Meanwhile in Palestine and Iraq (The Obsessive Compulsive's Guide to the Middle East): Meanwhile in Palestine

Meanwhile in Palestine and Iraq (The Obsessive Compulsive's Guide to the Middle East): Meanwhile in Palestine

Location moved...

Now blogging for baracktheyouthvote
with cross posts at Backseat Babyboomers for Obama

Countdown For Change

I suppose this is the 5th house party I have hosted since Februrary; each RSVP delivers new faces and even more enthusiasm and 'fired up, ready to go' support as we now enter the last four months prior to the Iowa Causus.

My group today munched on strawberry wholewheat panckes, chicken salad, assorted fruits and lavosch and talked precincts, blocks and how we're all going to be prepared with packs of lifesavers to hand out candy "O's" to everyone we talk with.

We used our meeting as an introduction to newcomers who very much needed tips on how to use the website to access information about events and join groups as well as committing to attending our CD organizational meeting 10 days from now.

I urge anyone who hasn't done so yet, to sign up at barackobama.com and try hosting an open house or informational event or finding one near you. These are phenemenol opportunities to share information on why people are supporting Obama. Today's major themes emerged as honesty, integrity, strength, character. A few of us are planning to coordinate a trip to New Hampshire to help local chapters knocking on doors.

thoughts on Foreign Policy speech

The first strike in Obama's campaign to rule the emerging scape of 21st century America came in the Senator's last Foreign Policy address, when he discussed the role of the US in Pakistan. The timing, which initially was played by MSM and other candidates, was clearly highly strategic. He won that one. As he won the debate over not using nuclear weapons.

It was obvious this weekend in SF that Obama was about to roll out of cruise control and slide by the pack. The entire weekend was overdrive, exhilerating. When Kos posted last Fri or Sat that Clinton had beat Obama to the punch on commening on the upcoming Petraeus appearances, I wrote not so fast. This candidate and the campaign are on top of this big time.

the polls v the big "O"

A message for Obama supporters. Maybe we need to reprioritize. Shut off our laptops, open our doors again, and talk real time about the big "O."

The Week That Was

Foreign Policy

Obama's campaign surged into overdrive last Friday afternoon in San Francsico and has been cruising on with such alacrity it appears as though they just might have tapped into 'the field'.

Big news items include the brilliantly timed roll out of Obama'a nuanced Foreign Policy speech at Clinton, Iowa, in which he presented undoubtedly the most refined and expertly crafted analysis of America's role in the 'new world order.' a role which establishes us as an equal player in the global arena. It is not too late!

A link to his thoughts on pulling out of Iraq



Who's the "Greenest of 'em all?

Obama - 96
Kucinich - 92
Clinton - 90
Biden - 84
Richardson -82
Dodd - 77
Edwards - 59
Paul - 30
McCain - 26
Brownback - 14
Thompson - 12
Tancredo -11
Hunter - 9

Add your comments to the Take Action link

Big Military Support; rates highest on environmental issues

A report by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics shows that Barack Obama leads all other presidential candidates in donations from people in the military. Ron Paul, another candidate who like Obama opposes the Iraq War, was in second place.

Good news also comes to the Obama campaign from the League of Conservation Voters that rates Barack highest on environmental issues among all the presidential candidates. Obama had a 96 rating compared to Dennis Kucinich who came in second with a 92 rating.

Iowa endorsements

OBAMA IN SAN FRANCISCO

Barack Obama returns to Bay Area next week for two private fundraisers. Best chance to see him is on Friday around noon when he arrives to speak at luncheon for Bay Area Women at Civic Center old convention center. Great opportunity to grab some headlines from the Clinton Machine who are on the road together all week.

Who Would the World Elect

Barack Obama currently leads other candidates as the international choice for America's next president. Cast your vote and see how other citizens of the world are voting at Who the World Wold Elect.

Obama and Middle C

A repost from a blog I wrote back in February: I still believe!

As I read through these blogs, so many times I come across fellow supporters who, like me, left their youthful dreams of America back in that kitchen pantry in '68...

Since then, I have never witnessed anything like the excitement the Senator is generating across the country, across generations.

Do we dare to dream again? Will they take this away from us as well? Back in the 60s, media didn't ruin candidates with dis-information, distortions; the sophisticated manipulation of consciousness and opinion by means of neurolinguistic programing was beyond our capacity to even conceptualize.

I was 16 when the world as I knew it ended at 6:15 am on June 6, 1968. I had fallen asleep on the east coast before the results of the California Primary were announced. My clock radio woke me; it was the tone of the words that signalled a catastrophe well before the nature of the news; heavy, hushed, shocked and anguished sorrow. I rushed to my mother's room. "Mom, they shot him." I was crying.

For years I wondered who 'they' was? Now I know. We all know. "They" are now so everpresent, so omnipotent they have accomplished much more than assassinating presidents; they have staged wildly successful 'false flag' ops, dismantled and shipped our economy overseas, bankrupted our schools, shredded our constitution, stolen elections, blatantly engaged in the overthrow of governments to accomplish nothing short of ruling the world. The list goes on.

But the worst thing, the worst thing they have accomplished is what they have done to our souls. While we were sleeping, they have systematically robbed us of the freedom of thought. They are the body snatchers. They have lobotomized America.

And so here is my daughter, like so many of yours. A young college student who called me the other day to tell me she watched Obama's 2004 address to the DNC and remembered how she thought at the time "I want him to be president." She was one of the first members of the Facebook Obama contingent, she has had an Obama 08 sticker on her car since Christmas. My daughter, who is going to Uganda next September after graduating with a degree in International Relations to help connect a small Ugandan village to a regional water system. She is working with the Rotary Club; she does not trust the Peace Corps becase 'they' control it now. My daughter, who has travelled solo internationally for 3 years, engaging in political discussions with students and residents in Barcelona, Rome, Prague, Paris, Galway, London, Vienna ... ashamed of her country.

And now? What we all dispaired of ever experiencing again ... an electrifying political figure who has the opportunity to awaken and ignite our dream of America.

How can we allow them to break these young hearts too?

This is my message. My 'pitch.' A few months ago, I called a piano tuner to set up an appointment. He asked me to go to the piano and hit "Middle C." At first my mind went blank, a famiiar term, to be sure, but it was so many years ago, I was a mere child when I last sat at a piano. But when I walked over i knew without thinking which key to strike. It was intuitive.

Just from hearing that key over the phone, he knew he would only have to tune the piano two times. How is that possible?

I think this is what Obama '08 is all about, this explains the phenomenom that has already so energized hundreds of thousands of us. The Senator is that Middle C which sets the tone around which all the other keys harmonize. We know him, we recognize him.

Obama is resonating at 261.6. We are captivated in the quest for harmony. We are seeking perfect pitch.

In this quest, there are no differentials, no distinctions between ages,world views, gender, skin color, economic or educational background. There is only the reality.

Keep your eyes on the conductor. He will lead us. He's in 'flow.'

Organize. Unite. Don't look back.

Not again.

Hearts and Minds

Rhetoric/Policy

1.The Senator needs some advice about his use of the term winning the 'hearts and minds' ... this is one of the many terms used by the Bush administration to define our policy in Iraq. Originally traced to America's campaign in Vietnam, the term actually can be traced back to the policies of the British occuppiers of Kenya.

During the 1950s, the British government imprisoned hundreds of thousands of proported Mau Mau supporters in interment centers, where they were tourtured, raped, subject to forced labor, starved, maimed and murdered. In reporting back to their countrymen about their campaign, they described their mission as 'winning the hearts and minds' of the Kenyan people ...

This information is from Caroline Elkins' shocking and terrifying expose of the gulag in Kenya.

"But it is the conditions of that imprisonment that reveal the depths to which the British sank to maintain the illusion of their great empire, and which would ultimately prove its undoing. Elkins has bravely done justice to that history." a Nation Review.

2. The Senator might also consider abandoning use of the fear-inspiring 'war on terror'

3. I have also suggested before that the one issue the Senator could safely develop on his campaign tours is a redefinition of the Presidency. What powers would he cede back? There is a great article in the Village Voice(Nat Hentoff) suggesting educating his audiences about the Military Commissions Act. Link him show it by taking advantage of the extraordinary national attention he is now getting and explaining to the American people the savage assault on the Constitution made by the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals (the second-most-important court in the country) when it upheld the Military Commissions Act of 2006 on February 20 ( Lakhdar Boumediene, et al. v. George W. Bush).

"This law, one of the last acts of the Republican-controlled Congress (engineered with the "dark arts" assistance of Dick Cheney), is among the most dangerous pieces of legislation in American history, and its fate in the Bush-Roberts-Alito Supreme Court is, at best, uncertain."

4. The Joshua Generation: Searching for the term, I come up with information about Dominionists and how they are calling the group of children they are homeschooling 'the Joshua Generation." The Senator has to clarify that he is in no way associated with this group. I have read several posts suggesting the Senantor is signallling his connection with these theories.

Civics Primer: Branches of Government

An examination "We, the People" and of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches of government as outlined in the Constitution.

The Preamble the unique status of the American people in creating their new government:

It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political institutions on accident and force.

Article I; The Legislative Branch
Congress is the only branch of the U.S. government that existed prior to the Constitution, although it took a different form. The framers of the Constitution expected that Congress would overshadow the newly created executive and judicial branches, and they spelled out its powers in considerable detail. They also placed explicit limits on the powers of Congress, to balance its weight against the other branches. Thus, Article I is the longest part of the Constitution—longer than Articles II and III combined, which cover both the executive and the judiciary.

Article I contains the laundry list of federal powers—among them to collect taxes, borrow money, regulate commerce, establish post offices, and declare war. It also allows Congress to make all laws “necessary and proper” for carrying out the powers specifically granted, a broad source of authority in the modern regulatory state. Article I holds two compromises that were essential to the formation of the Union: equal representation of the states in the Senate, and the valuation of a slave as three-fifths of a person.

Article 2: The Executive Branch

The duty of the executive branch is to enforce the laws. As a result of increasing federal regulation, the executive is by far the largest branch of government. It consists not only of the president, the vice president, and the cabinet officers, but also more than three million civilian and military employees. The primary responsibility of the president, and the entire executive branch, is best expressed in Section 3 of Article II: “He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Article II focuses almost exclusively on the president. It sets forth how the president is to be selected, through the electoral college. Article II also describes presidential powers—among them commanding the armed forces, negotiating treaties, and nominating justices of the Supreme Court. And, if the president has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” Article II allows him or her to be impeached and removed from office.

Article 3: The Judiciary
he duty of the judicial branch is to interpret the laws. Or, in the words of Chief Justice John Marshall, “to say what the law is.” Article III has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to give the judiciary the power to declare acts of the president or Congress unconstitutional. This power, known as judicial review, gives American courts much more influence than in other countries.

Article III is the shortest, and least specific, of the constitutional provisions establishing the three branches of government. The framers of the Constitution spent far less time—and debate—on the judiciary than Congress or the president. Yet the power of unelected judges to overturn laws in a democracy has become one of the most controversial issues in American government.

An examination "We, the People" and of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches of government as outlined in the Constitution.

The Preamble the unique status of the American people in creating their new government:

It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political institutions on accident and force.

Article I; The Legislative Branch
Congress is the only branch of the U.S. government that existed prior to the Constitution, although it took a different form. The framers of the Constitution expected that Congress would overshadow the newly created executive and judicial branches, and they spelled out its powers in considerable detail. They also placed explicit limits on the powers of Congress, to balance its weight against the other branches. Thus, Article I is the longest part of the Constitution—longer than Articles II and III combined, which cover both the executive and the judiciary.

Article I contains the laundry list of federal powers—among them to collect taxes, borrow money, regulate commerce, establish post offices, and declare war. It also allows Congress to make all laws “necessary and proper” for carrying out the powers specifically granted, a broad source of authority in the modern regulatory state. Article I holds two compromises that were essential to the formation of the Union: equal representation of the states in the Senate, and the valuation of a slave as three-fifths of a person.

Article 2: The Executive Branch

The duty of the executive branch is to enforce the laws. As a result of increasing federal regulation, the executive is by far the largest branch of government. It consists not only of the president, the vice president, and the cabinet officers, but also more than three million civilian and military employees. The primary responsibility of the president, and the entire executive branch, is best expressed in Section 3 of Article II: “He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Article II focuses almost exclusively on the president. It sets forth how the president is to be selected, through the electoral college. Article II also describes presidential powers—among them commanding the armed forces, negotiating treaties, and nominating justices of the Supreme Court. And, if the president has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” Article II allows him or her to be impeached and removed from office.

Article 3: The Judiciary
he duty of the judicial branch is to interpret the laws. Or, in the words of Chief Justice John Marshall, “to say what the law is.” Article III has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to give the judiciary the power to declare acts of the president or Congress unconstitutional. This power, known as judicial review, gives American courts much more influence than in other countries.

Article III is the shortest, and least specific, of the constitutional provisions establishing the three branches of government. The framers of the Constitution spent far less time—and debate—on the judiciary than Congress or the president. Yet the power of unelected judges to overturn laws in a democracy has become one of the most controversial issues in American government.

Article IV: The States
rticle IV governs the relationships among the states. Under the Articles of Confederation, the states treated one another like independent sovereign nations, but under the Constitution states had to respect one another’s court decisions and laws. From marriage and divorce, to criminal prosecutions, to the status of slaves, the states were bound to acknowledge the validity of another state’s laws even when they disagreed with the outcome.

Article 5:
According to Article VI, the Constitution and laws of the United States are “the supreme law of the land.” Both state and federal officials, including judges, must take an oath to support the Constitution, even if state law contradicts it. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution trumps state power. However, the Constitution also protects the powers of the states in many ways. This system of federalism, in which the national and state governments share power, is a key feature of American government. Article VI also guarantees a measure of religious freedom by banning religious tests for public office.

Sources:

The Interqactive Constitution
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/constitution/
Discover how the Constitution relates to more that 300 indexed topics from school prayer to civil rights.
Search the text of the Constitution by Supreme Court decisions.
search for keywords in the text of the Constitution and the in-depth explanations we've linked to it.

http://www.constitutioncenter.org/explore/BasicGoverningPrinciples/SeparationofPowersandaSystemofChecksandBalances.shtml

Separation of Powers and a System of Checks and Balances –the national Constitution Center

Current Issues: Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances.Executive Power and the Patriot Act, Unwarraqnted wireless tapping, Executive privledge in US Attorneys Case, Singing Statements.

Where's Waldo?

In the past two days, I have run into at least 10 individuals who are not aware of the community and opportunities to hear about local events, connect with local supporters and contribute funds to the campaign.

A big wakeup call! the internet is not enough, progressive radio is not sufficient, and traditional methods of finding out information through out local newspapers is these days more often than not hit and miss. We wonder why more people don't show up to demonstrate, why millions took to the streets in the 60s and so few do today. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING!

I'd like to put forth the idea that we consider utilizing Critical Mass events in cities throughout the US on the last Friday of every month to not only set up tables (do we have bike stickers for Obama) but to rally local Obama supporters to bike en mass through their cities streets decked out in Obama gear and carrying sachels of flyers about local happenings, how to contribute, etc. to distribute along the way.

A few years back there was a series of books FIND WALDO. This might be an excellent idea for national roll out. "FIND THE OBAMA SUPPORTER"

The campaign or if not them those of us here online could begin campains which we publcize locally via billboards, local radio, local press, word of mouth, asking our neighbors to Find THE OBAMA SUPPORTER in their communities. Then each of us start showing up in Obama t-shirts all over the place: in churches, at PTA meetings, on bikerides, at kids games, sitting in flower pots, roller blading or skateboarding somewhere unexpected. Then as the game grows we start really making the game a tad more different ...

Just a germ of an idea ....

Back to original message: maybe we can begin sharing ideas about how we are making the Obama campaign and Obama supporters more visibile in our communities.

Here in Marin County California, we need some ideas.

I for one would be up for meeting a bunch of Bay Arera for Obama people on the last Friday of August in SF at Justin Herman Plaza.

"35 years Experience?"

MSMs obsession with currying favor with the Clinton camp is becoming so blatant to be insulting the intelligence of any conscious viewer with a mere speck of political awareness. .... Friday's MSNBC article which characterizes the latest overblown interaction between presidential candidates as a move by Obama to "plunge into charge-countercharge politics after a promise to run "a different kind of campaign" is over the top.

Just another example of manufacturing news to favor one candidate over the other when everyone with half a cogent brain understood that inherent in Obama's initial response was the fact that he wasn't putting these 'rogue' leaders on his Blackberry speed dial.

Quite frankly, as even Ken Blackwell recently noticed, it appears that Hillary just keeps getting these opportunities just dropped in her lap by whatever individual is handling the debate. She never seems to get the tough questions first (or ever, says Blackwell) and she always has ample opportunities to answer second affording her enough time to slam one out of the park by focusing on a tangent of the main point.

Why does the MSM continue to allow Cllnton to present herself as running on "35 years of experience" without asking Sen. Clinton to give us a rundown of what exactly SHE accomplished in that long, long stretch of government activism and service. To my knowledge, she has only served 7 years as an elected official and was first lady of the US for 8 years (Governor's wife for perhaps as long).

If Senator Clinton wants us to include her 8 years as First Lady as part of her experience, perhaps interviewers might ask about her administration's policies towards the WTO, NAFTA and working to push through China's favorable nation status to escalate its ascention to the WTO in 2001. Her politics most assuredly laid the groundwork for much of the Bush agenda, including sanctions and ongoing flyovers in Iraq, nonaction on the Rwanda Genocide due to pressure from multinational investors who reorganized the region as a launching pad for The Congo Wars (ie, the payoffs and plunder by Western business of regional natural resources, including Coltan for the burgeoning cell phone business); the 'unofficiial' use of Islamlic Fundamentalist troops in Bosnia/Chechynia; and the failure of her administration to rope in binladen when he was offered by the Sudanese. The framework for the disastrous No Child Left Behind began under Clinton's Education Secretary William Bennett; the viscous outsourcing of our economy began under her administration; negotiations with the Taliban on behalf of western oil giants to build a pipeline through Afghanistan began under her administration.

Frankly, in retrospect, her administration's initial limited curtailment of our constitutional rights under the Terrorism Act, along with her administration's own warrantless wiretapping programs most assuredly qualify Senator Clinton as representing BushLite. In fact, I believe Obama showed great restraint.

This was no mud-slinging political cheap shot on Obama's part. And you guys know it.

Serve it straight or don't serve it at all.

All Options Are On the Table

MSM’s ongoing positioning of HRC as the heir apparent to the imperial Bush-Clinton-Bush dynasty continues to weave and cast veil upon veil of glutinous gauze over the true mechanisms of these nefarious US administrations.

Disgracefully, Senator Clinton is allowed sans challenge to conflate her own experience in international affairs with her 8 years as First Lady in the White House.

Okay. So lets give her that.

Lets say that HRC was right in there when plans were rolled out for the WTO, NAFTA, and the China whitewash. She okayed the government’s decision to militarily back anti-Sadaam forces in a post Desert Storm coup; then decided against it, a decision which lead to massive bloodletting by the Iraqi dictator. She agreed not to engage supplemental US troops to assist in Somalia’s Blackhawk Down disaster and pulled all US troops out soon afterwards. She did nothing after the Cole was attacked because there just wasn’t enough evidence. She had Bin Laden in sight. But called off the strike. She flip-flopped on the US role in Bosnia, refused to send assistance to Rwanda.

And her administration was well aware prior to 2000 of PNACs plan to restructure the Middle East via Iraq, having received a personal letter from the group and then introducing the Iraq Liberation Act through which $97 million was appropriated for various clandestine operations inside the borders of Iraq. As Senator, Clinton most probably cast one of the most informed votes signaling the go-ahead for the Iraq invasion. This "If I knew then what I know now" is ludicrous.

But the most shocking recent Clinton arabesque is her absurdity of her position relative to Senator Obama’s decision to remove the nuclear option from the table.

Here’s Clinton in Feb. at AIPAC.

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," she said. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table."

(And all the Dem. Candidates were towing this line for some time, all undoubtedly mindful of the Pentagon’s plan to go nuclear in an attempt to wipe out Iran’s nuclear arsenal.)

In parsing the above quote, pay special attention to "we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons"

Why isn’t anyone asking her about ‘her’ administration’s transfer of classified blueprints to Iran paving the way for them to advance their nuclear capabilities? ("State of War" by James Risen, the New York Times reporter)

And why her administration also provided China with advanced missile technology and provided North Korea with nuclear technology enabling them to develop nuclear weapons?
See

What exactly IS going on here? Given her WH experience it’s easy to understand why she didn’t have to read the Patriot Act before signing it: the 1996 Antiterrorism Act was a first draft See Village Voice & Clinton’s1996 Antiterrorism ActSee Village Voice & Clinton’s1996 Antiterrorism Act

All this talk about Obama’s being naïve and lacking experience. How quickly we forget the shortcomings of Mr. Clinton whose lack of foreign policy experience certainly did not disqualify him in Mrs. Clinton’s eyes for being ‘THE MAN’ for the job during that campaign.
Note how Bill waffled back and forth on his foreign policy agenda during his campaign: Re the first Gulf War: "I agree with the arguments of the people in the minority on the resolution -- that we should give sanctions more time and maybe even explore a full-scale embargo ... before we go to war ... I guess I would have voted with the majority if it was a close vote. But I agree with the argument the minority made" (Arkansas Gazette, 1/15/91)."
See

And what about the Clinton’s experience with Halliburton? Most assuredly, according to her POV, she must have been privy to the fact that Halliburton’s revenue from the Defense Dept doubled over a 2-year period during her administration.

"In 1998, Halliburton's total revenue was $14.5 billion, which included $284 million of Pentagon contracts. Two years later, Halliburton’s DoD contracts more than doubled."
See

MSM, read our lips: Americans DO NOT want a North American Union; they do not want a one world government. They do NOT want a nuclear war. They do not want another ‘phantom puppet president’ whose rise to international notoriety coincides with the conflagration of an ever-swelling noblesse elite, an elite in which the Clintons uncategorically number themselves.

Obviously, MSM isn’t going to look beneath the voluminous veils of deceit to find out what’s really going on here. Has anyone thought to notice the similarities between the grooming job done on Hillary and the alien-esque aura of Condi Rice? No wonder gender isn’t an issue in this campaign. The Clinton Phenomena is so perfectly cast it appears in its final stages of hardening, capable of sustaining its shape sans the mold.

It’s no wonder the best the Republicans are offering in 08 is a soon-to-be ‘MKUltrad’ Fred Thompson and an alleged former Mafiosa NY mayor running on the imprint of his toxic 911 halo. They don’t need a candidate. They have Hillary. And GE, Times Warner, Disney and News Corp continue to frame the news as if her presidency is a fait accompli.

Would that we could impeach the whole lot of them!

Obama: Not About Locking up the DC Establishment

Is America really looking for a candidate who has the blessing and backing of DC?

I think not.

Not only are the Democrats disillusioned by their representatives failure to take decisive action in the first 8 months (the latest being the inexcusable midnight hour passage of the new NSA/FISA debacle) against this administration, but I believe potential Republican voters are shell shocked by a party run amuck by the Bush Crime Family.
Obama’s message of appeal to the majority of Americans (and not just that 51%) is truly a winning vision in this campaign. And would be the major message conveyed by MSM if they were actually reporting on the buzz on the ground.

Obama’s growing sense of himself as established enough now to speak directly and honestly to issues and to stand even taller after massive ongoing expertly coordinated attacks to put yet another truth out there is becoming a phenomenon in and of itself. You wouldn’t know it, however, unless you were really watching and listening to primary source references and not tv, web or print media NLP lynching extravaganzas. (and I apologize for the use of this word but this is exactly what I see occurring and it would be occurring to any candidate who threatened the new status quo)

But as it appears now, the emphasis is on getting this nomination process over as soon as possible (witness the recent horror of the repercussions on Florida perhaps loosing its delegates) AND the focus focus focus is on the ‘inevitability’ of a Clinton nomination as a fait accompli sans any valid scrutiny by either the press or those who as representatives of the press magnificently control the debate process. The Clinton campaign during this short process hopes to continue its policy of sending out Mr. Wolfson to deflect any questioning of his candidate by Senator Obama as breaking his campaign pledge to run a clean campaign AND to hold onto superiority by referring to the National Polls. Of course, nobody is even bothering to question the conflict of interest involved in many of these polls, being run by media whose interests are directly tied in to supporting a candidate who will ensure continued US military involvement overseas through their affiliations with huge military conglomorates and Big Oil.

Environmental activist and writer Paul Hawken’s most recent book Blessed Unrest discusses the birthing of over hundreds of thousands of grass roots organizations globally which have sprung into existence while we were looking elsewhere. That is the feeling one comes away with after attending a Barack Obama rally. Where did all these people come from? Where have they been hiding? And how does MSM and their candidates continue to hold onto the idea that they can win this thing in the face of such a monumental movement?

The problem is there is no voice, no cohesion for these people. Most asssuredly, there is no political party to represent them. No media outlet to present non-editorialized or undistorted representations of their message.

A candidate who controls the DC establishment is the WRONG candidate for these people. The DC establishment does NOT REPRESENT them. And the question becomes how can the Obama campaign succeed in signing the unrepresented people to vote and ensurd that come primary day there are sufficient opportunities and locations for them to vote and know their vote will be counted? How does this campaign ensure that these potential supporters understand in Clear and Concise terms that this election is NOT about representing the DC establishment but ih defeating it?

As I see it, Camp Obama represents the sole grassroots movement in the US which is currently offering us the opportunity to mobilize and move out into our communities and to communities beyond our natural boundaries with information and registration materials and sign up sheets to ensure that the DC establishment NO LONGER determines who Americans elect as their next president. Camp Obama has the unique opportunity to EDUCATE Americans about what has happened to our government and how we are now at the ‘tipping point’ .... Returning to a Clinton Whitehouse means a continuation of the partisanship which has so effectively kept our attention diverted from the real issues which have morphed the US into a country most would not recognize if their minds were cleared from the pumped-pumped-pumped salad-spin of propaganda, lies and disinformation we’ve been tossing in since the Reagan years. How many among us have had the chance to come up for air?

I think John Edwards would make a wonderful president. I just don’t believe he has a chance of winning. What I do believe is that Obama is our best chance of rising as a people again and having our sheer number, our enthusiasm and inspiration, our shared desire for vast change in government fight tous ensemble against a Hillary nomination. Frankly, this might be our best and only chance to defeat MSM, the ridiculous poll numbers, and the DC establishment.

Let’s be honest here. The mega-conglomorates, the self-perpetuating, horrifically evolving military industrial complex now controls everything. Except the multitudes. The unwittingly silenced and dispossessed. Our only hope against the annihilation of our core rights – life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness – necessitates the joining of forces against this insidious enemy. We have no time to quibble amongst ourselves. Right now, we need to move beyond politics and talk survival.

To me that means Obama.