Home » Blog » DFA at the Holidays - It's today!
Blog for America
DFA at the Holidays - It's today!
Linked to groups: NJ for Democracy
Fresh on the heels of last night's standing-room only NJ Presidential Caucus, organized by NJ for Democracy & our progressive allies, DFA members from across the state are getting together today for an end-of-year celebration and a look ahead to where we're going in 2008.
1pm - everyone's welcome at Morris County Democratic HQ - 11 Washington Street, Morristown - for a planning meeting. Bring your ideas for where DFA should head in 2008.
3pm - Then the party starts, across the street at The Famished Frog, a great pub-restaurant where we'll order off the menu & just unwind and have a good time. Invite your family!
More info & RSVP & Google Map here!
Hey! John Edwards won the Caucus, by the way. And for all the delicious detail, fun info & play-by-play ...come to DFA at the Holidays today!
Show: Expand All Reply
* rdorgan
Sat, 12/08/07
12:09 pm
Reply to this
http://www.oprah.magazine-order.com/director?page=44&umc=6799&mtrack=1516&redirect=no
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
It's agent "007" ---
--- O and O in '07
who do you trust - howard or the repubs ?
Fri Dec 7, 2:14 PM ET
To: POLITICAL EDITORS
Contact: Stacie Paxton or Caroline Ciccone both of the Democratic National Committee, +1-202-863-8148
WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following response after Republicans blocked Democratic efforts to fix the Alternative Minimum Tax and pay for it:
"Republicans continue to prove that you just can't trust them with your money. The Bush Republicans in Congress can't claim to be fiscal conservatives one day and then block Democratic efforts to responsibly manage our country's finances the next. Democrats are absolutely committed to stopping a tax hike on millions of unsuspecting middle class Americans but Republicans are blocking efforts to do so responsibly. With our national debt rising by $1.4 billion a day and foreign governments controlling our debt, what will it take for Republicans to act responsibly?"
...
rd wrote "Thanks for your consistency in reminding us how we all first got here on this blog."
I would take more credit, but the reality is I'm just a creature of habit and happen to think Dr. Dean is one of the greatest political leaders in our lifetime.
Indeed Mr. Gore is a visionary.
How did he know some folks would be trying to insert Religion in to our Government and th Presidential Election?
Uploaded a few days ago, Mr. Gore adresses this issue.
http://current.com/items/88283801_no_off...
Go Al
Go Al
Go Al
Indeed Howard Dean is numero uno !
Apologies for any duplications
----
Hillary Clinton Might Be the Least Electable Democrat
By Guy T. Saperstein, AlterNet
December 7, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/69916/
Last Sunday's New York Times contained an op-ed by Frank Rich ("Who's Afraid of Barack Obama," Dec. 2) suggesting that, for a variety of reasons, Barack Obama is the Democrat the Republicans fear most. While Rich emphasized Obama's authenticity, his early and unequivocal opposition to the Iraq war and his cross-over appeal to independents and Republicans, missing from his otherwise excellent article were polling results confirming why Republicans fear an Obama presidential candidacy and why they would prefer to run against Hillary Clinton.
While Clinton maintains her lead in national polling among Democrats, in direct matchups against Republican presidential candidates, she consistently runs behind both Barack Obama and John Edwards. In the recent national Zogby Poll (Nov. 26, 2007), every major Republican presidential candidate beats Clinton: McCain beats her 42 percent to 38 percent; Giuliani beats her 43 percent to 40 percent; Romney beats her 43 percent to 40 percent; Huckabee beats her 44 percent to 39 percent; and Thompson beats her 44 percent to 40 percent, despite the fact Thompson barely appears to be awake most of the time.
By contrast, Obama beats every major Republican candidate: He beats McCain 45 percent to 38 percent; Guiliani 46 percent to 41 percent; Romney 46 percent to 40 percent; Huckabee 46 percent to 40 percent; and, Thompson 47 percent to 40 percent. In other words, Obama consistently runs 8 to 11 percent stronger than Clinton when matched against Republicans. To state the obvious: The Democratic presidential candidate will have to run against a Republican.
Clinton's inherent weakness as a candidate shows up in other ways. In direct matchups for congressional seats, Democrats currently are running 10 percent to 15 percent ahead of Republicans, depending on the poll, while Clinton runs 3 percent to 7 percent behind -- a net deficit ranging from 13 to 22 percent. No candidate in presidential polling history ever has run so far behind his or her party.
View the full story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/69916/
Linda wrote "Indeed Mr. Gore is a visionary."
David wrote "Indeed Howard Dean is numero uno!"
I indeed feel like I should post a comment with the word "indeed" in it.
Linda, those are indeed great photos. They're so good, I almost thought you were Daniel Rooney posting there for a moment.
Indeed Tom Bearse is ---
is ---
greeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaattttttttt !
(that enough tiger in your tank ?)
I should learn not to put numbers anymore being this blog is so messed up.
I think it is hysterical when I see one number above with a time like
11:40PM and then a number below...far below with a time 11:03PM
???hmmmm, forget vertigo...migraines.
rd wrote "(that enough tiger in your tank?)"
I'd like to take a moment to discuss a more serious subject and that is, does everyone fully appreciate what a true genius we have in our midst in rdorgan?
11.
aw, schuks
(self photo -- my better side)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_scientist
...
Caucasian, male, aging, crooked teeth, messy hair, lab coat, spectacles/goggles, dramatic posing ...11.
Republicans blocked Democratic efforts to fix the Alternative Minimum Tax and pay for it:
Indeed (ha Tom) they did do that.
The Republicans gave Democrats no other choice than to remove the "pay as you go" part of the bill so millions of lower income Americans would not get stuck paying more taxes next year. A proposal to offset that cost with a tax increase on executives at private equity firms and hedge funds, was stripped out of the Senate bill after Republicans opposed it.
So, if the House approves this, Dems will be blamed for not following their pay as you go promises. These are the dirty tricks Repugs in the Senate play with the filibuster. The bill is only a temporary one-year fix however.
Caucasian, male, aging, crooked teeth, messy hair, lab coat, spectacles/goggles, dramatic posing ...
Just great,
Blast kills local al-Sadr leader, family
Story Highlights
Bomb strikes radical cleric associate's home as family sleeps
Suicide car bomb kills four police officers, two civilians
Reuters.com: Target was counterterrorism official, who was wounded
Separate blast sets major oil pipeline on fire
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A regional leader of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's movement and his family died when an explosion went off as they were sleeping in their home in southern Iraq, police said.
Smoke rises Friday from a bombed pipeline in northern Iraq.
Uday Hamid, his wife and two children died in the Numaniya blast, which police told CNN was a bomb.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/12/08/iraq.main/index.html
13.
Nope (i'm still trying to invent an elixir to do that).
Oh well, back to the lab.
Poof (for now).
Joan wrote:
"John you would rather have eight more years of Republicanism?? A simple Yes or No answer will do since there isn't any other choice at the ballot box. You either do or you don't."
Joan, you and Tom state the choice in stark, binary terms. I hate the thought of 8 more years of Republican rule, but if that happens, the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. They have broken the promises they made in 06, and have betrayed the trust of the Independents and Progressive Democrats who voted for them in sufficient numbers to overcome Republican voter suppression and outright vote stealing. Pelosi, Hoyer, Schumer, Feinstein, and co. vote against the Democratic base then proclaim arrogantly that we have nowhere else to go in 08.
So Joan (and Tom), it's not a simple yes/no question. When I questioned Levin's vote for Lieberman's anti-Iran resolution, he responded with an offensive, vitriolic screed full of White House and AIPAC talking points. And you expect me to support his re-election. Levin also clings to the bogus "support the troops" mantra when challenged on his war funding votes. I won't vote for Levin's Republican challenger, but I will vote for a Green or Independent challenger. Same thing in the house race against the awful Republican incumbent (Candice Miller).
As for the presidential race, Hillary will probably lose, even if I do hold my nose, as I did with Kerry. But she has not earned the votes of Progressive Democrats and independents. The same is true of Barack "Happy Talk" Obama. I have no illusion about either of the genuine Democrats (Kucinich, Gravel) winning the nomination, so I will swallow hard and vote for Edwards if he is the nominee. Otherwise, I will vote for the alternative candidate who best represents my views and values. If that results in President Giuliani, don't blame me, put the blame where it belongs, the Democrats.
Tom likes to quote Howard concerning the "perfect being the enemy of the good". If one of the Democratic Corporatists is the nominee, there will be no "good". Your binary choice will be between the awful and the even worse, Hobson's choice.
Huron John
Sat, 12/08/07
12:54 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
John,
You dont owe the likes of Joan and especially Tom and explanations for your rationale......bullying like they do Democrats and Independents shows the are shitting bricks over this upcoming election..........they should. The dont have the capacity obviously to comprehend that in this country there is a mass of smoldering discontent with BOTH parties from Democrats , Independents AND Republicans alike...............
Let Joan and Tom preach all they want...the jigs up with the Democrats, and if that means more republican rule then, as you say, they have only themselves and party to blame...
Such choices, Republican Light or a Republican, who do you choose?
...what happened to the Democratic Wing of the Democratic party. Representation for the people, not the corporations.
...I myself will not vote just any ol' (d)...even if the folks who always fall in line do. But that won't matter, as John points out, even though we held our nose, the ones YOU NEED TO PULL IN TO VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRAT, WON'T.
They seem to forget the many disenfranchised, or not the old tried and true
who fall in line on their polling.
No matter what. When given a choice of real or fake, folks take real.
The only difference being if one is able to disguise so well what they are.
But considering we are a year out from the General election, those realities wil
come to light.
...Are folks buying this "electable" stuff again. Kerry Part Deux
Mike wrote "John, You dont owe the likes of Joan and especially Tom and explanations for your rationale......bullying like they do."
Not only don't you owe an explanation, but I don't want to hear any. I've heard enough already, and it's not improving with age.
You can take some heart in the fact that I'll be voting for Edwards if he's the nominee, too, and it won't be with any more enthusiasm than you. There, solidarity.
Huron John.....
That's about the way I have it figured.
Just think if we all withheld our support till election the front runners might be singing a different tune.
Some think if they jump in and support the one who is most electable, they will have a better chance of getting a president more to their liking. The truth is why would they want to do anything for you, they already have your support and $$$, they'll just go off to the right and work for someone else's vote. When we let them do that, they forget to come back.imo
Huron John
Sat, 12/08/07
12:54 pm
... yep.
Now you'll get Tom, derF, and Indy all over you, for not getting into the line down at the slaughterhouse.
Clinton, as illustrated in the numbers above, goes down like a rock. Please stay in the Senate Hillary... or not.
Unfortunately Obama doesn't thrill enough of us to make us work for him, not like for Howard. He does lack administrative credentials when compared to others running.
Edwards? Well, maybe he'd have Venezualian election monitors brought in, or keep his win through the courts.
On the backs of Iowans we'll not get the progressive with the heart of a lion and the genile of a violate. From the 'wise' we'll get 'change' or 'electible'/'viable'. We won't get a record of courage and action, even in the face of dangerous opposition.
... from IA and NH, add SC, we'll get continuation of 'the proud', not the 'brave'. We'll get more of the 1950's, not the 2010's, in foreign affairs backed by a mammoth war machine.
The 'brave' lead into new eras of inclusion and common achievement. The truly 'wise' makes peace with his enemies, helps his fellows, and truncates bloviation so as to listen more.
... as the boyking missed the home of the terrorists by hundreds of miles, the Democrats of the 'first' states will miss by hundreds of 'calculations', or maybe a speck of 'feeling'.
... maybe it's the future sheep deserve.
I bet Al From and Bruce Reed are having a blast with themselves.
They've given us the candidates, again.
Hillary and the Anti Hillary.
Dave wrote "Unfortunately Obama doesn't thrill enough of us to make us work for him, not like for Howard."
Why did you support Dean and not Kucinich in 2004?
Bad ....or worse. hmmmm If you were going across the desert and you had a bad pair of shoes that wasn't a 'perfect' fit, but you could wear them and maybe break them in a little ...or a WORSE pair that would rip your feet up and you'd DIE in the desert.... so in a 'fit' you throw away BOTH pair.....?
hmmmmm
'the gentile of a violet'
... sheez.
Kuchinich/Feingold '08
... love ya'll, mean it!!
Kucinich/Feingold '08!!
The Interrogation Tapes
There was no reason to destroy those tapes unless, something illegal had happened...
"Nixon’s big mistake was that he didn’t destroy the tapes. ..... interviewed [Nixon historian] Roger Morris
"I was under medication when I made the decision not to burn the tapes....Richard Nixon" http://www.people.ubr.com/political/by-first-name/r/richard-nixon/richard-nixon-quotes.aspx
I'm trying to determine how it is that we'll not get the progressive with the heart of a lion and the gentile of a violet on the backs of Iowans.
Huckabee – the ‘compassionate, sunny guy: “ I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk," ………"In light of the extraordinary funds already being given for AIDS research, it does not seem that additional federal spending can be justified. An alternative would be to request that multimillionaire celebrities, such as Elizabeth Taylor, Madonna and others who are pushing for more AIDS funding be encouraged to give out of their own personal treasuries” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7270.html
Dave wrote "Kucinich/Feingold '08!!"
It makes sense to consult Feingold about 2008 under these circumstances:
"Feingold lauded both Gore and Obama as potential candidates who were early critics of the war and said he thinks voters will be looking for a nominee who 'had the judgment to understand (the war) was a bad idea from beginning. . . . I don't think it is asking a lot for people to see this was a stupid idea.'
"He added:
"'I will run if I want to run, regardless of who else is running. But I will tell you, seeing Barack Obama considering running gives me comfort. If I decided not to run, it makes me feel good, it makes me very happy to see him thinking about running. . . . If he came up to me and asked me, should he run . . . I might tell him, "It's a good thing."'"
WORSE
Hillary voting for Cheney's wet dream declaration about Iran. AND not seeing our troops(neocon empire enforcement hostages) out of Iraq by 2013.
WORSE
Impeachment of known and ongoing war criminals, who still infest our White House, taken off the table by 'the peoples' very first woman Speaker.
... hmmmmm
11.
Unfortunately Obama doesn't thrill enough of us to make us work for him, not like for Howard.
If Obama, Edwards or Dodd wins the nomination, I will be the first to work hard for him to win the general election. I have no interest in any of the others.
Unfortunately, my primary vote here will not actually count at the convention unless Howard has a change of heart. So I will have to count on reasonable people elsewhere to make a reasonable choice.
Love those cards Reed!
Joan* In*Florida
Sat, 12/08/07
3:15 pm
After Clinton failed to hold the previous criminal actions of the Reagan/Bush1 accountable, it wouldn't kill the DNC to pardon everyone prior to the convention.
Howard needs to show some of his own judgement there.
Sam Ross.....
The desert is where we get taken every election. We need to stay out of the desert.
Deaniac...
a good one!! A Dean/kucinich would clean things up in a hurry.
This subject is worthy of serious discussion. Here's another perspective from a DFA member, Ben Iglar-Mobley, dated 10/29/07:
"I am a progressive. I am for single-payer healthcare, the immediate withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq, impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, opting out of NAFTA and the WTO, and the creation of a Department of Peace. But I am not for Dennis Kucinich for president. No movement progressive should support Kucinich, because Kucinich does not support the movement.
"I don't believe Kucinich is too far to the left for me to support him; in fact, on many issues I stand further left than he is. I opposed the war against Afghanistan before it was even engaged, while Kucinich stills supports it. I am a lifelong supporter of reproductive freedom, while Kucinich only came around to that position in 2003 when he decided to run for president.
" . . . .
"In the 2004 cycle, Dennis Kucinich was running against one person, and it wasn't George W. Bush. It was Howard Dean. Kucinich famously brought a visual chart of military spending to a radio debate and was gently ribbed by the moderator for offering a prop that 'doesn't work so well on radio.' What was Kucinich's response? Did he say, 'It works if my opponents can see it'? No, he said, 'It works if Howard Dean can see it.' Why Dean alone? Why would he seek to undermine another candidate who at least shared his opposition to the Iraq War and to the USA PATRIOT Act? Later, going into the Iowa caucuses Kucinich instructed his supporters specifically not to caucus for Dean if their precincts did not reach the threshold for him, but instead go over to Edwards. This was the Edwards of the time who had not yet decided that invaded Iraq was a mistake and who did not regret his vote for the invasion-- the same Edwards who voted for PATRIOT and for Bush's tax cuts, which Dean opposed. How was that meant to build the left? I kept waiting to hear Kucinich go after Joe Lieberman in the debates, who after all was sharing a stage with him and who I think offered a prime target for what Kucinich said he opposed in the Democratic Party. I'm still waiting to hear him go after Lieberman. Finally, I would have been happy hearing Kucinich go after anyone besides Dean. He never did. Effectively, Kucinich signed on for the 'stop Dean' counter-insurgency in the Democratic Party-- although he was coming from the completely opposite direction as the rest of it. I'm still waiting to hear from any Kucinich supporter how trading Dean for Kerry-- who, again, at the time supported the war, the tax cuts, and PATRIOT-- was in service of building the progressive movement's issues.
" . . . .
"Gloria Steinem commented on Ralph Nader in 2000 that it was easy for him to stake out the positions that he took because he wasn't seeking to build coalitions as Al Gore was. I think the same can be said of Dennis Kucinich's campaigns, in 2004 and now 2008. Dennis Kucinich is 'Nadering' the Democratic Party from inside it. He offers the appearance of building the left, while in reality his campaign is a 'symbol' that represents nothing but itself.
"Support Kucinich if you wish, but don't think you're building the left with your support. Don't think you are building the movement. A movement requires us to move-- to move legislation, to move ourselves to action. In the end, Dennis Kucinich is sound and fury... signifying nothing."
At the annual convention of Native Americans, It seemed like Howard and Dennis got along quite well. Dennis was the only invited candidate to show up. Dean was there, well, because he is Howard. Dean was the only one to show up last election, if I remember correctly.
I'm lucky to be living in their time. two selfless patriots working hard for our country. We owe them, imo. The thing that would bring DFA together is for Howard to change his mind.
I thought Huckabee was the new thread and have been posting there. Is this it? Jeez............
"undocumented guests seeking the American dream" need to have some regularized system to enter so they are not exploited but in anycase are deserving of basic human rights"
I agree with providing them with a path, much better border security, fines for corps who hire them and basic human rights. I do not agree that they should be called "guests." They are not. I also think they need to learn English and at least be mandated to finish high school. All citizens should be mandated to finish high school. In fact, finishing high school used to be mandatory when I was young. What happened? A vibrant educated society would never let fascism in the door.
I also looked into Canada and Australia and didn't meet the many requirements . How come other civilized countries can put restrictions on immigration, but we're criticized if we do? And more countries will do so as the world population increases.
<b><a href = "http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/23224">NJ Democracy for America</a></b> — 8 December 2007 — <i>Congratulations to the well organized John Edwards and Barack Obama campaigns </i>— Last night at a New Jersey DFA “Presidential Caucus” conducted in Roselle Park, John Edwards was victorious with 41% of the vote, followed by Barack Obama at 38%, and <a href = "http://dennis4president.com">Dennis Kucinich</a> with 19%. Hillary Clinton and the other candidates were also-rans with tallies in single digits. “John Edwards and Barack Obama are formidable candidates,” said New Jersey Impeach Groups organizer Stuart Hutchison. “<b>We know the strongest candidate is Kucinich</b>, and a Kucinich-Edwards ticket — <i>or</i> a Kucinich-Obama ticket — will bring the landslide victory our country needs in order to win substantial majorities in both houses of congress, and achieve a real mandate for big change in the USA.”
<b>Impeaching Them</b> in the Bush gang is important.
But getting rid of the bad guys won't mean a thing when they continue to control the voting process and steal democracy from us.<b>
<a href = "http://impeachthem.com/files/voters_bill_of_rights2007october.pdf">THE VOTERS' BILL OF RIGHTS is equally important</b>.
Get copies of all our<b> <a href = "http://www.impeachthem.com/node/316">KEY DOCUMENTS</a> </b>
Contact<b> <a href = "mailto:info@impeachthem.com">info@impeachthem.com</a></b>
<!--break-->
IMO, Huck is worse than putz. Huck is truly messianic whereas putz is a pure heartless corporatist, wearing messianic clothes and *what, me worry" persona.
We need to get the word out that Clinton is unelectable. Many people won't know the real reasons she's a poor choice, but will buy the unelectable theme. And we can make Dodd electable since this seems to be the concern of our astute voting public. If they're not yet paying attention in PA, what does this say?
So we need a candidate who's both the right dem for the job AND electable. IMO Dodd comes the closest and he'll fight for the Constitution and doesn't seem to be kissing up to AIPAC. That could change once in office, but we have to chance that.
*sigh*
Let's try this again . . .
Kucinich places third in Jersey DFA "caucus"
NJ Democracy for America — 8 December 2007 — Congratulations to the well organized John Edwards and Barack Obama campaigns — Last night at a New Jersey DFA “Presidential Caucus” conducted in Roselle Park, John Edwards was victorious with 41% of the vote, followed by Barack Obama at 38%, and Dennis Kucinich with 19%. Hillary Clinton and the other candidates were also-rans with tallies in single digits. “John Edwards and Barack Obama are formidable candidates,” said New Jersey Impeach Groups organizer Stuart Hutchison. “We know the strongest candidate is Kucinich, and a Kucinich-Edwards ticket — or a Kucinich-Obama ticket — will bring the landslide victory our country needs in order to win substantial majorities in both houses of congress, and achieve a real mandate for big change in the USA.”
Kucinich and Howard both are not "builing the left" as was stated, they are working from witrhin the Dem party at the moment. I'm sure we'll get the signal if that changes, and then the detractors can spew their criticisms of that effort.
Detractors attacked Dean for not being left enough, and now they appear to be doing it with Dennis. I look at what they've done and what they are, not some phony label.
Huckabee ordered that drives from 87 state computers be destroyed
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=government&articleId=9010162&taxonomyId=13&intsrc=kc_top
audrey wrote "Detractors attacked Dean for not being left enough, and now they appear to be doing it with Dennis."
Evidently, Kucinich was one of the detractors.
As long as we're working to get Hoyer, Pelosi, and Reid replaced, how about getting Harman and Rockefeller replaced too?
-
By Tom Bearse on Dec 8, 2007 11:51 AM ESTDean is first. There you go.