I Own My Vote - Sign The Pledge
By Larry JohnsoncloseAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on June 25, 2008 at 11:06 AM in Barack Obama, Delegates, Democracy, Democratic National Convention, Democratic Party, Dems4McCain, Hillary Clinton, Misogyny, Racism, Sexism, Women's Suffrage
When you read the I Own My Vote Pledge, keep in mind that the demands it contains are not admissions of defeat, nor are they conditions precedent to your vote. Hillary’s campaign is only suspended, not ended. And only you can decide when your vote has been earned. Whether you are a PUMA activist, a WomenCountPAC donor, a Just Say No Deal blogger, a Clinton Democrat for McCain, a yellow dog Democrat for VoteBoth, or simply a Hillary Clinton supporter who feels like the Party leaders and their presumptive nominee are ignoring everything that you value, the most powerful statement you can make right now is that YOU OWN YOUR VOTE. Only in finding that common ground will we be counted, for only in that common ground will we be able to count ourselves.
On Saturday, June 7, 2008, Hillary Clinton suspended her historic campaign for President. To her 18 million voters, it may have seemed like an end, but I pledge to make it a beginning … a beginning of a movement to achieve the democratic and just country that Hillary has envisioned for America.
I stand together with Hillary Clinton’s 18 million voters to demand that Senator Obama and the Democratic Party:
- Bring us together by seating 100% of the Florida and Michigan delegations in Denver with 100% of their votes, allocated in accordance with the popular vote of each state.
- Bring us together by adopting policies on the Platform Committee that Hillary Clinton has championed.
- Bring us together through reform of the primary and caucus system to reflect the basic principle of one person/one vote.
- Bring us together through outspoken denunciation of all gender bias, racism and other forms of discrimination.
- Bring us together by fairly and respectfully including Hillary and her supporters at the Democratic National Convention in Denver by, among other things, placing her name in nomination for President, conducting a roll call vote, and providing her a prominent speaking role during prime time on August 26th, the 88th anniversary of women’s suffrage.
I own my vote. It does not belong to any party. It does not belong to any candidate. It does not belong to any mob that would impose its will on me. Only I can decide how to use my vote, and I can decide based on any criteria I choose. Therefore I pledge not to give my vote to anyone who does not earn it.
Click here to sign the pledge: http://iownmyvote.com/


















Pelosi………is very open minded……….her brains just fell out….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Mun0eiF1s
See what KIA thinks about Obama.
they used ‘his image’ in their commericial
Will not vote for Obama no matter what he promises or does.
Nader Says Obama Trying to Appeal to White Guilt
Asked if he thinks Obama is trying to “talk white,” Nader said, “of course….The number one thing that a black American politician aspiring to the presidency should be is to candidly describe the plight of the poor, especially in the inner cities and the rural areas, and have a very detailed platform about how the poor is going to be defended by the law, is going to be protected by the law, and is going to be liberated by the law,” Nader said. “Haven’t heard a thing.”
Nader also says Obama wants to show he’s not “another politically threatening African-American politician. He wants to appeal to white guilt.
http://countusout.wordpress.com/
It is now being revealed that the birth certificate flaunted on Obama’s campaign website is a fake.
http://www.web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm
link is not working, any more info available?
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm
The link should not have a http://www. at the front.
Hopefully this works
we all wonder what Obama is hiding. My guess is that he is a bastard. I think in the time he was born if the mother and father were not married the child was given the mothers last name. Has anyone seen records of marriage or divorce between Obama’s parents? Because they are public records, They shouldn’t be hard to get as long as you know what state they were married/divorced in, unless someone had them sealed.
Also, I think I read he went by the name Barry Soetoro when he lived in Jakarta with his mother and step father. It would appear to me his family felt free to give him any name that was convenient at the time.
Sonia,
Good article. Thanks!
News Update
Obama To Receive Sacred Idol For Good Luck
http://WWW.OBAMA-WIRE.COM
Interesting article regarding nobama’s birth certificate from the Israeli Insider:
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm
Is anyone else having a problem signing the plege? I tried numerous times yesterday on the first link and again today, and I get “Failed to deliver query”. Yesterday I sent an email to advise them I was unable to sign the pledge, and that was returned as UNDELIVERABLE.
HELP?…tried using Opera and IE and no luck.
*************************
NEWS UPDATE
*************************
**OBAMA TO RECEIVE SACRED IDOL**
I am not making this up. Obama is receiving an idol bc it has been reported he is an ardent follower of Lord Hanuman.
For More Info Go To:
http://www.obama-wire.com
Obama needs contributions. Is the idol made of solid gold?
PUMA
Obama needs more than contributions. Like an integrity transplant for instance?
Actually the Idol thingy makes perfect sense to me. Haven’t our elections become like American Idol? All that glitters is now all that matters.
PUMA!
Snakes in HILLARYVOICES…..
guest post by Linfar
Does anyone care about Hillary anymore?
A website whose reputation and business quadrupled when it backed Hillary Clinton’s candidacy is in the– Resurrect Hillary business now.
No that’s wrong. It is in the Screw Obama Anyway You Can business now.
A Hillary blogger has created her own website to promote Hillary’s candidacy–well, until the end of August anyway. But by then the website will be up and running. Front page positions are available Yoohooo.
And I have now been thrown off Hillarysvoice, a site owned by Alegre, the blogger mentioned above. Dissent is an idea to exploit, when you are the dissenter, otherwise banning those you disagree with is just fine.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/
lmao Oh, how sad. Is she Desperately Seeking Attention? She posted that last week over on mydd.
Can we make a C grade average in english a requirement for posts? Please?
I see mangled grammar everywhere…
TaylorMarsh.com…is that a site about Benedict Arnold? or maybe Quintus Servilius Caepio Brutus? Guess its a toss up.
It may be easy for people like Taylor Marsh and many others, to simply support anyone with a “D” after their name. Some of us, not so much. We require integrity and honesty and we don’t find it in this Democratic Party.
And while TM always said she would support the Democratic nominee she never said she would attack others who don’t turn their coats so easily.
Wasn’t so long ago we were all laughing at those dumb Republicans that would vote for any pinhead with an “R” after their name. Looks like for Taylor Marsh, Linfar and others, the joke is not only on them, it is them.
Looks to me like she is TROLLING for affection! She lost all credibility when she jumped on the Obamabamadingdong wagon! She is trying to stay relevant. But what she is not understanding is, Her hypocrisy cost her dearly!
Has everyone seen that Moveon.org ad for “i’m Voting Republican?”
Some creative individual needs to counter that with an “I’m Voting Democrat” version.
Here, to help you get started try a few of these:
some of these may seem offensive but they are no more offensive than the protrayals in the move on ad for why people are voting republican.
Good stuff!
Who is really behind the Iownmyvote.com site? Ownership is hidden behind Proxy Inc.
Kinda like the Obama sites being bought in 2004, huh?
…anyone not positive they were planning this all along, as soon as the young Senator got first Elected to the US Senate in 2005?
Larry, can you answer this one? I was wondering myself.
I googled this “I own my vote website” and came up with Clinton Democrats (clintondems.com) who say they own this site. However, it’s not the same link and page as Larry’s and the “pledge” is worded differently.
Go to:
http://clintondems.com/2008/06/together4us-falling-in-line-i-own-my-vote/
Yeah, who owns it? And what do they intend to do with the collected data?
If you’re going to flog this site, at least give some background.
If you clicked on the link, you would have seen where they clearly stated they will be presenting the pledges to the *DNC*, *Senator B O* and *McCain*.
So who owns it? Don’t be surprised if you’re being played.
By who?
Who’s ashamed of not voting for Obama?
McCain pwned again!
OK, you don’t like the secret Muslim born on Mars, but what’s Plan B? Obama is getting the Dem nomination whether you like it or not, so who’s your backup?
There is plenty of time between now and august for an asteroid to hit planet earth and put us all out of the Obama mean country hate and racebaiting misery.
Yeah, that’ll work.
Well if you can buy Obama’s obbullshit excuses denials distractions evasions and flip flops, you should have no problem believing in an asteroid sent by god.
pithy.
So…no Plan B? This is all about taking your ball and going home because someone else won?
Selected ,not elected
Selected by the same rules that HRC (and Ickes) played by.
Nope.
She didn’t take her name off the ballot.
Yup.
No this is all about not being willing to vote for someone we don’t believe is qualified. It isn’t about who lost.
That option has always been on the table. I’m not sure why you insist that anyone “owned” your vote in the first place, unless you need a strawman to immolate.
“…get over it.”
“…party unity.”
That’s why.
we already told you what the plan was idiot.
Plan A) Hillary
Plan B) McCain
“Plan Stupid) Obama” is not an option
Given that choice B is wildly inconsistent with choice A, it comes down to nothing more than spite.
Given that choice B is wildly inconsistent with choice A
That’s not true for moderate Independents like me. There are issues I disagreed with Hillary on and issues I disagree with McCain on. I weighed the pros and cons of each and made my choice thusly.
Obama isn’t an option for me, because I don’t trust him with national security, and I don’t believe he will keep his promises regarding the economy. Enough said.
Oh, and before you rip into me, just keep in mind that statistically it is moderate Independents like me who decide most of the presidential elections.
Same old talking points.
We don’t care how many of Hillary’s positions Bacrackhead Obullshit stole and said ME TOO to.
We know Bacrackhead won’t keep his word and will flip flop on just about every one of them.
With a democratic controlled house and Senate McCain will be unable to do much damage as you term damage.
With Bacrackhead Obullshit in office it would be a recipe for disaster.
I am not willing to sacrifice my country under the false threat of the rights of my vagina.
But a myopic messiahworshipping bafoon like you wouldnt understand that.
Its a shame really that you and your ilk of Obullshit supporters see the world as so black and white and Republicans = evil Democrats = good.
World is just not like that.
There is just as much rotten in the DNC as in the RNC.
Moreso this election cycle.
What you call spite i call common sense and the judgement to vote. something you clearly lack.
John McCain is the “backup” because, unless someone else enters the race and has time to get their name on the ballot in all 50 states, John McCain — if he is indeed the republican nominee — is the only person who can beat Obama. On the other hand, if the “natural born citizen” requirement is waived and Arnold Schwarzenegger is the republican nominee, then the “backup” gets cranked up a few notches! Anybody but Obama. That’s the deal. And it shouldn’t be too hard to understand. How many left of left “democrats” stomped their feet and screamed for months “Anybody but Hillary”? So they should understand the power of an “Anybody but ….” vote, right? Riiiight.
Here’s the difference: most people who screamed “anyone but Hillary” would have swallowed their disappointment and voted for her in the GE because they realize the stakes are to high to waste it on a “protest” vote.
Then there’s this place…
Nope.
Because they realize she’s qualified to hold the office.
You mean the same people who were screaming IF YOU DONT VOTE BACRACK YOU IS A RACIST!!!???
yeah i am sure they would have.
Listen, its clear you are channeling Donna Brazile.
But hey you already cannabolized a good chunk of your own party, its time you turn your attention to the republicans because we dont matter and you can win without us…so FUCK OFF!
I would have liked to believe you at one time, but the continuous outpouring of venom changed all that. It’s amazing. The “presumptive nominee” has the delegates, right? He will win/has already won, right? Every poll I’ve seen says that the losing candidate’s supporters have indeed come over to the winner’s fold, all but “a few.” Yet the venom keeps coming and instead of working in the national campaign to ensure their candidate gets elected, the venom spouters continue showing up on blogs like “this place.” Why waste your time? Unless you need to keep tabs on what we really know about the birth certificate … the shadowy associations … the source of the money … the real agenda. There can’t be any other reason why you’d be here, not when there’s so much “unifying” to be done, so many voters to reap in the fields, so many minds out there to convert.
“What you know”? You don’t “know” anything.
The Birth Certificate? Speculation on the part of people desperate to pin ANYthing on Obama, nothing more. Lack of evidence does NOT equal evidence.
Shadowy Associations? Who, Rezko? Even Hannity dropped that one - there is no “there” there.
Source of money? The filings are all there with FEC, by law. Go to opensecrets.org and have a look.
Under $200.00?
Of course not, but how “shadowy” is someone who donates less than $200? What kind of influence do you think that buys?
You bundle the money. Obama’s money funneled through law firms consists of lots of little contributions from families, friends, and other connections to lobbyists. Don’t you know about the “bundlers”? Don’t you know that’s why Obama’s “directive” to the DNC not to take lobby/pac money is such a farce? You’ve been hoodwinked.
A birth certificate is such a simple thing, really. Why has it become so complicated in the case of Barack Obama? Why produce a “certified copy” of your birth certificate that has no official seal from the state of Hawaii and that has so many obvious graphic design errors in it? And why get involved with people like Rezko and Auchi in the first place if you’re telling everyone you’re a “reformer”? Some of the hundreds of nagging questions that make one’s heart want to pledge to never, every vote for Barack Obama.
Mohamud Abdul and Hussein and Kalif sit in the celler of Bobo Obaba with a huge stack of unmarked bills from the middle east stuffing 3 50s 2 20s and a 5 into plain unmarked envelopes. Every few hundred thousand they run it upstairs to Johnny Bundler who then takes it over to the Obama Headquarters…
OMG LOOK DONATIONS FROM SMALL INDIVIDUAL DONORS BUNDLES AND UNACCOUNTED FOR!!!!
THIS IS BETTER THAN DEAD PEOPLE VOTING!!!
Larry,
I gotta be honest. 2 seconds after Hillary conceded, Obama volunteers were calling my house non-stop. With enough chutspah, I was able to make them stop. But, I’m not signing my name to anything political anymore in the fog-o-sphere.
I gave a little money to the Dems in 2004 and my mailbox wass clogged. I read one of your pleas (or Susan’s) and I gave a little dinero to Hillary and what do I get? Emails galore from Boxer, Reid, Pelosi, Obamastan, Kerry (the creep), Edwards, etc.
Sorry folks. I’ll lurk and comment, but the Dem party machine and its Kossacks have lost me forever.
I don’t want my name or email or phone number or address on anything that will let people know that I actually exercise my rights and vote!
thats odd.
I never gave my email address out to any political organization but Hillary’s presidential campaign.
I donated to hillary before and after she suspended.
I have yet to recieve a single email form the DNC or from Obamatopia.
I guess they don’t want My support because of my uiser name here…imagine that.
same deal here
i am pretty sure hillary’s team cross referenced to see if you appeared on the dnc email rolls before releasing. THey are not stupid.
Larry:
I added the graphics and the Link onto my site also. We need to get the word out to like minded sites and people. It is not to late to stop this aberration.
Reddragon62.blogspot.com
Obama: “I’m Going To Need” The Clintons”.
Duh.
But Larry this comment seals the no deal on McCain:
“I don’t know what would make a draft happen unless we were in an all-out World War III.”
He wants to bomb Iran which may cause Russia and China to protect their oil interests in Iran and start WWIII.
I think McTortured soul has not been treated for being tortured and wants to take on China again.
This Larry, is insane. I think you may want to rethink supporting WWIII.
ignore the troll.
Something does not sit right with me concerning this orgainzation. I feel that it is really backed by the Obama organization and just a front to gather the email addresses of his opponents. Why is the Black power/unity raised fist used? Don’t give them info on yourself.
Silly silly Wabbit!
They use that excuse at every opportunity. “McCain is a warmonger”. McCain wants to bomb Iran”, McCain want’s to start WWIII” McCain want’s to eat your children’.
Look, I am no supporter of McCain, but please try to come up with something original. The fear tactic is not working. Silly insults about his sanity do not further the discussion. But then again, when dealing with Obot’s, Nothing you say will further the discussion!
Gallup Poll McCain Obama TIED 45%
Signs Of HILLARY supporters not falling in line for OB.
Voter preferences had been fairly evenly divided for the past week, with Obama generally holding a slight advantage of two or three percentage points. This is the first time since Gallup’s May 31-June 4 rolling average that Obama does not have at least a slim advantage over McCain. Obama’s largest lead to date has been seven points. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108376/Gallup-Daily-Obama-McCain-Tied-45.aspx
THAT POLL IS CLEARLY BIASED!!
EVERYBODY KNOWS GALLUP IS RUN BY RACISTS!!
ITS IMPOSSIBLE THAT BARRY JESUS MARIA SANTOS DOMINUS VERITAFIBULOUS POSSUMUS BAPTISMO NOMUSLIMO OBABA IS NOT AHEAD BY ATLEAST 15 POINTS!!!
ITS A LIE!!!
ITS A GREAT RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!!!
ITS THAT FING HILLARY CLINTON’S FAULT!!
YOU HATERS ARE ALWAYS USING BIASED POLLS FROM RACIST ORGANIZATIONS!!
I MEAN COME ON!! EVERYONE KNOWS THAT EVEN THE NAME GALLUP IS RACIST AND ANTI OBAMA!! GALLUP IS A VEILED REFERENCE TO THE HORSE AND BUGGY DAYS!!
IF THAT GALLUP ORGANIZATION WAS CREDIBLE THEY THEY WOULD HAVE OBAMA UP BY 25 POINTS IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT THE RESPONDENTS SAID!!!
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT OBAMA SUPPORTERS ARE TOO BUSY AT EVENTS AND RALLIES TO STAY HOME AND ANSWER THE PHONE FOR THESE BIASED POLLS!!
ITS IMPOSSIBLE THAT THEY ARE TIED!! EVEN DUKAKIS WAS UP 17 POINTS IN JUNE!!! ITS CLEAR THT THIS IS A CONSPIRACY AGAINST OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, HE WHO MUST NOT BE MIDDLE NAMED!
I AM GOING TO REPORT THIS OBVIOUS LIE AND MANIPULATION OF POLL RESULTS BY A CLEARLY BIASED MEDIA THAT IS OUT TO GET OBAMA TO THE FBI AND THE DNC!!!
YOU PEOPLE BETTER WATCH OUT!!!
YOU ARE BEING WATCHED AND WE WILL KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH YOU ONCE BARRY IS EMPEROR!!!
I signed last night, Larry. Thanks for reposting.
I signed it. I’ll throw it on my blog with image hyperlink.
Obama might well be better then sliced bread but what is going to hurt him most is his foreign policy experience or lack of it. Obama is somewhere between, Rodney King’s, “Can’t we all just get along”, and Alfred E Neuman’s ” What, me worry?”. Folks we are in for a long hot summer.
**NEWS UPDATE**
Potential VP for Obama Does Business With Iran…
More Info At: http://WWW.OBAMA-WIRE.COM
Hillary’s campaign hasn’t given Obie MY phone number!
I signed the petition. How hard is it to stand up? No pain, no gain. duh.
Sorry, I don’t have time to answer the phone for barack’s Billionaires Club.
I’m out.
Back to the ‘pledge’:
If you have to start something with a preamble saying it’s not an admission of defeat and it’s not this and not that — such a preamble is ITSELF an admission that the ‘pledge’ is not ready for prime time. Is that preamble supposed to go to every SD and every MSM reporter who receives the ‘pledge’?
Whatever the ‘pledge’ is supposed to mean — WIRM — it’s eminently spinnable as defeat and surrender, as figleaves for both sides.
No Deal. PUMA.
i say write hillarys name in november. lets show the powers that be that we are not kidding. hillary is the one
I have not signed this because I also want it delivered to the RNC. I also am no longer a Democrat, Republican or Independent. I am Not-Declared. I don’t want to click on other and have them assume I am part of the Socialist, Communist, or any other party. I want them to know that I am no longer associated with any party and that now they all must work for my vote.
The http://www.iownmyvote.com is run by some very loyal Hillary supporters, some are Hillraisers….this is a petition that will help QUANTIFY her support to have her name placed into nomination at the convention!