable. (none / 0)

We choose a candidate to support because we think they are the best one to do the job.  That's why I chose Biden.

After Biden dropped out, I took a look at the remaining candidates.  I liked Edwards but it was already obvious he was running distant third and I didn't want to have to go through yet another choice.

Having watched the early debates I had a lot of respect for Clinton.  I didn't know too much about Obama, the new guy, so I decided to watch the videos of his speeches, check out his bio and what he did before he went into politics.  I also watched a 45 minute speech by Michelle Obama.  After all of this I decided he had something special.  Plus the fact that my grandson, a first time voter, was supporting Obama.

I wavered around for awhile but finally settled on Obama...partly because of the lack of mandates in his healthcare plan.  It was/is my opinion that mandates requiring people to purchase something from a private vendor would be seized upon in the GE by the republicans as socialism.  Let's face it, neither candidate is advocating universal healthcare...they're advocating universal health insurance.

As the campaigns progressed I became more and more impressed with Obama and not sorry I made the decision.  I was so disappointed that Clinton's campaign chose to push her in a direction that didn't come naturally to her.  She is being marketed as Rambo and pushed to become more hardhitting and negative.  When she drops that pretence and acts like herself I remember why I initially liked her.

My point, if I have one, is you should watch the Obama speeches, check out his website, read everything you can about him.  I think you will be pleasantly surprised how likable he is and what a good fit he is for President at this time.


No Way, No How, No McCain!
by GFORD on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:59:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 1)

Great post!


by Mostly on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:48:32 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 1)

Amen.


We have nothing to fear but fear itself. And clowns.
by haremoor on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:42:20 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 1)

I wish I could push a super duper Recommend button with exclamation points on it for this diary.


by sclminc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:43:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 4)

I voted for Edwards in my State's Primary. I will vote for the Democrat in November.

It must ABSOLUTELY gall both Clinton and Obama to see some of their 'supporters' threatening to vote for McCain. You can damn well bet your last dollar that NEITHER of them support that ridiculous action....especially if done in their names! They will be shocked and dismayed and disgusted to have any of their 'supporters' vote for the Republican in November.

I guarantee that whoever gets the nod, the other will IMMEDIATELY throw their support behind the nominee/winner (along with Edwards and Gore and all other true Democrats). They will also ask their supporters to join them in doing so. Why? Because THEY ARE DEMOCRATS!

It will either be Hillary supporting Obama or Obama supporting Hillary come November. Anyone who truly supports either candidate here and now will stick with them in November and vote Democratic.

To say otherwise is asinine. At best.


by Kysen on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:57:10 AM EST

Right on! (2.00 / 3)

Let's all come together and repeat after me...

"we have two awesome candidates"
"we have two awesome candidates"

one more time, with feeling

"we have two awesome candidates"

Stop the infighting and focus on getting a democrat, whichever one of the two remaining awesome candidates it might be, elected this Fall.


by toom on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:57:50 AM EST

Re: A few reasons (2.00 / 2)

I never really believed that many Democrats would vote for McCain, or sit out, or vote Nader, or write-in someone.  Most of the people advocating that are now gone from mydd.  True Democrats can look past the superficial differences between Clinton and Obama and see they agree on virtually all the major issues.  They disagree strongly with McCain on all the major issues.

Every presidential election has candidates who don't make it to the general.  There will always be some bitterness, some hurt, and some feelings that the best candidate lost the primary.  But true progressives would never help the Republican just to stick it to the Dem nominee.

Great diary.


by Skaje on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:00:30 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support (2.00 / 3)

Thank you for the graphic reminder of why we are here.


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:18:20 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 3)

http://ivaw.org/

or an organization I belong to
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/

every day...every way...Stop McCain..


"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie
by nogo war on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 08:48:39 AM EST

Yes. (2.00 / 4)

We've been suffering the Bush "administration" now for seven long years and counting. I can't wait to pull the lever for a Democrat to finally draw a line under the last years. It mystifies me how someone can call themselves a Democrat and not be filled to the gills with the exact same sentiment.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:25:48 AM EST

Another reason to vote Dem this year (2.00 / 1)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102213. html?hpid=topnews


by the mollusk on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:48:44 AM EST

I posted this in its own diary... (2.00 / 4)

...but this is a better thread.

___

Are you guys ready? Let's roll.

--Todd Beamer, passenger of United Flight 93, American Hero

I'm tired.  So tired.  I've been blogging here for a couple of weeks now, and I get discouraged at all the infighting and recrimination between Clinton supporters and Obama supporters.  When I went on vacation for a few days last week, however, I didn't see any of that from people.  

There were folks that were Clinton supporters and were suspicious of Obama, there were Obama supporters who were angry with what they saw as Clinton's dirty tricks, but all of them realize that we're at a critical juncture, and we can't allow ourselves to get distracted from the real goal.

The reason I quote Todd Beamer, one of the people aboard United 93 who pushed away the terror of impending death and saved countless others by not remaining a sheep, not remaining silent and pliant, is because, although our situation does not match the gravity of that for which his immortal words were spoken, we are nonetheless in a situation where we have a lot of opportunity to do good for something greater than ourselves.

George Bush was supposed to be a custodian president.  Given the reins of a flush economy, he could have just served out a term or two with relatively little flourish.  He was already intending to go into Iraq, but the case would've been a hard sell to even a Republican congress had 9/11 not fallen into his lap as the perfect lever to con us into a brutal and unnecessary war.

Because of this, we have spent nearly $508 billion in the Iraq misadventure and lost the lives of 4011 American soldiers and nearly 1.2 million Iraqis.  Thousands if not millions more people are facing life with limited mobility or dexterity or mental capacity due to heinous wounds suffered in the line of duty.  145 of our soldiers have taken their own lives rather than continue with their demons.

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

When I was in junior high, a bully, pumped on steroids, sucker punched me and knocked my glasses down the hall.  I got up and grabbed the nearest person that could've been the bully and took him down, only realizing my mistake after I'd already hurt them.  To my credit, I backed off when I realized my mistake.  George Bush would have beaten that innocent bystander to death while the real culprit walked off with a smirk on his face.

Why am I telling you these things?  Is it a long and tasteless April Fool's joke?  No.  I'm telling you these things because John McCain wants to further tarnish the sacrifice of Todd Beamer and his compatriots.  He would turn his eye to Iran, another country that was not behind 9/11, and extend the cycle of war for another generation.  He still does not see the difference between Sunni and Shia, or understand the 1400-year-old rift in religious dynasty that has split the middle east into countless wars.

Should we still be embroiled in Iraq when this happens, John McCain, who so bravely fought in one long war with a draft, may turn to Selective Service to supplement our already-cracking military.  There has been some reporting that the machinery for instituting the draft was spooled up in 2005.  An international coalition in this fool's errand seems unlikely at best; this might be the only way such a war would be possible.

John McCain cares little for the economy.  He and his family and his friends have done fine under the Bush economic policies of borrow-and-spend.  Why would he need to change?  Bush saw no need to take up the American people on our offer of service and sacrifice after 9/11, instead telling us to go on vacation, to go to the mall.  There is no "wartime economy," just an economy where more and more power gets siphoned off to corporate interests as plunderers try to make off with as much loot as they can before someone rational gets back into office and realizes that maybe, just maybe, putting the lobbyists in control of government policy regulation might result in problems down the road... and our home owners now suffer forclosures at thousands per day. Our gas prices reach greater levels than ever before. It costs more just to feed families because the cost of freight has gone up.  

All this is okay with John McCain.  Somebody else will have a look at it.  Lobbyists have been pretty good to him, despite their differences.  They even serve on his campaign, they can't be that bad, right?  The free market will sort everything out, anyway.  But at what cost to normal Americans like you and me?

John McCain is a hero himself, but he dishonors the sacrifices of Todd Beamer, of his fellows on United 93, of the firefighters that ran into collapsing skyscrapers just to save another life, of our soldiers that have given their lives or their limbs in the service of both an unjust war in Iraq and a nigh-forgotten just war in Afghanistan.  These men and women are heroes, too.  

John McCain and those like him starve the government when it suits their purposes, just to see how long they can go before fixing a bridge, in hopes that it won't collapse before someone else is in office.  The real heroes risked their lives to save a busload of children.

John McCain and those like him support a disaster institution that still has not provided a proper reckoning or repair of the worst natural disaster to strike our shores in decades.  The real heroes were those who went out to save people from the roofs of houses, and those who opened their own houses to refugees.

John McCain and those like him support new Supreme Court Justices with comparative records as thin as their commitment to the honest and neutral interpretation of the law.  Just one more extreme conservative justice to replace 88-year-old Justice Stevens, and women will start losing control over their own bodies and methods we deem as torture (as John McCain did once) or infiltration of our rights to privacy will become perfectly fine.  The real heroes were the members of the Justice Department who refused to politicize their jobs, and lost them as a result.

Many think that John McCain is somehow different from George Bush, that he is a maverick... but those days are long behind him.  Friedrich Nietzsche once wrote:

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

John McCain once could have been a great president, but he stared into the abyss too long.  He became the monster he fought when he quietly stood by and let Karl Rove and George W. Bush smear his adopted daughter Bridget, only 8 years old at the time.  He went back to these people for help.  He is owned by them.

His lesson is our lesson.  We cannot remain divided.  For years we have fought the Republicans.  Some of the most successful Democrats have won by emulating them.  We must be wary of losing our soul the way John McCain has.  

We get one shot at this every four years.  Our choices might end up not being perfect, might not be everyone's ideal, but we owe it to all the heroes that came before us not to let their sacrifices be squandered for personal gain of a cabal of wealthy men suckling from Haliburton, Airbus, or the Carlyle Group.  

Don't be a sheep.  Don't let neocons tell us what to think about our candidates.  Don't let fear win.  We need to stop John McCain, and we need as much help as we can get.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:59:40 AM EST

Great diary (2.00 / 4)

I wish we could just leave the pictures up with the diary title as a permanent part of every Democratic blog on the web.
People need to be reminded of what we've been dealing with the last 7 years.
THINK.
by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:12:02 AM EST

Amen!!!! (2.00 / 3)


by beachmom on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:21:16 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 4)

Not only beat me to it, but executed it in a way that I would have never come close to. Awesome post


by hotran on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:31:57 AM EST

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 2)

i think you're posting this diary on the wrong website.


by campskunk on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:38:27 AM EST

O RLY? (2.00 / 4)

Seems to me that both sites need this message


by sharpfork on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:15:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 2)

This is a unity diary.  Put this crap somewhere else.  

If you do this here, then someone has to point out to you that Obama supporters feel this way because giving Hilary the nomination would mean SDs overturning the results of the state by state voting whereas Clinton supporters can't make the same claim so there would be reason for the backlash.  Clinton supporters will then have to respond by pretending like sticking with the rules and the agreement that her campaign helped to create is unfair.  Next thing you know, we're on the path to McSame and more war, economic destruction, more loss of civil liberties, etc.  

The voting has gone how it has gone. The campaigns have done what they've done to court votes.  The delegates have gone to whom they've gone to.  We will have our nominee soon enough.  Attitude and anger won't change it.  Regardless, the nominee WILL be a democrat regardless of whether it's the one you prefer.

You can accuse those around you of inappropriate, childish, or unwise behavior all you want.  Until your behavior (such as your comments) doesn't implicate you in the same, your comments won't hold water.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:21:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No. (2.00 / 1)

Waiting for there to only be one candidate for there to be calls to unity would be even more disingenuous.  

Most supporters of both sides want us to come together, no matter who it's for.

Would you rather see yet another Bosnia or Wright hatchet job diary?  What point would that serve?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:32:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No. (none / 0)

You've missed my point entirely.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:41:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Er, sorry (none / 0)

Distracted.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:48:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Er, sorry (none / 0)

I understand.  My 2 crumb snatchers have evidently decided that today is rampage day.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:03:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 4)

This is where we are, so this is where the message goes. There is no 'right' or 'wrong' blog on which to post this message. The calls for unity are increasing at dKos, as well. Whether the majority of people there heed the message or continue their petulance is up to them.

But here, where the community is smaller, we really do have the ability to change the tone and elevate the discourse.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:25:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A few reasons to support the Dem nominee whoev (2.00 / 2)

Did you miss the bit that said cross posted at dailykos?


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:25:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Support the Dem nominee whoever it is. (2.00 / 4)

Great positive diary!  Rec'd!


by NewOaklandDem on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:47:19 AM EST

McCain WILL kill Roe (2.00 / 4)

Just one more justice will flip Roe vs. Wade and you can bet McCain (who has ALWAYS been pro-life) will appoint a justice to overturn it.

America, listen up!  JOHN MCCAIN WILL OVERTURN ROE vs. WADE


John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.
by jkfp2004 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:16:08 PM EST

Re: McCain WILL kill Roe (1.00 / 5)

I think Obama will as well and will regard it as one of post-partisan triumphs. Don't even try and scare me with that one. Obama voted present and then lied about his reasons for doing so. He has no credibility on the subject whatsoever.


by Little Otter on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:30:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now you're lying (2.00 / 1)

Nobody gets a 100% from Planned Parenthood by being pro-life.

Illustrate exactly how he lied and managed to fool the one organization most interested in reproductive rights in the country, and we'll discuss the issue.  You CAN NOT spread that sort of misinformation and expect to be unchecked.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:58:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Educate yourself (none / 0)

During Senator Obama's 2004 senate campaign, the Illinois NOW PAC did not recommend the endorsement of Obama for U.S. Senate because he refused to stand up for a woman's right to choose and repeatedly voted `present' on important legislation.

As a State Senator, Barack Obama voted `present' on seven abortion bills, including a ban on 'partial birth abortion,' two parental notification laws and three 'born alive' bills.  In each case, the right vote was clear, but Senator Obama chose political cover over standing and fighting for his convictions.

"When we needed someone to take a stand, Senator Obama took a pass," said Grabenhofer. "He wasn't there for us then and we don't expect him to be now."

illinoisnow.org


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:52:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh my (2.00 / 1)

The National Organization for Women prefers Clinton over Obama.  Shocking.

Snark aside, I'll take the word of the foremost advocate of reproductive rights in the country, who was actively working on the legislation, over the state chapter of a non-specialized women's advocacy group.

It was the New York chapter of NOW that said this about Ted Kennedy when he endorsed Obama:

Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy's endorsement of Hillary Clinton's opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.

"And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He's picked the new guy over us. He's joined the list of progressive white men who can't or won't handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not "this" one). `They' are Howard Dean and Jim Dean (Yup! That's Howard's brother) who run DFA (that's the group and list from the Dean campaign that we women helped start and grow). They are Alternet, Progressive Democrats of America, democrats.com, Kucinich lovers and all the other groups that take women's money, say they'll do feminist and women's rights issues one of these days, and conveniently forget to mention women and children when they talk about poverty or human needs or America's future or whatever.

"This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women's rights, women's voices, women's equality, women's authority and our ability - indeed, our obligation - to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who `know what's best for us.'"

Kinda makes "Judas" look kinda tame in comparison.

This was such an outragious outpouring of ill-aimed anger that the national umbrella chapter said this:

The National Organization for Women has enormous respect and admiration for Sen. Edward Kennedy (D- Mass.). For decades Sen. Kennedy has been a friend of NOW, and a leader and fighter for women's civil and reproductive rights, and his record shows that.

Though the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee has proudly endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, we respect Sen. Kennedy's endorsement. We continue to encourage women everywhere to express their opinions and exercise their right to vote.

In short, while I heartily respect what NOW has been able to do since it was founded, I don't find the condemnation of one chapter to be particularly damning for Obama, especially when they knew that Clinton was going to be running.  Their agenda was showing.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:05:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Snark aside (none / 0)

I'll take the word of the National Organization For Women (NOW) in Obama's home state who attempted to directly work with him on reproductive rights and found his actions to be evasive at best and lacking leadership. They were DIRECTLY involved in this legislation, and had a ringside seat.

I also agree with NOW in their assessment of Ted Kennedy, who chose to betray his constituents by announcing he wouldn't support Hillary Clinton, their OVERWHELMING presidental choice.

In short, I heartily respect what NOW has been able to do since it was founded -- protecting the rights of women nation wide. Their agenda IS showing, and I heartily approve.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:17:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Snark aside (none / 0)

So, you agree with NOW for calling Kennedy a "betrayer" for endorsing Obama over Clinton, their "OVERWHELMING presidential choice," ten months before the presidential election?  Or are you talking about the primary, and if so, are we back to the specious argument that you attributed to Obama that even already-aligned superdelegates should go with their constituencies?

How do you even know she is their overwelming presidential choice?  I'd like to see your time machine, friend.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:26:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Snark aside (none / 0)

Ted Kennedy is a delegate to the Democratic convention, and democrats in the state of MA overwhelming voted for Clinton. No one needs a time machine to see that he's obviously betraying his constituients by voting AGAINST their preferred candidate.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:09:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

STOP IT (2.00 / 1)

Everyone-
If we ever hope to raise the level of discourse around here, we need to stop making assertions like this:
"Obama voted present and then lied about his reasons for doing so. He has no credibility on the subject whatsoever."

When the only source I know one could cite to back up such an assertion has clearly been refuted: http://mediamatters.org/items/2007121400 04

"We at Planned Parenthood view those as leadership votes," Pam Sutherland, the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, told ABC News. "We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive'. They put these bills out all the time ... because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats."


by sharpfork on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:23:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 100% NOT TRUE (none / 0)

From IllinoisNow.org:

To be clear, voting "present" on those bills was a strategy that IL NOW did not support. At that time, we made it clear to the legislators that we disagreed with the strategy. We wanted legislators to take a stand against the harmful anti-choice bills being brought to the floor of the Illinois State Senate.

Voting "present" does not demonstrate leadership and does not send the clarion signal that one is unwavering in their support of a woman's right to choose. IL NOW knew that those bills were unacceptable to women. Except for these present votes, Senator Obama's record on choice has been excellent, but he has not taken leadership on the issue at the same level that Hillary has.

Ms. Brett asserts that the strategy to vote "present" was devised to give political cover to legislators in conservative districts. State Senator Barack Obama did not represent a conservative district and he could have voted "no" with little negative consequence in his district.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:56:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Come on. (2.00 / 1)

NOW's loyalty to Clinton is admirable, but do you really think that they're greater authorities on reproductive rights than Planned Parenthood?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:08:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, you come on (none / 0)

Illinois NOW worked directly with Obama on reproductive rights legislation in his home state. They were right there to evaulate his motives and effectiveness, firsthand. They chose to endorse Clinton, and it's easy to see why.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:21:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes. (none / 0)

It's easy to see why the National Organization for Women endorsed the first viable Democratic female candidate for President.  Very true.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:35:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes. (none / 0)

And it's easy to see why the Illinois NOW, who worked directly with Obama on abortion legislation in his home state, are NOT supporting him based on the positions he took.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:11:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Its easy to see how WOMEN who often have more (none / 0)

common sense than MEN, (I say that as a man) support the female Dem. candidate that stands for an end to healthcare TERROR in the US, not the candidate that has pledged to INCREASE MILITARY SPENDING, and who purports to be helping everybody on healthcare but in reality is just rearranging deck chairs so that those who get pushed off are a bit less visible (in statistics of 'uninsured')

Has anyone here watched Elizabeth Edwards endorse Hillary's health plan this morning?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/ 23919149#23919149


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.
by architek on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:21:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain WILL kill Roe (2.00 / 1)

Oh come on. That's just garbage. Go read what the president of NARAL said. I can't believe you are that ignorant of this fact. This is one of the most important issues to me because it is up for grabs in this election. You can have reservations about Barack for whatever reasons you like, but don't spread blatant lies. Please.


by cecilybecily on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:31:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain WILL kill Roe (none / 0)

Go read what the National Organization For Women in Obama's homestate said:


"When we needed someone to take a stand, Senator Obama took a pass. He wasn't there for us then and we don't expect him to be now."


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:00:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Right (2.00 / 1)

You needn't post the text from the pro-Clinton site again and again.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:11:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

You needn't attack the National Organization For Women again and again. They know the issues that face women, and they choose to endorse Clinton.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:25:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Attack? (none / 0)

Are you crazy?  I said that they did good things, but that they might not be the last word in a few areas, and this particular one.

I also suggested that sometimes their chapters don't always represent the whole of the organization.

Persecution complex?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:38:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

Yes, I agree, but to dismiss Obama's 100% rating with planned parenthood is just disingenous. Anyone thinking Obama would appoint pro-life justices is just kidding themselves. Anyone who thinks McCain would be better on reproductive rights than eith candidate is just plain deluded.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:53:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

No one is dismissing Obama's rating with Planned Parenthood. But given his proclivity to vote "present" in the Illinois legislature on reproductive freedom issues, many women don't want to take a chance that he'll appoint justices who will do the same.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:15:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (2.00 / 0)

Well, we're kinda off topic, because this is more about any dem candidate vs. McSame, and anyone who thinks McSame is better than Obama on reproductive rights is seriously divorced from reality.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 08:31:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

And anyone who doesn't think that Clinton is better than Obama on reproductive rights is "seriously divorced from reality." Voting "Present" is not voting "Aye."


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:38:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

Sorry, gotta call bullshit on this:

"No one is dismissing Obama's rating with Planned Parenthood. "

That's what most of this thread has been about.  It all started with a statement that McSame would overturn Roe.  Then came the attacks on Obama as a choice candidate.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 08:44:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Right (none / 0)

Pointing out the truth about his "present" votes on women's reproductive rights is NOT an attack.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:37:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain WILL kill Roe (none / 0)

Yes, but as I am from Illinois, and have read about those votes from key players in the pro-choice movement here, the "Present" votes were part of a strategy laid out by leaders of the Illinois pro-choice movement . I wish I was computer savvy enough to post a link, but you can easily google the topic and find out exactly why Obama voted "present". Google Planned Parenthood Chicago president Steve Trombley and Planned Parenthood Illinois president Pam Sutherland on this issue. It was a strategy to defend pro-choice dems in Illinois. Planned Parenthood contacted Barack because he was a key player in Illinois. Voting "present" is a way to vote in opposition of a proposed bill without letting that vote be used against you in future elections. Their hope was that fellow dems would follow suit and the anti-choice bill would not pass.


by cecilybecily on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 05:16:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain WILL kill Roe (none / 0)

It looks like Obama listened to Planned Parenthood Chicago and Planned Parenthood Illinois instead who urged him to vote "Present" as part of their strategy. Do you think Planned Parenthood is anti-choice? Do you think Planned Parenthood advocates electing conservative judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade?


by cecilybecily on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 05:20:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

This is the diary that we needed (2.00 / 3)

Fantastic diary!  Pictures really do say a million words.  This is one of the most important elections in our lifetime.  For about a week, I was in a "I'll never vote for Clinton" mindset.  I feel guilty about it now.  I will vote for whoever wins the nomination because what we need now is a Democrat.  Period.


by nrioq on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:29:21 PM EST

Re: A few reasons (1.75 / 4)

If those things are more important, then Obama needs to start campaigning actively for Florida and Michigan's delegates to counted as currently apportioned. Because without that action on his part, then no one is going to take seriously that he's interested in making the world a better place.

Obama and his supporters have spent a lot of this campaign engaging in both racist and misogynist rhetoric. To tell the recipients of that thuggery that they must look the other way because other things are more important misses the point that Obama isn't entitled to anyone's vote because of mistakes Bush made. If he wants me to vote FOR him, then he has to earn that and he's at a deficit right now, very similar to the one that Republican candidates traditionally hold in my esteem.

Obama made the mess in the Democratic party. He can clean it up. If he does, he can win. If he doesn't, he'll lose. It's that simple. But you don't get to demand the people who he has repeatedly insulted do his work for him.