Definitely

It is essential that progressives move to elect the most electable candidate who can win and that we do all we can, systematically, with planning and strategic coordination, to push that candidate to the left on key issues.

by Rob Kall (857 articles, 3983 quicklinks, 343 diaries, 1821 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 11:02:10 AM
 

As we have managed to do

with Pelosi and Conyers on impeachment? Or the Democratic Congress on timelines or zero funding for the war? As we have managed to do with tax policy? As we have in saving several Amendments in the Bill of Rights? As we have in obtaining Universal Single Payer Health Care?

C'mon Rob, you should know better. The Dems are not the solution, they are part and parcel of the problem and they have left the progressives of America far behind in their move to the right. They know, and your position, your own words, proves, that you have nowhere else to go. They don't hope you will vote for them, they know you will.

by Jack Harrington (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 396 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 12:38:55 PM
 

Thank you

For responding to Rob's childish beliefs exactly as I felt as I read them.  Again, I say, Rob and so many others on this site are neo-progressives, meaning Democrats seeking to masquerade as progressives because it makes them feel soooooo much better, as if they are really achieving something, when in reality they are contributing to the continuing demise of our country by not fighting the two-party plutocracy.

by Joel S. Hirschhorn (131 articles, 34 quicklinks, 60 diaries, 526 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 7:09:59 PM
 

Hillary...

Hillary was not only for the war, before her failed presidential bid started, she profitted from the war buying stock in war machine companies. People too remember that NAFTA was shoved down our throats during Bill Clinton's presidency. Clearly a republican agenda.

by Matthew Peters (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 98 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 12:37:41 PM
 

Actually, Obama hasn't won the nomination yet...

Obama is the presumptive nominee because he has won a lot of delegates who are bound to vote for him on the first ballot at the convention PLUS because enough super delegates have promised to vote for him on the first ballot. COMBINED he has enough votes. But the super delegates are NOT BOUND to vote for him. Clinton is trying to swing some of them - enough to make Obama fall short on the first ballot, thereby throwing the whole thing open to a brokered convention.

by Don DeBar (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 1:02:41 PM
 

Why is Hillary there now?

Why is she really standing again at the DNC?
Didn't she concede already?

Back in May she referred to the death of Bobby Kennedy when giving her reason for staying on. She seemed to be implying that "something could happen" to Obama.    Does she know of something that we don't know? 

Her stated reason for resurfacing now is that it is "in the best interest of party unity". 

Of course!   "What could possibly be a better idea for "party unity" than stirring up all the bad feelings that have been dormant for months one last time at the exact moment when the Democratic Party should be throwing all their energy behind one person?"   - Dennis DiClaudio,  blog.indecision2008.

Somehow, I get the impression that there is more to all this than we are being told.  Maybe we'll know some of it by the end of the DNC. 

by Aurora (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 353 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 4:44:26 PM
 

"why did Obama win the nomination"

The only reason I can see that Obama got where he is at is due to the fact that people are tired of Bush, Clinton, Bush politics. This is the only thing that makes sense to me. Now take into consideration that he has not one but 3 muslim names and his middle name, Hussien tells that he is islamic, I do not have a clue why anyone would pick this guy to run. After 911,  It should be that all the voting public would turn the other way on this guy. Let's face facts, it is ma and pa kettle that have to take their shoes off in the airport and be subjected to a physical search.  Why? Did they have something to do with the twin towers coming down? How come Obama's actual citizenship does not come into question? He didn't live in the US for 15 years after his birth. He went to a muslim school and claims he went as, of all things, a catholic. If he gets elected, I think you will be seeing a lot of people in the arab countries cheering like they did when the towers went down. If this happens, you can thank the liberal press to some extent. We need some real American people to run for office, not some guy that is best friends with people that bombed police stations back in the 60's and are proud of it.

by Jay Timmins (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 103 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 2:00:41 PM
 

Your choice is clear

So vote for McCain.  I like train wrecks.

by Gregg Gordon (26 articles, 47 quicklinks, 15 diaries, 199 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 3:18:37 PM
 

American?

It is people like you who have caused the country to be what it is today. Your comments are bigoted and sick in the head.

You deserve no respect, and I will give you none.

You don't deserve to be an American.

by JC Garrett (40 articles, 65 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 604 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 4:38:38 PM
 

No Guarantee That Wisdom Comes With Age

"Now take into consideration that he has not one but 3 muslim names and his middle name, Hussien tells that he is islamic..."

I guess, then, that we should deny you are a man because you have a first name often given to girls__you know, short for Janice or Janet or Jeanette.

I am reminded of an incident years ago when a man so much older than myself struck up a conversation about baseball. The exchange was mostly pleasant and informative. It soured when he mourned the decline of baseball that, he said, "Started when they let the niggers in."

I was so appalled by what he said that I angrily told him that this country will never be as good as it can be until everyone of his generation is dead.

The deep hurt in his eyes told me he couldn't understand why I turned on him like that. He silently got up and left.

I never got to explain to him that my intolerence had been bubbled up by his own. My need to believe that old men are wise men in order to calm my own fears as I closed the door on my own youth was rattled by that 65-year-old's stupid and racist observations.

Jan, your comments brought all of that back. I am 5 years away from being as old as you. Will I be, also, so full of fear, then, that I will roar hate and think and say awful things like a cowardly lion protecting himself from imaginary threats.  

Whatever you have lost, they didn't take it. Time did.  

by Robert Arend (4 articles, 16 quicklinks, 19 diaries, 178 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 11:09:50 PM
 

Zinn

Zinn - Election Madness
The Progressive      March 2008 Issue

I'm not taking some ultra-left position that elections are totally insignificant, and that we should refuse to vote to preserve our moral purity. Yes, there are candidates who are somewhat better than others, and at certain times of national crisis (the Thirties, for instance, or right now) where even a slight difference between the two parties may be a matter of life and death.

    I'm talking about a sense of proportion that gets lost in the election madness. Would I support one candidate against another? Yes, for two minutes-the amount of time it takes to pull the lever down in the voting booth.

    But before and after those two minutes, our time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice.

===

It's building a base of action locally that offers a way up

by abacus (2 articles, 2 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 61 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 5:47:46 PM
 

I'm Puzzled

In rebuttal to J.C. Garrett’s article, Lesser Evils, you were far from kindly disposed, or supportive of Obama. Here are just a couple of the confrontational remarks, which I found there:

“Obama, the Great Black Hope (and, apparently, a Great Hope for many whites who consider themselves anti-war), cannot plausibly claim the “peace candidate” mantle while simultaneously serving as a member in good standing of the club that lobbies for ever-increasing military budgets.

“And past conduct shows Obama finds it politically expedient to forsake the Constitution and specifically, the Fourth Amendment.”

You made it clear that voters should divert their votes from Obama to some unspecified third party candidate (presumably given your past advocacy, Nader).

Now, we find in this posting, you appear to, conditionally, have switched your support to Obama. Conditional in that you expect him to respond to your apparent demands to end all military activity in the Middle East.

“We should mobilize under this storyline because we the people who wish the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would end have been against these wars for some time now (and even prior to their start). More supported the war in Afghanistan than the war in Iraq, but we all have come to see these current U.S. military occupations as part of a phony “war on terror” that must come to an end.”

You make no comment on the reconstitution of Al Qaida in  Afghanistan as well as Pakistan, nor do you apparently have any concern in the reemerging  activity of the Taliban or for that matter, the potential for a future nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel.

So, since you want us to end all military activity in the Middle East, I’m curious, under just what conditions would you use force? Equally of interest is, what caused you to decide to reveres your earlier position, and support Obama?

by Sherwin Steffin (15 articles, 25 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 97 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 7:45:18 PM
 

Hang on Sherwin

I'm not done with the series yet.

And nowhere in this article do I say I support or will vote for Obama.

I am focused on the we the people. Forget me, the individual.

by Kevin Gosztola (230 articles, 127 quicklinks, 72 diaries, 895 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 9:23:38 PM
 

No Coors Beer

What is the message that the Democrats want to get across at the Democratic Convention in Denver?  I heard no Coors Beer and No Fried Chicken!  Are we led to believe the Democratic Party is trying to tell us what we can eat and can't drink?

 But  hey, Hilary  gets two nights, with  Bill, what a campaign for Obama, maybe Hillary will still get the nomination. Is this the same person when asked about abortion, that the answer was above his pay level, and the three people he will look up to for advise in the White House is his wife, grandmother and Ted Kennedy?  America is doomed, as Iran raises her  ugly head.

by don bybee (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 206 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 10:35:49 PM
 

Peddle Your Wares Elsewhere

"I find it hard to believe that the public feels led astray by President Bush for leading us into a war blindsided. Where were you when Bush went to the United Nations for help in finding out if Iraq had WMD's. How many chances did we give Saddam to come clean only to hear over and over again "I need more time, No you can't enter Iraq" How many chances did we give him? If it was up to the Democratic party would we still be waiting? Where were you when President Bush said enough... we're going in... where were you when Saddam said "If you attact Iraq, we will destroy you with our "WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRUCTIUON" That didn't should like a threat?: and now the cry... we never found the WMD's.. Then why wouldn't Saddam let us in? Now since Congress has been lead by the Democrats our gas prices have soared... not because of Bush... Congress makes the laws... But it's easier to blame Bush.. Thank God he put an end to Saddam. I pray God doesn't give America what she deserves The Democratic Party wants us to pay more taxes and offer us what in return? Changes? Like Congress has shown? We know nothing about Obama, but choose him to lead America.. to more change.. Will he bring down gas prices? Find more jobs for the jobless and homes for the homeless... Wake up America" __Bybee's OPED profile.

The RNC has started a program of paying commentors to infiltrate liberal blogs. Are you paid a flat salary or per comment?

"Wake up America?" you plead. Our Republic is in a death rattle, and you and your heros put her there. Peddle Your wares elsewhere. 78% of the nation are awake, to the truth of the liars, thieves, murderers and traitors that you revere, so what does that say about you? 

by Robert Arend (4 articles, 16 quicklinks, 19 diaries, 178 comments) on Monday, August 18, 2008 at 11:50:25 PM
 

Get Real, Folks

The truth is Obama won because he, being the weakest candidate, was chosen by the mainstream media-CEO oligarchy.

 As for Saddam, he did indeed invite Bush to bring the US Army to search-- he offered to leave the country, but Bush preferred war. Check your history.

If you people can't see the difference between a black guy raised by a single mom on the south side ghetto of Chicago who made it to being a law professor, and a war criminal who was shot down on his first mission, whose father and grandfather were admirals, then go ahead and split the vote and throw the election to the GOP and get exactly what you're all rejecting. 

by martinweiss (20 articles, 4 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 362 comments) on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 5:48:21 AM
 

Hillary-Barack

OK, I get it -- Obama won because --- And then Hillary didn't win because --- And we should vote for someone because --- And we can't have train wrecks because --  And, well, golly, my head is all fileld up with comments by some people who have no idea what the truth is, so they make it up. If you want to sound erudite and at least give us the impression that you know what you're talking about, at least spend time on the campaign trail and talk with the people. Listening to news channels is only one way to get information. Getting involved to be able to make decisions is a better way.

 Now, as for Rob Kall's comments (which some attacked). We're not going to dump the 2-party system. As bad as it is at times, it's just not gonna happen. Stop complaining and get used to it. Rob was, I think, trying to tell us that within the confines of the system we need to push the Democrats more to the left to be a CHOICE. The Republicans somehow pushed their flock to the right in the past two elections. We need more progressives. (I call myself a liberal.) We need to stop belly-aching abt what BO did or didn't do, and either support him (and hope he didn't sell out this early), and force him to understand the critical issues that define liberals-- or risk giving McCain the presidency. What is it that you want in the end game?

by Brasch (68 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 58 comments) on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 7:07:07 AM
 

SOMETHING FOR EVERYBODY

THE GLOBAL ELITE THE ROYALS THAT ARE, IN CONTROL OF OUR ELECTIONS THROUGH THE MASS MEDIA DECEPTION, PUT OUT POLLS ONE AFTER ANOTHER, TO SEE WITCH CANDIDATE THE SHEEP WILL EXCEPT. AND THEN THEY DECIDE WITCH ONE GETS THE NOMINATION, SO THIS WAY WE THE PEOPLE THINK WE ARE VOTING FOR OUR CANDIDATE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE OBAMA, AND MC-CAIN  ARE BOTH THE SAME PAWNS, BUT BY KEEPING THIS COUNTRY DIVIDED, IS HOW THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE CONTROL OF THIS COUNTRY. AND LETS FORGET THIS LESSER OF EVIL, THEY ARE BOTH JUST AS EVIL, SO REMEMBER WHEN YOU VOTE YOU PUTTING THE LAST NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF WHAT USED TO BE A GREAT AND WONDERFUL AMERICA. ITS NOT ARE FAULT FOLKS, JUST TO GLAD THINKING WE ARE FREE, AND TRUSTING THE PEOPLE WE PUT IN OFFICE, LOVE THIS COUNTRY AS MUCH AS WE DO, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE WE WE WRONG, THEY LOVE MONEY, POWER, AND GREED MORE. AND WE WHERE DUPED. ELECTION DECEPTION AND THE SHEEP FALL FOR IT EVERY TIME. AND ITS A LOT EASIER TO NOT LOOK AT THE TRUTH EYE TO EYE. AND PRETEND THAT OBAMA IS GOING TO RIDE UP ON A BIG WHITE HORSE AND SAVE US FROM THE  CRIMINALS, DECEIT, DECEPTION, IN WASHINGTON THATS BEEN GOING ON FOR AS FAR AS I CAN REMEMBER, AND SO CAN YOU.

by rich racer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 229 comments) on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 7:47:07 AM
 

How can anyone support Rahm's Bendovercrats?

Obama won because 

by Nathaniel Heidenheimer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 45 comments) on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 7:59:02 AM