If Obama Does Not Win, Blame The American People

[Yavin4]

No matter what Obama or McCain's campaigns do or not do, no matter what the media does or does not do, no matter who is selected as VP, Obama should win this election easily, for this election is a simple choice between a new direction or a repeat of the last 8 years.

And if the people of Ohio, MI, PA, and FLA vote for a continuation of the last 8 years, then truly ignorance reigns supreme in America, and there's nothing that no one can do about it, not even the Clintons.

Look at the war in Iraq, look at foreclosures, the deficit, gas and food prices, job losses, declining wages, healthcare crisis, education, etc., etc. etc., and you're stupid enough to continue this disaster for another four years?!?!?!

At some point, it's the American people who have nothing but themselves to blame.

[Ron Green]

1. We Americans have our heads in the sand; we're too close to our own petty concerns.

That's one reason people all over the world are so eager (and anxious) for Obama to be elected. They can see us for what we have become, much better than we can.

[gateley]

2. Agree. It's a simple choice, as you put out. More of the same? Or not? nt

[RazBerryBeret]

3. Exactly right.

I came to that conclusion in 04. I canvassed for moveon.org....thought that there was not a chance in hell that Bush could be re-elected since he'd barely made it the first time....I live in Ohio; I did all I could.

I had to explain to my kids that sometimes the best person does NOT win, no matter what, it was heartbreaking, for all of us. I do NOT want to go through that again....

[MichiganVote]

4. meh...in Michigan at least, other than Levin, its not as if the Dem's have been

beating a path to the doors of voters here. Neglect a state long enough and rot tends to sink in.

And may I remind you that the American people did not cause the debacle that was 2000. That was all done by the republicans.

[MH1]

8. The American people IGNORED the debacle that was Selection 2000.

When faced with stories of rampant election fraud, and the probability that the will of the voters was thwarted, the American people collectively shrugged, said "eh, whatever", and "who's gonna win the Super Bowl?"

[AspenRose]

62. And the Senate ignored the Congressional Black Caucus.

Even the "most liberal" senators ignored them.

[BlooInBloo]

5. DUers can't WAIT to blame Obama for the evils of the American Voter.

[Buddy Tess]

6. Well, that's about the most ignorant thing I've read on here for awhile....

....since the American people are the ones that VOTE! Duh....who would we blame? The Germans?

[GCP]

9. No, it's the ones who DON'T vote

And the others who are too lazy and/or ignorant to do their homework and vote for the best guy for the job as opposed to the one they think they can have a beer with.

[Yavin4]

12. No, There Will Be Cries on DU and Elsewhere To Blame Obama

His campaign strategists. The media. etc. Everyone else will get the blame except the true culprit. The ignorant American voter.

[nam78_two]

49. Precisely-I get your point Yavin4.nt

[GCP]

7. Agree completely

And am seriously considering moving back to the UK if McCain becomes the next president.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

90. Can I move back to England with you? I used to live there and loved it. Too expensive, though.

Seriously, I will conclude that the average American voter continues to struggle with internalized racism. The fact that we cannot elect a man who is clearly more capable, more suitable and more knowledgeable...who can lead...well, that would be tragic. I can't go through it again. I simply can't.

[indepat]

10. If Obama does not win, I'll conclude a majority of voters must like perpetual wars, torture, a

meltdown in the housing market, record foreclosures, rampant and continual increases in energy and food costs, a shrinking economy, a downwardly spiraling dollar, plummeting stock markets, a much lower standard of living, and a defiled environment to the prospects to risking anyone left of the extreme right who would, as defined by the 'puke smear machine, be a commie-loving, weak on national defense, soft on crime, soft on drugs, soft on terra bleeding-heart pinko liberal who likes to kill babies and doesn't think every person should have the right to carry a cannon on his/her hip. :P

[FrenchieCat]

11. That's what my husband says.

He said.....all of those White people who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Barack, should buy a shovel now.....because they are doing nothing more than digging their own graves. They will have earned laying in them while the pollsters and pundits enthusiastically shovel dirt over their dumb faces.

[AspenRose]

66. It's a test, Frenchie

You and I know and understand this. It's a test to see if America can look past color and/or gender to elect effective leadership from the party she knows in her heart is best for her overall interests. It's an opportunity to do the right thing.

If this country is too shallow to get its act together, we get what we deserve, and may God help us all.

[Median Democrat]

13. That's Blaming The Victim - Democracy Is Dead Due To Big Media

Getting any real journalism or independent analysis is close to impossible. If you thought it was bad during the Clinton years, it has gotten worse, such that most media is controled by just 5 companies now:

<>

The problem is that Big Media pervasively controls what Americans see and hear, thus it controls what they think. The stories and coverage are tailored to undermine Democratts. For example, remember the discussions of John Kerry's wealth even though it belonged to his wife. Notice that there is no such discussion of John McCain's wealth even though he would be in the Top 5 richest presidents if he were elected. The American people are victims. The only hope is for us in the know (Democrats) to (1) engage in grass roots organizing and (2) fully use alternative media to try counter the grip of Big Media and the GOP's natural advantages with Big Corporate owned media:

<>

[bridgit]

14. Yup

[LostinVA]

15. Good post -- interesting graphic -- thanks for posting!

[Yavin4]

17. With All Due Respect, Bullshit

If your house is being foreclosed on, if you cannot find a job, if you don't have healthcare, if your paying sky high prices for gas and food, then your own personal experiences should be more than enough to motivate you to vote for change, regardless of what the media says or does not say.

We've lost almost 500K so far this year, even the "official" UE rate is creeping up, and your going to let Rush Limbaugh, a multi millionaire, tell you who to vote for?

Blame the victim, my ass. Fucking ignorance is fucking ignorance.

[CTyankee]

23. I always think "Why is it that WE got it right on Iraq, the environment, Bush, Katrina etc

and the general public just doesn't fricken GET IT!

Sometimes I hate being right but I always am. I'm really sick and tired of having to live under conditions that I had no part in creating. I am angry as hell at people to enabled it to happen. They never "get it" and yet I am stuck, along with the naysayers, paying the bill.

[Median Democrat]

24. I Actually Blame You and Big Media

It is easy to blame the poor and the ignorant. Republicans do that all the time. Heck, its in their religion, which states that the rich and rich because they are blessed:

<>

I agree with the idea of personal responsibility, however, as Obama notes responsibility must be coupled with opportunity, and due Big Media control of what we see and hear, when gas prices are going up, and Big Media tells them that they need to drill for oil off the coast, what is the average American going to believe. If they lack healthcare, and all media plays is don't trust government, then that is what people will believe. Finally, when Big Media tells them that John McCain is a "maverick" with his "straight talk express," and does not challenge him, but dwells on weather Obama is too skinny or too much of a celebrity, what is the average American going to think?

The person I blame is Yavin4, because you know better. The responsiblity lies in people who do know the truth to educate those who don't. That is called providing opportunity to make an informed choice. Sadly, Big Media does a poor job of informing people, because there is no competition. Just give companies controlling what we see and hear.

Sitting at home blaming everyone else is not going to change squat. Big Media is biased. Deal with it. HOw do you deal with it. By educating folks who have no other opportunity to learn about what Democrats stand for, because Big Media does not cover the issues. They cover bull shit like who threw out the race card. They cover distractions. What they don't cover are the real issues. So, you can blame everyone for not knowing better, or you can try to convince people on a face to face basis why Democrats should be elected.

If you do that, great. If you don't, and are just blaming people, then you should re-examine which party you should be in, because the Republicans ae great for blaming everyone: gays, minorities, immigration, Obama for throwing a race card, and not taking responsibility. Take responsibility by taking it upon yourself to convince people to vote, and to vote democrat. If you are good with youtube, then film a commerical or video. If you are not hot like Obama girl, then don't.

[Codeine]

25. Well what makes you and I different?

Why are we immune to the influence of "Big Media" while others aren't? We're not special. We're not paragons of intellectual thinking.

I can't stand this attitude! The assumption that people who believe or vote differently from you or I are ignorant or information-deprived is incredibly demeaning. Do you really think the average voter is not going to vote for Obama because of Candy Crowley?

If people who are the natural constituency of the Democratic Party aren't voting Dem, or - more likely - aren't voting at all it isn't the fault of the media (because we haven't been fooled, so I don't assume they have either) or a symptom of their ignorance, it's because our party, from the DNC on down to the grassroots like us, HAVE NOT SOLD THE PRODUCT! We aren't organizing enough, we aren't registering enough, we aren't getting out the vote on the big day.

That's the truth. It's our own fault. We did it, or rather didn't do it.

The people who don't vote aren't being "fooled by Big Media" because they don't even watch the news. They don't care about our candidates and our issues because we haven't convinced them they need to care.

[Median Democrat]

30. In Italy, I Guess Its A Big Coincidence That Silvio Berslusconi Is PM

What makes me different is the availability of alternative media, which allows people who are willing to put in the effort to actually look up the candidate's positions, voting records, and past statements. I use the alternative all the time to get information from the souorce, rather than have it spoon fed to me by the media. It took some time to figure it out over the past couple of elections. I used to think that media was liberal, because that's what the pundits told me, but after listening to the speeches, and doing my homework, I discovered otherwise.

As for the rest of your post, I am not sure whether you are disputing whether there is bias in the media or whether you are claiming that this bias does not have an impact. So, let me adress both arguments.

First, Big Media is biased as the threads discussing the free replays of McCain's commercials and the studies regarding coverage show. Still not convinced? Ok, here is a leaked memo from ABC, which documents a blacklist of liberal radio station Air America:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610310008

Additional sources, articles and links are in my journal, and I'd be happy to review any articles or studies that establish that the concentration of media in 5 corporations has not affected content:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Median%20Democrat

Second, if you are admitting bias, but claim it has no affect, then why is the entire board filled with discussion regarding media strategy? Why have a media strategy, if the average voter is not going to vote for Obama based on the media, as you claim: "The people who don't vote aren't being "fooled by Big Media" because they don't even watch the news. They don't care about our candidates and our issues because we haven't convinced them they need to care."

Also, is it coincidence in Italy that media mogul Silvio Berslsconi is PM if media and media bias have no impact?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi

/snip


Berlusconi is the founder and major shareholder of Fininvest, among the ten largest Italian privately-owned companies,<3> operating in media and finance, including three national TV channels. Together these account for nearly half the Italian TV market. He owns three (out of seven) national analogue television channels, various digital television channels and as some of the country's larger newsmagazines.

/snip

His political rise was rapid and surrounded by controversy. He was elected Member of Parliament for the first time and nominated as Prime Minister following the March 1994 snap parliamentary elections, when Forza Italia gained a relative majority a mere three months after having been officially launched. He formed the first centre-right administration in 34 years. However, his cabinet collapsed after seven months, due to internal disagreements in the centre-right coalition. In the April 1996 snap paliamentary elections, he ran for Prime Minister again but was defeated by centre-left candidate Romano Prodi. From 1996 to 2001 he was the leader of the parliamentary opposition. In the May 2001 parliamentary elections, he was again the centre-right candidate for Prime Minister and won against the centre-left candidate Francesco Rutelli. Berlusconi then formed his second and third governments, which together lasted five years.

Berlusconi was leader of the centre-right coalition in the April 2006 parliamentary elections, which he lost by a very narrow margin, his counterpart being again Romano Prodi. On 17 May 2006 he was formally succeeded by Prodi. From 2006 and 2008 he returned to be the leader of the parliamentary opposition. Less than two years since his 2006 resignation he was re-elected with a large majority in the snap parliamentary elections of April 2008 and sworn in again as prime minister on 8 May 2008 after the collapse, on 24 January 2008, of Romano Prodi's last government.

/snip

This is why I think some of the second guessing regarding Democrat strategy from Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Obama, largely misses the mark when people say the Democrats should go negative. Going negative assumes an impartial media. However, Big Media is hardly impartial. For the time being, Big Media's control of the American thought process has been somewhat discrete. However, it is only a matter of time, as media companies continue to consolidate, before the lines between government and the media are erased, and we have our own version of Silvio Berslusconi, perhaps one of the heirs to Rupert Murdoch's media empire.

[brindis_desala]

43. Wrong, they are ignorant, sorry. And it's (mostly) the media's fault

General misperceptions
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/714.html

Belief that Obama is Muslim is Durable, Bipartisan – but Most Likely to Sway Democratic Votes
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/898/belief-that-obama-is-muslim-is-bipartisan-but-most-likely-to-sway-democrats

A study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs found the number of stories about the environment on the network news went from 377 in 1990 and 220 in 1991 to only 106 in 1998 and 131 in 1999. At the same time, the number of stories about entertainment soared from 134 in 1990 and 95 in 1991, to 221 stories in 1998, and 172 in 1999.
http://dailysource.org/about/problems


* Overall, representatives of business were quoted or cited nearly two-and-a-half times ƒ as frequently as were workers or their union representatives.
* In coverage of both the minimum wage and trade, the views of businesses were ƒ sourced more than one-and-a-half times as frequently as those of workers.
* In coverage about employment, businesses were quoted or cited over six times as frequently as were workers.
* On only one issue that we examined, ƒ credit card debt, was coverage more balanced, presenting the perspectives of ordinary citizens in the same pro- portion as those of business.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/06/world_without_workers.html

"Homer Simpson, Yes -- 1st Amendment 'Doh,' Survey Finds" (Associated Press 3/1/06).

"About 1 in 4 Americans can name more than one of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment (freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition for redress of grievances.) But more than half of Americans can name at least two members of the fictional cartoon family, according to a survey.

"The study by the new McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum found that 22 percent of Americans could name all five Simpson family members, compared with just 1 in 1,000 people who could name all five First Amendment freedoms."

[Codeine]

52. Oh baloney.

People know Obama isn't a Muslim, they're just using that as an excuse not to vote for a black guy. The media has run a billion stories about him being a Christian -- Rev. Wright, anyone?

And as to whether people know their Constitutional freedoms, that's not the media's fault, that rests on schools and parents.

[Yavin4]

32. Explain A State Like Mississippi Then

In that state, you have a large percentage of African American voters and a larger percentage of White voters. The African American voters are largely working class and poor, as well as the White voters.

Yet, the African American voters vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic party in big numbers. In fact, the average poor African American in MS is more likely to vote at all than the average poor White voter in that state.

The African American voter's media is no different from that White American voter. No different at all.

The reason why Republicans continue to win in a state like Mississippi is all due to the ignorance and prejudice of the White voter, who votes against their own economic interest because of sheer bigotry.

Mississippi is a state that almost like a Third World nation. I say "almost" because most Third World nations are leaving Mississippi behind.

[Median Democrat]

35. Good Question - I Ask In Response, Is Jesus A Right Winger?

My response is that the GOP has aggressively exploited Christian conservatives through leaders such as James Dobson who aggressively reject any type of progressive agenda, including the recognition of global warming, and instead focus purely on "moral" issues. This exploitation is described in this article regarding John J. DiIulio Jr., who ran Bush's Faith Based Initiative:

http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000032.html

/snip

President George W. Bush called John DiIulio "one of the most influential social entrepreneurs in America" when he appointed the University of Pennsylvania professor, author, historian, and domestic-affairs expert to head the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. He was the Bush administration’s big brain, controversial but deeply respected by Republicans and Democrats, academicians and policy players. The appointment was rightfully hailed: DiIulio provided gravity to national policy debates and launched the most innovative of President Bush’s campaign ideas—the faith-based initiative, which he managed until this past February, the last four months from Philadelphia.

"There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus," says DiIulio. "What you’ve got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

In a seven-page letter sent a few weeks after our first conversation, DiIulio, who still considers himself a passionate supporter of the president, offers a detailed account and critique of the time he spent in the Bush White House.

"I heard many, many staff discussions but not three meaningful, substantive policy discussions," he writes. "There were no actual policy white papers on domestic issues. There were, truth be told, only a couple of people in the West Wing who worried at all about policy substance and analysis, and they were even more overworked than the stereotypical nonstop, twenty-hour-a-day White House staff. Every modern presidency moves on the fly, but on social policy and related issues, the lack of even basic policy knowledge, and the only casual interest in knowing more, was somewhat breathtaking: discussions by fairly senior people who meant Medicaid but were talking Medicare; near-instant shifts from discussing any actual policy pros and cons to discussing political communications, media strategy, et cetera. Even quite junior staff would sometimes hear quite senior staff pooh-pooh any need to dig deeper for pertinent information on a given issue."

/snip

Former Bush appointee, David Kuo's book, Tempting Faith, also discusses this exploitation in depth.

You ask why do poor whites tend to vote against their economic interests in the South, well, I would attribute at least some of this due to the active exploitation of their faith by the GOP. Yet, when one looks at Christianity, it should actually be closer a liberal view, than a conservative one. The Bible actually has verses that would be considered liberal, if not leftist:

"If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered."

-Proverbs 21:13

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy."

-Proverbs 31:8-9

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

-Matthew 6:24

He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker; whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished."

-Proverbs 17:5

"He who oppresses the poor to increase his wealth and he who gives gifts to the rich--both come to poverty."

-Proverbs 22:16

"Jesus answered, 'If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'"

-Matthew 19:21

"He who gives to the poor will lack nothing, but he who closes his eyes to them receives many curses."

-Proverbs 28:27

Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

- Luke 12:33,34

Indeed, liberation theology, which the Right Wing Christians consider leftist, is based on this quote from Jesus:

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord." (Luke 4:18-19)

So, yes, as a Democracy we are ultimately responsible for our government. However, I also think we have entered a new age of politics that is dominated by a concentrated corporate media that works hand in hand with a political party that has no ethical opposition to shamelessly exploiting the faith and religion of Americans to adopt policies that harms them economically. It is a shameless and sinful marriage of convenience and opportunity between the GOP and the leaders of the conservative Christian movement such as James Dobson.

So, simply blaming everyone does not really solve the problem. Understanding the problem is the first step to fixing it.

[nam78_two]

51. Yup- and all of that is mirrored in many other red states as well.nt

[jonestonesusa]

54. I agree more with the OP, with all due respect.

Your premise, that the wealthy and educated need to take care of the poor and ignorant who are biased because of media, doesn't hold up if you look at some recent elections during the neocon phase of American politics. Quite often, high income and well educated voters still support Republican policies that we probably agree are bad for everyone's interest, especially in the long term. In terms of education, there is some degree of preference for Democrats if your attainment is higher, but in terms of income, there is stronger support for Reagan, Bush, etc. the higher up you go.

Besides that, African Americans suffer a great deal from the same income and education gaps you speak of. Why is it that they consistently, nearly unanimously support the Democratic Party's political agenda, when white voters of all income levels do not identify so strongly with that agenda? I would be interested in your own answer to that question, but in my opinion it certainly has to do with symbolic issues - white privilege, gun ownership, prayer and patriotism, etc. Republicans have successfully used symbolic issues to influence the white electorate of this country, and the white electorate, as a whole, has yet to repudiate these tactics. If America as a whole had voted in the last three decades as black voters have, there would have been no Reagan, no Bush, and there would certainly be no McCain presidency.

I posted some exit polling for perspective on these voting patterns, if you're interested.

1976/1980
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980

2004
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

[Median Democrat]

70. I Think Obama's Speech On Race Nailed It

You ask:

"Why is it that they consistently, nearly unanimously support the Democratic Party's political agenda, when white voters of all income levels do not identify so strongly with that agenda? I would be interested in your own answer to that question, but in my opinion it certainly has to do with symbolic issues - white privilege, gun ownership, prayer and patriotism, etc. Republicans have successfully used symbolic issues to influence the white electorate of this country, and the white electorate, as a whole, has yet to repudiate these tactics."

I think Barack Obama addressed this issue in his speech on race, but I can be even more blunt. Both parties have used wedges issues, but the GOP is really good at it. With Reagan, you had welfare queens. With Bush, you had Willie Horton. With Jesse Helms, you had affiramtive action, and the famous commercial of a white male being fired in favor of a less qualified African American. Even today, immigration is used as a wedge issue. That is why "repudiation" is a tall order, because as Obama notes, the GOP's racist agenda is based on a kernal of legitimate concern, and the tough challenge for Democrats is to attack the racism without saying that the underlying concerns of rural whites below the poverty line are not legitimate. Sadly, after several elections, you have to admit that the cynical use of wedge issues works, hence you have Karl Rove's famous 51% strategy.

Obama explained that there is a difference in experience between white voters and minorities. White voters and minority voters do have similar and legitimate concerns. White unoion workers, for example, fear competition for their jobs. The GOP is great at focusing on the "comptetive element," and pushing the idea that the success of one ethnic group must come at the expense of another ethnic group. Most people are not on welfare, even those who are below the household median income line. Thus, a commercial or attack on welfare queens resonates well with working class workers who will resent someone allgedley getting a free steak with food stamps.

So, yes you are right, that economics is a factor, but those economics are exploited as a wedge issue. In addition, as my early post regarding Jesus makes clear, the GOP has been very good at exploiting the evangelical vote where the GOP promises to promote the moral agenda of the evangelical right while the evangelical right does not say squat about social justice issues. As noted by the former head of Faith Based Initiatives, he described the Republicans who ran faith based intiatives as the "Mayberry Machiavelles."

[jonestonesusa]

108. Good response - I appreciate it and agree with much of it...though not all.

In my opinion, there are no shortcuts for Democrats, progressives, etc. to subvert Republican exploitation of economic wedge issues without addressing the underlying racial divisions directly, and to do so with both a short and long term strategy. Are we all really willing to work towards such a strategy, given how much policing goes on even on DU every time that a poster brings up the enduring problem of racial inequality? Back in the day, Bill Clinton made a reasonable effort to speak to these questions as some Southern politicians are able to do better than Northerners, but to sustain the discussion and make institutional change happen one must have a lifetime commitment to these issues, and be prepared to take flak the whole time. Very few public figures can reach this standard; I hope that Obama will, and I hope that the rest of us everyday people will be ready to sustain a dialogue and act for change in our circles.

So I do not disagree with all of your earlier post; I just think it's fair to serve notice when our racial ideologies dupe us, as is the case with whites vote against their economic interests in order to preserve racial privilege. Sure, the use of wedge issues by Republicans works, especially when Democrats run scared and do not play to their base of voters, which includes the two least-appreciated Democratic constituencies, African Americans and liberals, the once that do not bolt and vote for Bush or Reagan or McCain. And, there have been some points in our recent history where arguments for racial justice have motivated people - they are motivating many voters now. Enough with the coddling of voters who think black people are a stealing white American wealth, bankrupting the country through welfare - how long will we hear this, how long will you defend it, before we directly challenge it?

It's kind of sickening to me that Obama has to coddle white voters by reassuring them that American racism hasn't turned him into a black nationalist - enough is enough. The least we can do is have a real national discussion. You describe the concerns of white rural voters as "legitimate concerns" over the effects of affirmative action and welfare and how that plays into income insecurity; I see most of these concerns as varying between subtle and blatant racism (how long has the specter of blackness been used to divide the working classes in America - at least since the era of indentured servitude). I see these concerns to be legitimate exactly to the extent that economic insecurity is seen as affecting the aspirations of both "hardworking Americans, white Americans," and black Americans. But that's exactly where meaningful dialogue is needed.

So I also agree with you that courageous and thoughtful discussion is required from the left on these issues, and we're not likely to get it from most politicians, Democratic or otherwise, so the task is left to others. Obama's speech went part way there in the effort he made to speak to the concerns of black and white constituencies in his speech, and he used polite language the best he could given that his words were bound to be interpreted as "playing the race card" no matter how conciliatory he is. Race and politics have an ugly history in our country, and while the present isn't as ugly as the past, to be overly conciliatory is also a mistake, especially if we do not happen to be a politician.

[unapatriciated]

67. and on that note may I suggest

We all volunteer to "Drive For Obama" to get out the vote on election day.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6573401&mesg_id=6573401

[Cha]

41. You're right but the "victims" are too

easily brainwashed.

[chieftain]

16. If the media lives up to its responsibilities and reports the

election even close to fairly and Barack loses, I will agree with you. But if we see a replay of '00 and '08 with the chattering class falling all over themselves to kiss Old Man McCain's ass, then the preponderance of the blame will rest with the 4th estate. The preservation of a democratic form of government requires an informed electorate. That was not even close to the case in the past 2 GE's thanks to the feckless Corporate Media. I pray to God that their dereliction of duty will not extend to this year.

[highplainsdem]

18. Oh, yeah, it always helps to be openly contemptuous of voters in an election.

:sarcasm:

Most Americans agree with you that what we have now is a disaster.

But polling has shown that McCain isn't viewed as McSame or any of our favorite nicknames for him by a majority of voters. His favorability rating is double that of W.

Obama needs to make the case that McCain's policies are too close to W's.

He also needs to unite the Democratic party. There are more Democrats than Republicans. But it was a very close primary race, with Obama barely winning the nomination -- and whether or not those who supported him through the primary like it, his best chance of uniting the party is having Clinton on the ticket. We'd have needed a unity ticket for a certain victory, no matter which one of them had been the nominee. It was simply too close for the nominee to pretend that the strongest rival and that rival's supporters don't exist.

I believe that if she's announced as the VP at the convention, with maximum media coverage, Obama will come out of that convention with a bounce in the polls that will make the effect of his world tour look trivial by comparison. I don't even want to think what might happen with the polls, whether we'll see the usual post-convention bounce, if the VP is anyone but Clinton.

[LWolf]

19. That's a good start.

I'd rather see this in GDP where it belongs.

I'd suggest that it's a little more complex than that.

If Obama does not win, all of the following are factors:

1. He didn't earn enough votes. That's his responsibility, and the responsibility of his campaign and his party. If he loses, they are all at fault.

This could happen because he alienates the left in his efforts to bring republicans into the fold. It could happen because given a republican and a republican lite, too many republicans vote for the republican.

2. The election wasn't clean. The last 2 weren't, and I haven't seen Democrats burning the candle at both ends to make sure that this one would be.

3. Dirty campaigning and mass propaganda about his background, his name, his religion.

4. Racism.

[Median Democrat]

42. I Would LIke To See Even More Use Of Non-Big Media Outlets

I think there are some structural problems that all Democrats face in running for the Presidency. I do think it is a mistake to think that the Democrats can simply lift and use Karl Rove's approach, because Rove's approach heavily relies on an extremely helpful media, particularly Fox News and ABC. I don't think McCain's commercials are particularly clever, but it does not matter. If McCain releases a web ad, Fox News plays it on an endless loop ostensibly for comment. Whenever I see Fox News at the gym, it is a constant attack on Obama, and thiss sets the tone of the debate. Obama and the DNC do not have this luxury.

Obama to his credit, really has tried some new things that do not heavily depend on Big Media. The rallies, for example, are great grass roots ways of communicating directly with the American people, which is why th GOP so aggressively attacks them, and tries to turn them into a liability, because they are so darn effective. Also, youtube has been used to great effect, and I think some of the independent commercials and videos are just fantastic. I also think that the increasing use of news sites and features that target new stories to the people who have certain characteristics holds some promise, but raises big brother issues. So, Big Media will continue to be a pervasive influence.

So, while Obama and every Democrat needs to be prepared to work with Big Media, they also cannot rely on the fairness and impartiality of BIg Media. It is naive to think that an institution that will be economically affected by the election is going to portray the elections in an impartial manner.

[LWolf]

53. That's true.

It also requires people to QUIT USING BIG MEDIA OUTLETS to get their information. I don't think that will happen until people recognize the way they spin and market EVERYTHING. Even then, those who like the spin will stick with them.

Let's be honest. If big media were doing the exact same thing for democrats that they currently do for republicans, democratic voters and politicians would be in no hurry to change that. The corruption is only "bad" when it benefits "them" instead of "us."

I'd really like to see all media re-regulated; some modern version of a fairness doctrine, and some anti-trust laws with teeth.

I do not get news or political "talk" from tv, and rarely from radio. I do listen to radio when I'm driving: NPR and the local community radio station, when I'm in range of their signal.

[Winston.]

20. Maybe the American people are not so dumb

and do not vote partly because they can recognize that this system is rigged, how many more assassinations, stolen elections and unprincipled politicians on BOTH sides will it take for the others to wake up? That is the real question.

[Skidmore]

21. So, we can just beg St. Ralph to save us, or better yet,

Lyndon LaRouche.

[Winston.]

27. No one will save us

We can only save ourselves, there is a bigger picture here and it's not about supporting one or another candidate, how did we get here, in the mess we are today, we need to reflect on that and deepen our analysis if we ever hope to get off this merry go round.

[Skidmore]

31. It always amazes me when people don't recognize that stepping up

and taking ownership is exactly what Obama has asked us to do.

[pansypoo53219]

22. i'll still blame

the teevee gnews that feed the sheeple the bad shit.

[Imagevision]

26. How anyone can experience Bushco for 8 years and want McCain is mind boggling

It would suggest that most people are better off today then they were 8 years ago?

[salonghorn70]

28. Thank Goodness Obama's Campaign Doesn't Think Like This

I believe that Obama's campaign does not think that they "should win easily." They know that this is a street fight. Campaigns which believe that they should win easily are the ones that lose.

[AZBlue]

29. Only OH, MI, PA & FL are voting? They are only campaigning there?

It's up to all of US - including you, Yavin4.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

33. Obama will win, and I will not credit the American people one whit.

The American people showed what they are made of in 1994, 2002 and 2004, and that's just what it is.

They will elect Obama out of disappointment with the results of their own vile actions in 2002-2004, while accepting not a scintilla or responsibility for having created the mess.

To the degree to which the American people can be characterized in terms of electoral results, fuck the American people.

[Howzit]

34. How can Obama possibly lose?

Democrats outnumber Republicans by a wide margin don't they? If Obama doesn't win, wouldn't that mean America wants more of the same? Is this possible?

[GarbagemanLB]

36. I'll just say this. I will be done with national politics for a long time if McCain is elected.

[TrogL]

37. The repugs want to win

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x41812

Yes, I know I'm posting this all over the damn place. I'll knock it off tomorrow.

[bridgit]

38. Yeah, and they will again so long as we keep confusing "American voters"...

with 'ignorant, prejudiced, bigoted white voters', some purer, more rarefied, higher, ascended, accomplished, master voter...and Dem voters. The reptilian brain of republicans has no such complexities to deal with. Harboring the simplicity of a light switch, they are keyed upon fight or flight instead. And fight they will make no mistake.

Here, on the other hand, we are flat-out prone to gnawing the ankles off each other in code. Yay Us!! :bounce:

[GoForTheJugular]

39. My signature says it all

[bridgit]

40. welcome to du, GoForTheJugular...

:toast:

[Leeny]

44. I agree, but

that assumes that we have an election this time that is not stolen. I hope to god it doesn't happen again. If McCain wins, that'll be the nail in all our coffins.

[cherokeeprogressive]

45. How profound.

Especially since it's the American People who will be casting votes.

[silverlil]

46. if he wins

It was not a new direction on foreign policy when he spoke in Germany. I doubt he would get the same reception again with that speech. He came out with the same bs as George Bush, there was nothing new regarding his policies towards Iran and his kissing ass with Israel and asking in a round about way for more help in Afghanistan. Afghanistan, is a no man's land and I got the feeling he wants to transfer the war to Afghanistan. I will vote for Senator Obama, I voted for him in February here in California, and have contributed to his campaign, but my expectations have been lowered, starting with FISA and his speech in Germany.

Senator Obama has not jumped in the polls either with his speech in Germany. Obama will get my vote AGAIN. Anything is better than McCain.

[BlooInBloo]

47. The electorate gets the credit if they choose correctly, and the blame if they don't....

To the best of my knowledge, Gawd is the only one who gets all the credit and none of the blame. (A pretty good gig, if you ask me.)


EDIT: Subject typo.

[depakid]

50. Bottom line is that it's the campaign's responsibility to make an effective case

same as it is the lawyers' responsibility to plead a case to the jury.

If the lawyer blows it- it's not always (or even mostly) the jury's fault. They can only be expected to make decisions based on what they hear- and how well the lawyers understand the priciples of persuasion and the rules of evidence.

Given the nature of the case at hand- if Obama can't beat this guy, with all the evidence, credibility and character on his side, then I suspect he'll end up about where Dukakis is- and has been, for the past 20 years.

[BlooInBloo]

64. (shrug) With that stupid analogy, it's the jury's job to choose in good conscience....

They get the credit if they do, and the blame if they don't.

[nam78_two]

48. I felt that way about both the 2000 and 2004 elections too honestly

For all the blame that was heaped on Kerry as a candidate, I don't know...I don't have much (any really) respect for the political opinions of the kind of dopes that go out and vote for someone because they seem like someone you could have a beer with or is against gay marriage or abortion or any of that nonsense.

There is a lot of blame I place on Repuke voters in the last two elections. I honestly thought both Kerry and Gore were excellent candidates and didn't think they should be blamed so much for the stupidity and political illiteracy of a reasonable chunk of the American voters.

Basically it comes down to this, even if they weren't your idea of the ideal candidate, do you think that a reasonably politically literate person wouldn't think either a vastly superior choice to BUSH? I mean seriously...especially in 2004-by then we had already had a taste of just how awful this guy and his administration were. But still...I guess Kerry didn't have enough charisma or something :eyes:....

[Yavin4]

71. Thank You

People here are quick to blame the campaigns and the media when we lose instead of the fact that the American people are to blame. These past 8 years have been a horror show. We've been lurching from one crisis to another, and to even remotely consider voting for another 4 years of this crap is beyond insane.

[GoesTo11]

55. Countries get the governments they deserve

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

- Ben Franklin

[Fly by night]

56. Horseshit. After two STOLEN elections, anyone who still blames the American people ...

... couldn't find his own butt with both hands.

The American people are not to blame for electing the Shit-Slinging Chimp even once. We are to blame for allowing him to ever move into our White House or letting him stay there very long.

Eat the rich.

[Joe Chi Minh]

65. Leave them alone. They're preparing the ground well for the next charade.

All part of the noise-machine.

[Yavin4]

72. In Other Countries Where Elections Are Stolen...

There are mass demonstrations in the streets. Not here.

[Fly by night]

75. Ever hear of the 51 Capitals March?

Otherwise, what I said above....

[Stevepol]

78. Bingo! I think we have a winner!

When a criminal organization or group of criminal organizations make something happen illegally, please everybody let's blame the VICTIM.

The American people are VICTIMS!

If McCain wins the election, I feel absolutely sure that it won't be because the American people voted for this idiot.

But people who don't recognize a stolen election when they see it are even worse idiots I'm afraid, especially after the dozens of well-documented books and articles, many whistleblowers, studies of all kinds, etc.

[Hoof Hearted]

57. You're absolutely correct. In the end, voters decide.

[tedoll78]

58. Nope.

He'll get at least part of the blame. Especially if he continues to run this kind of wimpy, ineffectual general campaign.

Campaigns are won on offense, not defense.

[nomaco-10]

60. Taking the high road now equals "wimpy, ineffectual".....

I guess the younger, black, democratic candidate should beat the shit out of the white, balding, skin cancer ridden, physically challenged old war vet for our viewing pleasure on cable tv.

Yeah, that will get Obama elected.

[glitch]

59. We are to blame for allowing our election systems to be corrupted.

How we actually vote is anybody's guess.

[sniffa]

61. It's much easier to blame Kerry, Gore, and then Obama should he lose

We deserve what we get.

[Jade Fox]

63. Voting for ANY Republican at this point.....

definitely requires some serious disconnect. Unfortunately, many Americans seem unable to connect the dots, when it comes to politics.

[Willo]

68. I totally agree with the OP

There is only so much blame you can put on Obama, election fraud and the MSM. We are all responsible for informing and updating our neighbors, co-workers and anyone we happen to meet about the truths, tactics and stakes of this election.

I've spoken to people who say they don't watch the news, who say Obama should admit the surged worked, who say they are voting for Obama, who say all politicians are the same and who say elections are rigged but will vote anyway.

During each and every conversation I have been able to point out several things to which they respond, "Really, I didn't know that?" The conversations usually end with me taking their email addresses and giving them the addresses to several blog and video sites.

How? I show them what I see the MSM not showing or saying: I print, carry and give out news articles and (best of all) pictures: Obama's huge crowds, McCain's small and non-diverse attendees -- pictures of Obama and "his problems" such as: smiling old white people, smiling working class white people and smiling white women.

I personally don't believe that racism is a majority in the face of the stakes at risk. On the other hand, I strongly believe in visual reinforcements. There is nothing close about this election and no reason it should be.

The way I see it is each one might talk to and email another one, might listen to what the MSM says a bit differently and might be more willing to speak out and make a stand if and when the time comes.

If we lose this election in any form or fashion, we'll get what we will have deserved.

[BPAW]

69. I Respectfully Disagree

Obama is a better candidate with better ideas. His opponent is a retread with disproven ideas. If Obama cannot convince the American people that he is the best person for the job, especially in this environment, it speaks more about him than them. We'll never win by disparaging the intellect of our countrymen, but we will win if we more effectively communicate why our ideas are better than our opponents. If we lose again, we should fix the blame where it belongs: on ourselves.

[Yavin4]

73. Given The Last 8 Years, Obama Should Win By Default

There's not been one positive event during the 8 years of Bush, not one. It's been one disaster after another, 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, the housing market, the economy, job losses, inflation, unending wars, shredding of the constitution, Gitmo, Justice Dept. scandal, Valerie Plame, and on and on. It's been a never ending parade of shit coming out of Washington.

And, some fucking stupid commercial featuring Britney Spears and Paris Hilton is going to turn this election around?

Give me a fucking break.

[BPAW]

76. Yes...

I certainly agree with your overview of the state of the nation. I also agree that a single commercial won't turn the election around. My point is that the American people aren't stupid, and though I may disagree with the conclusions of countrymen, they DO have reasons for seemingly voting against their own interests.

If McCain were to win in these conditions, somehow convincing the nation that he would be the best steward for the nation (perhaps by defining Obama through the use of BS tactics like the commercial you referenced), we have to figure out why our superior ideas and candidates aren't winning the day and fix the problems. This is our responsibility.

Blaming the American people for serves no purpose and is self-defeating.

JMHO.

[Yavin4]

77. Broccoli Fart In A Jar

The great comedian Patton Oswalt has a routine in 2004 wherein he stated that even if the Dems nominated a "broccoli fart in a jar" then you should vote for that because Bush is just that bad.

Well, my point is that given the littany of horrendous governing over the past 8 years, a "broccoli fart in a jar" would indeed be a superior choice to continuing these insane policies.

This election is a referendum on the intelligence of the American people, not the Obama campaign, not the media. No, the actual intelligence of the American people.

If McCain wins, then ignorance reigns in this country.

[BPAW]

82. LOL

I disagree with you, but damn funny comparison!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

96. Yeah, it would definitely say more about him if he cannot convince the American people

that he's the better candidate. It would mean that he cannot change his skin color. As I type this, the Obama ad is playing again. I've seen this ad now 8 times since the Redskins-Colts game started.

What about the responsibility of our Democratic party leaders? What about OUR responsibility? Did we do all that we could to get Obama elected? If people are unwilling to vote for a black man (read: biracial man), then that says much more about America than Barack Obama!!

[NorthCarolina]

74. You could also look to Obama turning away from the base of the Democratic Party as being

a factor should he not prevail in November. I further think that if he chooses either Bayh or Kaine as his VP, homophobic bigots both of them, he will likely pay a price amongst the LGBT community as well.

[WVMountainMama]

79. thanks for the insult.

[Ian David]

81. Get used to it. n/t

[mrreowwr_kittty]

83. I can't believe the dumbass is still here. nt

[Ian David]

93. Gone now!

[Smitty619]

80. Personally, I would blame the Democrats for fielding such a crappy candidate...

Personally, I would blame the Democrats for fielding such a crappy candidate...

And thanks for calling me an "ignorant American" simply because I will not vote for Obama.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

84. You're welcome, ignorant American.

You're probably an ignorant, bigoted American too, I'm guessing.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

86. Yep.

You are also in violation of the rules of this site. Enjoy your short stay.

[Smitty619]

88. ...

How did I violate the rules? The OP stated it was the fault of the American People if Obama loses. I offered my opinion that the Democrats, you know, the Party, should not have fielded a crappy candidate.
How the hell is that a violation of any rule? Just because I'm not toeing the Party line?

Obama fanboys like yourself need to take a long walk off a short pier.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

89. You need to take your trifling ass out of DU.

It's a simple matter to click on the rules.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

[Smitty619]

91. You need to pull your head out of your ass.

I am not working for the defeat of Obama. I simply stated I will not vote for him.

Since when is HOPE and CHANGE a fucking platform for a Presidential race?
When Islamic terrorist organizations throw support Obama, something tells me he is the WRONG fucking candidate.
Obama wants mandatory national service for youngsters. Sounds like he needs to read the 14th Amendment.
Chances are he will raise my taxes. I don't like taxes.
Not to mention Obama has ZERO experience on the world stage. 140 days a Senator does not a President make...

Now explain to me how it is my fault the the Dems can't even field a relevant candidate in what should be a shoe-in election year.

Before you write me off, I haven't voted for a Republican Presidential candidate, EVER.
There is really no difference between Reps and Dems these days. Its the same pile of shit, different smell.

[Sparkly]

97. You're proving the OP's point.

:eyes:

You obviously don't bother to get FACTUAL INFORMATION.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

98. Wow. That's quite the pile of crap you're spewing there.

So much bullshit in one post. I'm almost impressed.

[Smitty619]

102. Not really.

Again, I ask, since when is HOPE and CHANGE a viable Presidential platform?

Concerning mandatory national service, from his website:
Expand Service-Learning in Our Nation's Schools: Obama will set a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year.

Concerning Islamic terrorist organizations support, Hamas has publicly stated their support for Obama.

On taxes, federally funded universal healthcare won't just fall from the sky. Somebody will have to pay for it...

What experience does he have? Anyone?

He voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act in 2006.
He did not vote to oppose the war.


Sounds to me like you guys are the "ignorant" ones.

[Catherine Vincent]

104. If you're not going to vote for Obama, then you really shouldn't be here.

Try freerepublic.com.

[AdHocSolver]

109. "HOPE and CHANGE" worked for FDR.

Fifty hours of community service for middle and high school students would probably do them some good and certainly is not onerous.

So Hamas supports Obama? Maybe we should let them vote.

As for universal health care, it would reduce the overall cost of health care for Americans, even while allowing for all Americans to be covered. The funds to pay for it would come out of what we save by eliminating for-profit health insurance companies. The savings would come about due to elimination of duplicative administration costs, eliminate the huge profits, which are a cost to the consumer, elimination of advertising costs by insurance companies, elimination of all those executive bonuses and perks, provide the ability of a single payer entity to negotiate lower drug prices, and the doctors and hospitals could substantially reduce their administrative costs by having only one bureaucracy to deal with rather than dozens of different insurance bureaucracies. The U.S. currently spends twice as much per capita for health insurance than any other country, and has 47 million uninsured, and many more under-insured citizens.

As for experience, George Bush's experience was mainly in guzzling beer. Any president has to rely on advisors, and then use his judgment. Obama seems to have the intellectual capacity to make good decisions, certainly as good as any candidates fielded by any party within the last eight years.

[Smitty619]

111. Finally, someone can offer a discussion, instead of name calling...

I agree that community service would be beneficial, especially with the caliber of youths today. However, I cannot support making it mandatory. What about being pro choice? You can choose to volunteer for community service, or not to. If the parents wanted to make the kids volunteer, let them make that decision, not the gov.

I understand one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. With that said, any organization whose prime motive is to wipe a certain race off the map is no "freedom fighter." Don't glorify these guys. They are nothing more than bigoted, religious zealots with guns and bombs, the Middle Eastern version of the KKK. Maybe I'm reading more into your comment than I should. Maybe you don't have a solid grasp of what they do. I dunno, but it was in poor taste.

We can go on about health care. But if today's public schools are an example of government efficiency, I want none of it. Think of the DMV, but its your doctor. No thanks. FWIW, I pay out of pocket for my health insurance. $2400/yr

You are absolutely right. And Obama has even less experience than him. See the irony?

[Pushed To The Left]

87. The right wing hate machine is very powerful, but the people should be smart enough to see through

the right wing's bullshit. If Obama doesn't crush McCain, either the people are to blame or the right wing will have stolen the election. The thing is, considering the choices and the last 8 years, it shouldn't be close enough to steal.

[Karen O]

92. If Obama loses,

it will be based on experience, or at least the public's perception of it.

[Smitty619]

94. Well what experience does he have? ntxt

[Karen O]

101. He uhh, ... umm

gives fantastic speeches! :)

[FrenchieCat]

113. Y'all some of those dumb voters we keep talking about?

***CAUTION! INFORMATIVE THREAD****

Do you know what Barack Obama has accomplished
in the policy area in his 20 years in public life?

Barack Obama has made many proposals as to what he will do to "CHANGE" our government.
But what has he actually done?

here is some of what Obama has DONE--

Judge Him by His Laws

By Charles Peters
Friday, January 4, 2008; A21

...Since most of Obama's legislation was enacted in Illinois, most of the evidence is found there -- and it has been largely ignored by the media in a kind of Washington snobbery that assumes state legislatures are not to be taken seriously. <>

Consider a bill into which Obama clearly put his heart and soul. The problem he wanted to address was that too many confessions, rather than being voluntary, were coerced -- by beating the daylights out of the accused.

Obama proposed requiring that interrogations and confessions be videotaped.
This seemed likely to stop the beatings, but the bill itself aroused immediate opposition. There were Republicans who were automatically tough on crime and Democrats who feared being thought soft on crime. There were death penalty abolitionists, some of whom worried that Obama's bill, by preventing the execution of innocents, would deprive them of their best argument. Vigorous opposition came from the police, too many of whom had become accustomed to using muscle to "solve" crimes. And the incoming governor, Rod Blagojevich, announced that he was against it.
Obama had his work cut out for him.
<>
The police tried to limit the videotaping to confessions, but Obama, knowing that the beatings were most likely to occur during questioning, fought -- successfully -- to keep interrogations included in the required videotaping.

Then he talked Blagojevich into signing the bill, making Illinois the first state to require such videotaping.
---------
Obama noted that he sponsored successful death-penalty-reform legislation as a lawmaker in Springfield. That legislation, among other things, required the videotaping of homicide interrogations, and he promised to advocate for similar reforms on a national scale.

He backed federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement. He cited Texas as an example of a place where a law allowing people to carry weapons has "malfunctioned" because hundreds of people granted licenses had prior convictions.

said mandatory sentencing laws should be overturned to give judges more discretion and provide more equitable treatment for minorities.
http://www.icadp.org/page236.html
--------------------
Obama cites role in death penalty reform
Barack Obama can honestly claim to have made a difference on a matter of life and death.

While an Illinois state senator, Obama was key in getting the state's notorious death penalty laws changed, including a requirement that in most cases police interrogations involving capital crimes must be recorded.

The changes enacted in 2003 reformed a system that had sent 13 people to death row, only to have them released because they were later determine to be innocent or had been convicted using improper methods.

"Without Barack's energy, imagination and commitment I do not believe the very substantial and meaningful reforms that became law in Illinois would have taken place," said author Scott Turow, a member of the state commission that recommended many of the changes.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/12/obama.death.penalty.ap/


Obama didn't stop there. He played a major role in passing many other bills, including the state's first earned-income tax credit to help the working poor

and the first ethics and campaign finance law in 25 years (a law a Post story said made Illinois "one of the best in the nation on campaign finance disclosure").

Obama's commitment to ethics continued in the U.S. Senate, where he co-authored the new lobbying reform law that, among its hard-to-sell provisions, requires lawmakers to disclose the names of lobbyists who "bundle" contributions for them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303_pf.html

Ethics and Lobbying Reform

Throughout his political career, Barack Obama has been a leader in fighting for open and honest government. During his first year as an Illinois State Senator, he helped lead the fight to pass Illinois' first ethics reform bill in 25 years. As a U.S. Senator, he has spearheaded the effort to clean up Washington in the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal.

Senator Obama is one of the authors of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (S. 2180). The bill would lengthen the cooling off period to two years for lawmakers and staff who seek to become lobbyists, and it would require immediate disclosure as soon as any job negotiations begin.

The bill would open conference committee meetings to the public and require that all bills be posted on the Internet for 24 hours before they can be voted on by the Senate. Finally, the bill would end all lobbyist-funded gifts, meals, and travel and strengthen the Senate office that monitors lobbyist disclosure forms.

In addition, Senator Obama has sponsored three other ethics-related bills:

The Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act (S. 2259)

The bill creates an outside ethics commission to receive complaints from the public on alleged ethics violations by members of Congress, staff, and lobbyists. The commission would have the authority to investigate complaints and present public findings of fact about possible violations to the House and Senate Ethics Committee and Justice Department. By taking the initial fact finding out of the hands of members of Congress, who are often reluctant to investigate their colleagues, the bill ensures prompt and fair disposition of public complaints.

To avoid manipulation of the commission for political purposes, any person filing a complaint that they knew to be false would be subject to a fine and/or imprisonment. No complaints could be filed against a member of Congress for 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election.

The bill has been widely endorsed by reform groups. According to Common Cause, "this legislation would do more to reform ethics and lobbying than any other piece of legislation introduced thus far because it goes to the heart of the problem: enforcement."

Public Citizen praised Senator Obama "for having the courage to challenge the business-as-usual environment on Capitol Hill and introduce far-reaching legislation." Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington stated: "This is the first bill that deals seriously with the lack of oversight and enforcement in the existing congressional ethics process. . . . This bill will help restore Americans' confidence in the integrity of Congress.

The Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act (S. 2261)

The bill sheds light on the almost 16,000 earmarks that were included in spending bills in 2005. Under the bill, all earmarks, including the name of the requestor and a justification for the earmark, would have to be disclosed 72 hours before they could be considered by the full Senate. Senators would be prohibited from advocating for an earmark if they have a financial interest in the project or earmark recipient. And, earmark recipients would have to disclose to an Office of Public Integrity the amount that they have spent on registered lobbyists and the names of those lobbyists.

The Curtailing Lobbyist Effectiveness through Advance Notification, Updates, and Posting Act (The CLEAN UP Act)
(S. 2179)

The bill aimed to improve public access to information about all legislation, including conference reports and appropriations legislation, in particular after hurried, end-of-session negotiations. Conference committee meetings and deliberations would have to be open to the public or televised, and conference reports would have to identify changes made to the bill from the House and Senate versions. Finally, no bill could be considered by the full Senate unless the measure has been made available to all Senators and the general public on the Internet for at least 72 hours.

PLUS HE WAS KEY IN THE FOLLOWING......

Destroying Surplus and Unguarded Conventional Weapons

After visiting weapons stockpiles in Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan, Senators Lugar and Obama introduced S. 2566, which would expand the cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons.

cosponsored Dru's Law (S. 792)

which created a nationwide sex offender database and requires greater monitoring of sex offenders upon their release from prison. The bill passed the Senate on July 28, 2005.

He also cosponsored the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. This bill increases the penalties for sex crimes against children under the age of 12, and creates a national Internet site known as the National Sex Offender Public Registry. The bill will also provide grants to local law enforcement to assist in preventing and investigating sex crimes against minors.

Cosponsored the extension of Violence Against Women Act
(S. 1197)

which passed the Senate on October 4, 2005, and was signed into law. The Act provides increased funds to law enforcement to combat violence against women. It also establishes a sexual assault services program and provides grants for education programs to prevent domestic violence and encourage reporting of abuses.

The Senate Immigration Bill

Senator Obama played a key role in the crafting of the immigration reform bill that the Senate passed in May 2006. The bill, which President Bush supports, would provide more funds and technology for border security and prevent employers from skirting our laws by hiring illegal immigrants. The bill also would provide immigrants who are now contributing and responsible members of society an opportunity to remain in the country and earn citizenship. But not all illegal immigrants would be guaranteed the right to remain in the U.S. under this proposal; they would first have to pay a substantial fine and back taxes, learn English, satisfy a work requirement, and pass a criminal background check.

Senator Obama offered three amendments that were included in the Senate bill. The first amendment strengthens the requirement that a job be offered at a prevailing wage to American workers before it is offered to a guestworker. The second amendment makes it simple, but mandatory, for employers to verify that their employees are legally eligible to work in the United States. And the third amendment authorizes $3 million a year for the FBI to improve the speed and accuracy of the background checks required for immigrants seeking to become citizens.

Amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act

which passed the EPW Committee on July 20, 2005. The Obama amendment provides $37.5 million over the next five years to protect the country's drinking water from a terrorist attack. It also instructs Environmental Protection Agency and the Centers for Disease Control to develop the tools needed by drinking water systems to detect and respond to the introduction of biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants by terrorists.

Greater Funding for Veterans Health Care

As early as February 2005, Senator Obama warned of a shortfall in the VA budget. Four months later, the VA reported that in fact it had more than a $1 billion shortfall. Senator Obama cosponsored a bill that led to a $1.5 billion increase in veterans' medical care. During the debate on the Fiscal Year 2007 budget, Senator Obama cosponsored measures that would have provided additional funding increases for veterans.

In September 2006, Senator Obama introduced the Lane Evans Veterans Health and Benefits Improvement Act (S. 3988) to improve the VA’s planning process to avoid budget shortfalls in the future. The bill requires the VA and the Department of Defense to work together and share data so that we know precisely how many troops will be returning home and entering the VA system.

Homeless Veterans

Every year, 400,000 veterans across the country, including an estimated 38,000 in Chicago, spend some time living on the streets. Senator Obama has been a leader in fighting homelessness among veterans. He authored the Sheltering All Veterans Everywhere Act (SAVE Act) (S. 1180) to strengthen and expand federal homeless veteran programs that serve over 100,000 homeless veterans annually. During the debate on the Fiscal Year 2007 budget, Senator Obama passed an amendment to increase funding for homeless veterans programs by $40 million. These funds would benefit programs that provide food, clothing, mental health and substance abuse counseling, and employment and housing assistance to homeless veterans.

In June 2006, Senator Obama introduced the Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475), which would expand access to long-term affordable housing for homeless veterans by setting aside $225 million to purchase, build or rehabilitate homes and apartments for veterans. The legislation would also greatly expand existing veterans rental assistance programs and create a new office within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to coordinate services to homeless veterans.

Food for Recovering Soldiers

Senator Obama introduced an amendment that became law providing food services to wounded veterans receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services at military hospitals. Previously, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and TBI
Senator Obama fought a VA proposal that would have required a reexamination of all PTSD cases in which full benefits were granted. He and Senator Durbin passed an amendment that has become law preventing the VA from conducting a review of cases, without first providing Congress with a complete report regarding the implementation of such review. In November 2005, the VA announced that it was abandoning its planned review.

Senator Obama passed an amendment to ensure that all service members returning from Iraq are properly screened for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). TBI is being called the signature injury of the Iraq war. The blast from improvised explosive devices can jar the brain, causing bruising or permanent damage. Concussions can have huge health effects including slowed thinking, headaches, memory loss, sleep disturbance, attention and concentration deficits, and irritability.

Easing the Transition to the VA Senator Obama passed an amendment that became law requiring the Department of Defense (DOD) to report to Congress on the delayed development of an electronic medical records system compatible with the VA's electronic medical records system. DOD's delay in developing such a system has created obstacles for service members transitioning into the VA health care system.

In September 2006, Senator Obama introduced the Lane Evans Veterans Health and Benefits Improvement Act (S. 3988) which would help veterans transition from the DOD health system to the VA system by extending the window in which new veterans can get mental health care from two years to five years. The Lane Evans bill also would improve transition services for members of the National Guard and Reserves.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633

Senate Passes Kerry-Obama Legislation to Close KBR Tax Loophole, Provide Tax Relief for Troops

Thursday, May 22, 2008
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Senators John Kerry and Barack Obama today announced that the Senate passed the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008 (The "HEART Act"). The Act would provide tax relief to the men and women in our nation's armed services and others volunteering service on behalf of the United States, including Peace Corps volunteers and AmeriCorps volunteers - and is paid for by the Kerry-Obama tax reform that closed the tax loophole that allowed defense contractor KBR to avoid paying its fair share of taxes. The Act passed the House yesterday and now goes to the President for his signature.

Kerry and Obama were instrumental in ensuring that the funds that will be used to pay for these benefits came from defense contractors that were not paying their fair share of taxes. In March, they introduced the Fair Share Act of 2008 to close the loophole that had allowed KBR to fleece the American taxpayer by almost $100 million a year. It was discovered that KBR and another defense contractor have avoided paying their fair share of Social Security and Medicare taxes by creating shell companies in the Cayman Islands. The Fair Share Act of 2008 will end the practice of U.S. government contractors setting up sham companies in foreign jurisdictions to avoid payroll taxes.
http://obama.senate.gov/press/080522-senate_passes_k/

Global Poverty Act of 2007

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Congressman Adam Smith (D-WA) today hailed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's passage of the Global Poverty Act (S.2433), which requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community, businesses and NGOs. This legislation was introduced in December. Smith and Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) sponsored the House version of the bill (H.R. 1302), which passed the House last September.
http://obama.senate.gov /

Legislation would aim to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015

Barack Obama’s record on rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina.

Sept. 2, 2005: Obama holds press conference urging Illinoisans to contribute to the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts.

Sept. 5, 2005: Obama goes to Houston to visit evacuees with Presidents Clinton and Bush.

Sept. 7, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a national emergency family locator system

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a National Emergency Volunteers Corps.

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Katrina Emergency Relief Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Harry Reid

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Hurricane Katrina Bankruptcy Relief and Community Protection Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Russ Feingold

Sept. 12, 2005: Obama introduces legislation requiring states to create an emergency evacuation plan for society’s most vulnerable

Sept. 15, 2005: Obama issues public response to President Bush’s speech about Gulf Coast rebuilding.

Sept. 21, 2005: Obama co-sponsors bill to establish a Katrina commission to investigate response to the disaster introduced by Hillary Clinton

Sept. 21, 2005: Obama appears on NPR to discuss the role of poverty in Hurricane Katrina.

Sept. 22, 2005: Obama and Coburn’s Hurricane Katrina financial oversight bill unanimously passes Senate committee.

Sept. 22, 2005: Obama’s amendment requiring evacuation plans unanimously passes Senate committee.

Sept. 28, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement about the need for a Chief Financial Officer to oversee the financial mismanagement and suspicious contracts occurring in the reconstruction process

Sept. 29, 2005: Obama and Coburn investigate possible FEMA refusal of free cruise ship offer

Oct. 6, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement on FEMA Decision to re-bid Katrina contracts

Oct. 6, 2005: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Infrastructure Redevelopment and Recovery Act of 2005.

Oct. 21, 2005: Obama releases statement decrying the extension of FEMA director, Michael “Brownie” Brown’s contract. Obama calls Brown’s contract extension, “unconscionable.”

Nov. 17, 2005: Obama and Coburn introduce legislation asking FEMA to immediately re-bid all Katrina reconstruction contracts.

Feb. 1, 2006: Obama gives Senate floor speech on his legislation to help children affected by Hurricane Katrina

Feb. 2, 2006: Obama introduces legislation to help low-income children affected by Hurricane Katrina

Feb. 23, 2006: Obama issues statement responding to a White House report on Hurricane Katrina. Obama noted that the top two recommendations that the report had for the federal government were initiatives he had been working on since immediately after the storm hit. Obama called the administration’s response “delinquent.”

May 2, 2006: Obama gives speech about no-bid contracts in Hurricane Katrina reconstruction

May 4, 2006: Obama’s legislation to end no-bid contracts for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction passed the Senate.

June 15, 2006: Obama and Coburn announce legislation to require amendment to create competitive bidding for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction for federal contracts over $500,000. Although it passed previously, the language was stripped in conference.

June 15, 2006: Obama releases podcast about his pending Katrina reconstruction legislation in the Senate.

June 16, 2006: Obama and Coburn get no-bid Hurricane Katrina reconstruction amendment into Department of Defense authorization bill.

July 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn’s legislation to end abuse of no-bid contracts passes senate as amendment to Department of Defense authorization bill.

August 11, 2006: Obama visits Xavier University in New Orleans to give Commencement address

August 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn ask FEMA to address ballooning no-bid contracts for Gulf Coast reconstruction

Sept. 29, 2006: Obama and Coburn legislation to prevent abuse of no-bid contracts in the wake of disaster passes Senate to be sent to President’s desk to become law.

Feb. 2007-Present: As Obama begins his Presidential campaign he references Katrina as a part of his stump speech as he travels around the country in his familiar line, “That we are not a country which preaches compassion and justice to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of a major American city. That is not who we are.”

June 20, 2007: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act of 2007 introduced by Senator Chris Dodd.

July 27, 2007: Obama and colleagues get a measure in the Homeland Security bill that will
investigate FEMA trailers that may contain the toxic chemical, formaldehyde.

Aug. 26, 2007: Obama outlines a detailed Hurricane Katrina recovery plan.

December 18, 2007: Obama calls on President Bush to protect affordable housing in New Orleans

February 16, 2008: Obama releases statement on toxic Gulf Coast trailers
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/when-the-cameras-are-off-barack-obamas-hurricane-katrina-record/

Will OBAMA uphold the constitution?

Obama Says Gitmo Facility Should Close

The Democratic presidential hopeful pledged to work side-by-side with the rest of the world on issues like nuclear proliferation, poverty, economic development in Latin America and the violence in Darfur.

"While we're at it," he said, "we're going to close Guantanamo. And we're going to restore habeas corpus. ... We're going to lead by example _ by not just word but by deed. That's our vision for the future."

Habeas corpus is a tenet of the Constitution that protects people from unlawful imprisonment
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/24/AR2007062401046.html

---------------

Human Rights Should Be Bigger than Politics

Senator Barack Obama delivered this speech on the floor of the US Senate, in reaction to Senate passage of S. 3930, Military Commissions Act of 2006, which approved US torture of detainees and strips Constitutional rights away from detainees.
Senator Obama decries the placement of politics over human rights, and condemns S. 3930. He states, "This is not how a serious Administration would approach the problem of terrorism."
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaTorture.htm

excerpts from Obama's statement...

In the five years that the President's system of military tribunals has existed, not one terrorist has been tried. Not one has been convicted. And in the end, the Supreme Court of the United found the whole thing unconstitutional, which is why we're here today.

We could have fixed all of this in a way that allows us to detain and interrogate and try suspected terrorists while still protecting the accidentally accused from spending their lives locked away in Guantanamo Bay. Easily. This was not an either-or question.

Instead of allowing this President - or any President - to decide what does and does not constitute torture, we could have left the definition up to our own laws and to the Geneva Conventions, as we would have if we passed the bill that the Armed Services committee originally offered.

Instead of detainees arriving at Guantanamo and facing a Combatant Status Review Tribunal that allows them no real chance to prove their innocence with evidence or a lawyer, we could have developed a real military system of justice that would sort out the suspected terrorists from the accidentally accused.

And instead of not just suspending, but eliminating, the right of habeas corpus - the seven century-old right of individuals to challenge the terms of their own detention, we could have given the accused one chance - one single chance - to ask the government why they are being held and what they are being charged with.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaTorture.htm

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html
For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)

It's hardly a new stance for Obama, who has made similar statements in previous campaign speeches, but mention of the issue in a stump speech, alongside more frequently discussed topics like Iraq and education, may give some clue to his priorities.

STRONG RECORD ON ELECTION RIGHTS AND ELECTION REFORM

In our own Technology Voters' Guide, when asked whether he supports shielding telecommunications and Internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of illegal spying, Obama gave us a one-word response: "No."

Including this:
In 1992, was the Director of Illinois Project VOTE, which registered approximately 150,000 mostly Democratic voters in Chicago's Cook County
Opposes the death penalty and school vouchers
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511

I believe that with Barack Obama as President, we will get meaningful Election reforms passed through the Congress, and it is my opinion that this issue is just if not more important than the rest of the issues being offered during this election.

Barack as a Constitutional Law Expert and an advocate for Civil Rights is the leader that will get this done for us.

----------------------

OBAMA'S US SENATE RECORD:

S.1975 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.

Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/8/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Committees: Senate Rules and Administration
Latest Major Action: 11/8/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

---------------------

S.4102 : A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the use of telecommunications devices for the purposes of preventing or obstructing the broadcast or exchange of election-related information.

Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 12/7/2006) Cosponsors (None) Committees: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Latest Major Action: 12/7/2006 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
--------------------

S.4069 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.

Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/16/2006) Cosponsors (4)
Committees: Senate Rules and Administration
Latest Major Action: 11/16/2006 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
--------------------

Obama's Rewards

$13,000 a year, plus $2,000 for a car--a beat-up blue Honda Civic, which Obama drove for the next three years organizing more than twenty congregations to change their neighborhoods.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070416/moberg

Obama's organizing history may give few clues about what policies he would pursue as President, but Obama the presidential candidate still shows his roots--a faith in ordinary citizens, a quest for common ground and a pragmatic inclination toward defining issues in winnable ways.

Even when Obama was an organizer, Augustine-Herron told him he would be the nation's first black President. Now the Rev. Alvin Love, whom Obama recruited to DCP, looks at his candidacy and says, "Everything I see reflects that community organizing experience. I see the consensus-building, his connection to people and listening to their needs and trying to find common ground. I think at his heart Barack is a community organizer. I think what he's doing now is that. It's just a larger community to be organized."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070416/moberg

What Obama has done in the past, not including what he has done thus far during the primaries; bringing new voters into the frey.

Vote of Confidence
A huge black turnout in November 1992 altered Chicago's electoral landscape—and raised a new political star: a 31-year-old lawyer named Barack Obama.

In the final, climactic buildup to November's general election, with George Bush gaining ground on Bill Clinton in Illinois and the once-unstoppable campaign of senatorial candidate Carol Moseley Braun embroiled in allegations about her mother's Medicare liability, one of the most important local stories managed to go virtually unreported: The number of new voter registrations before the election hit an all-time high. And the majority of those new voters were black. More than 150,000 new African-American voters were added to the city's rolls. In fact, for the first time in Chicago's history-including the heyday of Harold Washington-voter registrations in the 19 predominantly black wards outnumbered those in the city's 19 predominantly white ethnic wards, 676,000 to 526,000.

None of this, of course, was accidental. The most effective minority voter registration drive in memory was the result of careful handiwork by Project Vote!, the local chapter of a not-for-profit national organization.

"It was the most efficient campaign I have seen in my 20 years in politics," says Sam Burrell, alderman of the West Side's 29th Ward and a veteran of many registration drives.

At the head of this effort was a little-known 31-year-old African-American lawyer, community organizer, and writer: Barack Obama.

To understand the full implications of Obama's effort, you first need to understand how voter registration often has worked in Chicago. The Regular Democratic Party spearheaded most drives, doing so using one primary motivator: money. The party would offer bounties to registrars for every new voter they signed up (typically a dollar per registration).

The campaigns did produce new voters. "But bounty systems don't really promote participation," says David Orr, the Cook County clerk, whose office is responsible for voter registration efforts in the Cook County suburbs. "When the money dries up, the voters drop out." Nor did the Democratic Party always vigorously push registration among minorities, Orr says. "It's not that they discouraged it. They just never worked hard to ensure it would happen."
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence

-----------------------
Project Vote is the voter-mobilization arm of ACORN. It is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization whose professed purpose is to carry out "non-partisan" voter registration drives; to counsel voters on their rights; and to litigate on behalf of voting rights -- focusing on the rights of the poor and the "disenfranchised."

Project Vote’s major program areas include the following:

Voter Participation Program: “, Project Vote has helped more than 4 million Americans in low-income and minority neighborhoods register to vote, including 1.1 million in 2003-04. In the same period, Project Vote reached more than 2.3 million low-income and minority voters to educate them about the importance of voting. Our methodology is based on face-to-face contact between voters and trusted community messengers, generally a representative of a local community organization.”





This compliments this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4678548

[krispos42]

114. Dammit, man!

Make that it's own OP!

:applause:

[Sparkly]

95. Wow -- I was just thinking the very same thing

and was going to post it in reply to a thread about McCain's gains last week.

WTF is wrong with this country? At some point, it's not even the media's fault. In other countries, people work to the bone for survival yet have the time and energy for a thought like, "I want this to change." It's just not complicated.

Yes, the media has treated game shows as if they were important, and politics as if they were game shows. But in this country, information is available. People aren't simply victims. There is choice. I am AMAZED at the sheer STUPIDITY of the American public. This race shouldn't even be CLOSE -- nor should either of the past two.

I swear to GOD if they get more opportunity, I'm looking for work in other countries, to get out while I still can. This country's downhill slide is just escalating -- and I agree with you that ultimately, it's the fault of a sleepy, comfortable, self-centered, STUPID public.

[AdHocSolver]

110. The American "system" has been designed to "dumb down" the populace.

The media, both news and entertainment, the "brainless" advertising, and the educational system in this country are all designed to produce knee-jerk responses in the people.

The person who asks questions, wants to think before acting, or who wants to do research before making a decision is frowned upon and belittled by "authority" figures.

It is the corporate mentality that rules on the job, in school, and in our private lives. Asking for a clarification amounts to challenging whomever you are dealing with. Most people don't have the fortitude to do so when dealing with a teacher or a boss, or even socially.

Read about the authoritarian personality. Bill O'Reilly is an imbecile with a megaphone. However, he is an authority figure to millions of people. It is a Pavlovian response type of relationship. Many preachers, TV personalities, and business executives spout all kinds of nonsense. They are "leaders" to millions of people.

The No-Child-Left-Behind testing demonstrates how this mentality is facilitated. The "authorities" develop a mind-numbing test that is imposed on everyone across the board. The authorities threaten to take away funding to any school in which a majority of students fail the test. So the teachers and school administration neglect "real" teaching to get students ready for the test. The test is standardized gibberish. It ensures that students fill their minds with whatever crap is on the test, and what they actually "learn" is that instant regurgitation of mindless crap amounts to "learning".

This "lesson" is carried over into all areas of life. Thinking, pondering anything, becomes a sign of lack of intelligence, or a lack of education. Movies, TV shows, and computer games in which quick reflexes take precedence over thoughtfulness in order to be entertained, or to "win", becomes the norm.

The average American has so far been getting along on making snap decisions. Spending more than they could afford on a gas-guzzling SUV (to keep up with the Joneses), buying a bigger house than they could afford because that low interest balloon mortgage provides low payments, putting that $3,500 54-inch plasma TV on the old credit card hasn't hurt too much because they have a good job.

Then the company they work for starts offshoring jobs, laying off employees, ups their health insurance premiums and these Americans are so surprised. Even though this has been happening for years, did the average American put some savings away for bad times. Naw! This course of action would have required thinking through a situation, and the average American is too busy to stop and think.

The economy is tanking and people are beginning to become aware of it. Does that mean they are going to start thinking? Probably not. "Drill in ANWAR", say the "experts", and the new supply will lower gas prices. This is pure nonsense, but a lot of people believe it, as they still make up their minds in a knee-jerk fashion by listening to any gibberish spouted by "authority" figures.

When they are unemployed, they will have time to think about how it came about. However, they still may not come to the correct understanding. Americans weren't born stupid. They were trained by the media and the educational system to learn to be stupid. They were trained to see themselves not as victims of the corporate system, but as failures.

Yet, they don't blame the corporate system. They blame, for example, affirmative action, or illegal immigrants, or foreign labor, or "liberals".

However, I disagree with your diagnosis of the public. Self-centered they are. Exhausted, rather than sleepy. The public is hyperactive on caffeine, nicotine, booze, or media to ease their abject fear of the future. They fear "failure", "rejection", being left behind in the "rat race", "ridicule". This is why gambling is so popular in the U.S. Americans get "high" to ease their fear. They are fearful, because they cannot think clearly. They cannot think clearly because they are on a mental treadmill. They are afraid to stop and get off.

This also explains the "success" of negative campaigning. Average Americans are a fearful lot, and easily jerked around. Peel away the self-centeredness, the arrogance, and the hypocrisy and you see what you are dealing with: a very fearful person. This description may not provide a solution. However, I present it to, hopefully, provide some understanding.

[kurtboss]

99. No, blame the Democrats

This election is there for the taking. We have a great candidate with virtually no negatives. If Obama loses it's because the Democratic establishment still doesn't know how to market/combat Rovian politics.

[Smitty619]

103. That's what I said, and some people here think I am an ignorant, bigoted American. ntxt

[McCamy Taylor]

100. Sorry, if he loses it will be his own fault. That is part of he nominee's job, getting elected.

[kurtboss]

107. He Can't Go Negative

Part of the problem with being a black candidate. The positive is big AA and youth turnout. But, sad as it is, he has to be constantly mindful not to get aggressive or lose his temper.

Which is why he, especially needs a good Democratic Party effort. Which is MIA so far. (And honestly, every candidate should have groups like the GOP does to sling dirt and handle the media...it just is particularly necessary in this election.)

[depakid]

112. If he takes that advice, then he will likely lose- just like past candidates

and in that event, it will indeed be his "fault" for failing to learn from past campaigns' mistakes.

[paparush]

105. Blame M$M for not reporting election fraud. Blame Neocons for willingness to steal elections

Blame 40% of eligible voters who don't vote.
Blame Republican officials who purge voter rolls and make rules prohibiting statewide recounts.

And yes..blame Joe and Jane Six Pack for nodding and drooling their way to ruin.

[bridgit]

106. You know what? I agree after all. Blame the black people, the red people, the 'yellow' people...

the brown people, the pink people, the white people, the peaches & creme people, the people in between, the 'pure breeds', the mutts, the mud bloods, the phony noble, and all the people that think they even know what America is...BLAME THEM ALL!! Its ours to lose choke on it!! :thumbsup: