SUNRISE

Free at last, Free at last... Lord Almighty, we are free at last!

House of Representatives: Check

Senate: Check

Presidency: Check

/

(Told ya so moment: 2005 thoughts on the 2008 elections )

.

Not a moment too soon. It does not speak highly of my fellow Americans that we came close to electing another carbon copy of that madman Bush.

.

Racism, narcissism and ignorance still fuel a large segment of the American population. I am surrounded my those who are voting for McCain here in West Texas. I have yet to find even ONE of these folks who actually believe in McCain. They fear and hate Obama, though. They send text messages in the millions daily - racist jokes and lynching fantasies. I knew most people in this area were racist. This list includes my co-workers, my family, and even some people I considered friends. But the level that this group of people has outed themselves at shocks even this Redneck. I guess all it takes is one uppity nigger-and the very real fear that the White man's thumb on everything is being removed.

.

Change. That's what they fear.

.

They can't stop it. But thank Crom we've stopped them, at least for the moment. Every day more of these McCarthyist dinosaurs breathe their last, cancerous breath and new Americans are born to breathe fresh new life into this country.

/

Change is coming.

..
It's not gloating, it is tears of joy and relief...

In case you've forgotten - some memories of the Republican Reign of Terror:

TraitorGate

Treason for Dummies

Palin-publicans

Media Apologists for Bush

Rummy

Crimelords in Office

Conspiracy to Terrorize

Olbermann: We will not fear George Bush

Bush vetoes bill banning Waterboarding

The Bailout before the Bailout

and for shits and giggles:
Images from the House of the Rising Sons from the past 4 years

Off the Fence

First things First: Freida Bee and Liberality: I'm working on my tag post... (busy weekend)

Now, on to business-

Like me, A lot of Democrats have been sitting on the fence. Obama or Clinton wasn't our first choice, so we didn't really care which one of them won the nomination. And then, I made a distinction based on the recent actions of the two candidates. I went with Obama.

Michael Moore has finally jumped off the fence and onto Obama's side. His reasoning is much like mine. This is from his newsletter:

My Vote's for Obama (if I could vote) ...by Michael Moore
April 21st, 2008

Friends,

I don't get to vote for President this primary season. I live in Michigan. The party leaders (both here and in D.C.) couldn't get their act together, and thus our votes will not be counted.

So, if you live in Pennsylvania, can you do me a favor? Will you please cast my vote -- and yours -- on Tuesday for Senator Barack Obama?

I haven't spoken publicly 'til now as to who I would vote for, primarily for two reasons: 1) Who cares?; and 2) I (and most people I know) don't give a rat's ass whose name is on the ballot in November, as long as there's a picture of JFK and FDR riding a donkey at the top of the ballot, and the word "Democratic" next to the candidate's name.

Seriously, I know so many people who don't care if the name under the Big "D" is Dancer, Prancer, Clinton or Blitzen. It can be Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Barry Obama or the Dalai Lama.

Well, that sounded good last year, but over the past two months, the actions and words of Hillary Clinton have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting. I guess the debate last week was the final straw. I've watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name "Farrakhan" out of nowhere, well that's when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the "F" word to scare white people, pure and simple. Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama's pastor does -- AND the "church bulletin" once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!

This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!

Yes, Senator Clinton, that's how you sounded. Like you were nuts. Like you were a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity. How sad that I would ever have to write those words about you. You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds. And now to throw it all away for an office you can't win unless you smear the black man so much that the superdelegates cry "Uncle (Tom)" and give it all to you.

But that can't happen. You cast your die when you voted to start this bloody war. When you did that you were like Moses who lost it for a moment and, because of that, was prohibited from entering the Promised Land.
How sad for a country that wanted to see the first woman elected to the White House. That day will come -- but it won't be you. We'll have to wait for the current Democratic governor of Kansas to run in 2016 (you read it here first!).

There are those who say Obama isn't ready, or he's voted wrong on this or that. But that's looking at the trees and not the forest. What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate.

That is not to take anything away from this exceptional man. But what's going on is bigger than him at this point, and that's a good thing for the country. Because, when he wins in November, that Obama Movement is going to have to stay alert and active. Corporate America is not going to give up their hold on our government just because we say so. President Obama is going to need a nation of millions to stand behind him.

I know some of you will say, 'Mike, what have the Democrats done to deserve our vote?' That's a damn good
question. In November of '06, the country loudly sent a message that we wanted the war to end. Yet the Democrats have done nothing. So why should we be so eager to line up happily behind them?

I'll tell you why. Because I can't stand one more friggin' minute of this administration and the permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I'm almost at the point where I don't care if the Democrats don't have a backbone or a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name ain't "Bush" and the word "Republican" is not beside theirs on the ballot, then that's good enough for me.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years. That's why I will join millions of citizens and stagger into the voting booth come November, like a boxer in the 12th round, all bloodied and bruised with one eye swollen shut, looking for the only thing that matters -- that big "D" on the ballot.

Don't get me wrong. I lost my rose-colored glasses a long time ago.

It's foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country. Any endorsement of a Democrat must be done with this acknowledgement and a hope that one day we will have a party that'll represent the people first, and laws that allow that party an equal voice.

Finally, I want to say a word about the basic decency I have seen in Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

But no, Obama won't throw that at her. It wouldn't be right. It wouldn't be decent. She's been through enough hurt. And so he remains silent and takes the mud she throws in his face.

That's why the crowds who come to see him are so large. That's why he'll take us down a more decent path. That's why I would vote for him if Michigan were allowed to have an election.

But the question I keep hearing is... 'can he win? Can he win in November?' In the distance we hear the siren of the death train called the Straight Talk Express. We know it's possible to hear the words "President McCain" on January 20th. We know there are still many Americans who will never vote for a black man. Hillary knows it, too. She's counting on it.

Pennsylvania, the state that gave birth to this great country, has a chance to set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there. In that Constitution, they wrote that a black man or woman was only "three fifths" human. On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption.

Yours,Michael Moore

If you can read all that, AND STILL Support Clinton, well, I'd love to know why. If not, start emailing your Dem reps, your Dem Senators, your delegates and everybody else- that Clinton needs to bow out. It's time to move forward.

Framing The "Debate"

A friend called me early this morning. He's a default Texas John McCain supporter, which means : He won't vote for no split tail or no negro, by God.

A day before I had ripped McCain to this Truck Driver- and explained why he should be voting Democrat for the rest of his natural born life, apparently, 24 hours set in and he forgot the fifteen damn factors I had instilled in him via reason, logic, and historical example.

He called me from his cell as he was truckin along, and he asked me if I was still supporting Obama. Before I could answer, he followed up with : "Have you seen the news?" - Now, I am a news JUNKIE. I mainline C&L, I shoot MSNBC Straight, I chase it with NPR Radio , and while I'm at it, I have a slice of Yahoo and smoke a bowl of CNBC. And I wash it all down with a suicide of various blogs. So, sitting down at my desk that early morning, I hadn't even booted up my PC yet. All I had was my morning drive with NPR's tibetan updates.

I thought- 'Well, shit! what did I miss?'

"Obama got a terrorist working for him.Yep, it's all over the news!" He exclaimed.

Unawares of what the heck he was talking about, I kinda mumbled- "I didn't see that on the news" But nonplussed, I followed up with the standard West Texas talking point- "Well, hell, Rocky, I'll still vote for a terrorist over Hillary or McCain". That got a chuckle.

"Well, I just thought you should know that's what I heard. That your boy got terrorists working for him."

He couldn't cite a news agency or details, and he had to go abruptly. I quickly got online, thinking to myself- What-in-the-fck-now?

Unsurprisingly it dawned on me that there was no news concerning this soundbite. I had forgotten that the rest of the country isn't quite up to speed on current events. Maybe he had finally heard some shit about Madrassas. Maybe he had heard about Weather Underground. Maybe he heard some uppity black preacher was badmouthing the flag. But whatever bullshit he took in one ear, didn't quite make it out the other.

All that careful conversation I had with him the day before, meant nothing now. All he heard was that I was supporting a black man over the white one. And although he listened carefully and even told me what a sorrry ass Bush was, worst President ever- a day later all that registered was that crazy ass nigga's middle name was Hu-saaaaannnnne and he won't say the pledge of allegiance by damn!

...

He wants to vote Republican. Because he's been told to. But everything is shit and it has been for the past 8 years. Nothing has quite worked out like the Republican party told him it would. He just don't know. But ho-shit- It's not just a split-tail running for President, that's a god-damn Clinton! By Jesus, He'd take a bj in an outhouse with his wife holding a roll of toilet paper outside, but he cain't abide the Preznit getting his jollies in the oval office!

Not if he's damn democrat, at least! And then the other option is a half-breed! And half breeds ain't so bad, Hell this guy's grandson is a "half-breed". But this fucker is half (whisper- BLACK! whisper)

Sumbitch!

McCain is a white guy and hell he's even a War Hero. (If it all it takes to be a war hero is to be captured by a rice farmer in a paddy where you've been bombing civiilians)... So when he hears "Hussein" or "Farrakhan" or "black President" his mind is made up.

The wit and wisdom, the facts and the figures, the history and the truth isn't going to sway him.

UNLESS...

So, what I propose- is to fight like a dirty, piece of shit Republican. Do what they have done to Obama and to Hillary before him- Make up a bunch of bullshit and pass it down the line. Who knows? Knowing the Middle Amerkan dipshit like I know so well, they will PROBABLY improve on it as it goes in one ear and out their ass.

I'm sure you've heard some dirt on McCain. Well, do what THEY do, and just assume its true and pass it around. But frame it in the worst possible way to Right wingers and their ilk; Make a headline about McCain. Say that you heard it from a "reputable source" and let that fucker fly. We are dealing with idiots, slaves, and sycophants. For four years of blogging, I've laid out the truth in careful little lines only to be ignored by morons who want to know who's Britney's Sister's Baby's Daddy is.

FUCK THEM.

McCain wants to Double the Estate Tax! I read it in the Wall Street Journal!

McCain owns interest in a Chinese Nuclear Weapons facility! It was on FoxNews!

McCain called one of Mitt Romney's three wives' (the thirteen year old) a bitch! I heard it on Rush!

McCain beat his ex-wife as she lay in a cancer ward, then had sex with his mistress in the same room as she lay bleeding afterwards! it was on Drudge, I Swear!

McCain wants Cheney as his Vice President! (that might be true)

Rove threatens to blow the whistle on McCain's Bondage Affair with Condi Rice, her lesbian girlfriend and Jeff Gannon! I read it at Free Republic!

McCain secretly vows to George Bush in a satanic blood brother ritual that they will do a 9-11 in every major city until the Democrat party is no longer a majority in Congress! I saw it on Perez Hilton!

Because the horrible truth is- THESE Lies are more likely to get attention than Bush okaying Torture, Blackwater pulling guns on American soldiers with no consequences, Iraq going to hell in a handbasket, our President funneling millions of dollars in weapons to Saudi Arabia and Israel, our government allowing crooked corporations to loot American stockholders, or our military being destroyed by the Incompetent Republican leadership.

So lie all you want. The truth is far worse.

Chaos Inc.

Random blogging, part 763




NOTE TO DISGRUNTLED BLOGGER-AMERKANS:

I think we've all felt this way sometime or other during the past year:

"that this election is really going to make one godamn bit of difference and that this is still a functioning democracy....ha-ha! Now, that's funny!"
The Culture Ghost

I think the biggest way to cure apathy is to get pissed off again. So, to all of you who feel like CG right now, and I'm sure its a growing group out there: Get Pissed Off Again.

To all of you who feel like this election is all a useless endeavor- Remember this- The Republicans WILL be voting. Even though they don't like their candidate, they seem to understand what many of us don't - Their vote counts, and it's worth the effort to put it in for your candidate, because, even though that candidate may not be everything you want, it's the small differences that WILL COUNT in the 4 years of the immediate future. They know it. They know McCain will keep pushing Republican bullshit that will aid them in little ways, if nothing else, he will keep the ni**ers, the fa*s, the wetbacks, the fucking poor, the unions, the non-christians, the non-racists, the peaceniks and the socialists DOWN where the Republicans think they all belong. And they will hustle their sorry asses down to vote for that one point only, if it all boiled down to it.

And if You STILL don't think it matters in the end- well fucking shut the hell up and DO Something MORE for your country.

For those of you who feel that working within the parameters of the system isn't going to effect any change- you have plenty of alternatives outside the box. If you are convinced that Democracy is dead, and I am certainly not- are you going to put up or shut up?

Because I'd love to see something either way. I've been right here with you myself before, feeling defeated and dismayed at the whole bullshit system. But selling the idea that everything is useless is ... well, useless. Be a patriot. Shake things up. Get back in the game. Fight for what you believe is right. Too many people sitting on the sidelines is what makes this country weak.

"We are about to become refugees. Was Moses an independent?" Mandt (commenting at The Culture Ghost)

Fuck being a refugee. That shit's for the birds. FIGHT. Note: You may have to turn off your computer and go outside.



Best Matthews description Evar :

"Yet for as basic as he has become to the political and media furniture, Matthews is anything but secure. He is of the moment, but, at 62, also something of a throwback -- to an era of politics set in the ethnic Democratic wards of the '60s and the O'Neill-Reagan battles of the '80s. And he is a product of an aging era of cable news, the late-'90s, when "Hardball" started and Matthews made his name as a battering critic of Bill Clinton during the Monica saga.Cable political coverage has changed, however, and so has the sensibility that viewers -- particularly young ones -- expect from it. Mat-thews's bombast is radically at odds with the wry, antipolitical style fashioned by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert or the cutting and finely tuned cynicism of Matthews's MSNBC co-worker Keith Olbermann. These hosts betray none of the reverence for politics or the rituals of Washington that Matthews does. On the contrary, they appeal to the eye-rolling tendencies of a cooler, highly educated urban cohort of the electorate that mostly dismisses an exuberant political animal like Matthews as annoyingly antiquated, like the ranting uncle at the Thanksgiving table whom the kids have learned to tune out."

I link, therefore I am

Tracking a Marine lost at home

Letter from Venezuela

The alternating Relevance of those who make the simple truth look so easy to understand

Bob ponders not voting for Obama...

My response:

To me, actions speak louder than words. Hillary or Obama, in my crystal ball, will ACT much the same in office. Like you, John Edwards was my choice. Hillary has dropped the ball in three ways recently, though: failing to vote on the FISA matter, when Obama did. That's an action that had a consequence with this voter. Then cozying up to the worst of the worst of Republican hacks: Rush and Scaife. Finally, I believe I've watched this race with a neutral eye for some time. And again and again, I see the Clinton campaign using Rethug tactics to smear her Democratic opponent and actually Cheer on the Republican candidate. So, I am for Obama. Even so, Bob, I'd happily vote for Hillary over McCain. Because I can tell the difference between McCain and Hillary. And if Obama becomes the candidate, I surely hope you (and other HRC supporters) can find it in your heart to see the difference between Obama and McCain.

Why did you become a Democrat?

Long term Goals

Just some thoughts on the current Primary situation-

I talked at length with one of my closest friends last night. Now, Greg is as Republican as I am liberal. I don't mean he is conservative, because his thoughts just don't run that deep. He's a good friend, but the guys a straight-up freeper and proud dittohead. Politics means more to him than policies. He is convinced that Liberals are the devil, he reads Coulter, and couldn't create an original thought if an attack on Iran depended on it. He's mainly just a computer geek and scion to a small fortune, so he's never really had to think much, anyway.

He chuckled as we discussed politics. "Don't you get what Rush is doing?" he asked.

"Well, yes," I replied, "he's playing the dems against each other to weaken Obama. But doesn't he realize that if Hillary gets the nomination, he might be facing his worst enemy?"

"Oh please!" I was told. "Obama is the threat, not Hillary. She's just doing our work for us right now and pissing off the undecideds at all Democrats."

"McCain?" I laughed- I know what the true Repubs think about McCain. "But he doesn't have a chance in hell against either of them!" I insisted.

"Sure, that's what you said about Bush in '04."

"But what do you Really think about McCain?"

"Oh" -long pause -"he sucks, but it doesn't matter. Every single Republican out there will vote for McCain, regardless, no matter what we say now. The "Terror" and the "liberal threat" talking point is going to get real big. You guys can't do anything in Congress that involves the war or terror, can you?"

But looking around, the divide and conquer strategy is working. The momentum is slowing, and the focus is being shattered. Meanwhile, supposedly Coulter is gearing up to release a movie about Hillary in spite of her loud claims of supporting Hillary over McCain.

Coulter (and Rush and the rest)would never give an ounce of support to Hillary if they believed it would actually result in her becoming President. When they recently threw their support behind Hillary in the primaries and in the media, it was just to keep the Dem race going closely.

As Greg brags, they are gaming America again. And, some progressives are helping them. The 2008 election isn’t the be all, end all for Hillary. In fact, it is my belief, that by standing down now and throwing her full support towards Obama and whoever he chooses as VP- it will yield PRICELESS results as far as 2012. Face it- in 2012 there will be MORE dems in Congress, and there will be a lot less of a burden to deal with as President.

Let Obama have ‘08. Bow out gracefully, and without expecting to be appointed as VP. Let Progressives come together to fight against our true enemy, as one, without any more of this divisive race. My candidate, Edwards, didn’t get there, and I’m sad, because I think he would have been the strongest candidate. But I’m not that worked up over it- there will be more chances for our candidates to have the presidency. Right now, Obama has the momentum, and for better or for worse- the high ground.

Let’s join, fight and Hillary can have her day in years to come, when the anti-Hillary fervor has abated a bit more. As someone mired in a red-state, I can tell you, Anti-Hillary bias is still at a fever pitch and will make the 08 race closer than it needs to be.

That's my long-er term plan. The bitch of it is, whoever ends up in the white house in 2008 has a HUGE row to hoe. I simply hope that whoever it is can end the farce of an occupation in Iraq and remove the radicalism of the Bush agenda from U.S. policy once and for all.

Edwards and Obama

Edwards Meets Obama - From John Nichols at Common Dreams (and The Nation)

EXCERPTS
So Barack Obama jetted out of Wisconsin, where he is battling for a big victory in Tuesday’s primary, for a Sunday meeting in Chapel Hill with John and Elizabeth Edwards. The Illinois senator left reporters behind to make what he hoped would be a secret trip, but a North Carolina television station was tipped off and got footage of Obama leaving the home where he met with the Edwardses.

Obama asked for an endorsement. But he also provided the former senator and his wife with detailed arguments about why he would be a stronger Democratic candidate in November, and an outline of how he would seek to implement progressive economic reforms as president.
A key part of the discussion focused on a priority of John Edwards: writing a Democratic platform that outlines a genuine change agenda.

“The meeting with John, we just wanted to talk about how we can move the party in a direction that focuses on middle-class issues, relieving poverty, reducing the influence of special interests in Washington,” Obama acknowledged Sunday night.
...
Obama has framed his Wisconsin campaign against Clinton as a fight over trade policy, but Obama’s record is not a whole lot better than Clinton’s on this issue. Edwards, who ran for the Democratic nomination this year as an ardent advocate for fair trade policies, has earned credibility with key unions — especially the United Steelworkers and to a lesser extent the United Auto Workers.

If an Edwards endorsement were to help break loose endorsements from those two unions, which remain powerful players in Ohio, it would be a dramatic boost for Obama.

Additionally, Edwards remains a particularly popular figure in rural and southern states. In Oklahoma, for instance, the former senator took more than 10 percent of the vote on February 5, after he had withdrawn from the race.

Parts of Oklahoma are a lot like parts of Texas, and Obama would love to have Edwards take a swing through the Lone Star state before the March 4 primary.

Will it happen?

Thoughts?

I notice my No-Civil-War post hasn't made anyone more civil by the way... More political name-calling by progressives on both sides. Bushbots, and Hillbots, and Obamabots, oh my! From Kos to No Quarter, there is some ugliness out there. I was going to link the specific posts, but I decided not to give the divisiveness any more publicity. Forward, not backward, guys and gals...

Again, progressive posts that viciously attack Obama OR Hillary and insult the people who support them with derogatory terms are just self-defeating. And to use the "Repubs will say this, too" defense is ignorant, as well. Watch where you guys are chucking those stones, after all, we all have to live in this big glass house in the end.

Keep your eye on the prize, people- Hillary AND Obama are both iffy candidates that could mean a close election in what should be a landslide. What makes either of them electable is that the Republicans have destroyed their credibility on the economy and the war (two matters intrinsically tied together, by the way...) and being all attack and no substance, time and again.

Namecalling Obama and Hillary supporters isn’t going to help your chosen candidate, it just demeans the Democratic side as a whole.

This is the only real chance Republicans have to win in 2008: that the Progressives fall into infighting. I hate to see this shit on No Quarter, from people who have seen firsthand just how bad the Repubs are, and what lengths they will go to. I can't say much about Kos, I rarely visit that site...

Hillary isn’t some super liberal, as you well know. Neither is Obama. But both are better than the alternative. The more attack posts there are among progressives, the closer we are to having McCain as a President. Please, PLEASE focus on the positives on the candidates, if you can, and refrain from attacking the Democrats who have thrown their support to 'the other side'.
If the only “support” you can dredge up for your candidate are these attacks - then you will end up helping another piece of shit Republican get elected. Please, take a minute before you go into attack mode. If you are just mudslinging on another Democrat, who you don't like as much as your candidate, - or worse, ridiculing progressives and liberals who support the other Dem, then maybe it's not worth posting.

Okay - The time of mourning is over

Well, now that Rush and the rest are going to be amping up to Re-label McCain a true conservative to the Republican base, I guess I'm going to have to take off my shroud of mourning for John Edwards and get on the Democratic bus. There will be no more bitching about Hillary or Obama, unless they really do something stupid. My vote will go to whichever is the nominee for the Democratic party, because there really is no alternative.

I will still be pimping Ron Paul for the "I ain't voting for no women, no minorities, and no damn liberals!" crowd. Because like it or not, he's a thousand miles ahead of the Bush crony alternatives. And a vote for Ron Paul is, effectively, a vote for the Democratic party in the end.

So all of you undecided Republicans- Vote your conservative conscience! Vote Paul. Or just don't vote at all, that will show America!

Paul does have his strong points- he's one of the few who understand monetary policy among the candidates. And here was his view on Iraq, stated in the House of Representatives in 2002

I sure like the way he talks about ending the war in Iraq, not because it is a failure, but because it is and has been a farce, from the get-go. Hillary can't do that, because she can't admit she was wrong to vote for the war. I don't mind a little flip-flop, if its under the impression that she was fooled by the corrupt Republicans who wanted this war so bad they broke several laws and traitorously exposed our own anti-terror personnel to our enemies...

Whoever speaks out the strongest against the occupation and getting us out of Iraq will get the nomination. I understand that they are worried about how to frame the withdrawal. For that, they could definitely take a page or two or three from Ron Paul's playbook-

I understand the need to play it safe, but with 70% of Americans wanting our troops home, and most of the remaining 30% being die hard Republican hawks, I think You are safe to say "Support the Troops. Bring them home" And by the way, when we bring them home, we will be saving the American taxpayer a Billion a month (a week?) ...

John Edwards 2008

No other candidate even comes close. It's Edwards or Corporate Cronyism.

Edwards articles at C&L - Vids, Political news concerning Edwards

Four Trials: Edwards Memoir, very well received - A different kind of political memoir, from a different kind of politician

.

John Edwards.com - His official site

.

John Edwards : The Plan to build one America - Pdf format, 80 pages

.

Edwards Twitter Updates - brief updates tell you what Edwards is up to, day to day

.

Edwards on Foreign Policy "Re-engaging with the World" from Foreign Affairs.org -Very good article written by Edwards that addresses his format for changing current foreign policy.

.

On The Issues: Edwards and other candidates as well. Basically just a list of various soundbites on each of the biggest issues.

From House of the Rising Sons- previous Edwards posts:

Edwards Firing Up - Dec 2006

Edwards First - May 2007

Kwisatz Haderach - Sep.2007

Who should be leading the Country? - Oct. 2007

Why Edwards is Right - Dec.2007

Edwards better than Obama or Hillary - Dec. 2007

Michael Moore on the Candidates - Jan. 2008

Ending the Occupation - Jan. 2008

.

Other blogposts about Edwards:

John Edwards and the End of Political Cronyism

Taylor Marsh on Edwards

Montana Maven

Frederick on JRE

The Pragmatic Progressive notes Edwards has the most detailed plan

.

And to all my fellow bloggers, who are still fence-sitting, or who don't want to seem biased to any one candidate yet- Please show some support for Edwards. This election is too important to give it to anyone but the absolute BEST Candidate for President. And Edwards is that person. And if you have a favorite post about Edwards leave the link in the comments and I'll add it to this post!

Hillary - Why

A post at Hullabaloo was addressing those who cannot understand why Hillary is ahead. People have been blaming the win in NH on the women, on sympathy for the crying vote, and whatever other fancy takes them. Far from being enraged by these people I find myself wondering WHY also...

Watching the election run-up is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. The good news is that votes for Democrats are coming in twice as much as the votes for Republicans. It's a lot harder to steal an election when a big majority is there for the good guys. It was great news when Edwards jumped up a bit this past month. But still, Hillary Clinton maintains a large part of the progressive vote. And there isn't a damn reason why she should.

Some at Hullaballoo would tell you that it's because "she's willing to listen to voters. Or that she knows what she's talking about on a myriad of issues" - Okay, not exactly something Clinton monopolizes, but I'll concur with that...

.

then they go on to say that: "Or that voters actually do care about these issues and care that someone has thought them through and can be articulate and organized in discussing them" - and "Or that voters weighed what Clinton proposed and concluded they were pretty good ideas, and that she made a better case than her rivals."

That's where I've got to say : BULLSHIT.

Clinton on healthcare? Maybe. Clinton on Iraq, war with Iran, wiretapping, constitutional rights, Gitmo and the Economy? Bullshit, bullshit,bullshit, bullshit, and a steaming pile of ... more bullshit. Edwards has her beaten, hands down, on all of these issues.

Hillary hasn't done much as a "liberal" Senator. She hasn't taken a stand on Bush and Cheney, she hasn't stood against the war, and she is way too much of a insider for me to want her to have anything to do with a role as a President that will actually CHANGE ANYTHING.

Obama, even less, the Rock Star of Pandering and posing.

The biggest factor in the voters reasoning, that these same liberals (and me) bitched about in 2004- that they seem to have forgotten in this election - is that A LOT OF AMERICANS ARE IN FACT POPULARITY WORSHIPPING FOOLS.

.

After EVERYTHING that we've witnessed the past seven years, I see my fellow progressives propping up these two hollow candidates as our candidate for President and I wonder WHY?WHY?WHY?

.

The facts bear this out - Hillary is not the most Progressive candidate out there. She is pro-status quo and pro-establishment. She, (or Obama) will gladly take your vote to the whitehouse and then do nothing with it, except start appointing cronies, which, admittedly will be better than those bottom of the barrel bush cronies.

.

Even Republicans don't get it. They hate Hillary, but understand she's the closest thing to a neocon we've got. If Liberals are so pissed, why are they appointing someone who's been so lackluster on the issues while a Senator? They don't mind, though, even though they hate the Clintons, they recognize one of their own on the real issues, wink,wink, nudge nudge.
.

So maybe people ARE grasping for straws at why anyone is supporting her for President.

Because for the life of me, I cannot figure it out.

Games Parties Play

Drinking Liberally - Superdelegates

From JobsAnger
"The Texas Democratic Party says Dennis Kucinich will not be on the party's primary ballot in March. Kucinich did file the necessary paperwork, but would not sign a loyalty oath to support the party's nominee in November."

Careful where you point that thing, from MCCS

Throwing support, away from Morning Martini
Kucinich backs Obama in Iowa...

No Quarter shoots, dissects, and mounts the head of Obama's campaign on the wall of the den
Larry Johnson explains about Obama's lobbyist ties and his ability to say anything that will get him on the road to , eventually, not being elected.

Because some days are brighter than others

Sun, Rise

The two worst contenders for President go down in flames in Iowa.

Edwards Shines

Moore's final words say it all. I hate to post him twice in one week, but he's right on target with this :

"Bottom line: People have had it. Iowa will go blue (Happy Blue Year, Hawkeyes!). Whomever your candidate is on the Dem side, this was a good night. Get some sleep. The Republicans won't go down without a fight. Look what happened when Kerry tried to play nice. So Barack, you can talk all you want about "let's put the partisanship aside, let's all get along," but the other side has no intention of being anything but the bullies they are. Get your game face on now. And, if you can, tell me why you are now the second largest recipient of health industry payola after Hillary. You now take more money from the people committed to stopping universal health care than any of the Republican candidates.

Despite what your answer may be, I was proud to sit in my living room tonight and see you and your family up on that stage. We became a bit better tonight, and on that I will close by saying, sweet dreams -- and on to that other totally white state of New Hampshire!"

And it couldn't have all happened on a better week for me, personally.

Sitting in the new house, with all four of my children together and the love of my life filling up the empty space that I didn't even believe I needed to fill at one time- life has just been really damn good... It's been just a brilliant, beautiful holiday for my family and as of yesterday night- for the rest of the country too. Hope may spring eternal from the hearts of fools- but it sure is nice being a fool this morning!

The boys head back to Arizona tomorrow, and I wish the time hadn't gone so fast, but really I couldn't have asked for a better time this year. I hope your holidays have been equally joyous.

And, as always: GO EDWARDS!

Progress = Ending the Occupation

Only One Top Dem will End Iraq Occupation

Guess Who that is ?

(from Alternet)
EXCERPT
"According to the National Journal, the Democratic candidates' "disputes over issues have almost completely evaporated in the campaign's final days." The leading Dems, according to the Journal, are beating each other up over who has the most effective "leadership style" or similar abstractions. The notion that the top candidates are virtually identical on the issues and vary only in "tone" -- with Clinton the voice of experience and pragmatism, Obama the feel-good "uniter" who can heal a divided country and John Edwards the aggressive economic populist -- has become, to some degree, the conventional wisdom of campaign 2008.

But, as is often the case, it's also simply wrong."

"While it's true that the big three have similar stances on a number of issues, on Iraq -- the one that Democrats and swing voters say is either their top concern, or No. 2 after the economy -- the top candidates' differences couldn't be more significant. In fact, only John Edwards among the top three Dems would effectively end the occupation of Iraq within a year of taking office."

Stopping the Occupation/"war" is the first step for any real progress in this country. And John Edwards is the only one who I believe will actually attempt to bring our troops home from Iraq as soon as he can.

Anyone who is fed up with the insanity of the neocons has only one real choice to stop more of our soldiers for dying in Iraq for the sake Billionaire War profiteers and neocon chickenhawks.

If you AREN'T Enraged at 4 years of our soldiers dying for lies by rich, fat fucking lowlife corporate slime powermongers like Dick Cheney and George Dubya, then you ARE the traitor to our country.

And waving your fucking little flags is a piss poor excuse for really supporting the troops as Dubya and his Saudi backroom oil buddies send our military into a meatgrinder, then take away their goddamn healthcare, pensions, and futures once they return crippled.

Shame on every one of you who has supported the anti-American policies of war, torture, and the murder of civilians that George Bush has brought us.

Shame.

This is a very important juncture in our nation's future - Don't Fuck It UP by voting for some corporate sycophant or some ineffective, insincere "Rock Star" who hasn't even done a good job as a Senator.

Michael Moore on who to vote for

Michael Moore sent out his thoughts on Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

It's a good read. I didn't want to cut and clip anything less I be accused of pimping Edwards over Hillary and Barack...

January 2, 2008

Friends,

A new year has begun. And before we've had a chance to break our New Year's resolutions, we find ourselves with a little more than 24 hours before the good people of Iowa tell us whom they would like to replace the man who now occupies three countries and a white house.

Twice before, we have begun the process to stop this man, and twice we have failed. Eight years of our lives as Americans will have been lost, the world left in upheaval against us... and yet now, today, we hope against hope that our moment has finally arrived, that the amazingly powerful force of the Republican Party will somehow be halted. But we know that the Democrats are experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, and if there's a way to blow this election, they will find it and do it with gusto.

Do you feel the same as me? That the Democratic front-runners are a less-than-stellar group of candidates, and that none of them are the "slam dunk" we wish they were? Of course, there are wonderful things about each of them. Any one of them would be infinitely better than what we have now. Personally, Congressman Kucinich, more than any other candidate, shares the same positions that I have on the issues (although the UFO that picked ME up would only take me as far as Kalamazoo). But let's not waste time talking about Dennis. Even he is resigned to losing, with statements like the one he made yesterday to his supporters in Iowa to throw their support to Senator Obama as their "second choice."

So, it's Hillary, Obama, Edwards -- now what do we do?

Two months ago, Rolling Stone magazine asked me to do a cover story where I would ask the hard questions that no one was asking in one-on-one interviews with Senators Clinton, Obama and Edwards. "The Top Democrats Face Off with Michael Moore." The deal was that all three candidates had to agree to let me interview them or there was no story. Obama and Edwards agreed. Mrs. Clinton said no, and the cover story was thus killed.

Why would the love of my life, Hillary Clinton, not sit down to talk with me? What was she afraid of?

Those of you who are longtime readers of mine may remember that 11 years ago I wrote a chapter (in my first book) entitled, "My Forbidden Love for Hillary." I was fed up with the treatment she was getting, most of it boringly sexist, and I thought somebody should stand up for her. I later met her and she thanked me for referring to her as "one hot s***kicking feminist babe." I supported and contributed to her run for the U.S. Senate. I think she is a decent and smart person who loves this country, cares deeply about kids, and has put up with more crap than anyone I know of (other than me) from the Crazy Right. Her inauguration would be a thrilling sight, ending 218 years of white male rule in a country where 51% of its citizens are female and 64% are either female or people of color.

And yet, I am sad to say, nothing has disappointed me more than the disastrous, premeditated vote by Senator Hillary Clinton to send us to war in Iraq. I'm not only talking about her first vote that gave Mr. Bush his "authorization" to invade -- I'm talking about every single OTHER vote she then cast for the next four years, backing and funding Bush's illegal war, and doing so with verve. She never met a request from the White House for war authorization that she didn't like. Unlike the Kerrys and the Bidens who initially voted for authorization but later came to realize the folly of their decision, Mrs. Clinton continued to cast numerous votes for the war until last March -- four long years of pro-war votes, even after 70% of the American public had turned against the war. She has steadfastly refused to say that she was wrong about any of this, and she will not apologize for her culpability in America's worst-ever foreign policy disaster. All she can bring herself to say is that she was "misled" by "faulty intelligence."

Let's assume that's true. Do you want a President who is so easily misled? I wasn't "misled," and millions of others who took to the streets in February of 2003 weren't "misled" either. It was simply amazing that we knew the war was wrong when none of us had been briefed by the CIA, none of us were national security experts, and none of us had gone on a weapons inspection tour of Iraq. And yet... we knew we were being lied to! Let me ask those of you reading this letter: Were YOU "misled" -- or did you figure it out sometime between October of 2002 and March of 2007 that George W. Bush was up to something rotten? Twenty-three other senators were smart enough to figure it out and vote against the war from the get-go. Why wasn't Senator Clinton?

I have a theory: Hillary knows the sexist country we still live in and that one of the reasons the public, in the past, would never consider a woman as president is because she would also be commander in chief. The majority of Americans were concerned that a woman would not be as likely to go to war as a man (horror of horrors!). So, in order to placate that mindset, perhaps she believed she had to be as "tough" as a man, she had to be willing to push The Button if necessary, and give the generals whatever they wanted. If this is, in fact, what has motivated her pro-war votes, then this would truly make her a scary first-term president. If the U.S. is faced with some unforeseen threat in her first years, she knows that in order to get re-elected she'd better be ready to go all Maggie Thatcher on whoever sneezes in our direction. Do we want to risk this, hoping the world makes it in one piece to her second term?

I have not even touched on her other numerous -- and horrendous -- votes in the Senate, especially those that have made the middle class suffer even more (she voted for Bush's first bankruptcy bill, and she is now the leading recipient of payoff money -- I mean campaign contributions -- from the health care industry). I know a lot of you want to see her elected, and there is a very good chance that will happen. There will be plenty of time to vote for her in the general election if all the pollsters are correct. But in the primaries and caucuses, isn't this the time to vote for the person who most reflects the values and politics you hold dear? Can you, in good conscience, vote for someone who so energetically voted over and over and over again for the war in Iraq? Please give this serious consideration.

Now, on to the two candidates who did agree to do the interview with me...

Barack Obama is a good and inspiring man. What a breath of fresh air! There's no doubting his sincerity or his commitment to trying to straighten things out in this country. But who is he? I mean, other than a guy who gives a great speech? How much do any of us really know about him? I know he was against the war. How do I know that? He gave a speech before the war started. But since he joined the senate, he has voted for the funds for the war, while at the same time saying we should get out. He says he's for the little guy, but then he votes for a corporate-backed bill to make it harder for the little guy to file a class action suit when his kid swallows lead paint from a Chinese-made toy. In fact, Obama doesn't think Wall Street is a bad place. He wants the insurance companies to help us develop a new health care plan -- the same companies who have created the mess in the first place. He's such a feel-good kinda guy, I get the sense that, if elected, the Republicans will eat him for breakfast. He won't even have time to make a good speech about it.

But this may be a bit harsh. Senator Obama has a big heart, and that heart is in the right place. Is he electable? Will more than 50% of America vote for him? We'd like to believe they would. We'd like to believe America has changed, wouldn't we? Obama lets us feel better about ourselves -- and as we look out the window at the guy snowplowing his driveway across the street, we want to believe he's changed, too. But are we dreaming?

And then there's John Edwards.

It's hard to get past the hair, isn't it? But once you do -- and recently I have chosen to try -- you find a man who is out to take on the wealthy and powerful who have made life so miserable for so many. A candidate who says things like this: "I absolutely believe to my soul that this corporate greed and corporate power has an ironclad hold on our democracy." Whoa. We haven't heard anyone talk like that in a while, at least not anyone who is near the top of the polls. I suspect this is why Edwards is doing so well in Iowa, even though he has nowhere near the stash of cash the other two have. He won't take the big checks from the corporate PACs, and he is alone among the top three candidates in agreeing to limit his spending and be publicly funded. He has said, point-blank, that he's going after the drug companies and the oil companies and anyone else who is messing with the American worker. The media clearly find him to be a threat, probably because he will go after their monopolistic power, too. This is Roosevelt/Truman kind of talk. That's why it's resonating with people in Iowa, even though he doesn't get the attention Obama and Hillary get -- and that lack of coverage may cost him the first place spot tomorrow night. After all, he is one of those white guys who's been running things for far too long.

And he voted for the war. But unlike Senator Clinton, he has stated quite forcefully that he was wrong. And he has remorse. Should he be forgiven? Did he learn his lesson? Like Hillary and Obama, he refused to promise in a September debate that there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq by the end of his first term in 2013. But this week in Iowa, he changed his mind. He went further than Clinton and Obama and said he'd have all the troops home in less than a year.

Edwards is the only one of the three front-runners who has a universal health care plan that will lead to the single-payer kind all other civilized countries have. His plan doesn't go as fast as I would like, but he is the only one who has correctly pointed out that the health insurance companies are the enemy and should not have a seat at the table.

I am not endorsing anyone at this point. This is simply how I feel in the first week of the process to replace George W. Bush. For months I've been wanting to ask the question, "Where are you, Al Gore?" You can only polish that Oscar for so long. And the Nobel was decided by Scandinavians! I don't blame you for not wanting to enter the viper pit again after you already won. But getting us to change out our incandescent light bulbs for some irritating fluorescent ones isn't going to save the world. All it's going to do is make us more agitated and jumpy and feeling like once we get home we haven't really left the office.

On second thought, would you even be willing to utter the words, "I absolutely believe to my soul that this corporate greed and corporate power has an ironclad hold on our democracy?" 'Cause the candidate who understands that, and who sees it as the root of all evil -- including the root of global warming -- is the President who may lead us to a place of sanity, justice and peace.

Yours,

Michael Moore (not an Iowa voter, but appreciative of any state that has a town named after a sofa)
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com

Moore always has an interesting take....

oh yeah- and EDWARDS 2008!

UPDATE: NY Times Interview with Edwards (hat tip Americablog)

The Presidential Rat Race

The Leading Candidates...



Guliani - This is the face of Conservatism?


This is the face of Liberalism?




True Centrism- He'll say anything to get your vote, then do whatever he wants to. Too bad no one knows what the hell that is.

Keep your religion out of government.

This guy is the biggest joke on the campaign trail. But, he's laughing all the way to the bank. And with Republicans throwing away their money on him, I AM TOO.




Lone "Wolf" McCain - a cur that not only sits around licking his own balls, but also licking those of the rest of his pack...





Edwards - the only person who should AND Can be elected. I like Ron Paul's foreign policy. I'd love to see him run as Edwards' running mate once the Republican party kicks him to the curb and goes with Guliani or Romney. But Paul's economic policies don't make much sense and he doesn't have the desire to help save middle America. Kucinich would be great as a running mate for Edwards as well. But as for electability, we are talking Mondale here.

Make your own mind up. I've made up mine watching Edwards beat all the Progressive candidates on the issues time and again. And while Obama and Clinton beat Edwards on the money trail following their consultants' advice, Edwards is following policies, not rhetoric. Support the candidate who will do the most to repair our country.

wow, I can breathe now..

Democracy ain't dead yet, praise gods, the founding fathers and liberal bloggers!

It's a grand day for America- that much is sure. But It ain't over!

We have come a long way. I am very glad to have men of vision and moral clarity who have made their dedication to our democracy and constitution their FIRST Priority. Men like John Amato, Glenn Greenwald, Keith Olbermann and the thousands of my fellow C&L'ers and bloggers who have helped expose this band of crooks for what it is.

Accountability starts today. If the Dems who got in today sit back on the laurels in the spirit of bi-partisanship then they will fail us.These Repubs aren't going to roll over. Look at Tom Delay, listen to Rush Limbaugh- Watch Tucker and company spin "bipartisanship" in the hopes that NO Republicans will be Held accountable for their despicable actions.There's a long way to go. But yesterday was helluva big step.

Democrats took the house, the jury is still out on Virginia and Montana for the Senate.
I shudder at how racist/sexist the state of Virginia must be, for so many people to vote for George Allen. I mean, that guy put a horse's head in the mailbox of his black neighbors as a joke, calls people niggers and macacas and spit in his ex wife's face. Classy.

Republicans are going nuts all around me. My boss is particularly upset today, he sent an email of pics of puppies out to "cheer up" his fellow rich republican/libertarian elites... They probably shudder at the fact that minimum wages may finally be raised. Thank god. Only a working man who busts his ass all day and still can't feed his family can properly understand what a charade making $200 / week for 40 hours of work is. Its fucking ridiculous but the Rich Republicans have fought this tooth and nail for the past 12 years.

God bless the working man- Only Democrats support these men. I don't know any Republicans that put in a full day of actual work. God knows that these rich fuckers that come in and out of my financial group all day don't.

The Bush/Rove Cult is irreparably damaged. I can hold my head high again as an American in light of the America's actions yesterday. Hopefully we can get rid of the corrupt closeted self hating fags and corporate sellouts in the Republican party and bring some Accountability back to our government.

The first step is deploying our troops out of Baghdad and into Afghanistan. Hell, there's no reason to LOSE BOTH WARS. Bechtel has given up on Iraq. They made 2.3 billion of American money, FAILED to rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq and now are cutting and running. This is a big deal, people. The only thing we are building in Iraq NOW is our multibillion dollar Embassy/Castle/Mansion. And maybe one or two permanent bases...

But the point is- with no reconstruction efforts, our troops are stuck there with no American benefits coming to the Iraqi people. Our occupation becomes even less desirable to Iraqis (is that possible?!)

The Shia have put up with the occupation more or less = give or take a few fiery Al-Sadrs... But the fact is, Shiites Haven't put forth any substantial effort to killing U.S. troops the way the Sunnis are. The Sunnis are responsible for 80% of the U.S. casualties. But Al-Sistani is basically ignored by the Iraqi people in deferment to Al-Sadr nowadays, and Sistani is, in turn avoiding speaking to U.S. officials. Maliki is trying to show that he isn't another Bush poodle. The Shia politicians have pointedly asked the American occupation to end, immediately. Iraqis want us gone, except for the ones who were milking Halliburton and Bechtel- But like I say- that is ending. With the civil war getting more and more intense, the Mahdi army won't avoid open firefights with troops much longer. We need to get our boys and girls out of harm's way, immediately.

I need to check with the Iraqi blogs today, and see how the Iraqis are taking the Anti-Bush statement that was made yesterday. I predict that they will receive this news with welcome. The farther that the American people can push Pres.Bush and his cronies from us, the better the world will receive the United States. But still, welcome news to Iraqis or not- they want us gone from their country. Yesterday. And in that, I am in perfect agreement with them.

Callous as it may sound, Here's what I think needs to be done-

Redeploy our troops to Afghanistan. Crush the Taliban and hold a serious presence there, not the half ass job that is being done right now. Build permanent bases in Afghanistan. Crush the drug trade and build some REAL infrastructure for the Afghani people.

Let the Iraqi civil war begin in earnest. I hope the Shia win. And don't fret about Iranian ties just yet. Remember, as soon as Iraqis control Iraq- they will remember their distate for Iran. And if they don't, I must confess, I don't give a damn. Iran is not a threat. And the more we leave these people alone, the less they will fucking hate us. Got it?

Iraq will rebuild itself. It will be bloody, but its a necessary transformation. And for those of you who are only concerned about the oil: Relax, you immoral greedy bastards! Rest assured, the U.S. will wheel and deal with whoever ends up controlling Iraq. You can bet your last dollar on THAT.

May Fortune smile upon us

May all evil sleep, May all good awake, In thy way.

Matt Taibbi's Rolling Stone Article "The Worst Congress ever" is must read stuff. It has the benefit of being written by in a scathingly funny tone while simultaneously delivering more insight into the way our government is currently being run than ANYTHING ELSE I have read this year. A tour de force Expose' of - the not-so-hidden overbelly of the Republican congress.

The whole article can be found here: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/worst_congress_ever/page/6

This passage, for me, spotlights the worst of the worst:

EXCERPT
When one considers that Congress has forsaken hearings and debate, conspired to work only three months a year, completely ditched its constitutional mandate to provide oversight and passed very little in the way of meaningful legislation, the question arises: What do they do?

The answer is easy: They spend. When Bill Clinton left office, the nation had a budget surplus of $236 billion. Today, thanks to Congress, the budget is $296 billion in the hole. This year, more than sixty-five percent of all the money borrowed in the entire world will be borrowed by America, a statistic fueled by the speed-junkie spending habits of our supposedly "fiscally conservative" Congress. It took forty-two presidents before George W. Bush to borrow $1 trillion; under Bush, Congress has more than doubled that number in six years. And more often than not, we are borrowing from countries the sane among us would prefer not to be indebted to: The U.S. shells out $77 billion a year in interest to foreign creditors, including payment on the $300 billion we currently owe China.

What do they spend that money on? In the age of Jack Abramoff, that is an ugly question to even contemplate. But let's take just one bill, the so-called energy bill, a big, hairy, favor-laden bitch of a law that started out as the wet dream of Dick Cheney's energy task force and spent four long years leaving grease-tracks on every set of palms in the Capitol before finally becoming law in 2005.
Like a lot of laws in the Bush era, it was crafted with virtually no input from the Democrats, who were excluded from the conference process. And during the course of the bill's gestation period we were made aware that many of its provisions were more or less openly for sale, as in the case of a small electric utility from Kansas called Westar Energy.

Westar wanted a provision favorable to its business inserted in the bill -- and in an internal company memo, it acknowledged that members of Congress had requested Westar donate money to their campaigns in exchange for the provision. The members included former Louisiana congressman Billy Tauzin and current Energy and Commerce chairman Joe Barton of Texas. "They have made this request in lieu of contributions made to their own campaigns," the memo noted. The total amount of Westar's contributions was $58,200.

Keep in mind, that number -- fifty-eight grand -- was for a single favor. The energy bill was loaded with them. Between 2001 and the passage of the bill, energy companies donated $115 million to federal politicians, with seventy-five percent of the money going to Republicans. When the bill finally passed, it contained $6 billion in subsidies for the oil industry, much of which was funneled through a company with ties to Majority Leader Tom DeLay. It included an exemption from the Safe Drinking Water Act for companies that use a methane-drilling technique called "hydraulic fracturing" -- one of the widest practitioners of which is Halliburton. And it included billions in subsidies for the construction of new coal plants and billions more in loan guarantees to enable the coal and nuclear industries to borrow money at bargain-basement interest rates.

Favors for campaign contributors, exemptions for polluters, shifting the costs of private projects on to the public -- these are the specialties of this Congress. They seldom miss an opportunity to impoverish the states we live in and up the bottom line of their campaign contributors. All this time -- while Congress did nothing about Iraq, Katrina, wiretapping, Mark Foley's boy-madness or anything else of import -- it has been all about pork, all about political favors, all about budget "earmarks" set aside for expensive and often useless projects in their own districts. In 2000, Congress passed 6,073 earmarks; by 2005, that number had risen to 15,877. They got better at it every year. It's the one thing they're good at.

There is simply nothing more I can add to that, is there?

Vote ALL Democrats / Progressives/ Independents / Liberals. NO MORE REPUBLICANS.

Our country can't afford it. This is Capitalism as the Golden Cash Cow idol. And your prayers to this cash cow, your checks written for a slice of salvation- are just making these fat cats fatter.