If you do happen to have a linkedin.com profile join the Hillary Group and proudly show your Hillary Linkedin Badge on your profile.
Click Here to join the Hillary Linkedin Group
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
HRC, The Next FDR?
I was reading today's new Daily Kos article on Hillary Clinton (or as many have began referring to her as, HRC - Which I like a lot by the way), and it was kind of compelling. The comparison of "HRC" and FDR is accurate , and it's telling.
See the following excerpt from the article:
"Basically, Hillary is doing her part to continue building upon the good legacy that FDR left us.
FDR had more than just a great stump speech, and promises. He had what it took to make things happen, and so does "HRC!"
See the following excerpt from the article:
"Basically, Hillary is doing her part to continue building upon the good legacy that FDR left us.
As I have said before, Hillary is strongly committed to changing course and putting an end to the disastrous legacy that Bush & Cheney are leaving us. Hillary is committing to a true universal health care plan that will cover everyone, lower costs systemwide, and enact enact tough regulations on the insurance industry. Hillary is committing to a truly bold and revolutionary climate action and energy indpendence plan that will take on our addiction to fossil fuels and go far and beyond even our own state plan in California in tackling the climate crisis. Hillary has put forth a comprehensive plan to end Bush's disastrous Iraq Occupation, and she has matched her words with action when it comes to ending Bush's era of neocon-style "cowboy diplomacy". When it comes to fighting for a bold agenda of progressive change and building upon all of FDR's good work, Hillary truly is "our girl".
And you know what makes all of this even better? Like FDR, Hillary now has the strength, the courage, and the experience to deliver on her agenda of progressive change. Hillary obviously has the domestic and foreign policy experience to hit the ground running as soon as she's sworn in as our next President. And of course, she also has the know-how to make proposed policy into enacted law."
----------------
Ya know it's one thing to talk a good talk, but HRC has what it takes to stand up and fight for what's right, and ACTUALLY get things done. I know I for one am so sick of politicians talking, and doing nothing. I firmly believe if we elect Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as president, she will roll up her sleeves and do what it truly takes to put the USA back on a better course.FDR had more than just a great stump speech, and promises. He had what it took to make things happen, and so does "HRC!"
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
This Is The Hillary We Know!!
Tom Vilsack on Hillary
Helping the National Guard and Reserves get Health Insurance
The Hillary We Know!!
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Help Make 2008 Possible
Click Here to Add A Hillary Banner To Your Profile
Please Repost
Helping the National Guard and Reserves get Health Insurance
The Hillary We Know!!
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Help Make 2008 Possible
Click Here to Add A Hillary Banner To Your Profile
Please Repost
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Hope for America
Tonight, as I enjoy being finished with finals for this quarter, I think of how lucky I am to be able to receive higher education. In fact, much of my education, thankfully is paid for by the state of California (not all of it) and the federal Pell Grant. It makes someone like me, who's parents were never financially able to assist me with my education, get the education I need to further my life.
Man, I'm lucky. To be a citizen of this great country, the United States of America. Fortunate to have a great family who loves me unconditionally, and me the same them. To live where I have the freedom to be whatever religion I want, if any at all. We have a lot to be thankful for, as citizens of this great land. I would never want to live any other place. I truly feel that our country, is more than just land and shores, but that it has a "soul." I really feel that. It's the people who make this great country, the leaders, the teachers, Moms and Dads, Grandparents, our friends, everyone...
I'm optimistic about the future of our country. I believe our country has gone down a dangerous road for the last 7+ years, and we must do what it takes to save the United States of America. We MUST let the Republicans know, that Democrats are united in our stance to take back this country for the PEOPLE! We will fight them, tooth and nail, and we will win!
The 2006 Midterm Congressional Elections are just a HINT of the victories we will enjoy! I'm happy that I have a chance to make history, and elect the first woman president of the USA. But, Hillary Clinton is much more than just a woman running for president. She IS who we need to bring this country back on the right course. It DOES matter, though, that she's a woman. It's not the sole factor that qualifies her for the great office of the presidency, but it matters. Imagine the signal we can send to the world. We talk about America being the country of tolerance, and a place where EVERYONE in this land can obtain their dreams (the American Dream) if they truly work for it. Imagine the message we could send to the world electing a female president! A president who will restore our standing in the World, make sure all of our citizens are taken care of, and protect us from the imminent threats that forever loom!
Great citizens of this nation, be positive and optimistic, for we have a GREAT opportunity to make history this year! Let's make it together, WE CAN DO IT!!
Chris McLeod
Man, I'm lucky. To be a citizen of this great country, the United States of America. Fortunate to have a great family who loves me unconditionally, and me the same them. To live where I have the freedom to be whatever religion I want, if any at all. We have a lot to be thankful for, as citizens of this great land. I would never want to live any other place. I truly feel that our country, is more than just land and shores, but that it has a "soul." I really feel that. It's the people who make this great country, the leaders, the teachers, Moms and Dads, Grandparents, our friends, everyone...
I'm optimistic about the future of our country. I believe our country has gone down a dangerous road for the last 7+ years, and we must do what it takes to save the United States of America. We MUST let the Republicans know, that Democrats are united in our stance to take back this country for the PEOPLE! We will fight them, tooth and nail, and we will win!
The 2006 Midterm Congressional Elections are just a HINT of the victories we will enjoy! I'm happy that I have a chance to make history, and elect the first woman president of the USA. But, Hillary Clinton is much more than just a woman running for president. She IS who we need to bring this country back on the right course. It DOES matter, though, that she's a woman. It's not the sole factor that qualifies her for the great office of the presidency, but it matters. Imagine the signal we can send to the world. We talk about America being the country of tolerance, and a place where EVERYONE in this land can obtain their dreams (the American Dream) if they truly work for it. Imagine the message we could send to the world electing a female president! A president who will restore our standing in the World, make sure all of our citizens are taken care of, and protect us from the imminent threats that forever loom!
Great citizens of this nation, be positive and optimistic, for we have a GREAT opportunity to make history this year! Let's make it together, WE CAN DO IT!!
Chris McLeod
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Official Chris Memo to President Bush and Congress - "We won the war"
Whether it be 2007, or 2017, I don't think some Americans will ever feel comfortable with us leaving Iraq. Why? Because they see it as "Retreat," or "Defeat." Let's remind those folks of some facts.
The Occupation of Iraq, also known as "Operation Iraqi Freedom," began March 20th, 2003. In a few months, we will hit the very significant 5 yr mark since the invasion of Iraq. President Bush and his administration told us of a threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In 1991 Iraq agreed to a UN resolution to give up their weapons of mass destruction. Since 1991 weapons inspectors had been in Iraq, looking for them. There were times in the late 90s where Saddam Hussein blocked inspectors. After they had been there 5+ yrs and found nothing. Kinda like looking for drugs in a car for 5 yrs, and when someone says "ok can you stop looking now?" you say they are not "Allowing" you to properly search.
The Iraq Survey Group concluded in 2005 that Iraq had ended it's WMD operations in 1991. There was no evidence of a connection between Al Qaeda (those who coordinated the attacks of 9/11) and Saddam's administration.
On May 1st, 2003 President Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln, and declared an end to major combat missions in Iraq. He stood in front of a sign that read "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." Oh boy, imagine if it had truly "ended" there. Just two months after the beginning of the invasions. Not even hundreds of our brave men and women killed in combat yet.
On December 13, 2003 Saddam Hussein, was captured by coaltion forces. Ok, I can deal with that. 8 months after the beginning of the occupation, we have a true "mission accomplished." If Saddam was REALLY seeking more WMD like Bush's folks claimed, then it should have TRULY been over when he was finally captured and taken out of power once and for all...but was it? No...
After Saddam's capture, many Iraqis expected us to leave, atleast for the most part. We lived up to our promises, so why wouldn't we? Instead of doing that, we persued Iraq more. The insurgency, as it's known now, really took off in 2004. Radical islamic terrorists became further inflamed, and flooded the region like never before. They came from all over, taking advantage of Iraq's newly unstable borders.
On January 21, 2005 Iraqi's elected an interim government. Ok there goes our "Spreading Democracy around the world" goal.
Ok let's recap, it's January 31st, 2005:
Made sure they didn't have WMD - Check
Saddam captured, out of power - Check
Iraqis have free and democratic elections - Check
UGHHHHHHH January 31st 2005, was nearly 3 YEARS ago. Isn't something wrong with this picture? Am I just crazy?
By 2006 Iraq had a PERMANENT and active government.
Here we are, nearly December of 2007. President Bush issued a "surge" of troops in the beginning of the year. He added more than 20,000 US forces to Iraq. That HAS seemed to curb some of the violence in the region. Or atleast, reduce the number of US deaths nonetheless. But we're not the world police. There is violence all over the world, we can't stop violence from existing. We can try to assist in curbing the violence from a non-combat role though.
Soldiers' tours of duty have now been extended beyond imagination in some cases. Tours are now 16 months, instead of the usual 12 months. Our military is bogged down in a civil war in Iraq. A civil war that may never go away as long as we are occupying their country.
So where does all this lead us? Well, in my opinion, it's simply that someone is confused. I say we already "won." It's not "retreat" if we leave now, it's not a "defeat." That's WHAT YOU DO when you win a war. Who didn't get the memo?
We took out Saddam Hussein and made sure a dictator regime didn't have access to WMD (We should have made sure of that before invading, but that's a different story!), we helped Iraqis to free and fair elections, we WON. At least in the sense that we accomplished our main goals. That's what you do, you accomplish your goals, and you go home.
Please someone deliver the memo to President Bush and the Republicans in Congress. The war is over, we aren't retreating, we won a long time ago, someone just forgot!
Let's make the most of our military. The USA is the greatest country in the world. I appreciate the sacrifices of the brave men and women who have fought for our country and done the missions given to them, no matter what they are. We need to make the most of the military.
It's not that they aren't CAPABLE of finding Osama Bin Laden, they aren't being utilized in that area. It's not that they aren't capable of defending our OWN borders from the possible threat of terrorism at home, they just aren't being asked to do it. It's not that they aren't capable of helping to stop the genocides in Darfur, we aren't asking them to. There's so much we need them to do. Let them do their jobs, let them protect the interests of the United States of America around the world. Let's elect a leader who will properly utilize our military, and who will see a win as a win, collect our medals, and go home till the next fight. Let's elect Senator Hillary Clinton. Thank you.
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
The Occupation of Iraq, also known as "Operation Iraqi Freedom," began March 20th, 2003. In a few months, we will hit the very significant 5 yr mark since the invasion of Iraq. President Bush and his administration told us of a threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In 1991 Iraq agreed to a UN resolution to give up their weapons of mass destruction. Since 1991 weapons inspectors had been in Iraq, looking for them. There were times in the late 90s where Saddam Hussein blocked inspectors. After they had been there 5+ yrs and found nothing. Kinda like looking for drugs in a car for 5 yrs, and when someone says "ok can you stop looking now?" you say they are not "Allowing" you to properly search.
The Iraq Survey Group concluded in 2005 that Iraq had ended it's WMD operations in 1991. There was no evidence of a connection between Al Qaeda (those who coordinated the attacks of 9/11) and Saddam's administration.
On May 1st, 2003 President Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln, and declared an end to major combat missions in Iraq. He stood in front of a sign that read "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." Oh boy, imagine if it had truly "ended" there. Just two months after the beginning of the invasions. Not even hundreds of our brave men and women killed in combat yet.
On December 13, 2003 Saddam Hussein, was captured by coaltion forces. Ok, I can deal with that. 8 months after the beginning of the occupation, we have a true "mission accomplished." If Saddam was REALLY seeking more WMD like Bush's folks claimed, then it should have TRULY been over when he was finally captured and taken out of power once and for all...but was it? No...
After Saddam's capture, many Iraqis expected us to leave, atleast for the most part. We lived up to our promises, so why wouldn't we? Instead of doing that, we persued Iraq more. The insurgency, as it's known now, really took off in 2004. Radical islamic terrorists became further inflamed, and flooded the region like never before. They came from all over, taking advantage of Iraq's newly unstable borders.
On January 21, 2005 Iraqi's elected an interim government. Ok there goes our "Spreading Democracy around the world" goal.
Ok let's recap, it's January 31st, 2005:
Made sure they didn't have WMD - Check
Saddam captured, out of power - Check
Iraqis have free and democratic elections - Check
UGHHHHHHH January 31st 2005, was nearly 3 YEARS ago. Isn't something wrong with this picture? Am I just crazy?
By 2006 Iraq had a PERMANENT and active government.
Here we are, nearly December of 2007. President Bush issued a "surge" of troops in the beginning of the year. He added more than 20,000 US forces to Iraq. That HAS seemed to curb some of the violence in the region. Or atleast, reduce the number of US deaths nonetheless. But we're not the world police. There is violence all over the world, we can't stop violence from existing. We can try to assist in curbing the violence from a non-combat role though.
Soldiers' tours of duty have now been extended beyond imagination in some cases. Tours are now 16 months, instead of the usual 12 months. Our military is bogged down in a civil war in Iraq. A civil war that may never go away as long as we are occupying their country.
So where does all this lead us? Well, in my opinion, it's simply that someone is confused. I say we already "won." It's not "retreat" if we leave now, it's not a "defeat." That's WHAT YOU DO when you win a war. Who didn't get the memo?
We took out Saddam Hussein and made sure a dictator regime didn't have access to WMD (We should have made sure of that before invading, but that's a different story!), we helped Iraqis to free and fair elections, we WON. At least in the sense that we accomplished our main goals. That's what you do, you accomplish your goals, and you go home.
Please someone deliver the memo to President Bush and the Republicans in Congress. The war is over, we aren't retreating, we won a long time ago, someone just forgot!
Let's make the most of our military. The USA is the greatest country in the world. I appreciate the sacrifices of the brave men and women who have fought for our country and done the missions given to them, no matter what they are. We need to make the most of the military.
It's not that they aren't CAPABLE of finding Osama Bin Laden, they aren't being utilized in that area. It's not that they aren't capable of defending our OWN borders from the possible threat of terrorism at home, they just aren't being asked to do it. It's not that they aren't capable of helping to stop the genocides in Darfur, we aren't asking them to. There's so much we need them to do. Let them do their jobs, let them protect the interests of the United States of America around the world. Let's elect a leader who will properly utilize our military, and who will see a win as a win, collect our medals, and go home till the next fight. Let's elect Senator Hillary Clinton. Thank you.
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
New Poll, HRC beating all Republican candidates
Yes, I know it's nearly a year until the 2008 Presidential election. And we haven't even had the primaries and caucuses yet. BUT, they are sure coming close. So it's not SO premature to start thinking about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as our Democratic candidate in 2008. We have a lot of work to do before then, especially in Iowa, but nevertheless, this news is exciting.
Check out the following excerpts from a new (11-26-07) Gallup article, www.gallup.com:
"Clinton -- the dominant front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination -- would appear to have at least a slight advantage over any Republican candidate among registered voters if the election were held today."
"She has a five-point edge over Giuliani (49% to 44%) and a six-point edge over McCain (50% to 44%). Clinton runs much more strongly against the lesser-known Thompson (53% to 40%) and Romney (54% to 38%)."
"Gallup previously tested these same matchups in June (Clinton versus Giuliani, McCain, and Romney) and July (Clinton versus Thompson). Since then, Clinton's standing against Giuliani, McCain, and Romney has remained about the same, while she now fares much better against Thompson. In July, 48% of registered voters preferred Clinton and 45% Thompson."
The truth is, while Hillary's Democratic opponents try to say she is not "electable," the fact remains, and Gallup has shown, that she IS. The Republicans know it, that's why they have already started attacking her, before the nomination process! They are gearing up early. We have to all be ready Clinton supporters! We the USA is lucky enough to have HRC as the Democratic nominee for President, we must be prepared for the vile and vicious attacks from the right. But that's no problem for HRC, she's dealt with these types for most of her career, and knows how to handle it!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Check out the following excerpts from a new (11-26-07) Gallup article, www.gallup.com:
"Clinton -- the dominant front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination -- would appear to have at least a slight advantage over any Republican candidate among registered voters if the election were held today."
"She has a five-point edge over Giuliani (49% to 44%) and a six-point edge over McCain (50% to 44%). Clinton runs much more strongly against the lesser-known Thompson (53% to 40%) and Romney (54% to 38%)."
"Gallup previously tested these same matchups in June (Clinton versus Giuliani, McCain, and Romney) and July (Clinton versus Thompson). Since then, Clinton's standing against Giuliani, McCain, and Romney has remained about the same, while she now fares much better against Thompson. In July, 48% of registered voters preferred Clinton and 45% Thompson."
The truth is, while Hillary's Democratic opponents try to say she is not "electable," the fact remains, and Gallup has shown, that she IS. The Republicans know it, that's why they have already started attacking her, before the nomination process! They are gearing up early. We have to all be ready Clinton supporters! We the USA is lucky enough to have HRC as the Democratic nominee for President, we must be prepared for the vile and vicious attacks from the right. But that's no problem for HRC, she's dealt with these types for most of her career, and knows how to handle it!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Watch the newest Hillary Video its Hilarious!!
Watch the newest Hillary Video its Hilarious
DONATE DONATE DONATE!!
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
DONATE DONATE DONATE!!
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
"Turn Up the Heat." But how hot should we go?
Hillary has been saying lately we should "turn up the heat" on Republicans. After all, that's the only way to win in 2008. She knows it. She's the best candidate to do it. This little measly criticism from the Obama and Edwards campaign is nothing she can't handle. She's dealt with way worse her entire life. They just look desperate, she looks presidential.
But today, we have a report that Sen. John McCain, someone who I don't agree with usually, though I have always respected. I respect him for his service to the USA, both in the military and in public office. He also has seemed to be one of the few Republicans to take the high road normally. However, things may be a-changing on his end.
Check out the following story, about McCain just standing by and laughing it off when a support calls Senator Clinton a "bitch."
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/report_mccain_stands_by_as_his_supporter_calls_hillary_bitch.php
Look guys, I'm all for "tough" politics. If you can't "take the heat," then get out of the kitchen. Hillary is comfortable in the kitchen. But, there are things that are over the line. I expect Senator McCain, as a respected public official, to not tolerate someone (one of his supporters) calling her a bitch in front of him. Now, I know this isn't the first time someone has called Hillary or any other politician such a derogatory name, but the point is McCain just stood by while a colleague of his is talked about in this way, and laughed it off. It's pretty sad for McCain. It just shows the tough spot his campaign is in I suppose. After all, as we've seen on our side as well, they DO tend to get desperate when the poll numbers keep falling..
Hmmm...
I just thought Sen. McCain would take the higher road, I guess not!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
But today, we have a report that Sen. John McCain, someone who I don't agree with usually, though I have always respected. I respect him for his service to the USA, both in the military and in public office. He also has seemed to be one of the few Republicans to take the high road normally. However, things may be a-changing on his end.
Check out the following story, about McCain just standing by and laughing it off when a support calls Senator Clinton a "bitch."
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/report_mccain_stands_by_as_his_supporter_calls_hillary_bitch.php
Report: McCain Stands By As His Supporter Calls Hillary A "Bitch"
Warning: Folks who like to tout John McCain's civility and adherence to decorum should approach the following with caution.
We've just obtained some video of a Fox local affiliate reporting on a McCain campaign appearance in South Carolina. In it, one of McCain's supporters emphatically calls Hillary Clinton, McCain's fellow United States Senator, a "bitch." McCain's response? According to the Fox affiliate's reporter, McCain "laughed off" the comment. Take a look:
We contacted the McCain campaign about this to ask whether McCain should have condemned the remark, whether he wanted to condemn it now, and whether the Fox affiliate's report had represented what happened accurately.
His camp declined to comment.
-------------------------------------------------------
Look guys, I'm all for "tough" politics. If you can't "take the heat," then get out of the kitchen. Hillary is comfortable in the kitchen. But, there are things that are over the line. I expect Senator McCain, as a respected public official, to not tolerate someone (one of his supporters) calling her a bitch in front of him. Now, I know this isn't the first time someone has called Hillary or any other politician such a derogatory name, but the point is McCain just stood by while a colleague of his is talked about in this way, and laughed it off. It's pretty sad for McCain. It just shows the tough spot his campaign is in I suppose. After all, as we've seen on our side as well, they DO tend to get desperate when the poll numbers keep falling..
Hmmm...
I just thought Sen. McCain would take the higher road, I guess not!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Democratic Successes this year, and in the future!
Our party has enjoyed a multitude of successes since 2006. I remember after the 2004 election feeling so down. I had put so much thought and energy into that election, and to wake up and it all be over--so much disappointment and other emotions filled my body.
After all, this is some of the most important stuff of our LIFETIME! I thought we had a good chance in 2006, but was still lacking the confidence. Democrats proved that we CAN do it! We not only won back the House AND the Senate, we gained a lot seats in local races (Governors and State legislatures)! It was a great year. In the 2007 elections, we had some successes as well, although there wasn't a whole lot going on this election. We won another gubernatorial race in Kentucky! We also won a lot of victories in Virginia, winning back the Virginia state Senate, and gaining seats in the state House as well as other states.
It's been a good year! We have to keep the momentum going! Right now, all the leading 2008 Democratic presidential candidates poll higher when compared to any of their Republican opponents. I believe Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is the candidate to continue our successes past 2007 and into the future. The days of the Republican smear machine are over! Their tactics just don't work anymore. According to RealClearPolitics, which takes an average of all current polls, Hillary fairs best against Republican Rudy Giuliani! She leads him by over 4% in the polls! I believe Hillary is the one we need to stand up to the Republicans!
Sure, internally we have our differences. But we also have some basic goals and principles that unite us all as Democrats! Instead of attacks against EACH OTHER during this crucial primary campaign, let's focus on what's at stake. The 2008 Presidential election, and possibly gaining MORE seats in the House and Senate.
Congressional leaders haven't been able to pass everything we want, there's been a lot of roadblocks. Republicans blocking important bills, President Bush using his veto pen.
We HAVE had a great deal of success also:
*We've provided disaster relief to Katrina victims.
*Raised the minimum wage from $5.15/hr to $7.25/hr over over a 2 yr period.
*Implemented important recommendations from the 9/11 commission, including 100% inspection for all air cargo entering the USA .
*Passed the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 strengthening public disclosure requirements concerning lobbyists, placing more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress, and requires mandatory disclosure of earmarks.
*Passed the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, and effectively OVERRIDING President Bush's initial veto of the act.The bill garnered bipartisan support which funds various water projects including beach restoration, clean water and flood control programs--many projects crucial in sensitive areas like New Orleans.
We also have passed numerous other important bills, such as The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, expansion of SCHIP, and an original bill that required withdrawal from Iraq that President Bush unfortunately vetoed.
The point is, this Congress HAS proved we know how to govern, and by picking up more seats in 2008 and getting a Democratic President (preferably Hillary Clinton) we can do SO much more! Let's focus on our successes and what we CAN continue to do, not attack each other!
We need EVERY Democrat in 2008 and every other year!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
After all, this is some of the most important stuff of our LIFETIME! I thought we had a good chance in 2006, but was still lacking the confidence. Democrats proved that we CAN do it! We not only won back the House AND the Senate, we gained a lot seats in local races (Governors and State legislatures)! It was a great year. In the 2007 elections, we had some successes as well, although there wasn't a whole lot going on this election. We won another gubernatorial race in Kentucky! We also won a lot of victories in Virginia, winning back the Virginia state Senate, and gaining seats in the state House as well as other states.
It's been a good year! We have to keep the momentum going! Right now, all the leading 2008 Democratic presidential candidates poll higher when compared to any of their Republican opponents. I believe Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is the candidate to continue our successes past 2007 and into the future. The days of the Republican smear machine are over! Their tactics just don't work anymore. According to RealClearPolitics, which takes an average of all current polls, Hillary fairs best against Republican Rudy Giuliani! She leads him by over 4% in the polls! I believe Hillary is the one we need to stand up to the Republicans!
Sure, internally we have our differences. But we also have some basic goals and principles that unite us all as Democrats! Instead of attacks against EACH OTHER during this crucial primary campaign, let's focus on what's at stake. The 2008 Presidential election, and possibly gaining MORE seats in the House and Senate.
Congressional leaders haven't been able to pass everything we want, there's been a lot of roadblocks. Republicans blocking important bills, President Bush using his veto pen.
We HAVE had a great deal of success also:
*We've provided disaster relief to Katrina victims.
*Raised the minimum wage from $5.15/hr to $7.25/hr over over a 2 yr period.
*Implemented important recommendations from the 9/11 commission, including 100% inspection for all air cargo entering the USA .
*Passed the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 strengthening public disclosure requirements concerning lobbyists, placing more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress, and requires mandatory disclosure of earmarks.
*Passed the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, and effectively OVERRIDING President Bush's initial veto of the act.The bill garnered bipartisan support which funds various water projects including beach restoration, clean water and flood control programs--many projects crucial in sensitive areas like New Orleans.
We also have passed numerous other important bills, such as The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, expansion of SCHIP, and an original bill that required withdrawal from Iraq that President Bush unfortunately vetoed.
The point is, this Congress HAS proved we know how to govern, and by picking up more seats in 2008 and getting a Democratic President (preferably Hillary Clinton) we can do SO much more! Let's focus on our successes and what we CAN continue to do, not attack each other!
We need EVERY Democrat in 2008 and every other year!
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Friday, November 9, 2007
Donate! Donate! & You Could Have Lunch With Hillary
Lunch With Hillary
Click Image To Donate
Donate to the Campaign and you and a friend could spend a day on the Campaign Trail with Hillary.
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
New Hillary Ad: Energy Future
Click Image To Donate
Donate to the Campaign and you and a friend could spend a day on the Campaign Trail with Hillary.
Donate To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
New Hillary Ad: Energy Future
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Hillary is leading the way on tackling the energy crisis
I personally appreciate Senator Clinton's bold initiatives for sound energy policy. She has outlined a $150 billion energy plan, all paid for without creating more deficit spending. This is the kind of spending we need. All spending is not "bad" as some may have you believe, the Republicans love to spend more than Democrats, however Democrats have been labeled as the spenders. I understand that stereotype. The difference is Democrats try to find ways to pay for their spending, while our Republicans "friends" enjoy deficit spending. Roaring our country more into debt. Their spending priorities are out of wack. They feel they cannot afford to extend health coverage under SCHIP to more American children, but can funnel billions of dollars into Iraq monthly. Where ARE their priorities? Wow I get on a roll with these guys and can't stop, this blog was supposed to be about Clinton's energy plan!
ANYWAY! :) I feel Hillary Clinton's plan is the best plan to tackle the energy crisis. I know there have been issues with Gore and the Clintons, I do wonder if he will support her plan.
Check out the DesMoinesRegister article on the plan:
Cedar Rapids, Ia. - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Monday laid out a sweeping plan that she says would move the U.S. economy from petroleum-based to renewable energy, and turn back global warming in the process.
The 10-year, $150 billion proposal includes a long list of specific goals, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent and raising automobile fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2050.
It would require sacrifice on the part of the energy and auto industries and all Americans, akin to overcoming the Great Depression and winning World War II, the New York senator said at a plant where wind-energy turbines are manufactured.
"The task before us commands the same urgency and demands the same resolve. Tackling the energy crisis is the calling of our time. And when I'm president, it will be the calling of our nation. And it will involve all of us," Clinton told an audience of about 350 at Clipper Windpower, including area Democrats and Clipper employees.
In rolling out the majorpolicy plan, Clinton tied the need to reduce U.S. reliance on imported petroleum and carbon-based fuel in general as beneficial to the climate, economy and national security.
Among her plan's other goals are to cut U.S. oil imports by two-thirds by 2030, increase the energy coming from renewable sources to 25 percent by 2025 and spur the development of 5 million clean-energy jobs within 10 years.
It would also offer U.S. automakers a trade-off of $20 billion in bonds for updating plants to accelerate hybrid vehicle production, in return for the sharp increases in fuel economy standards. Likewise, Clinton proposed tax credits to consumers who purchase hybrid electric vehicles of up to $10,000.
"I believe that America should do what we do best, lead the innovation race," she said, likening her proposal to President Kennedy's call in 1960 for a round-trip, manned lunar mission.
Some energy policy experts described Clinton's proposal as ambitious and within reach, but not necessarily an easy sell in Congress.
"Is she going to roll this up into one bill and drop it on Jan. 21, 2009? I think not," said Daniel Weiss of the Center for American Progress, a Democrat-leaning policy group. "A lot of this is politically doable, but not instantly."
Other Democratic presidential candidates to offer comprehensive energy proposals are Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
Weiss said two things distinguish Clinton's plan from the others. One is the level of detail in how it would be implemented, he said. The other is the provision to create a strategic energy fund, a $50 billion federal account made up of fees assessed to oil and gas companies and discontinued tax breaks to those industries.
This fund would help prime the renewable energy industry through government investment in energy efficiency, clean-coal technology, ethanol and other renewable fuels.
The remaining costs of the proposal would be financed through dedicating savings from closing loopholes for oil and gas producers and dedicating a portion of revenue from a cap-and-trade program.
The cap-and-trade provision involves allowing companies that produce greenhouse gas emissions to sell the credits they are granted for producing such pollutants. The proceeds from the system would be used in part to finance a program to help low-income Americans heat and cool their homes more efficiently.
Dodd, who has proposed taxing companies based on their greenhouse gas emissions, criticized Clinton's plan as not going far enough to require industry to rein in its contribution to global warming.
"I don't know how it would do in a public poll, but leading experts agree that a corporate carbon tax targeted at polluters is needed to reverse the effects of global warming," Dodd campaign communication director Hari Sevugan said.
Another key element of Clinton's plan is the establishment of a national energy council, led by a Cabinet-level national energy adviser, as a top adviser to the president.
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071106/NEWS09/711060392/1001/NEWS
-----------------------
CHRIS MCLEOD
ANYWAY! :) I feel Hillary Clinton's plan is the best plan to tackle the energy crisis. I know there have been issues with Gore and the Clintons, I do wonder if he will support her plan.
Check out the DesMoinesRegister article on the plan:
Clinton outlines $150 billion energy plan
Cutting reliance on oil imports helps climate, economy, security, she says
November 6, 2007
Cedar Rapids, Ia. - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Monday laid out a sweeping plan that she says would move the U.S. economy from petroleum-based to renewable energy, and turn back global warming in the process.
The 10-year, $150 billion proposal includes a long list of specific goals, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent and raising automobile fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2050.
It would require sacrifice on the part of the energy and auto industries and all Americans, akin to overcoming the Great Depression and winning World War II, the New York senator said at a plant where wind-energy turbines are manufactured.
"The task before us commands the same urgency and demands the same resolve. Tackling the energy crisis is the calling of our time. And when I'm president, it will be the calling of our nation. And it will involve all of us," Clinton told an audience of about 350 at Clipper Windpower, including area Democrats and Clipper employees.
In rolling out the majorpolicy plan, Clinton tied the need to reduce U.S. reliance on imported petroleum and carbon-based fuel in general as beneficial to the climate, economy and national security.
Among her plan's other goals are to cut U.S. oil imports by two-thirds by 2030, increase the energy coming from renewable sources to 25 percent by 2025 and spur the development of 5 million clean-energy jobs within 10 years.
It would also offer U.S. automakers a trade-off of $20 billion in bonds for updating plants to accelerate hybrid vehicle production, in return for the sharp increases in fuel economy standards. Likewise, Clinton proposed tax credits to consumers who purchase hybrid electric vehicles of up to $10,000.
"I believe that America should do what we do best, lead the innovation race," she said, likening her proposal to President Kennedy's call in 1960 for a round-trip, manned lunar mission.
Some energy policy experts described Clinton's proposal as ambitious and within reach, but not necessarily an easy sell in Congress.
"Is she going to roll this up into one bill and drop it on Jan. 21, 2009? I think not," said Daniel Weiss of the Center for American Progress, a Democrat-leaning policy group. "A lot of this is politically doable, but not instantly."
Other Democratic presidential candidates to offer comprehensive energy proposals are Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
Weiss said two things distinguish Clinton's plan from the others. One is the level of detail in how it would be implemented, he said. The other is the provision to create a strategic energy fund, a $50 billion federal account made up of fees assessed to oil and gas companies and discontinued tax breaks to those industries.
This fund would help prime the renewable energy industry through government investment in energy efficiency, clean-coal technology, ethanol and other renewable fuels.
The remaining costs of the proposal would be financed through dedicating savings from closing loopholes for oil and gas producers and dedicating a portion of revenue from a cap-and-trade program.
The cap-and-trade provision involves allowing companies that produce greenhouse gas emissions to sell the credits they are granted for producing such pollutants. The proceeds from the system would be used in part to finance a program to help low-income Americans heat and cool their homes more efficiently.
Dodd, who has proposed taxing companies based on their greenhouse gas emissions, criticized Clinton's plan as not going far enough to require industry to rein in its contribution to global warming.
"I don't know how it would do in a public poll, but leading experts agree that a corporate carbon tax targeted at polluters is needed to reverse the effects of global warming," Dodd campaign communication director Hari Sevugan said.
Another key element of Clinton's plan is the establishment of a national energy council, led by a Cabinet-level national energy adviser, as a top adviser to the president.
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071106/NEWS09/711060392/1001/NEWS
-----------------------
CHRIS MCLEOD
Friday, November 2, 2007
Clinton and the driver's licenses for illegal immigrants misinformation debacle
Since this week's MSNBC Democratic debate much has been said about Sen. Clinton's comments on illegal immigration, in particular Gov. Spitzer's proposal to grant illegal immigrants driver's licenses. The below article puts what was said in a little better context. We knew the Obama and Edwards camps would try to politicize what was said, and make it something it wasn't. What Clinton was trying to express and was taken out of context was that while she doesn't necessarily agree with the Governor's proposal, she understands very well the situation state officials are put in.
The US Congress had ample opportunity to pass immigration reform this year, Sen. Clinton and many others supported it. We could argue about the reasons it wasn't passed, but the fact is, it wasn't. It should have been. The state officials should not be left with these dilemmas. I don't think illegal immigrants in principle should have driver's licenses. It's a privilege given to U.S. citizens. However, I'm a logical person, and I know people also don't need to be going around our country without them. Not granting them licenses will not solve illegal immigration, nor will granting them. However, granting them will give the state officials some kind of hand on who's in their states and make it much easier for law enforcement.
So I hope people will sit back, and think about what went on in that debate. Sen. Clinton wasn't double speaking, she was speaking on a tough issue that needs to be addressed federally, and hasn't. Therefore we can't criticize the state officials for doing something, when the federal government is doing nothing.
-Chris McLeod-
--see the below article--
----------------------------------------
Des Moines Register
Other Democratic candidates for the White House certainly tore into her.
Here's what she said, in part: "Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation, trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York we want to know who's in New York. We want people to come out of the shadows. He's making an honest effort to do it. We should have passed immigration reform."
That will lead some voters - as former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina did - to accuse her of speaking out of both sides of her mouth.
She's not, though. Instead, Clinton perfectly mirrored the dilemma facing the country: It's deeply troubling that millions of people have entered the United States illegally. At the same time, that reality has to be dealt with. Refusing to give illegal immigrants driver's licenses makes it harder for police to handle traffic accidents, among a host of other problems that lack of identification creates. Indeed, that's why retired Des Moines Police Chief William McCarthy favored the change.
No license usually means no insurance. If there's a crash, licensed drivers suffer if the other driver takes off or can't pay for damages. It's a matter of being practical about public safety in the day-to-day scheme of things.
Clinton also is right about the big picture. Congress should have passed immigration reform last summer. It was gutless to duck this national crisis because it's so emotionally charged.
Yet emotions tend to get the better of people when the topic is immigration. Clinton's response simply acknowledged this issue has many facets.
No one should exploit that.
-Linda Lantor Fandel
The US Congress had ample opportunity to pass immigration reform this year, Sen. Clinton and many others supported it. We could argue about the reasons it wasn't passed, but the fact is, it wasn't. It should have been. The state officials should not be left with these dilemmas. I don't think illegal immigrants in principle should have driver's licenses. It's a privilege given to U.S. citizens. However, I'm a logical person, and I know people also don't need to be going around our country without them. Not granting them licenses will not solve illegal immigration, nor will granting them. However, granting them will give the state officials some kind of hand on who's in their states and make it much easier for law enforcement.
So I hope people will sit back, and think about what went on in that debate. Sen. Clinton wasn't double speaking, she was speaking on a tough issue that needs to be addressed federally, and hasn't. Therefore we can't criticize the state officials for doing something, when the federal government is doing nothing.
-Chris McLeod-
--see the below article--
----------------------------------------
Des Moines Register
Let's discuss immigration, but leave emotions at curb
November 2, 2007
Hillary Clinton may get hammered by the American public for her comments during Tuesday's debate about New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's move to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.Other Democratic candidates for the White House certainly tore into her.
Here's what she said, in part: "Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation, trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York we want to know who's in New York. We want people to come out of the shadows. He's making an honest effort to do it. We should have passed immigration reform."
That will lead some voters - as former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina did - to accuse her of speaking out of both sides of her mouth.
She's not, though. Instead, Clinton perfectly mirrored the dilemma facing the country: It's deeply troubling that millions of people have entered the United States illegally. At the same time, that reality has to be dealt with. Refusing to give illegal immigrants driver's licenses makes it harder for police to handle traffic accidents, among a host of other problems that lack of identification creates. Indeed, that's why retired Des Moines Police Chief William McCarthy favored the change.
No license usually means no insurance. If there's a crash, licensed drivers suffer if the other driver takes off or can't pay for damages. It's a matter of being practical about public safety in the day-to-day scheme of things.
Clinton also is right about the big picture. Congress should have passed immigration reform last summer. It was gutless to duck this national crisis because it's so emotionally charged.
Yet emotions tend to get the better of people when the topic is immigration. Clinton's response simply acknowledged this issue has many facets.
No one should exploit that.
-Linda Lantor Fandel
Thursday, November 1, 2007
The Politics of Pile On - Watch the Video
The Politics of Pile On
Hillary is the subject of a lot of attention in the October 30 Democratic presidential debate.
Donate $10 To The Hillary Campaign
Hillary is the subject of a lot of attention in the October 30 Democratic presidential debate.
Donate $10 To The Hillary Campaign
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
MSNBC debate--comments
I thought Hillary really explained herself well tonight in discussing her vote for the non-binding Iran resolution. There has been a lot of confusion on that vote as well as a lot of misleading done by opponents.
One problem I had with this debate was MSNBC and especially Tim Russert, someone I actually have quite respect for. I feel like he is so exasperated with Clinton, and I'm going to throw this out there, an idea-that he may have an issue with her gender. This is merely an observation. But it seems that the debates he is involved in are often Russert vs. Clinton. Like he feels the need to engage her, and sometimes he looks visibly upset with her. That's just an observation.
MSNBC basically made this an anti-Hillary debate. Exactly what Edwards and Obama wanted. They never once questioned Obama on shady happenings in his campaign, like him trotting out a gospel singer who claims he was "cured" of the evils of homosexuality. I felt like MSNBC used this as a forum to encourage them to engage Clinton. Kind of sad really.
However I won't complain too much. Clinton was fierce when battled by the guys, she stood her ground. It's obvious Obama and Edwards have abandoned their original campaign promises of "hope" and "positive" campaigning. They are getting desperate, and have found their only option now is to personally attack Clinton. It's quite sad for them that they have resorted to this. And MSNBC was right there beside them, nudging them along.
Chris McLeod
One problem I had with this debate was MSNBC and especially Tim Russert, someone I actually have quite respect for. I feel like he is so exasperated with Clinton, and I'm going to throw this out there, an idea-that he may have an issue with her gender. This is merely an observation. But it seems that the debates he is involved in are often Russert vs. Clinton. Like he feels the need to engage her, and sometimes he looks visibly upset with her. That's just an observation.
MSNBC basically made this an anti-Hillary debate. Exactly what Edwards and Obama wanted. They never once questioned Obama on shady happenings in his campaign, like him trotting out a gospel singer who claims he was "cured" of the evils of homosexuality. I felt like MSNBC used this as a forum to encourage them to engage Clinton. Kind of sad really.
However I won't complain too much. Clinton was fierce when battled by the guys, she stood her ground. It's obvious Obama and Edwards have abandoned their original campaign promises of "hope" and "positive" campaigning. They are getting desperate, and have found their only option now is to personally attack Clinton. It's quite sad for them that they have resorted to this. And MSNBC was right there beside them, nudging them along.
Chris McLeod
Don't miss tonight's Democratic Presidential debate, on MSNBC!
Well everyone, tonight is expected to be an exciting one. Tonight's Democratic Presidential Primary Debate on MSNBC (9pm EDT, 6pm PDT), will be the first since Senator Clinton's Democratic rivals have really stepped up the attacks against her. She will be forced to be on the defensive for most of the night, as attacking Clinton and using her as a political punching bag seems to be the last resort option for her opponents with falling poll numbers.
Luckily for us, Clinton can duke it out with the best of 'em. No worries, she'll dish it right back. Another thing we can expect however is for Clinton to not attack her opponents like they will attack her. Despite Sen. Obama's promise for a new breed of politics, or "politics of hope" as he is calling it--Clinton as you will all see, will be the one practicing this new kind of politics. She has done it throughout this campaign. She has apparently decided out of respect for her Democratic opponents, to focus on her record and what she plans to do for the country, instead of what the other candidates won't do and haven't done in the past. She feels that most of the American electorate is smart enough to make the decisions about which one will be the best Democratic candidate, on their own. Voters have been very responsive to the way Clinton has been running her campaign, as you all have seen with her staggering rise in the polls. There will be plenty of time for things to get nasty in the general election, because often there's just no way to avoid it during that time. So expect Senator Clinton to reiterate her message to voters, and largely brush off the baseless attacks from her opponents.
When you watch the debate, during or after, come back here and post your comments. You will see below this post is an option to leave a comment. Your comments are ALWAYS greatly appreciated. So I hope some of you will feel the need to leave your comments on the debate.
Thanks and happy watching!!
Chris McLeod
Luckily for us, Clinton can duke it out with the best of 'em. No worries, she'll dish it right back. Another thing we can expect however is for Clinton to not attack her opponents like they will attack her. Despite Sen. Obama's promise for a new breed of politics, or "politics of hope" as he is calling it--Clinton as you will all see, will be the one practicing this new kind of politics. She has done it throughout this campaign. She has apparently decided out of respect for her Democratic opponents, to focus on her record and what she plans to do for the country, instead of what the other candidates won't do and haven't done in the past. She feels that most of the American electorate is smart enough to make the decisions about which one will be the best Democratic candidate, on their own. Voters have been very responsive to the way Clinton has been running her campaign, as you all have seen with her staggering rise in the polls. There will be plenty of time for things to get nasty in the general election, because often there's just no way to avoid it during that time. So expect Senator Clinton to reiterate her message to voters, and largely brush off the baseless attacks from her opponents.
When you watch the debate, during or after, come back here and post your comments. You will see below this post is an option to leave a comment. Your comments are ALWAYS greatly appreciated. So I hope some of you will feel the need to leave your comments on the debate.
Thanks and happy watching!!
Chris McLeod
Monday, October 29, 2007
Obama aligning with Reverend who says "God delivered me from homosexuality."
Is this really a smart move for Sen. Barack Obama? Why would he align himself with this guy in the first place? So many questions, so little answers. It was questioned from the start when Barack started his "gospel concerts" campaign series and invited Rev. Donnie McClurkin to speak/sing. I'm not sure if Barack Obama supports the opinions of this guy regarding the GLBT community, but I'm sure Hillary doesn't. He has said that the performers at these events are some of he and his wife's "favorites." Sorry, that's enough for me Senator Obama!
That's why Hillary doesn't associate herself with these kind of people. The GLBT community is rightfully outraged. They don't feel their homosexuality is a choice, and people like this Rev. McClurkin only set their cause back. I don't know about you guys, but I never woke up one day and said "hey I think I'll be straight today." Attraction is a natural thing.
Is this Obama's way of trying to win support of the Christian community? Maybe. Nothing wrong with trying to broaden your appeal, however when it comes at the cost of hurting and demeaning a community that largely supports Democrats (the GLBT community), there is something wrong with it. This is an example of why Democrats should support Sen. Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination.
According to CNN:
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (CNN) — The controversial Gospel singer at the center of a gay and lesbian backlash against Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign struck back at his critics Sunday night, saying that he has been "vilified" and declaring that "God delivered me from homosexuality."
Rev. Donnie McClurkin, who headlined the final installment of the Obama campaign's "Embrace the Change" Gospel concert series, did not comment on the controversy until the just before the concert's finish, when he told the crowd of about 2,500 African-Americans: "I'm going to say something that's going to get me in trouble."
"They accuse me of being anti-gay and a bigot," McClurkin said. "We don't believe in discrimination. We don't believe in hatred, and if you do you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's the whole premise of God. That's the whole premise of Christ is love, love, love. But there is a side of Christ that deals in judgment, and all sin is against God."
-------------------------------------
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
That's why Hillary doesn't associate herself with these kind of people. The GLBT community is rightfully outraged. They don't feel their homosexuality is a choice, and people like this Rev. McClurkin only set their cause back. I don't know about you guys, but I never woke up one day and said "hey I think I'll be straight today." Attraction is a natural thing.
Is this Obama's way of trying to win support of the Christian community? Maybe. Nothing wrong with trying to broaden your appeal, however when it comes at the cost of hurting and demeaning a community that largely supports Democrats (the GLBT community), there is something wrong with it. This is an example of why Democrats should support Sen. Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination.
According to CNN:
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (CNN) — The controversial Gospel singer at the center of a gay and lesbian backlash against Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign struck back at his critics Sunday night, saying that he has been "vilified" and declaring that "God delivered me from homosexuality."
Rev. Donnie McClurkin, who headlined the final installment of the Obama campaign's "Embrace the Change" Gospel concert series, did not comment on the controversy until the just before the concert's finish, when he told the crowd of about 2,500 African-Americans: "I'm going to say something that's going to get me in trouble."
"They accuse me of being anti-gay and a bigot," McClurkin said. "We don't believe in discrimination. We don't believe in hatred, and if you do you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's the whole premise of God. That's the whole premise of Christ is love, love, love. But there is a side of Christ that deals in judgment, and all sin is against God."
McClurkin has said that homosexuality is a choice and that he overcame homosexual desires through prayer, comments that drew fire from gay and lesbian activists and caught the Obama campaign, which has been using faith to reach out to African-American voters, off guard.
The Grammy-winning singer said Sunday his words had been "twisted."
"Don't call me a bigot or anti-gay, when I have been touched by the same feelings," McClurkin went on. "When I have suffered with the same feelings. Don't call me a homophobe, when I love everybody … Don't tell me that I stand up and I say vile words against the gay community because I don't. I don't speak against the homosexual. I tell you that God delivered me from homosexuality."
McClurkin's words drew raucous applause from the crowd, who had lined up around the block to get into the Township Auditorium in Columbia.
Although a small demonstration led by the South Carolina Gay & Lesbian Pride Movement had gathered across the street from the concert venue, they were dwarfed by the crowd of black Gospel fans and Obama supporters who turned out to see the performance.
Meanwhile, Obama staff were inside and outside the building, working the crowd and trying to register new voters.
Nearly all of the African-American concert-goers interviewed by CNN expressed support for McClurkin. Some referenced the First Amendment, saying McClurkin had the right to say what he pleased. Others agreed with McClurkin and said that homosexuality is a choice. Several more invoked the Bible and said homosexuality is simply wrong.
A September poll conducted by Winthrop University and ETV showed that 74 percent of South Carolina African-Americans believe homosexuality is "unacceptable."
Michael Vandiver, president of the South Carolina Gay and Lesbian Pride Movement said that he was disappointed by Obama's refusal to take McClurkin off the bill, but that he hopes it will be an opportunity for new dialogue.
"This is not a protest of Senator Obama, but rather a vigil in opposition of Reverend McClurkin and his statements on homosexuality," Vandiver said before the concert. "We're also here to show our support for Rev. Andy Sidden."
Sidden is the white, gay pastor added to the concert bill as a last minute compromise by the Obama campaign. Sidden's appearance was notably brief and anti-climactic: He said a short prayer to the auditorium at the very beginning of the program, when the arena was only about half full, and then he left.
Obama, while not present, appeared on a videotaped message to the crowd, saying, “The artists you’re going to hear from are some of the best in the world, and favorites of Michelle and myself.”
McClurkin said during the concert that he had been introduced to Obama by Oprah Winfrey.
-------------------------------------
-CHRIS MCLEOD-
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Hillary on the California Wildfires
Glad to hear Hillary has commented on the Calif. wildfires. It's gotten crazy here. I'm finally back in my apartment tonight, after being evacuated. So I've been a little out of the loop on the news, except fire news.
Here's Hillary's comments on the fires:
"I have been following the news about the wildfires that are affecting seven counties in Southern California. My heart and prayers go out to the families that have been displaced, have lost their homes, businesses, or worse-have lost a loved one to these ravaging wildfires. "
"My thoughts are also with the thousands of brave firefighters and first responders who are risking their lives in battling the flames and helping the victims. We are praying for your safety." -Hillary-
----------
Keep everyone in So. Calif affected by these wildfires in your thoughts and prayers tonight guys. Be safe out there...
Chris McLeod
Here's Hillary's comments on the fires:
"I have been following the news about the wildfires that are affecting seven counties in Southern California. My heart and prayers go out to the families that have been displaced, have lost their homes, businesses, or worse-have lost a loved one to these ravaging wildfires. "
"My thoughts are also with the thousands of brave firefighters and first responders who are risking their lives in battling the flames and helping the victims. We are praying for your safety." -Hillary-
----------
Keep everyone in So. Calif affected by these wildfires in your thoughts and prayers tonight guys. Be safe out there...
Chris McLeod
Friday, October 19, 2007
Hillary, will be the "President of Families and Family Values"
This week Senator Clinton offered up a huge plan, what I like to call "The Family Plan." Think Sprints' "Fair and Flexible" cellular phone plans, except in politics. Her proposals will do some great good for American working families. She has proposed numerous plans to strengthen the American family. While Republicans are trying to tear down the American family, by putting partisan politics over the health of our children and trying to block certain qualified couples from adopting, Hillary Clinton is saving the American family unit.
See the below blog on "MotherTalkers" (www.mothertalkers.com) :
It's as if she had written the Motherhood Manifesto herself. Sen. Hillary Clinton offered a comprehensive family leave and flextime policy to families, including money to let low-income parents stay home with their children, according to details sent to MotherTalkers by the Clinton campaign.
-------------------
I enjoyed the blog from MotherTalkers and it's good to know mothers are out there listening to what Hillary has to say.
Meanwhile in an e-mail response to Clinton's plan (According to www.aikenstandard.com) , S.C. Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson released a statement that said in part: "South Carolina families should be offended by Hillary Clinton's disingenuous effort to hide her radical record for abortion-on-demand, gay marriage and higher taxes."
What do you know? While Hillary is trying to strengthen the American family, Republicans avoid the conversation and jump to gay marriage and abortion in no time. First of all, what does Clinton's plan have to do with abortion and gay marriage? Nothing at all. That's just it. Republicans, as usual, running from their own nasty record on helping families, jump to attack mode quick. It's sad for them, that they have resorted to such vile attacks on the American families that keep the country going.
Chris McLeod
See the below blog on "MotherTalkers" (www.mothertalkers.com) :
Hillary Proposes Flextime for Parents
By: ElisaIt's as if she had written the Motherhood Manifesto herself. Sen. Hillary Clinton offered a comprehensive family leave and flextime policy to families, including money to let low-income parents stay home with their children, according to details sent to MotherTalkers by the Clinton campaign.
To give all parents more time with their children, Hillary is proposing:
--Having all states give family leave by 2016. By “family leave,” she means time off for workers to care for their parents, children, spouses, or immediate family. To achieve this goal, she is committing $1 billion a year in start-up costs and matching funds for states to implement family leave through disability, unemployment insurance, business tax credits, “At Home Infant Care” and similar programs.
--Expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to give employees at companies with 25 or more workers 12 weeks of job-protected leave. The change from 50 employees (current law) to 25 would benefit 13 million workers at small companies.
--Guaranteeing at least 7 sick days per year -- up from the typical 5 days allotted by most employers.
--Promoting workplaces with flextime and telecommuting policies by providing grants and highlighting businesses that offer such perks. She will also require federal agencies to set specific telecommuting goals for their workers and allot up to $50 million annually in state and local telecommuting initiatives.
--Ensuring higher quality childcare by helping states improve and enforce licensing and safety standards of childcare centers, supporting public and private partnerships to increase the supply of affordable, high-quality childcare to working families and expanding the Child Care Development Block Grant to allow "qualifying low-income" families to stay home with their children. Currently, the block grants can be used only by parents who work outside the home.
--Making it illegal for businesses to discriminate against families for pregnancy or care-taking duties.
The total cost of her work-family initiative is $1.75 billion per year. Clinton plans to finance it by recovering the money from questionable -- or even illegal -- tax shelters.
Of course, the Republican spin will be that she is raising taxes. You can’t win with them no matter what sensible reform you propose to the tax code.
But, I am excited that Hillary has laid out a much-needed, but realistic, goal to come up with flextime for working families. She is a smart campaigner.-------------------
I enjoyed the blog from MotherTalkers and it's good to know mothers are out there listening to what Hillary has to say.
Meanwhile in an e-mail response to Clinton's plan (According to www.aikenstandard.com) , S.C. Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson released a statement that said in part: "South Carolina families should be offended by Hillary Clinton's disingenuous effort to hide her radical record for abortion-on-demand, gay marriage and higher taxes."
What do you know? While Hillary is trying to strengthen the American family, Republicans avoid the conversation and jump to gay marriage and abortion in no time. First of all, what does Clinton's plan have to do with abortion and gay marriage? Nothing at all. That's just it. Republicans, as usual, running from their own nasty record on helping families, jump to attack mode quick. It's sad for them, that they have resorted to such vile attacks on the American families that keep the country going.
Chris McLeod
Thursday, October 18, 2007
10 Questions Online Presidential Forum
Many of you watched the CNN/Youtube Presidential Primary Debates. I felt that was a pretty revolutionary idea for modern US politics. However, the only part that irked me the most was that CNN/Youtube were the ones picking the questions that made it through.
10 Questions is a Presidential Online Forum where people like you and I submit questions via Youtube, Yahoo, or Myspace Video. Then again people like you and I go to the site www.10questions.com view the videos, and vote on our favorite videos. NOW THIS is pretty revolutionary if you ask me! The Top 10 Questions (based on votes from US) will be submitted to the candidates, and videos of their responses will be posted. YOU DECIDE whether or not the candidates answered the questions, or answered them to your liking.
Go there now, find out how to submit your questions, and vote on the questions already submitted. Hillary Clinton support is needed, there are a couple of pointless questions to Sen. Clinton directly, go give them "Thumbs Down" votes. :)
Three of the videos posted are mine, so I hope you'll go give me some votes as well. You can see which ones are mine by looking below the videos. Mine will say "By : Chris1345"
Thanks, and check it out guys!
Chris McLeod
10 Questions is a Presidential Online Forum where people like you and I submit questions via Youtube, Yahoo, or Myspace Video. Then again people like you and I go to the site www.10questions.com view the videos, and vote on our favorite videos. NOW THIS is pretty revolutionary if you ask me! The Top 10 Questions (based on votes from US) will be submitted to the candidates, and videos of their responses will be posted. YOU DECIDE whether or not the candidates answered the questions, or answered them to your liking.
Go there now, find out how to submit your questions, and vote on the questions already submitted. Hillary Clinton support is needed, there are a couple of pointless questions to Sen. Clinton directly, go give them "Thumbs Down" votes. :)
Three of the videos posted are mine, so I hope you'll go give me some votes as well. You can see which ones are mine by looking below the videos. Mine will say "By : Chris1345"
Thanks, and check it out guys!
Chris McLeod
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
That's the best they've got?
All John Edwards can seem to talk about is how "unelectable" Senator Clinton will be in 2008. Of course the polls show otherwise, as we have shared with you all in the past. I've refrained, as a Clinton supporter, from bashing the others. I feel like all of the Democratic candidates are good people and deserve respect. Barack Obama started off promising a "different" kind of campaign, a campaign of "hope." When that didn't fair well for his dwindling poll numbers, he went on the attack like the rest of them.
John Edwards is basing everything on him being a former Senator from North Carolina. Well the Kerry/Edwards ticket didn't win North Carolina in 2004, so I'm not buying it that he's the candidate to win the South. I don't think we should nominate someone just because he has a smooth style and southern accent. I think you can win the South on honesty, being courageous, and being real - something Hillary Clinton is all of.
According to Real Clear Politics "Surveys also show that she (Clinton) widely is regarded as having many of the attributes needed by a president. An early September CNN poll found six in 10 respondents picked Clinton as having "the right experience to be president," while only 15 percent picked the second-place Democrat, Edwards, and 9 percent picked Obama."
"Surely even a bigger problem for Edwards is that recent ballot tests show Clinton beating the leading Republican contenders, and in most cases, running as well or better than her main Democratic rivals."
Is this all Edwards has got? He can have whatever accent he wants, but his short Senate voting record shows him as being pretty liberal. Nothing wrong with that, except when your whole primary campaign is based on being something other than that.
I haven't been hearing much talk from the Obama camp about Hillary's supposed and falsified "un-electability," they have chosen a different path. Attacking Hillary for votes that Obama skipped, and didn't bother even voting for or against-even though he was so "Strongly" opposed to it.
IS THIS the best you've got guys? Tell America where you stand on the issues. We know Hillary has passed the 50% mark in national polls for the Democratic primary, and beats all the Republican candidates in match ups for the general election - but surely your supporters and those you are interested in courting would like to know about your record and/or your plans for America's future, not just how you are "different" from Hillary Clinton. Isn't your record enough to make you feel secure?
Chris McLeod
John Edwards is basing everything on him being a former Senator from North Carolina. Well the Kerry/Edwards ticket didn't win North Carolina in 2004, so I'm not buying it that he's the candidate to win the South. I don't think we should nominate someone just because he has a smooth style and southern accent. I think you can win the South on honesty, being courageous, and being real - something Hillary Clinton is all of.
According to Real Clear Politics "Surveys also show that she (Clinton) widely is regarded as having many of the attributes needed by a president. An early September CNN poll found six in 10 respondents picked Clinton as having "the right experience to be president," while only 15 percent picked the second-place Democrat, Edwards, and 9 percent picked Obama."
"Surely even a bigger problem for Edwards is that recent ballot tests show Clinton beating the leading Republican contenders, and in most cases, running as well or better than her main Democratic rivals."
Is this all Edwards has got? He can have whatever accent he wants, but his short Senate voting record shows him as being pretty liberal. Nothing wrong with that, except when your whole primary campaign is based on being something other than that.
I haven't been hearing much talk from the Obama camp about Hillary's supposed and falsified "un-electability," they have chosen a different path. Attacking Hillary for votes that Obama skipped, and didn't bother even voting for or against-even though he was so "Strongly" opposed to it.
IS THIS the best you've got guys? Tell America where you stand on the issues. We know Hillary has passed the 50% mark in national polls for the Democratic primary, and beats all the Republican candidates in match ups for the general election - but surely your supporters and those you are interested in courting would like to know about your record and/or your plans for America's future, not just how you are "different" from Hillary Clinton. Isn't your record enough to make you feel secure?
Chris McLeod
Friday, October 12, 2007
Obama Campaign and the AP trying to paint Hillary as flip flopper..not gonna work!
I originally found this story from the Huffington Post (www.huffingtonpost.com). The Huffington Post, I must say is one of the most informative news/blogging sites out there. I recommend you all checking it out, if you haven't already.
They're right, it is interesting to have Fox News of all organizations, fact checking the Associated Press. Isn't the Associated Press supposed to be the non-biased ones? They need to check themselves.
Here's the story:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/10/associated_pres_8.php
Associated Press Is Outdone In Accuracy By...Fox News!
It's a very sad day for a reputable news organization when it finds itself badly outdone on accuracy by Fox News, but that's exactly what happened to the Associated Press today.
Update: Ben Smith says there's no flip-flop here, and Pat Healy suggests the same, only not as directly. And the Associated Press is now running a more accurate story with the old false lede rewritten.
----------
Chris McLeod
They're right, it is interesting to have Fox News of all organizations, fact checking the Associated Press. Isn't the Associated Press supposed to be the non-biased ones? They need to check themselves.
Here's the story:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/10/associated_pres_8.php
Associated Press Is Outdone In Accuracy By...Fox News!
October 12, 2007 -- 12:49 PM EST // //
It's a very sad day for a reputable news organization when it finds itself badly outdone on accuracy by Fox News, but that's exactly what happened to the Associated Press today. The AP is running with a story right now that strains as hard as Sisyphus did with his bolder to paint Hillary as a flip-flopper. The story claims that she has now reversed herself from her earlier criticism of Barack Obama's debate assertion that he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition. The only problem is that the story completely butchers the facts to do so:
CANTERBURY, N.H. (AP) -- Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition. Now she says she'd do the same thing, too.This characterization has now become an issue in the campaign, with Obama and John Edwards faulting her over it today. Unfortunately, however, Hillary didn't say this at all. What she did say, as Ben says, was this:
''I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading,'' she said at an apple orchard.Hillary is saying here that her administration would negotiate with Iran the country unconditionally -- something she's said in various forms repeatedly in the past. She is not saying -- as Barack Obama did -- that she'd personally meet with Iranian leaders without preconditions. Their dispute centered around whether to engage in unconditional personal diplomacy. Whichever side you take, and whatever you think of this distinction, there's just no meaningful flip-flop here.
Just a few moments ago, Fox News ran a segment on this very same thing -- and glory be, Fox actually got it right. After discussing Hillary's quotes, the Fox reporter criticized the AP as follows:
But the Associated press and the Obama campaign have seized on that, and characterized it as something of a flip flop, because Hillary Clinton criticized Barack Obama earlier this year when in a debate he said that he would meet in the first year of his presidency with a whole host of foreign despots, including Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, and Ahmadinejad of Iran, and that he'd do so without conditions.Yikes. When you find yourself getting fact-checked accurately by Fox News on the subject of Hillary Clinton, you know you're in a pretty bad place.Well, they claimed that Hillary Clinton suddenly embraced that position, but in truth she did not. Where Mr. Obama was talking about meeting with leaders in the first year of his administration, Hillary Clinton yesterday was talking about negotiations with Iran the country.
Update: Ben Smith says there's no flip-flop here, and Pat Healy suggests the same, only not as directly. And the Associated Press is now running a more accurate story with the old false lede rewritten.
----------
Chris McLeod
Senator Clinton, will be the "Civil Rights President"
According to the official Hillary Clinton campaign blog (http://hillaryclinton.com/blog/) :
(Believe it or not we are a grassroots blog, I know you thought we were official!)
This is very significant folks, because if it wasn't already evident before, Hillary Clinton is going to be the "Civil Rights President!"
Congressman John Lewis was an important figure and leader of the American Civil Rights Movement. He played a pivotal role in ending segregation. He has represented Georgia's 5th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives since 1987. For me, being a native Georgian, I take great joy in discussing his endorsement of Senator Clinton for President. He has always been a key figure in politics and civil rights in Georgia, as well as nationally.
He's lived a pretty historical life. He was only the 2nd African American to represent Georgia in the House since Reconstruction. He's a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, and has been senior chief deputy whip in the Democratic Caucus since 1991.
I hope all Clinton supporters will call or email Congressman John Lewis, and show our appreciation for his endorsement of Sen. Clinton in this campaign. If Mr. Lewis trusts Hillary to be the best candidate to lead the way for Civil Rights in this great country, well so do I!
-Chris McLeod-
(Believe it or not we are a grassroots blog, I know you thought we were official!)
The Clinton Campaign today announced the endorsement of civil rights leader Congressman John Lewis.
"I have looked at all the candidates, and I believe that Hillary Clinton is the best prepared to lead this country at a time when we are in desperate need of strong leadership," Rep. Lewis said. "She will restore a greater sense of community in America, and reclaim our standing in the world."
"I am proud and deeply honored to have the support of John Lewis, a great American hero," Clinton said. "John helped transform this nation, and his vital role in establishing civil rights for all Americans will never be forgotten."
Rep. Lewis is a civil rights pioneer who has devoted his life to equal rights for all Americans. From his days as a Freedom Rider and the head of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee, to his leadership of the "Bloody Sunday" march in Selma, Alabama, Lewis has been one of the most respected figures in the civil rights movement for four decades.
Rep. Lewis later served as Director of the Voter Education Project, helping register millions of new minorities to vote, and was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to direct more than 250,000 volunteers of ACTION, the federal volunteer agency.
Elected to the Atlanta City Council in 1981, Rep. Lewis was later elected to Congress in 1986, where he's represented Georgia's 5th Congressional District for the last 20 years. He is Senior Chief Deputy Whip for the Democratic Party leadership in the House, a member of the House Ways & Means Committee, a member of its Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, and Chairman of its Subcommittee on Oversight.
---------
This is very significant folks, because if it wasn't already evident before, Hillary Clinton is going to be the "Civil Rights President!"
Congressman John Lewis was an important figure and leader of the American Civil Rights Movement. He played a pivotal role in ending segregation. He has represented Georgia's 5th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives since 1987. For me, being a native Georgian, I take great joy in discussing his endorsement of Senator Clinton for President. He has always been a key figure in politics and civil rights in Georgia, as well as nationally.
He's lived a pretty historical life. He was only the 2nd African American to represent Georgia in the House since Reconstruction. He's a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, and has been senior chief deputy whip in the Democratic Caucus since 1991.
I hope all Clinton supporters will call or email Congressman John Lewis, and show our appreciation for his endorsement of Sen. Clinton in this campaign. If Mr. Lewis trusts Hillary to be the best candidate to lead the way for Civil Rights in this great country, well so do I!
-Chris McLeod-
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Clinton Proposes Universal 401(k) Plan
Latest Hillary News
-Hillary Beating Giuliani In Key Swing States
-Boston Goes Goo Goo for Hillary
-Clinton Unveils Retirement Savings Plan
-Selling Substance Over Style in Iowa
-NH Sen. Estabrook Backs Hillary
-Clinton Targets Retirement Security
-Poll: Hillary Holds Big Lead in Nevada
-Clinton Proposes Universal 401(k) Plan
-Clinton Outlines Innovation Agenda
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
-Hillary Beating Giuliani In Key Swing States
-Boston Goes Goo Goo for Hillary
-Clinton Unveils Retirement Savings Plan
-Selling Substance Over Style in Iowa
-NH Sen. Estabrook Backs Hillary
-Clinton Targets Retirement Security
-Poll: Hillary Holds Big Lead in Nevada
-Clinton Proposes Universal 401(k) Plan
-Clinton Outlines Innovation Agenda
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Clinton Leads Giuliani in Swing States
So listen, what we already knew is making headlines. We all knew Hillary Clinton could beat Giuliani in the General Election. In fact I've always believed she's the best candidate to beat him. Of course we don't know that he will be the Republican nominee, as he is behind in some of the key primary states, although he's ahead nationally. However, presuming Clinton is the Democratic nominee (and I think we have good reason to feel good that that may be the case), and Giuliani is the Republican nominee, Clinton is doing well matched up against him!
Check out the following new stats. I got this link from Huffingtonpost.com :
From Quinnepec University:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1109
October 10, 2007 - Clinton Express Rolls Through Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds --- FLORIDA: Clinton 46 - Giuliani 43; OHIO: Clinton 46 - Giuliani 40; PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 48 - Giuliani 42
------------------
More numbers and stats can be found at the link!
Chris McLeod
Check out the following new stats. I got this link from Huffingtonpost.com :
From Quinnepec University:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1109
October 10, 2007 - Clinton Express Rolls Through Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds --- FLORIDA: Clinton 46 - Giuliani 43; OHIO: Clinton 46 - Giuliani 40; PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 48 - Giuliani 42
| New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is overwhelming Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic primary field, and slowly increasing her lead over New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac University's Swing State Poll, three simultaneous surveys of voters in states that have been pivotal in presidential elections since 1964. | |
| Sen. Clinton's support appears to be as deep as it is wide. In Ohio, 74 percent of her supporters say they are not too likely or not likely at all to change their mind. In Florida, 59 percent of her supporters are unlikely to change their mind; in Pennsylvania it's 56 percent. | |
| Giuliani voters are less committed, as no more than 39 percent in any state say they are unlikely to change their mind. | |
| Clinton and Giuliani dominate their party primaries in each state, even though voters say Obama and Arizona Sen. John McCain are more principled in their decision-making. | |
| Matchups by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds: | |
| |
| "The news just keeps getting better for Sen. Clinton. She has a Democratic primary lead over Sen. Obama ranging from 27 to 34 points in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania and is widening her margin over the Republican hopefuls in each of those three critical states," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. | |
| "The candidates who trail Sen. Clinton and hope that they can pry voters away from her should wake up and smell the coffee. Not only is she far, far ahead, but a much greater share of her voters say they are unlikely to change their minds than those committed to other Democrats. This should not be any surprise. Sen. Clinton has been a favorite of Democratic activists for the past 15 years and benefits greatly from being Bill Clinton's wife - since he is probably the most popular Democrat in America," Brown added. | |
| Many Democrats think Clinton has the nomination "locked up," 44 percent in Florida, 43 percent in Ohio and 31 percent in Pennsylvania. | |
| Very few Republican voters think Giuliani has the nomination "locked up," 14 percent in Florida, 11 percent in Ohio and 15 percent in Pennsylvania. | |
| "Mayor Giuliani's lead over his Republican counterparts remains stable, but the vast, vast majority of Republicans don't believe he has the nomination locked up, and even six in ten of his supporters say they are somewhat or very likely to change their mind," Brown said. | |
------------------
More numbers and stats can be found at the link!
Chris McLeod
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Funniest Hillary Campaign Video Yet
Rob Reiner: Action!
Movie director Rob Reiner gives a few pointers to Hillary for President volunteers and encourages you to join them.
Make Noise, Be Heard, Make History
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Code To Repost This Bulletin Can Be Found at -- www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Movie director Rob Reiner gives a few pointers to Hillary for President volunteers and encourages you to join them.
Make Noise, Be Heard, Make History
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Code To Repost This Bulletin Can Be Found at -- www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Monday, October 8, 2007
Hillary On Target on Iran, Obama dazed and confused..
Look guys. I consider myself a loyal Democrat. I would support whatever Democrat wins the primary. But there's a reason I support Hillary Clinton above the pack. She knows what she means, means what she says, is strong and firm, and has the credentials to back it all up.
When Barack Obama did the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, I saw him as a "rising star" in the Democratic Party. Well folks, 2004 was not even 4 yrs ago. He's still rising, and still figuring some things out. Hillary Clinton has it all figured out!
Barack Obama has joined John Edwards in attacking Clinton on her vote for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, labeling Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. What everyone is forgetting, and maybe Obama doesn't know because he didn't even show up to vote yes or no on this bill, is that it doesn't give President Bush or any President the authority to go to War with Iran. She only voted for this bill after certain language was removed, that did insinuate authorization for war. This language was removed from the version Clinton voted "Yes" on.
The Clinton Campaign has released the following statement regarding Obama's attacks:
"It's unfortunate that Senator Obama is resorting to the same old attack politics as his poll numbers start falling. He knows that Senator Clinton was one of the first in Congress to say that Bush must seek an explicit authorization from Congress for any military action against Iran and that she is the lead co-sponsor of legislation by Jim Webb to prohibit funds for military action in Iran without approval from Congress. A flagging campaign is not an excuse to distort anyone’s record."
It is interesting that Obama conveniently missed this very important vote. If he was so against it, why didn't he show up to vote against it? It's obvious that he skipped the vote so he could use it for future campaign attacks against Clinton. Now he doesn't have to be held accountable on Iran one way or another. That's not doing what one thinks is in the best interest of the country. He didn't want to be attacked for voting against it, so he felt it easier to not vote at all. The safe way out! It's also interesting that Sen. Clinton is really the one being the positive campaigner here. I thought Obama was going to lead a "different" kind of campaign? How often do you hear Hillary attacking Obama? It's just not happening. She's leading a campaign educating voters on her record, and what kind of President she will be.
Unfortunately for him, he's getting desperate now, and resorting to unfounded attacks on Hillary's record, because he's finally feeling the vulnerability in this race. A word to the wise: it shows when you get desperate.
-Chris McLeod-
When Barack Obama did the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, I saw him as a "rising star" in the Democratic Party. Well folks, 2004 was not even 4 yrs ago. He's still rising, and still figuring some things out. Hillary Clinton has it all figured out!
Barack Obama has joined John Edwards in attacking Clinton on her vote for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, labeling Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. What everyone is forgetting, and maybe Obama doesn't know because he didn't even show up to vote yes or no on this bill, is that it doesn't give President Bush or any President the authority to go to War with Iran. She only voted for this bill after certain language was removed, that did insinuate authorization for war. This language was removed from the version Clinton voted "Yes" on.
The Clinton Campaign has released the following statement regarding Obama's attacks:
"It's unfortunate that Senator Obama is resorting to the same old attack politics as his poll numbers start falling. He knows that Senator Clinton was one of the first in Congress to say that Bush must seek an explicit authorization from Congress for any military action against Iran and that she is the lead co-sponsor of legislation by Jim Webb to prohibit funds for military action in Iran without approval from Congress. A flagging campaign is not an excuse to distort anyone’s record."
It is interesting that Obama conveniently missed this very important vote. If he was so against it, why didn't he show up to vote against it? It's obvious that he skipped the vote so he could use it for future campaign attacks against Clinton. Now he doesn't have to be held accountable on Iran one way or another. That's not doing what one thinks is in the best interest of the country. He didn't want to be attacked for voting against it, so he felt it easier to not vote at all. The safe way out! It's also interesting that Sen. Clinton is really the one being the positive campaigner here. I thought Obama was going to lead a "different" kind of campaign? How often do you hear Hillary attacking Obama? It's just not happening. She's leading a campaign educating voters on her record, and what kind of President she will be.
Unfortunately for him, he's getting desperate now, and resorting to unfounded attacks on Hillary's record, because he's finally feeling the vulnerability in this race. A word to the wise: it shows when you get desperate.
-Chris McLeod-
Thursday, October 4, 2007
CNN: With majority support, Hillary passes major milestone
I've posted some excerpts today from today's CNNarticle on Hillary Clinton's milestone in this election. We've got a long way to go before January, and especially before November - so don't get lazy or too comfortable ever, but the news is only getting better! This is significant news for the Hillary for President campaign!
The ABC News-Post polls, conducted September 27-30, had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points and involved telephone interviews with a national random sample of 1,114 adults.
From Bill Schneider
CNN senior political analyst
CNN senior political analyst
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Why is the latest ABC News-Washington Post poll released Wednesday different from all other polls? Because it shows Sen. Hillary Clinton passing a significant political milestone.
For the first time, a majority of Democrats nationwide supports Clinton for their party's nomination. Clinton's support in the Washington Post-ABC News poll jumped 12 points from last month, to 53 percent. She's 33 points ahead of her closest competitor, Sen. Barack Obama.
That establishes Clinton as the clear national front-runner. Being front-runner means being a target of criticism from other Democrats.
But does it mean she's likely to get the nomination?
Well, yes, if you look at the record. Which CNN did going back to the 1980 election. Every candidate who has gotten majority support in polls taken the year before the election has gone on to win the nomination.
Al Gore and George Bush both reached 50 percent in their parties in 1999. So did Bob Dole in 1995, George H.W. Bush in 1991 and 1987, and Walter Mondale in 1983.
What's behind the Clinton surge? Fifty-seven percent of Democrats think she's the candidate with the best chance to win the White House. That number went up 14 points in September. She also leads as the candidate who best reflects the Democratic Party's values.
The ABC News-Post poll is a national poll. National polls mean more than they used to. That's because of the frontloaded campaign calendar. The country is moving closer and closer to a national primary.
----
-Chris McLeod-How Do You Plan To Help Hillary in 2008
How Do You Plan To Help Hillary in 2008
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Hillary Or Obama at the MTV VMAs
Sodahead.com recently asked various celebrities at the MTV VMAs...Hillary or Obama? Watch the response.
Hillary on Sodahead
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Hillary Facebook Group / Hillary Myspace Group
Code To Repost This Bulletin Can Be Found at -- www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Hillary Or Obama at the MTV VMAs
Sodahead.com recently asked various celebrities at the MTV VMAs...Hillary or Obama? Watch the response.
Hillary on Sodahead
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Hillary Facebook Group / Hillary Myspace Group
Code To Repost This Bulletin Can Be Found at -- www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Stand By Hillary
Stand By Hillary
Check Out our Latest Blogposts
-Sen. Clinton responds to Bush's veto of SCHIP expansion
-Giuliani, hypocrite, attacks Sen. Clinton
-What color is in between red and blue?
-Polls prove Hillary is the candidate to beat in the general election
www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Latest Hillary News
-American Federation of Teachers Endorses Clinton
-Goo Goo Dolls Singer Rzeznik to Headline Clinton Fundraiser
- Poll: Clinton Holds Huge Lead on Electability
-American Federation of Teachers Backs Hillary
-lede: On Sputnik Anniversary, Clinton Unveils Science Agenda
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Grab Hillary Banners for your Myspace Here
Discuss Hillary
Hillary Facebook Group / Hillary Myspace Group
Check Out our Latest Blogposts
-Sen. Clinton responds to Bush's veto of SCHIP expansion
-Giuliani, hypocrite, attacks Sen. Clinton
-What color is in between red and blue?
-Polls prove Hillary is the candidate to beat in the general election
www.HillaryClintonNews2008.com
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Latest Hillary News
-American Federation of Teachers Endorses Clinton
-Goo Goo Dolls Singer Rzeznik to Headline Clinton Fundraiser
- Poll: Clinton Holds Huge Lead on Electability
-American Federation of Teachers Backs Hillary
-lede: On Sputnik Anniversary, Clinton Unveils Science Agenda
Donate $5 To The Hillary Campaign / Subscribe To Updates
Enter The Hillary Myspace Contest
Grab Hillary Banners for your Myspace Here
Discuss Hillary
Hillary Facebook Group / Hillary Myspace Group
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Sen. Clinton responds to Bush's veto of SCHIP expansion
Hillary Clinton commented today about Bush's veto of the bi-partisan bill expanding SCHIP. Democrats aligned with many Republicans to vote on a veto proof bill in the Senate, and sent it to Bush to sign. Unfortunately the House version of the bill came short of the needed votes to override President Bush's veto. It's unlikely Democrats/Republicans will be able to get enough Representatives in the House to support the bill when it comes back up on Oct. 17 .
However, hopefully the House leadership pressures those Representatives and fights this. There's still hope for millions of uninsured kids!
From Hillary Clinton:
"With the stroke of a pen, President Bush has robbed nearly four million uninsured children of the chance for a healthy start in life and the health coverage they need but can't afford. These children are invisible to this president, but they aren't invisible to the American people or to the overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress - and they aren't invisible to me."
-----
Chris McLeod
However, hopefully the House leadership pressures those Representatives and fights this. There's still hope for millions of uninsured kids!
From Hillary Clinton:
"With the stroke of a pen, President Bush has robbed nearly four million uninsured children of the chance for a healthy start in life and the health coverage they need but can't afford. These children are invisible to this president, but they aren't invisible to the American people or to the overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress - and they aren't invisible to me."
"I was proud to help create the Children's Health Insurance Program during the Clinton Administration, which today provides health insurance for six million children. In New York alone, almost 400,000 children benefit from CHIP every month. The president's veto today stopped us from insuring an additional 3.8 million children, including 72,000 more children in New York.
"I will continue to fight to provide health insurance to all children - as I have proposed in the Senate - and to pursue quality, affordable health care for all Americans. No child should be invisible in our country or in our health care system."
(source : www.hillaryclinton.com)-----
Chris McLeod
Giuliani, hypocrite, attacks Sen. Clinton
Giuliani is really getting desperate. He's losing support from conservative leaders by the day, and instead of fighting the right way to win the Republican primary, he's attacking Sen. Hillary Clinton to try to convince Republicans he's the one to beat Hillary.
First off, the obvious point is that we are still in the primary, and Giuliani is already spending resources on trying to attack Clinton. We all have heard these baseless Clinton attacks before. Republicans, especially Giuliani are trying to avoid talk of their positions on real issues, by running the usual attack smear campaign. Well guess what guys, whatever they want to say, it's already been said about Hillary before. She can stand up to any criticism with the best of them.
According to the AP:
"Republican Rudy Giuliani compared Hillary Rodham Clinton to 1972 Democratic nominee George McGovern on Wednesday and chided his rival for adding a Southern lilt to her voice as he intensified his criticism."
First of all Clinton lived a great portion of her life in Arkansas, and yes, I can tell you sometimes when you go back to those areas, you do pick up a little bit of the accent again. I was born, raised and lived most of my life deep in the South. I live in California now, but sometimes when I go back or even talk to family on the phone I can hear myself slip into an accent sometimes.
Also from the AP about Giuliani's latest attacks against Clinton:
HOPEFULLY VOTERS WON'T FORGET THAT RUDY GIULIANI VOTED FOR MCGOVERN IN '72. NOW IN 2007 HE'S ATTACKING HILLARY FOR BEING LIKE MCGOVERN.
Where DOES Mr. Giuliani stand on the issues? He changes his mind so often it's hard to keep up!
-Chris McLeod-
First off, the obvious point is that we are still in the primary, and Giuliani is already spending resources on trying to attack Clinton. We all have heard these baseless Clinton attacks before. Republicans, especially Giuliani are trying to avoid talk of their positions on real issues, by running the usual attack smear campaign. Well guess what guys, whatever they want to say, it's already been said about Hillary before. She can stand up to any criticism with the best of them.
According to the AP:
"Republican Rudy Giuliani compared Hillary Rodham Clinton to 1972 Democratic nominee George McGovern on Wednesday and chided his rival for adding a Southern lilt to her voice as he intensified his criticism."
First of all Clinton lived a great portion of her life in Arkansas, and yes, I can tell you sometimes when you go back to those areas, you do pick up a little bit of the accent again. I was born, raised and lived most of my life deep in the South. I live in California now, but sometimes when I go back or even talk to family on the phone I can hear myself slip into an accent sometimes.
Also from the AP about Giuliani's latest attacks against Clinton:
"Adding to the perception that she's unstoppable, Clinton picked up the endorsement of the 1.4 million-member American Federation of Teachers, increasing her union nods to six.
Other candidates trying to topple the two national front-runners courted voters in early voting states.
Three months before voting begins, polls show Clinton solidifying her months-long advantage for the Democratic nomination while the Republican race remains fluid. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, leads in national surveys, but GOP rivals Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and John McCain are in strong contention in various key states.
Positioning himself as the one Republican able to thwart another Clinton presidency, Giuliani lambasted Clinton's recent comments about giving a $5,000 savings bond to every U.S.-born baby.
"It's interesting that Hillary is taking something from the George McGovern playbook," Giuliani said in Manchester, N.H., likening her idea to the former South Dakota senator's proposal to send $1,000 to every U.S. resident.
In the 1972 election, Giuliani liked McGovern and his ideas enough to vote for him for president. The liberal lawmaker lost in a landslide to President Nixon.
Without naming Clinton, Giuliani also alluded to an appearance this past spring in Selma, Ala., in which she slipped into what sounded like a Southern accent before a largely black audience.
Asked by reporters whether he can win religious conservative votes, Giuliani said: "I don't have a different program for one group or another. I don't have a different accent for different parts of the country."
Clinton spokesman Phil Singer responded: "It's unfortunate that the mayor's entire campaign is premised on attacking others instead of talking about what he would do if elected."
HOPEFULLY VOTERS WON'T FORGET THAT RUDY GIULIANI VOTED FOR MCGOVERN IN '72. NOW IN 2007 HE'S ATTACKING HILLARY FOR BEING LIKE MCGOVERN.
Where DOES Mr. Giuliani stand on the issues? He changes his mind so often it's hard to keep up!
-Chris McLeod-
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
What color is in between red and blue?
I never claimed to be an expert on colors. But I know if you mix red and blue it makes violet. That's a color you don't hear much about in the political arena. "It's a violet state." Haven't heard that one yet!
However, some polls and research are now showing many southern states seen as "Red" are slowly turning to "Violet."
See the following article from InsiderAdvantage Georgia:
------------------------------
What's my point you may ask? Well Sen. Clinton is the candidate we need for the South in my opinion. Am I saying that we should expect Clinton to sweep the South? No, I don't think that's going to happen so suddenly, it will take time to win back the South. However, Howard Dean has been embarking on a "50-state strategy" for the DNC, and it will continue in the Presidential election. It's a good strategy, if you alienate every state in the South other than Florida, you will never win the South.
Many think of the South as so far out of reach that it's not worth bothering with. Don't forget that Bill Clinton won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, and came very close in Kansas in 1992. Hillary Clinton should be able to carry Arkansas, possibly Florida, if things keep going well regarding her public image as they have been she could pick up even more southern states.
Some of these Southern states are coming back around. They aren't that far out of reach. For instance, Georgia has never had a Republican Governor since before reconstruction until Sonny Perdue was elected in 2002. The south is within our reach, and Hillary is the one to do it!
-Chris McLeod-
However, some polls and research are now showing many southern states seen as "Red" are slowly turning to "Violet."
See the following article from InsiderAdvantage Georgia:
How 'Red' Will Georgia Be In Next Year's Presidential Race? Maybe Not As Red As Some Expect
(7/18/07) How “red” will Georgia be in next year’s presidential primary? Maybe not as red as conventional wisdom might suggest.
We asked this question of 1,081 registered voters during the period July 12-14, and weighted the survey for age, race and gender:
Q. Are you more likely to vote in next year’s Republican or Democratic Presidential primary in Georgia?
Here’s what they said:
Democrat: 39%
Republican 37%
No Opinion/Don’t Know: 24%
The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent.
The big story in this survey is with voters who describe themselves as independent.
Independent voters who already had made a choice said they preferred the Democratic primary by a 25 percent to 20 percent margin. More importantly, however, while most Republicans and Democrats stated that they would vote in their own party’s primary, over 53 percent of independents said they were undecided.
“This means that independent voters, who have for the past few election cycles trended towards the GOP, are less decided as to which party they prefer,” said InsiderAdvantage’s Matt Towery.
“Independents make up a huge portion of the vote in Georgia and many other large Southern states. Whether this is a trend or not will only be established as we see these independent voters starting to choose a primary or simply decide to sit the primaries out.’------------------------------
What's my point you may ask? Well Sen. Clinton is the candidate we need for the South in my opinion. Am I saying that we should expect Clinton to sweep the South? No, I don't think that's going to happen so suddenly, it will take time to win back the South. However, Howard Dean has been embarking on a "50-state strategy" for the DNC, and it will continue in the Presidential election. It's a good strategy, if you alienate every state in the South other than Florida, you will never win the South.
Many think of the South as so far out of reach that it's not worth bothering with. Don't forget that Bill Clinton won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, and came very close in Kansas in 1992. Hillary Clinton should be able to carry Arkansas, possibly Florida, if things keep going well regarding her public image as they have been she could pick up even more southern states.
Some of these Southern states are coming back around. They aren't that far out of reach. For instance, Georgia has never had a Republican Governor since before reconstruction until Sonny Perdue was elected in 2002. The south is within our reach, and Hillary is the one to do it!
-Chris McLeod-
Polls prove Hillary is the candidate to beat in the general election
Despite the common myth that Hillary can win the primary but never a general election, she is (according to the polls) the best one to beat the Republicans should she win the nomination. A lot of people like to ignore polls, but when polls from Fox News to CNN to Rasmussen all indicate the same trends, the truth can't be ignored.
It's spin if you ask me. This nonsense about Hillary not being electable. Obama supporters (some of them I will say) try to portray Hillary as unelectable, and Republicans have been trying to do their own reverse psychology on voters too. The truth is in the numbers, and she's ahead.
Go to Real Clear Politics for more info:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html
And check it out:
They take an average of 5 major polls that pit candidates from both parties together. Overall she leads Giuliani by +5%, Obama only leads Giuliani by +.6%.
She leads Fred Thompson by +10.7%, while Obama leads Thompson by +9.7%
She leads Mccain by +4.6%, while Obama leads Mccain by +3.7%
She leads Mitt Romney by +11.7%, while Obama is close and leads Romney by +11.4%
-Chris McLeod-
It's spin if you ask me. This nonsense about Hillary not being electable. Obama supporters (some of them I will say) try to portray Hillary as unelectable, and Republicans have been trying to do their own reverse psychology on voters too. The truth is in the numbers, and she's ahead.
Go to Real Clear Politics for more info:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html
And check it out:
They take an average of 5 major polls that pit candidates from both parties together. Overall she leads Giuliani by +5%, Obama only leads Giuliani by +.6%.
She leads Fred Thompson by +10.7%, while Obama leads Thompson by +9.7%
She leads Mccain by +4.6%, while Obama leads Mccain by +3.7%
She leads Mitt Romney by +11.7%, while Obama is close and leads Romney by +11.4%
-Chris McLeod-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
