"Hacking Democracy" MUST WATCH

I saw this documentary late one night right after the 2006 Midterm Elections. The issue of electronic voting is quickly becoming an incredibly important issue for me. This video is just over half an hour. So, watch it at home one night or during your lunch hour. (We can't have you destroying American productivity!) But, PLEASE watch it. Don't just watch it, forward a link to this post to as many people as you can.

Here's the bottom line. We're giving tens of millions of dollars of contracts to Diebold without them even having to prove to people that they are safe from hackers. This documentary was earth shattering to me. If we can get a critical mass of people to care about this issue, we can do something about it!

We should start in Florida's 13th Congressional District, where Democrat Christine Jennings was screwed out of victory because Diebold's machines "lost" 18,000 votes in a race where she lost by less than 400.

Here is the video that you MUST watch:

State of the Union Thoughts

I intended to do a comprehensive analysis of the President's SOTU speech. But, yesterday was largely taken by job networking activities. So, I'm going to just give you a few of my immediate impressions.

First, this President must be spending sometime with Marion Barry (if you know what I mean) if he thinks he can balance the budget in five years, WITHOUT RAISING TAXES. This is impossible. He wants to escalate the War in Iraq as well as increasing the overall size of the military by nearly 100,000. Early analysis says that discretionary spending would have to be cut by forty percent in order to achieve a balanced budget. I would also like to point out that the Republican Congress and this Republican President have driven our Federal budget into the largest deficits in history. It is simply amazing that he could stand before the Congress and the country and propose such a ridiculous idea.

(Let's not also forget that in the same speech, he already proposed raising taxes on employees who are provided great health plans by their employers. Read: Unions)

On a related point, others have correctly pointed out that the War(s) that we are engaged in presently is the only time in history that the President has not asked the American people to make a sacrifice to fund the War. This is particularly amazing to me because when you point out the fiscal disaster created by Republicans, they point to the War on Terror as the reason. However, instead of following historic precedent and raising the funds for a War, they cut taxes. Of course nearly 90% of their taxcuts went to the wealthiest 1% of our citizens.

So, when the President presents his budget to Congress, let's be wary of how the heck he's going to achieve balance in five years without gutting spending on domestic issues like education and healthcare.

Another point that really got me was his proposal to end earmarks. Thanks, Mr. President, but Speaker Pelosi already beat you to the point. By a couple of months. By the way, has anyone remembered that the Democrats are stuck passing LAST YEAR'S appropriations bills because the Republicans don't know how to govern?

And on Iraq. Jeez. This President is seriously delusional when it comes to Iraq. I'll leave it at that.

Below, I'm posting a response from one of my new favorite Members of Congress, Rep. Louise Slaughter, Chairwoman of the Rules Committee. You've got to love that Southern Accent from a NY Congresswoman!

The Real State of the Union

It's just after midnight. I've been spending time reading over the President's speech, listening to commentary, and listening to the ideas of fellow bloggers. Throughout tomorrow, I'll take different parts of the President's speech and tell you why his ideas are dumb, recycled, and generally bad for the country.

In the meantime, I'm pasting below the Democratic response to the President's version of the State of our Union. It's given by newly elected Virginia Senator Jim Webb. I understand he wrote the speech himself. It's well done. Chris Matthews said on MSNBC that it is one of the few instances in history in which the Response to the State of the Union was better than the President's speech. I mean, it's so good, that people are starting to chant 'Webb for Prez'!

Pull out the Flip Flops for McCain

John McCain is all over the place on the War in Iraq. Take a moment to visit ThinkProgress, which is the blog of the Center for American Progress. They have a scoop on an article to be published tomorrow in a new Capitol Hill newspaper, in which McCain blasts Cheney over Iraq strategy.

Basically, McCain was the original supporter of escalating the war in Iraq, once proposing many more troops than the 21,500 being deployed. Now, as the popularity of the war reaches drastic new lows, McCain is changing his position quicker than Cheney returns calls to oil execs. The Arizona Senator knows there is no viable exit strategy in Iraq and is making early moves to distance himself so it doesn't doom his nascent Presidential bid.

He had a dismal performance on Meet the Press yesterday. I'm a clip of the interview below. Even in his remarks yesterday, he is praising the escalation and questioning those who don't. Yet, his comments attacking Cheney is all about his mishandling of the war. Would the real John McCain please stand up?

On a separate issue, this video clip is directly responding to an add that MoveOn is running in Iowa and NH. That ad is a part of the video clip. In his response, McCain slams 527's and claims to have tried to get rid of them. 527's did not exist until the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act became law in 2002. From the Washington Post on April 6, 2006:

The 527 committees, named for a section of the tax law, are tax-exempt rganizations that use voter mobilization and issue-based ads to influence federal elections. They grew in importance after the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance law barred federal candidates and national parties from accepting unlimited donations from individuals, unions and corporations.

There was an effort to pretty much repeal the major provisions of McCain-Feingold:

The House approved campaign finance legislation last night that would benefit Republicans by placing strict caps on contributions to nonprofit committees that spent heavily in the last election while removing limits on political parties' spending coordinated with candidates.

The bill passed 218 to 209 in a virtual party-line vote.

Lifting party spending limits would aid Republican candidates because the GOP has consistently raised far more money than the Democratic Party. Similarly, barring "527" committees from accepting large unregulated contributions known as "soft money" would disadvantage Democrats, whose candidates received a disproportionate share of the $424 million spent by nonprofit committees in 2003-2004.

So, yes, they tried to get rid of 527's. But, at the same time, they tried to repeal the law banning unlimited contributions to the National Parties. What a crock.

Yet another flip flop for Senator McCain. This guy must be losing it.

FBI: We should have done more on Foley

Really? No kidding. But then again, hindsight is 20/20. And to be fair, they weren't the first folks to flub the whole thing.

Here's a link to the ABC News Blotter where they once again claim to have broken the story. But, we all know now that they didn't. In fact, they sat on the emails for months doing nothing about it. They probably would have sat on it indefinitely had they not seen Wonkette slamming the emails I posted on Stop Sex Predators.

At least the Inspector General of the FBI has acknowledged the mishandling of the emails that were submitted to them by CREW, but it's half-hearted.

While finding no official misconduct on the part of FBI officials, the inspector general said "the e-mails provided enough troubling indications on their face" to have warranted follow-up steps.

Instead, the inspector general found, the supervisory agent decided there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing and "placed the e-mails in her in box and took no further action" even though she found the e-mails "odd."

What I really wonder is if the FBI agent backed off from looking further into the emails because they were from a Congressman. That is a question that should have been answered in the IG's report.

I know from my own experience that the main stream media held the bar higher because Foley was a member of Congress. They seemed to be looking for a "smoking gun." ABC News didn't cover the original emails on their nightly news, only their website. Once they got the explicit instant messages, they finally reported widely on the scandal. That is all a part of the 'Culture of Washington' that I have talked about so much. For the media, it's mostly the 'CYA' mode of operation.

It's a good thing the blogosphere is around to be the true "fourth estate" of modern media.

Hillary: I was raised in a middle class family in the middle of the Country

Today, Hillary Rodham Clinton officially entered the fray of Presidential politics. You should watch the video below. It's well made, she looks comfortable, the message isn't bad, and her timing is fantastic. Expect to hear a great deal about it in the next couple of days.

I'm excited about her candidacy. The mere fact that she's running is historic. But, it's got the potential to be of massive historic proportions. That alone is enough to get excited about, so this isn't an endorsement.

You can be sure that this is a decision she didn't make without careful consideration. Neither Hillary, nor Bill Clinton are big fans of losing. She's in it to win. I think she can.

To earn victory, Clinton will have to get in the trenches of Iowa, NH, Nevada, and SC. She will have to show the voters that she wants it, that she's got a vision for America, that she's willing to work for it, and that she's got what it takes to be Commander in Chief. Given her incredible discipline and talented inner-circle, I think she can do all those things. Will she?

American Research Group released a poll in December showing Hillary leading in all four early Primary and Caucus States. Click here and scroll down a little to see a graph of all possible Democratic candidates and how they fared in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Should Hillary be successful in earning the Democratic Party's nomination, she will also be a formidable candidate in the General Election. She's got 100% name ID and she's at 47% both positive and negative name ID. That means she's got about 6% to work with. I think that's great news. If somebody hasn't already formed a negative opinion of her, they just might not. Those numbers are better than John Kerry ended up with at the conclusion of the 2004 campaign. Let's also not forget that her husband is the best campaigner in our lifetimes. He will not be hidden from the public as he was in 2000 or sidelined by health problems as he was in 2004. You can expect him, maybe even Chelsea, to be out on the trail for her early and often.

This will be a very interesting campaign. All political hacks will relish the opportunity to observe and analyze the most diverse Democratic Primary for President in history. We may very well end up with a woman, an African American, a Hispanic, and a Southern Democrat.

I look forward to watching this campaign play out over the next year.

Edwards: "It's time for Americans to be patriotic about something other than war."

I just watched this video, which contains excerpts from John Edwards' speech at Riverside Church in New York City on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. It's the same pulpit from which Dr. King delivered an inspirational speech opposing the Vietnam War a year before his tragic death.

Edwards delivers an eloquent and thoughtful speech. He looks comfortable speaking to a largely African American church. His message is moving. His politics are on point. It's nine minutes long, but worth listening to when you have the time. The line that stood out for me, in the title of this post, comes at around 8 minutes and 30 seconds. That's the kind of message that will truly resonate with so much of America.

White House Vales (some) Life

The White House has declared tomorrow "National Sanctity of Life Day." But they don't really meant it.

This sure is a great concept. Unfortunately, The Karl Roves of the world have hijacked the phrase for the sole use of the right wing nuts. We should value all life, right? George Bush and his the right wing only seem to value the life of the unborn. Heck, although I'm pro-choice through and through, I value the future people of the world too.

Here's the hypocrisy: George Bush has just ordered more than 20,000 American troops to join around 150,000 troops already in Iraq. Since the war began, we've lost more than 3,000 American soldiers and nearly 30,000 have been wounded. Nearly 60,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed as well. This is in a war that yields no positive benefits for the United States. So far, it's produced a Civil War for the Iraqi people, with many more deaths to follow.

If George Bush wants to value the "Sanctity of Life," then he should do just that and not pick and choose based on right wing ideology or right wing politics.

Democrats: Guilty of Honesty

Below, I'm posting a video of Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Chair of the Rules Committee, who took the floor of the House of Representatives to admit to committing an act of honesty. It is in response to Republicans whining about not having any imput about cutting off federal subsidies to the oil companies that have had record profits for the past two years. Instead, Democrats are putting the money towards alternative energy research and production.

Anyway, it is refreshing to be in charge and be able to do the right thing. Kudos to Chairwoman Slaughter for not backing down. Yay.

Time For Offense

Democrats around the country need to learn to go on the offense and stay there. We've been playing defense for far too long. We may never again have the factors that contributed to our victories in 2006. So, we've got to learn to play hard and play smart.

Here are TWO ideas that State Parties should adopt. They are applicable to both Blue and Red States.

FIRST, all State Parties should attack any Republican House Member who does NOT support every aspect of the House Democrats' First 100 Hours agenda. Not only do each of these issues have widespread public support, but Republicans are voting in droves with the Dems. State Parties should make extra, strong attacks on any vulnerable Republican who is not voting for these issues. These Republicans should face questions from their local press as often as possible about their opposition. It will slowly build a body of unfavorable press coverage that will come in handy come 2008.

On the flip side, the State Party organizations should work to promote their Democratic Members that are supporting the agenda. This is particularly important for new Members. The DCCC cannot be expected to support our incumbent protection efforts alone. We need engagement at the State and Local level.

SECOND, in early Primary States, there is an opportunity to gain favorable coverage by using the Iraq War. The Republican Presidential candidates will be travelling often to these States. This will give State and Local Party leaders the opportunity to push for hardened opposition to escalating the war. The more we can get them on the record for supporting it, the harder we can hit them for their lack of responsiveness to public opinion. For State and Local Republican Party Leaders that support 'pro-escalation' candidates, they CAN and SHOULD be called to task for supporting this policy by way of their endorsement. Even in Red States, we can continue to drive public opinion in opposition to the War in Iraq.

We should also continue to press Democratic candidates for President on this issue. There is NO room for a Democratic Presidential candidate that supports the failed policies of President Bush.

By utilizing this strategy, we can not only control the debate, but win it. By attacking State and Local officials for their Presidential endorsement of pro-escalation candidates, we can also make inroads in non-Federal elections in those States.

Please urge your party Leaders to have an agenda and be aggressive about it. We must NOT let Republicans get away with the failed policies of the past or not supporting the initiatives the public has clearly asked for.

Here is how you can reach the Early Primary and Caucus State Parties. There should also be links to local parties within the State websites. Click here for the DNC's interactive map of State Parties for other contact information.

Iowa Democratic Party
5661 Fleur Dr
Des Moines, IA 50321
515-244-7292
515-244-5051 (fax)
http://www.iowademocrats.org/
Chair: Scott Brennan; Vice Chair: Sarah Swisher; Executive Director: Mike Milligan

New Hampshire Democratic Party
2 1/2 Beacon Street
Concord, NH 03301
603-225-6899
603-225-6797 (fax)
http://www.nh-democrats.org/
Chair: Kathleen Sullivan; Vice Chair: Raymond Buckley; Executive Director: Nick Clemons

Nevada Democratic Party
1325 E. Vegas Valley, Suite C
Las Vegas, NV 89109
702-737-VOTE
702-735-2700 (fax)
http://www.nvdems.com/
Chair: Hon. Tom Collins; Vice Chair: Teresa Benitez-Thompson; Executive Director: Alison Schwartz

South Carolina Democratic Party
1529 Hampton Street, Suite 200
Columbia, SC 29201
800-765-1692 (toll free)
803-799-7798 (local)
803-765-1692 (fax)
http://www.scdp.org/
Chair: Joe Erwin; Vice Chair: Carol Khare Fowler; Executive Director: Lachlan McIntosh