Sadly, the answer from too many people is, “No.” No, they don’t understand the words coming out of my mouth (or in this case, laptop). No matter how many times I have said this: I will not vote for Obama. Ever. See the sidebar on my blog? “NOBAMA.” “I Own My Vote.” “Don’t Blame Me, I Voted for Hillary!” All of that? No, apparently not. I have received SO much pressure to cave, and vote for this man. No matter how many times I say no, and no matter how politely (I am a Southerner, after all), people still try to get me to commit to Obama. Or call me a Republican. I will not, and I am not.

But since no one seems to be able to understand me, let me share with you a piece by Victoria Brownworth (or part of it anyway, from Curve, Vol. 18#8, pp 30-31). Unfortunately, it is NOT online – it was in an honest-to-goodness magazine (apparently John McCain isn’t the only one who is not wired – oh, they do have a website: curvemag.com, but it does not contain the contents of their recent issues. If you want to read it for yourself, I’m afraid you’ll have to go down to the newsstand to do it.)

Anywho, Ms. Brownworth’s article, “My November Surprise: What Will It Take To Get A Real Progressive In The White House?” could have been written by a number of us, I suspect. No, I know. It could have been written by me, at least, at least 2/3 of it. So, here it is, typed out with my own hands, in an effort to get those who are trying to cajole/manipulate/shame/demand I vote for Obama:

It’s a secret I and many women have been keeping, but the time has come to reveal my big surprise. I will not be voting Democrat in November.

I worked for Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign from February through her withdrawal from the race in June. I worked hard, doing action alerts, writing column after column, alerting the media to information about Clinton’s stances on various issues and calling voters in key primary states. I felt that Clinton was the best presidential candidate the United States had seen in years, and I was excited to work for her.

When Clinton came within a hairbreadth of winning the popular vote (RRRA here – she DID win the popular vote), but the superdelegates went in a wave with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recommendations rather than their constituents, I was beyond disappointed. I was outraged, and that outrage did not dissipate, as I thought it might, after Clinton did the good-girl thing and threw her support behind Sen. Barack Obama, rather than contest the primary outcome as previous candidates, including Sen. Ted Kennedy, had done.

I assumed that I would feel the way I usually feel when I am at odds with the Democratic Party: disappointed, but nevertheless aligned with them against the Republican candidate.

That didn’t happen this time.

Instead, my outrage grew exponentially as each new story revealed yet another of Obama’s defections from the Democratic Platform. First, it was his embrace of the faith-based initiatives program of President George W. Bush, which has not only failed, but has been grossly prejudiced and bigoted. Then it was his vote for Bush’s telecom immunity in the FISA debate (Clinton and other Democratic senators voted against Bush, so Obama’s assertion that this was the only choice simply isn’t true.) Then it was back-pedaling on his stance on the war in Iraq and a ramping up of the war in Afghanistan.

All those issues affect me politically, not personally, but when I read reports alleging that Obama pays his female staffers markedly less than his male staffers in comparable positions, I was appalled (RRRA here – it is not an allegation – it is a FACT. There are a number of articles on this, including this one HERE along with SusanUnPC’s excellent piece at No Quarter on this topic). Then Obama, who had secured the endorsement of NARAL Pro-Choice America over Clinton (despite his sketchy record on choice and her strong record on the issue), announced that a pregnant woman’s mental illness should never justify a late-term abortion…

…(T)he Democratic Party has consistently disappointed me in the past eight years. In 2000, I felt Al Gore should have fought to be president, since he actually won the election. The United States is not a banana republic; there was no threat of the nation falling into disruption while votes were properly counted and tallied and the actual president was ensconced in the White House.

Had Gore been president in 2000, I have no doubt we would not be in Iraq, even if the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 had still happened.

In 2004, the Democrats disappointed me again, throwing their weight behind Sen. John Kerry instead of Howard Dean (RRRA here – to whom my partner, on a recent DNC request for money, responded, “F–k YOU, Howard Dean!”, summing up my feelings about him perfectly). Four years into the disastrous Bush administration, the Democratic Party went with the safe candidate instead of the progressive, anti-war candidate, once again, moving to the center instead of standing firmly to the left.

Both the Gore and Kerry campaigns were poorly run (RRRA again – that means YOU, Donna Brazile – on Gore, anyway), emphasizing defense instead of offense. Gore should have run on the progressive record of the Clinton administration, of which he was an integral part. Instead, he failed to reveal Bush’s inadequacy, even though Bush was an untested, unproven candidate (RRRA – hmmm – just who does THAT sound like?!?!) whose only political strength was the fact that his father had been a one-term president.

Kerry’s campaign regrettably mimicked Gore’s…

I thoroughly understood Clinton’s frustration during the primary: While she voted and acted progressively, Obama talked hope and change, with nothing to back it up. After she withdrew from the race, he was given his first opportunity to cast a pivotal vote for progressivism and vote against telecom immunity. He didn’t. While Clinton continued her progressive agenda and voted against it, Obama not only voted for it, but asserted that it was a good compromise, the same line anti-progressive Democrats have been proffering for years…

I remember wen being a Democrat meant being for change and actually acting on behalf of it. The first president I actually remember was LBJ, whose War on Poverty and programs like Head Start helped move the nation forward out of the divides of race and class.

There hasn’t been a more progressive American president since Franklin D. Roosevelt; he not only got the country out of the Great Depression, but initiated the New Deal and other safety net programs that would protect Americans if we ever had similar economic disaster.

When Clinton was running, some pundits referred to her as the New Deal candidate with a sneer. But given the economic disaster that the Bush administration has created, being compared to FDR should not have been seen as a negative.

I will not be voting for the Democrats this November. I’d like to, and wish I could, but I can’t. The last eight years of the Democratic Party and its refusal to take on the Bush administration have broken my faith in it…

I won’t deny that part of my decision has to do with the realization that I can no longer continue to vote against my own best interests. I have done that repeatedly, being guilted into voting Democrat when I should have taken a different route. I have argued in my newspaper columns that third party candidates are not the answer, but the past two elections, plus the current presidential race, have made me rethink that position.

The two major parties have failed a majority of Americans, but they have failed queers, women and minorities most definitively…

Vote for yourself this November instead of a party that has failed you. It’s the only way we will ever move toward real and lasting change in the United States. (Ms. Brownworth will be supporting Cynthia McKinney, the Green candidate, in November.)

I will not vote against my own self-interests again. If more WOMEN, in particular, did the same, Hillary Clinton would be the nominee now, if for no other reason than Nancy Pelosi would have supported HER instead of “the one God has blessed us with to us,” or whatever whackiness she said about Obama, and we would have, according to the polls anyway, the best PRESIDENT we have had in years. But no. Once again, the Democratic Party went with the weaker candidate instead of the sure bet.

Here’s a sure bet, though – they will not be getting my vote this year. They have done nothing to deserve it, and everything to make sure I didn’t give it to them.

Now do you understand the words I have been saying?

As Americans, we expect certain liberties and rights that were granted us by our forefathers, who wrote documents like the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. “We the people” expect that these fundamental rights will always be protected. However, in the current Democratic Presidential Primary, this has not been the case. We believe that the The Democratic National Committee (DNC) made a grave error by depriving American voters of their choice of Hillary Clinton as Democratic nominee. Senator Clinton, by all accounts, except caucuses, won the Primary Election and, therefore, should be the 2008 Democratic Nominee. That didn’t happen, due largely to illegitimate and illegal acts. We have interviews of many accounts from caucus states recounting threats, intimidation, lies, stolen documents, falsified documents, busing in voters in exchange for paying for “dinners,” etc. There are at least 2000 complaints, in Texas alone, of irregularities directed towards the Obama Campaign, that have lead to a very fractured and broken Democratic Party.

The preview, all 33 minutes of it, is compelling. In essence, it is a visual companion to the work of Dr. Lynette Long at Caucus Fraud and Peniel Cronin on Primaries and Caucuses (which will appear at NQ shortly). In short, it is disturbing not just how this happened, but THAT it happened in our country.

I invite you to watch the preview to this documentary, about which the authors said this:

This documentary is about the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign. We the People have made this film. Democrats have sent in their stories from all parts of America. We want to be heard and let the country know how our party has sanctioned the actions of what we feel are Obama campaign “Chicago Machine” dirty politics. We believe this infamous campaign of “change” from Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and intimidate Hillary supporters, stalk them, threaten them, lock them out of their polling places, silence their voices and stop their right to vote, which is, of course, all documented in “We Will Not Be Silenced.”

This documentary contains powerful, important information. I urge you to spread the word however you are able. Now is the time.

To view, CLICK HERE.

My deepest thanks to all of those at “We Will Not Be Silenced” for your commitment to democracy, to the rights of Americans, all Americans, to vote. Thank you for your courage and integrity in getting this critical information out. And thank you for bringing the voices of these Americans out for us all to witness

“I’m going to cast my ballot for her, and then the moment I cast my vote, I’m going to continue to enthusiastically support Sen. Obama. It’s going to be a good release for all of us.”

He said this in his interview with the PolitikerPA:

Gov. Ed Rendell, in an interview with PolitickerPA.com today, lauded the resolution reached last week that will allow Clinton’s name to be placed in nomination, before U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) ultimately accepts the party’s presidential nomination.

“I think Sen. Obama was extremely generous, and I think it’s good not because it will display any disunity, but because it honors the hard work of so many people who supported Sen. Clinton,” said Rendell, who was one of Clinton’s most visible and vociferous campaigners during the run-up to the state’s April primary. “Many of the Pennsylvania delegates worked their heart out for Sen. Clinton, and they’re excited to cast a vote for her. From my vantage point, that will be closure for them.

Rendell thinks it will be closure for Hillary’s supporters. The only way it will be closure for Hillary supporters is if she is the nominee. Hillary is still the best choice for the Democratic Party.

It is a little too late for Obama to try to woo us over. We are reminded each day that Donna Brazile said there is a new Democratic base and most of us aren’t welcome. Then Obama tells Hillary supporters to just “get over it”.

Thanks Governor Rendell but your promise to vote for Hillary in the Roll Call just isn’t enough.

Governor Rendell, remind the Super Delegates Obama has some real issues, issues that could result in defeat for the Democratic Party in November. Here is the worrisome list of issues (by no means inclusive) that elected delegates and SDs should consider before voting for Obama, False FEC filings, Votes in the IL Senate on the live birth measure, Illegal contributions received from the three brothers in the Gaza Strip, then there is the issue of his birth certificate (a petition drive is underway) to demand the FEC insist that Obama release a certified copy of his birth certificate, continued association with ACORN, a company with a history of voter fraud and misuse of taxpayer money and finally there are his poll numbers, tied with McCain for the third time in two weeks.

See you in Denver!

Rep.: Half of House Dems may vote Hillary at DNC

By AMIE PARNES & BEN SMITH | 8/15/08 5:58 PM EST:

On Friday, the Obama campaign confirmed that the floor vote in Denver, intended to assuage Clinton supporters still stewing over her narrow loss, will be conducted as a state-by-state roll call. (Um, NO – we are not stewing over “her narrow loss,” we are stewing at loss of democratic process; voter theft, fraud, and intimidation; and caucus irregularities, to name just a few.)

Rep. Loretta Sanchez says she’s happy for the chance to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton at the Democratic National Convention — and she predicts that as many as half of the Democrats in the House could join her. (WOOHOO!!!! About damn time y’all got yourselves some backbone!!! Not you, Rep. Sanchez – you have always been a stand-up woman!)

Just how many former Clinton supporters will vote for the former first lady during the symbolic first ballot is anybody’s guess, but each of them will be called upon to do so — whether they want to or not.

On Friday, the Obama campaign confirmed that the floor vote in Denver, intended to assuage Clinton supporters still stewing over her narrow loss, will be conducted as a state-by-state roll call. Under proposed convention bylaws, delegates would be forced to register their votes on a tally sheet with the convention secretary — the rules could be altered or suspended before the start of the convention.

“By putting her name in nomination, you’re putting people on the spot,” said former delegate counter Matt Seyfang, adding a second potential drawback: “Having a roll call … just chews into your broadcast time.” (Oh, dear, goddess – yes, that bothersome little democratic process is so TIME consuming! Don’t the little people know it is all about OBAMA?!?!?! We cannot be bothered with things like actual VOTES and a smidgen of transparency!! C’mon, already – sheesh!!)

Lower-key options were available. For example, Clinton’s name could have been entered into nomination, followed by laudatory speeches, ending with her release of delegates to Obama and proposal that he be nomination by acclamation, Seyfang said.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the “mechanics” of the roll call vote are still being worked out, but he conceded that Clinton probably will garner many votes on the first ballot. (”Mechanics”?? You mean, like how much they can strong-arm Clinton to just throw over her delegates to The One as quickly as possible without letting it LOOK like that is what they are doing?)

For Obama’s camp, the roll call is a ritual that will defuse any potential tension with Clinton or her supporters without affecting the outcome or the theater of Obama’s dramatic nomination. (Oh, I see – the whole roll call thing isn’t really a necessary part of the Democratic, or even Republican, Party electing its nominee, it is simply a “ritual”! Well, I have to tell you, I have learned something new today! All along, I thought the “ritual” of the roll call was to allow the respective delegates to vote for their candidate, thus representing the actual will of the people. Silly me!!! What a goof…)

Said Sanchez: “I believe there are a lot of supporters for Hillary among the superdelegates, especially now that they’ve agreed to place her name in nomination. I think half the House Democrats would probably be Hillary supporters, especially women. … I felt she was the most experienced and the best candidate and I still feel that way.” (Hell to the YES!!!)

Clinton herself has said she plans to vote for Obama. (Honestly, what else is she going to say? Poor thing – she is so between a rock and a hard place…)

A longtime Clinton adviser said it was “crazy” to guess at numbers but estimated that the former first lady would garner between 600 and 1,200 delegates — considerably short of the approximately 1,800 she had collected at the time of her departure from the race in early June.

“It’s a bizarre strategy,” said one Democratic strategist of the roll call. “It could backfire and show that her influence is waning. Chances are, she’s not going to have as many delegates vote for her on the floor as she had in the primary.”

Indeed, many Hillary diehards, including at least one member of the New York delegation, are reluctant to vote for Clinton after switching over to Obama.

“I think that most superdelegates, including myself, are going for Obama,” said New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, who campaigned with Clinton around the country. “I made my decision for Obama, and I’m not switching again.”

Other onetime Clinton backers are reluctant to reverse course for fear of angering their black constituents.

“My boss is totally conflicted about it — and pissed Hillary is putting us in this position,” said a congressional staffer for another New York House member. “We still haven’t made up our mind and I don’t know when we are going to.” (I’m sorry, s/he’s PISSED that HILLARY is putting him/her in this position?!?!? Golly gee willkers, pal – that democratic process thing just SUCKS for you, doesn’t it?? You are mad at HER for what, getting the majority of popular votes so that you might have to actually take a stand and piss some people off? Wowie zowie – you poor little things. But see, this was never supposed to be a SELECTION anyway, so for people to act like Obama should get it just so the AA community doesn’t get pissed off is just plain cowardice. And it’s insulting. To the AA community and the rest of us. This is NOT American Idol – really. It is about the highest job in all the land, and voting for the least competent candidate ever is a sacred duty. It is not one to be used to placate people who might get MAD at you if you vote the way the majority of people voted. Again, it’s called a SPINE – look into it, Congressional Staffer. Oh, and stop the blaming of HILLARY for being the candidate the PEOPLE want! That is assholic on oh-so-many-levels. Talk about blaming the victim – good grief.)

Another New York delegate, speaking on condition of anonymity, predicted that as much as 30 percent to 40 percent of the New York delegation would pick Clinton over Obama during the symbolic vote.

Obama’s decision to accept a roll call vote, which came after weeks of talks with the Clinton camp, doesn’t mean he’ll let the process get out of hand, observers say. (I’m sorry, does this say Obama is going to ACCEPT a roll call vote?!?!?! Oh, what a great guy! He is actually going to allow a DEMOCRATIC process that has existed for over a hundred years to take place?? How benevolent of him. Cough. Choke. Gimme a break already – this is the way Conventions are SUPPOSED to work. If a candidate with 1 delegate can be on a ballot, the only question is why they thought Clinton SHOULD NOT HAVE been in the first place!!!! THAT is the question, not how magnanimous Obama is being by following PROTOCOL!! What is WRONG with these people?!?!?!?)

“The convention is about nominating Barack, so his people want to speed through the vote as fast as possible so it won’t take too much TV time,” said a Democratic delegate who plans to vote for Clinton. “They also want to avoid a scenario where she’s leading at any point.” (Again, silly me. I thought the Convention was about nominating the candidate who is best for the country, the one for whom the majority of people voted. I did not realize before this year that the DNC has become synonymous with Barack Obama. I still cannot wrap my head around how this fledgling senator, with virtually no record, dangerous associates, and astonishing secrecy who will not even provide his REAL birth certificate, is the one the DNC hand-picked. It just boggles my mind. But this convention, this “show,” is all about OBAMA, not the Democratic National Party, or so it appears. What a tragedy that the DNC is morphing into the RNC. I never thought I’d see the day, and I sure wish I never had…)

(Additional reporting by Glenn Thrush.)

As Americans sat glued to their television sets watching the most hotly contested presidential primary in American history, pundits counted pledged delegates won in caucuses and primaries and discussed the highly prized superdelegates’ endorsements. Eventually it would be these superdelegates, Democratic officials, governors, and members of congress, who would determine the nominee, since neither contestant won enough pledged delegates in the 52 primary contests.

What the pundits forgot to tell the American public was that these superdelegates were doing some counting of their own. They weren’t counting how many of their constituents had voted for Senator Clinton or Senator Obama, but rather how much money was being put into their war chests by the Obama campaign and the Democratic hierarchy. This money, moved from one candidate to another via PAC’s, would determine their endorsements and ultimately the nomination.

Since 1987, Nancy Pelosi has represented California’s eighth district– including most of San Francisco. An Italian American, Pelosi was raised on politics. Her father was a Congressman from Maryland and the Mayor of Baltimore. Pelosi was elected as Democratic Speaker of the House 2002. Pelosi shattered the glass ceiling in the House of Representatives when she was elected the first female speaker in 2007. A shrewd politician, Madame Speaker exercises a lot of influence over the members of congress. She determines Committee assignments and in conjunction with the DNC and Howard Dean decides how much money and support the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee gives to each member of congress in their bid for re-election.

In addition, Pelosi also contributes money directly to the congressional campaigns of certain candidates through her Political Action Committee “PAC to the FUTURE.” Her PAC receives money from other PAC’s such as Service Employees International Union $10,000, American Bankers Assn $10,000, Sheet Metal Workers Union $10,000, International Association of Fire Fighters, $10,000, and Goldman Sachs 10,000. It also receives money from individuals.

In the 2008 election cycle, the Center for Responsive Politics (www.opensecrets.org) reports that Nancy Pelosi’s PAC received 585,400 and contributed more than $445,000 of this to 59 congressional candidates. PAC to the FUTURE gave money to 38 incumbents and 21 challengers.

Of the 435 members in the house, Pelosi gave money to 8.5% of them. Of the members who received money from Pelosi, 71% were men; only 29% were women. Only eleven percent of the female members of congress received support from Pelosi’s PAC. It’s disappointing that a female speaker did not symbolically make some contribution to all Democratic women in the house.

But even more important than the gender implications of Pelosi’s behavior was her impact on the Presidential election.

Publicly Madame Speaker did not endorse either Obama or Clinton in the Democratic Primary, but was she was anything but neutral.

Pelosi gave money to the campaigns of thirty-eight members of congress, twenty-eight of these endorsed Obama; ten endorsed Clinton. Pelosi contributed to the campaigns of Obama endorsers almost three to one. Pelosi not only gave to a greater number of Obama supporters, she collectively gave them more money.

Pelosi gave $250,000 to the campaigns of superdelegates that endorsed Obama and only $80,000 to the campaigns of superdelegates that endorsed Clinton. Money talks, and Pelosi and her PAC spoke volumes….in shorthand. She may not have publicly endorsed a candidate, but the members of the House of Representatives knew she supported Obama.

Of the thirty-eight Members of Congress Pelosi gave money to, sixteen went against the grain for Obama. This means, their state voted for Hillary, their district voted for Hillary, yet they endorsed Obama. Why? Follow the money.

By endorsing Obama, all of these Members of Congress went against the will of their constituents, twice, at the state level and at the district level. Only two members who received money from Pelosi’s PAC went against the grain and endorsed Hillary.

Is sixteen against the grain for Hillary and two against the grain for Obama a coincidence?

Pelosi’s contributions to the campaigns of state representatives followed a similar pattern. Sixty-three percent of the state representatives to whom Pelosi gave money, endorsed Obama in a state won by Clinton.

Ten thousand dollars, PAC to the FUTURE’s typical contribution, doesn’t seem like a lot of money but besides getting money from PAC TO THE FUTURE, most of these members got contributions from other PACs.

These contributions were most likely orchestrated by Pelosi and company since the overlap is too startling. Congressman James Clyburn from South Carolina has BRIDGE PAC. BRIDGE PAC gave money to all but two of these same members of congress. Steny Hoyer from Maryland has AMERIPAC. AMERIPAC gave money to almost every single one of these same members of congress. Typical donations from both of these PAC’S were $10,000.

And then there is the NATIONAL LEADERSHIP PAC and the NEW DEMOCRAT COALITION, and of course there is the HOPE FUND owned by Barack Obama. All of these PACs donated an average of $10,000 to most of their campaigns. These young representatives got a lot of pressure to endorse Obama no matter which way their district or state voted. The voices of their constituents were irrelevant.

It seems Obama was just posing as a Washington outsider. But in reality—all the real Washington insiders Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Clyburn, Hoyer, and Kerry were on his team all along. Pelosi’s Pac might be named PAC to the Future, but it took direct action to purposely undermine the first significant female candidate for the presidency in history. In so doing, she pushed women back decades.

ACTION: Call Pelosi’s office at 415-556-4862 and let her know how you feel. Let’s not just call her biased against women; let’s call her finished.

FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY, BEFORE IT DISAPPEARS.

(The EXCEL sheet is incorporated into the story.)

After all the DNC and Obama have done to you, it just makes me ill. I know you’re between a rock and a hard place – one the DNC and Barry put you between. I know it, I see it, but holy cow, he should be stumping for YOU! But there you go with your most awesome self, talking to the people, showing them how wonderful you are, how brilliant, how thoughtful and possible your policies are, especially now, with Georgia and Russia fighting, with tensions mounting in the Middle East, with that 3:00 a.m. call coming for real…

Wait a second. Now, just hold on – this is freakin’ BRILLIANT!!!!!! Yes, by all means, Obama, you just go away for a respite, and let HILLARY go around the country talking to the people – BEFORE THE CONVENTION HAS HAPPENED!!!

Abso-freakin’-lutely, you just run along, and let the GROWN UP do the talking.

People will be reminded of what a far superior candidate SHE is, and what a slouch YOU are, especially in the answering questions department, or talking department, or policy department…By all means – take all the time you want! Aloha!!

Come to think of it, as Diamond Tiger wrote in an awesome post yesterday, if Obama now wants to have all of the delegates restored, that would make the difference between the two only 59 delegates (nod to Marc Rubin for writing about that! FIFTY-NINE!!! That is statistically insignificant. It is statically MEANINGLESS. So, if the delegates are restored, as they SHOULD be anyway in a DEMOCRATIC manner (both small and Big “D” way), Obama should not be the presumed candidate. It’s basically a TIE, people.

And by “People”, I mean YOU, Super Delegates! Stop this foolishness already. Stop pushing this guy who is more secretive than DUBYA!! A guy who refuses to even present his REAL birth certificate! Who will not allow ANY of his records, college or grad school, to be released! The guy who has the same attitude problems toward the media that Bush has? Who cannot come up with his own policies?? Are you KIDDING me?? When Hillary Clinton goes out on the road soon, LISTEN. WATCH. THAT is a real leader. And a real leader is just what we need in these times. So stop messing around, forget about who gave you more money - pay attention. And cast your SD vote for the BEST candidate, not the hand-picked candidate. Do it for your country.

Here’s another action for you, again, courtesy of the amazing GeekLove on Donna Brazile, Obama’s puppeteer:

(Adapted from a post at Rabble Rouser Ruminations.)

I do want to mention that over 1,500 people have already died in this war between Georgia and Russia, a war not even a day old. Fifteen hundred people. Words fail, but my heart goes out to all those who are losing people in this conflict, and all conflicts being waged around the world right now, whether it is our people, or the people of Georgia, or Russia, or Afghanistan, or Iraq, or…Sadly, the list is too long.

And once again, as if there was any doubt, this is exactly why we need to have s leader, a strong leader, a compassionate leader, a decisive leader. And that person is, without a doubt in my mind, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

TAKE A BIG SWIG:

      ATV/Zogby Poll Toss-Up! McCain 42%, Obama 41% as Undecided Voters Increase… … “Obama loses support among his strongest demographic groups. …”

DON’T CHOKE NOW:

      Bob Herbert: Why is everyone missing the phallic symbols in McCain’s Britney ad?

(As I wrote to some friends, perhaps the problem is that Bob Herbert is the only person in America who sees ANY phallic symbols in those ads.)

Herbert read a book’s worth of meaning into this single phrase by John McCain last spring: “Mr. McCain had himself touted as the ‘American president Americans have been waiting for’.”

There was nothing subtle about that attempt to position Senator Obama as the Other, a candidate who might technically be American but who remained in some sense foreign, not sufficiently patriotic and certainly not one of us — the “us” being the genuine red-white-and-blue Americans who the ad was aimed at.

That is heavy. Quite frankly, Herbert is near hysteria: “The racial fantasy factor in this presidential campaign is out of control.”

And could it be that there is a RELATIONSHIP between Mr. Obama’s falling poll numbers and his playing of the race card? The American people — even white people — are decent, good people who overwhelmingly abhore REAL cases of racism. But they also detest the race card being flapped about, especially when a candidate is cornered because of his inability to handle the job of being a presidential candidate, let alone being a president.

Then I read this self-pitying drivel by Mr. Herbert — despite the fact that it is Obama’s OWN campaign that has promoted him as a hip pop icon!

Mr. Obama has to endure these grotesque insults with a smile and heroic levels of equanimity. The reason he has to do this — the sole reason — is that he is black.

Mr. Herbert, you’re an able (albeit not great) essayist, but your hypersensitivity is getting the best of you.

By your standards, there is nothing we can say against Mr. Obama that cannot be construed by you as racist.

Why can’t YOU see what most of America sees? That it is Mr. Obama and his campaign who have turned him into a “pop icon.”

That it is HE who has replaced the American flag with his giant O on the tail of his campaign plane? (While we’re speaking of symbols, just what is that giant O a symbol of, Mr. Herbert?)

That it is HE who put the word “President” on his plush seat on his incredibly expensive campaign plane.

That it is HE who okayed the use of a faux presidential seal on his lecturn.

Yet you twist Mr. McCain’s correct satire of Mr. Obama’s own iconic campaign strategy into somehow being highly sexualized, featuring two white blonde women. No. That’s not it at all.

Speaking of icons, why don’t you take to task the vile, misogynistic “lyrics” of Ludacris and Snoop Dog, both of whom Obama admires and listens to?

But, then, those are only insulting to women, and they had better get used to it, right?

_____________________

Just how did Barack Obama rack up so many superdelegates? Why did only a fraction of supers in Obama states support Hillary while so many supers in Clinton states were brazen enough to support the upstart their constituents had rejected? Follow the money, honey. (Democrats cost so little these days.)

Obama and his minions carried on for months about honoring the people’s vote. Well, guess what? Hillary won the popular vote (and YES, I am including Florida and Michigan where millions voted) and she won more big states. That means she won more congressional districts and counties. So, if Obama wants us to honor the people’s vote, why did almost 200 supers representing Clinton states or districts support Obama? It’s time they honored the people’s vote.

Using data from www.sourcewatch.org (superdelegate transparency project), I created the spreadsheet below. PUMAs, this is your list of superdelegates who betrayed Hillary, their constituents, and us, the Democratic voters. There are 190 names below! Are your elected officials on it? Find out! Contact them! Remind them that you don’t have to support them at the ballot box. We need 175 patriots to come to their senses before Denver – 175 off of this list – which means most. Get going!

superdelegates.xls

HTML version of list

plain HTML version of list

:::::::::::::::::::::::::

NoQuarterUSA Action Of The Day: We ask that you take part in the I Own My Vote Virtual Platform Committee Meeting now! It takes five minutes. Click here to start. If you have not yet signed the pledge, click here to do so.

But what does this have to do with Christina Applegate and Hillary Clinton?

You can add in there Sheryl Crow, Virginia Clinton, my aunt, my cousin, and a growing number of women: breast cancer. Yes, I saw today that Christina Applegate has been diagnosed with breast cancer. Again, what the sam hill does this have to do with Hillary Clinton? Well, a couple of months ago, when Hillary Clinton was on The Ellen Degeneres Show, she said that, if she becomes president, she wants to ERADICATE breast cancer within a decade. A DECADE!!! Ten years, for those of you who may not have had caffeine yet! AND, she wants to fund research to find out what the causes of breast cancer are. Oh, and to fund UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE so women who cannot afford treatment stop DYING. Clinton would do this. She would not flip and flop this way and that trying to appease first one group and then the other. Why? Because she cares about us, the people, the citizens of this country. She is not out to amass more and more power to feed her bottomless pit of an ego. (And yes, I know she’s a politician, and as such, certainly does have an ego, as we all do. But I have never seen her policies to be EGO-driven.) Heck, even her willingness to drop out before the Convention, an UNPRECEDENTED move, speaks to her desire to do what is best for the country and Party, misguided though that decision was, IMHO. I have absolutely NO DOUBT she was strong-armed into it, because honestly, she would do far more good for this country than Obama can ever dream of doing, but she also did not want to be the perceived catalyst for the disunity of the Party, thus losing the White House and an opportunity to change some of Bush’s disastrous policies. She wants to be able to do work in the Senate, if not elected, and that meant, as she was forced out, to be gracious about it. Something else Mr. Ego could learn from her (and he cannot be counted on to change ANY of Bush’s policies, as we have already seen, especially if it will give him more power). But I digress (hey, I’m a Southerner – that’s how we tell stories).

Should the Superdelegates somehow put aside their OWN egos, and clear the path to wisdom, thus voting for Clinton, the following is a glimpse to what we can look forward. Damn, I miss this woman (the part on breast cancer is a few minutes in, but just enjoy watching her!):

Oh, in case you are interested, I lost my aunt to complications from breast cancer. Despite a double mastectomy, her cancer recurred, first in the scar tissue from the mastectomies, then in her bones. My cousin, her daughter, is a survivor. I hope, and pray, that continues to be HER path – surviving the disease that claimed her mother.

But this is not just for those whom I know personally, or stars I like. This is for ALL the women out there – and breast cancer affects a huge number of women a year. If we can get Hillary Clinton into the White House, we will FINALLY have an advocate who cares about OUR health issues, and will work to eradicate this killer.

Get busy, SuperD’s – look at the fiasco the DNC is pushing on us! Choose the GROWN UP already!! Choose the one who CREATES the policies, not steals them!! Choose the one who works for US, the American PEOPLE, not themselves. You might try that, too. For my cousin, for Christina Applegate, Sheryl Crow, the sisters, mothers, aunts, daughters, nieces, and granddaughters – pick the one who cares about US!

UPDATED: (From Larry Johnson) Another video relevant to topic:

Well, meet Barack “Barry Soetero” Obama. Unlike Michael Dukakis, Obama’s poll numbers against John McCain are headed south. Rasmussen’s latest poll shows that McCain has inched ahead of Obama–and this has happened without any serious Republican attack ads. Obama is doing a nose dive into concrete.

Without the votes of the Super Delegates Obama cannot get the nomination. If the Super Delegates refuse to exercise their judgment and stop the Obama debacle, then the Democrats are in for a tough November–at least on the Presidential front. There are major stories brewing that will derail Obama’s message and campaign. These include:

1. Barack Obama’s campaign has filed false, misleading financial reports with the FEC. We have the story but a mainstream journalist is working on it. We will break the story, probably next week, once it hits the press.

2. Barack’s refusal to release his health records will blow up. Why is a seemingly healthy 46 year old guy unwilling to release his medical records? I have asked this question of several political pros and they have told me that it is probably because the records contain embarrassing information. Such as? Is there an STD in his past? Drug use/treatment? Psychiatrist? We don’t know. But the Obama campaign is kidding itself if it thinks they will be able to stonewall on this question for the duration of a general election campaign.

3. Barack’s refusal to produce a legitimate, valid certificate of live birth. Techdude’s article posted last night at NoQuarter demonstrates conclusively that what is posted on the Obama campaign site and at Daily Kos is a fabrication that used the Certificate of Live Birth of a woman born in the 1970s. A likely candidate? Maya Soetero, Barack’s sister. If this is the case then the next question will be did she consent to allowing her COLB to be used in this manner.

4. Which brings us to the question of Barack’s name and nationality. He was adotped by his Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetero. As a result of this adoption his birth certificate was amended and his name recorded as Barry Soetero. The failure of the campaign to come clean on this will be further fodder in the early days of the general election that will derail the Obama campaign’s effort to craft a clear message.

5. Barack’s meme as a humorless flip flopper with a God complex is set. The ads last week making fun of Barack’s celebrity and aura of deity are just the beginning of a flood of material that will turn Mr. Hope-and-Change into a national laughing stock.

Update: The McCain campaign has found Barack Obama’s Achilles heel, his humorlessness, and they are using humor to expose his weaknesses on policy, experience, and electability. This latest spoof of Obama’s comments asking people to properly inflate their tires to save on energy has gone “viral,” according to Memeorandum.com. This spoof works because it is hilarious and also delivers a serious message.

6. Campaign contributions from foreigners, especially Palestinians. Check out the latest from Aaron Klein. Someone on the Republican side surely will go thru these contributions with a finetooth comb. Barack taking money from folks perceived as enemies of America is another story line that won’t help Mr. Obama win the votes of angry white folks clutching guns and bibles in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia.

So Super Delegates, it is up to you. Stop this trainwreck and save Barack from himself. If Barack is crowned then let’s be clear about who is to blame–the leaders of the Democratic party. Rather than serve the interests of America you have surrendered to the cult of personality and squandered any hope of putting a real Democrat in the White House.

Hillary, we’re still with you.

I reckon “Backtrack Barack” is just going to flip or flop on every single position that got him to where he is now – the PRESUMPTIVE candidate. If he keeps this up, he’s going to get confused and end up at the REPUBLICAN National Convention!!

So, thanks tons, all of you Obamabots, for all of your abusive, thuggish behavior, for locking out Clinton supporters from caucuses, getting signatures outside of the caucuses, harassing Clinton supporters online, setting up inside polling booths, and the RBC ones who STOLE VOTES ot push Obama over the top.

Thanks so very, very much. This Bush III transformation is just about COMPLETE!! Way to go.

Just as a reminder, this is the one you SHOVED aside, treated like no other Democratic candidate in our history, on lo, this very subject (and yes, I had this in recently, but frankly, it bears repeating):

And just for fun, in my paper today was an article about John Edwards. Specifically, it was about the birth certificate of his alleged “Love Child,” and how the name of the father was left off. But what was INTERESTING, and by that I mean, a great set-up, was the accompanying photo of John Edwards. The original belongs to the AP, and we know how pissy they can be, but it was similar to the one below, except they were shaking hands:

Interesting, right? The way the paper laid it out, implicating Edwards as the Baby Daddy, and connecting Obama all at the same time! Kinda makes you think, right? And that was the point. Just like many of us think this was the EXACT reason Edwards endorsed Obama – he was being strong-armed. That seems to be the modus operandi of the Obama Bloc. Oh, yeah.

So, in one day, in one paper, we have Obama flipflopping on Offshore Drilling. And, Obama and Edwards together as Edwards “Love Child” is discussed. What a guy. What a candidate. Another George W. Bush. Great job, SuperDelegates. Regroup – even if you are embarrassed that you ever even endorsed this sham of a candidate, do NOT let pride get in your way. Or money. Give us the BEST candidate for the Democratic Party. Give us HILLARY!!!!

And one more fun video along those lines (thank you, Sophie!):

I watched your video and at the end … weeped for our loss.

I don’t think there is another candidate nor has there ever been another candidate who is more qualified, prepared and earnest than Hillary Clinton. She also is more courageous than any other person who ever walked this earth.

For her to have been skewered and us to be left with what we have representing us is tantamount to a world disaster.

Thank you. It is my hope that HRC is nominated and that each and every one of her delegates votes for her and that some of the O ‘folks’ who got caught up in his empty rhetoric-do the right thing and vote for Hillary.

I think it is especially important for those delegates, from the states she won, to do the right thing.

They will be responsible for the biggest failure of any party any time if they do not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Frankly, this has been the hardest event of my life to justify and settle in my soul. I just can’t find peace over this.

– From a faithful reader

A group of House Republicans charged today that Gov. Michael S. Dukakis, the Democratic Presidential nominee, had appointed three ”anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian” members to the party’s ruling body and challenged him to dismiss them.Representative Norman F. Lent, Republican of Nassau, said the three members were appointed to the 400-member Democratic National Committee after the party’s convention last July in Atlanta as a gesture of conciliation to the Rev. Jesse Jackson, the defeated Presidential contender.Mr. Lent identified the three as the Rev. Willie Barrow, executive director of Mr. Jackson’s Chicago-based Operation PUSH; Robert Farrell, a Los Angeles City Councilman and close Jackson associate, and Ruth Ann Skaff of Houston, whom he said was a spokeswoman for the pro-Palestinian Ad Hoc Committtee on Lebanon.Mr. Lent said that Mrs. Barrow and Mr. Farrell were supporters of the Rev. Louis Farrakhan, a radical Muslim leader who has made anti-Semitic statements. He said Ms. Skaff had led anti-Israel demonstrations. 

Barrow’s fondness for Farrakhan — a man who describes Jews as Satanic — is best summoned up in this quote:

Mrs. Barrow was quoted in a 1985 article in The Washington Post as saying, ”I love my brother, Minister Louis Farrakhan. The devil don’t like it, Chicago don’t like it, the world don’t like it, but we love it.” 

Not only does Barrow love Farrakhan, he returns the love to Barrow:

And Farrakhan has loved Willie Barrow back, affectionately quoting her in his sermons. During the recent NOI scandal Willie Barrow served as the chair of the Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes. When the Nation of Islam Minister of Protocol Claudette Marie Muhammad joined the commission, its Jewish members resigned after Muhammad invited other commissioners to a speech by Farrakhan filled with anti-semitic invective. Barrow, however true to her ties with the Nation of Islam, continued to defend Muhammad and condemn the commissioners who resigned. 

It’s now beyond doubt that Obama has surrounded himself with the leaders of the America-hating neo-left movement, a twisted form of “liberalism” which embraces and promotes anti-white and anti-Semitic rhetoric, fomenting resentment and demanding payback . Is America willing to accept and can it endure the moral relativism which Obama would bring to the White House? What would be the cost? 

You may not have to wait until 2012. Obama is imploding so fast that by convention time Dems will be running to Hillary screaming “Save us! Save us!”

I have already written Senator Nelson (I live in Florida), a Hillary supporter, to make sure her name is put in nomination. Above all, this is where our efforts now ought to be: getting commitments from the DNC and super delegates that her name be placed in nomination. If that I happens, I believe, she will win.

I spent many years in NY politics and I know many of the players. At this point, they are looking for a way out. We have to keep the heat on to give them room to maneuver.

The piece the other day on payoffs to super delegates by Obama was perfect. The more people see him for what he is, fewer will support him.

Obama’s Intrade odds are dropping. The Daily Gallup today showed McCain and Obama one point apart. By the convention McCain will be leading and if done right, the delegates will turn to Hillary.

You and Larry and all your posters have done a remarkable job. Very well done.

Do not give up hope. Take the fight to the Obamabots. We will win.

All the best,

[Name omitted]

So, once again, here is a video of Jim Cramer, from Mad Money on CNBC, telling Ellen Degeneres who is the BEST candidate for president in terms of dealing with the economy. That candidate is HILLARY CLINTON!

OKAY, Superdelegates – REALLY – open your eyes! It is not Amateur Hour here. We already had one of those, and it has been DISASTROUS.

Heck, that guy was way more experienced than the guy the DNC is pushing now!! We simply cannot AFFORD another president who is getting on the job training.

We need someone who has a good handle on the economic issues confronting the country, and the ability to lead us into economic stability. Hillary Clinton is the ONLY candidate to be able to do that. And really, there will be no hard feelings for your brief foray into the Obama camp. Unlike the Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s of the Obama camp, we will forgive and forget, as long as you come to your senses already, and realize this was just a crush, a passing fancy. But now it is time to get SERIOUS, and support the candidate who is best for the country. And who can beat John McCain with one hand tied behind her back. Don’t worry – we’ll have your backs against those rabid cultists. You can do it. We’re right there with you. We NEED Clinton as the nominee. The COUNTRY needs Clinton as the nominee. All right. You can do it! We know you can.

You know – come to think of it, the DNC completely breaking with tradition and moving the Convention to August might be one of the best things they have done in a year. It has given the Superdelegates, and the rest of the country, the opportunity to see that Obama is not at all ready, or able, to lead this country. It has made it abundantly clear that only Hillary Clinton can beat John McCain. And that her plans and policies are what this country needs. Who woulda thunk it?!?

Okay, SDs – just come on back to the reality-based community. We are here for you!