Fresh of one of the most family-oriented holidays of the year, I’m sure all of you will know exactly what I’m talking about with the following scene:
Half a dozen extended family members crowded in a small living room trying to accomplish a task nobody really knows how to do. At least twice as many proposals as people. And somehow everybody gets to thinking that if they just repeat their idea often enough, at loud enough volume, it will become the best idea. Total chaos. “Too many cooks,” as they say.
Except we’re not arguing about how to tell if the turkey is done, or what the best route to the movie theater is. We’re arguing about how you’re supposed to put an I.V. into somebody’s arm.
Yes, that’s right. An I.V. In my father-in-law’s arm. He needs his daily super-dose of intravenous antibiotics to rid his heart valve of a nasty infection that almost took his life just a couple weeks ago.
It started with what seemed like a bad cold. Eventually he grew so weak that he was bedridden. But he still went to work painting houses. He would have his workers drive him to the worksite, then he would lie down on a paint tarp on the front lawn and do his best to continue to direct things. My generation finds this to be utter lunacy, but we also know his generation is just like that. He survived a war–barely–during his childhood, then moved to America to offer a better life to his children. Living through a war close up does something to people. It makes them to go work when their hearts are all but failed.
Eventually all he could keep down was Pedialyte and we finally persuaded him to go to the hospital. Heart valve infection, very lethal (for obvious reasons), massive intravenous antibiotics needed, after the infection clears up evaluate for permanant damage that would require surgery. After a short stay in the hospital, he is cleared to leave and finish the course of I.V. antibiotics at home.
As you already know, this is where the story gets heartbreakingly frustrating.
At first, he had a nurse that would come daily to hook up his I.V. and monitor him for the approx. 20 minutes it took for the antibiotics to drip down through the tubes into a catheter in his arm. But apparently the company that employs the nurse was having issues with my father-in-law’s insurance (a private supplement to Medicare). My father-in-law tried to sort it out, spending endless precious Thanksgiving-weekend family time on the phone, on hold. Partly because who the heck can figure out that insurance B.S., and partly, I’m sure, because English isn’t his first language, it didn’t get sorted out.
So the nurse stopped coming. On her last visit, she tried her best to teach my sister-in-law what to do. But my father-in-law wasn’t there at the time (she came unscheduled, who knows if her employer even sent her or if she just took pity on us) so it couldn’t be a complete demonstration.
And that brings us to the day after Thanksgiving. We’re in the living room at each other’s throats about how to put an I.V. in my father-in-law’s arm. Oops! I dropped that! Now what? Do you think if I wipe it off with this alcohol wipe it will be ok? Bubbles, look at all those bubbles in the tube, there were never any bubbles in there when the nurse did it, were there? Sh*t! The liquid’s all over the floor! Damn it, I thought I saw the nurse do that to prime it.
Then we get back to those pesky bubbles. Somebody suggests that if you flick the tube where a bubble is with your finger, the bubble goes away. Some other people start in on flicking different parts of the length of tube, while others are still arguing about the spill and other ideas for fixing the bubbles. Then somebody else yells out that, hey, the flicking thing just makes tons of microscopic bubbles. Others look at their segments and, sure enough, all that all the flickers have done is make tons of little bubbles. More arguing and blaming. Somebody yells from another room something about what they just read on wikipedia about I.V.s. The surreality of practicing medicine using wikipedia is making my head spin. I turn away.
Then I notice that the 2 year old is missing. Arg! Can’t find her anywhere. Finally find her cowering under a blanket upstairs in my in-law’s bed. She’s crying. I try to get her to say what’s wrong but she won’t. But I know. “Harabaji’s going to be ok,” I tell her. She blankly repeats it back, but she’s far from sure. “Harabaji need to go to the doctor,” she says. “Doctor fix it all better.” Due to some birth defect problems with her brother, we’ve had plenty of talks about how doctors “fix it all better.” If only it were that simple. (brother’s problems were the subject of rant Pt. 1)
My FIL is still alive so I guess we did alright. (Everyone says first few minutes after they finally hooked him up were, well, tense. Thankfully I missed that part, upstairs consoling the 2-year-old. sigh.)
People, if you watched Sicko and bawled through at least part of it (who didn’t??) then
you know I’m not the only one who has had to witness an awful scene like this. You know that more than one 2-year-old has been traumatized from absorbing the worry of the adults around her. All this agony was caused by the fact that congress chose to privatize the Rx part of Medicare, thus leaving my FIL’s care in the hands of corporations with every reason to deny care and hedge up the way with Kafakaesque policies. This is America! We are so much better than this!! When are we going to fix this? What will it take? What can we DO?? Give me your ideas because I need to get this anger out by DOING something or else I’ll go crazy.
(I’ve now included some stuff on Dan Walters. Enjoy. Disclosure: I do work for Yes on 93. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)
UPDATE: I saw Dan Walters’ editorial when I wrote this post this morning, but if you’ve read Calitics very long you’ll see that I’m not really feeling his analysis. But Bill Cavala says it far better than I. Over at CA Progress Report, Bill lays into Dan Walters:
Dan Walters should have been a writer for PRAVDA. He knows all the tricks of making propaganda look like journalistic analysis. Today he twists the report of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies.
Well, Dr. Cavala should know that few are as adept as Dan Walters at spinning what might look like up to you and me into down for his Bee column. Just like Kevin Spillane of the official No on 93 campaign, Walters does a fine job of turning what is essentially an endorsement of Prop 93 into something else. It’s a gift I suppose. But, more to the heart of the specific issue here is that Walters is still miffed that there is no redistricting reform on the ballot. He apparently thought that the two had to be linked. However, the only person who linked the two reforms was the Governator. More from Cavala:
But Walters goes further, attempting to bolster the argument of the paid “No” on 93 campaign, which argues that we should condition our term limit vote on an evaluation of the Speaker and of the Pro Tem. Specifically, Walter’s writes, “once the term limit ballot measure was launched, they reneged on redistricting reform, without so much as an explanation”. To whom did they “renege” on such a promise? To Walters?
The dubious connection between redistricting and term limit reform was made by the Governor. He announced last winter he’d support the latter in return for the former. Both Democratic leaders tried to accommodate him – difficult, because he hasn’t a clue as to what “redistricting reform” means”. They failed in that effort, but not “without an explanation”.
The Pro Tem’s efforts stalled because Speaker Pelosi was unwilling to chance her Speakership and Democratic control of the US House of Representatives to the roll of the dice. Her opinion not only carries moral suasion within Democratic circles, it carries the certainty of a highly funded “No” campaign that would have split the party in a Presidential year. Perata ultimately offered to sacrifice the Senate’s redistricting authority over Senate districts and was turned down by the Republicans.
But, including the backstory or a real explanation would take up more than his allotted word limit, and really throw off his rhythm. And you know Dan is always a-rockin’ to the beat. However, instead of picking the facts that work with his opinion, perhaps we’d be better off with “Just the Facts, Dan.”
Original story over the flip.
A friend of mine, Sasha Horwitz, that I graduated from UC Berkeley’s policy school wrote a report a little while ago about term limits. You can download the PDF here. It took a bunch of research from a previous PPIC report, some analysis of some capitol watchers and pundits (like um, the force of nature that is Dan Walters), and synthesizes it in with some original analysis to come up with a finding that Prop 93’s twelve year plan would “improve some of [California’s term limits] structural weaknesses.”
So, it’s hard to see the report as anything but an endorsement of Prop 93’s purpose. But, as in any academic report, there is a lot of hemming and hawing. That’s just good 8-fold path analysis. Mad Props to Sasha, but it also grants a lot of wiggle room for political spin. You know as somebody who’s worked in politics for a while, and who has been educated in public policy, it’s pretty clear that there are some inherent conflicts there.
Richard Stapler, a spokesman for “Yes on 93.” “And Prop. 93 retains what’s good about term limits. We applaud the study’s findings.”
Kevin Spillane, spokesman for the “No on 93” campaign, countered that the study affirms term limits’ benefits and debunks some claims made by proponents. (MediaNews 11.26.07)
See? That’s some serious spin. Spillane, who does a lot of work on behalf of Howard Jarvis initiatives, manages to make some lemonade out of those lemons. In the end, what Mr. Spillane is arguing is that we should reject Prop 93 not because it’s bad policy, but because he doesn’t like people messing with his group’s law. He doesn’t dispute the underlying fact that this reports thinks that our system will be better after Prop 93. He just spins some more.
Look, before Prop 93, we had term limits. After Prop 93, we have term limits. This year out of the 80 Assemblymembers, 38 were freshman. What business could sustain such turnover? Yet, that is exactly what Spillane is advocating. How can we expect good results from our government when we don’t give them a reasonable chance of success?
Yeah, our prison system is messed up. In one story, a prisoner tells of how he became addicted to drugs while in prison. Another tells of how difficult it is to access services to help him kick drugs. At any rate, the video is quite informative; I highly advise checking out the video here. Kudos to the Bee for providing good multimedia content.
From Iowa to California to Massachusetts, the national healthcare debates are finally starting to hit the key point: the problem of the health insurance corporations. We’ll take a look below…cross-posted at the National Nurses Organizing Committee/California Nurses Association’s Breakroom Blog, as we organize for GUARANTEED healthcare on the single-payer model.
Clinton (and Edwards, Romney, Schwarzenegger, etc.) supports the individual mandate, requiring every person to carry health insurance, most likely purchased from one of the huge insurance corporations that have been busily gutting out health care system for their own profits. Obama is put into a difficult spot by charges that he doesn’t support “universal” care, but argues that the reason people don’t carry insurance is because they can’t afford-not, usually, that they don’t want it.
Of course, both sides are ignoring the key point: every other industrialized democracy is successfully operating some version of a single-payer system; only we put insurance companies ahead of public health needs. Nonetheless, it’s important to decide if we want to hand over more customers, influence, adn revenues to the same insurance corporations that are speedily wrecking our health care system.
Out in California, Schwarzenegger and the legislature is considering their own mandates, cheered on lustily by insurance donors greedy for more profits. One key problem?
public health officials who provide most of the care for millions of uninsured residents are increasingly concerned that the proposed system could leave big financial holes in the state’s safety net.
Which only makes sense…if you channel billions in public subsidies to insurance corporations, and guarantee their profits, of course the public health systems take a huge financial hit. That’s where the money comes from.
Well, I suppose juls is the one that really should be writing this, as she wrote far, far more about Arnold than really anybody in the state, certainly in the blogosphere. But directly from the, uh, what took you so long files, comes this editorial from the right-leaning LA Daily News:
But Schwarzenegger has bested even Davis in fundraising. Whereas Davis grossed $120 million in seven years, Schwarzenegger has raked in $125.8 million in only six. And like the special interests that bankrolled Davis, the special interests that are pouring millions into Schwarzenegger are no doubt looking for something in return.
***
And as long as the special interests control the state’s political process, they will continue to bankrupt California(LA Daily News 11.26.07)
Of course, the LA Daily News, as a typical reactionary, fails to make that last logical leap. That if the special interests are killing us, we need clean money. What other solution is there to the problems they’ve outlined? Of course, they don’t think as corporations as special interests, that label is reserved for unions and other organizations that support workers’ rights.
UNDERSTAND:
“In the Madina, Muhammad created a ‘brotherhood’ whose loyalty was to himself alone as the ‘apostle of Allah’ and bound all of them into one unit for defense and offence. This ‘brotherhood’ took complete precedence over all other ties and relationships; blood relations and loyalties to family and tribe were from then on completely obliterated to such an extent that a believing father would murder an unbelieving son and visa versa.” http://www.inthename…
Most of the noble, decent and chivalrous characteristics of the pagan Arabs were discarded and replaced by a ‘theology’ based on the lust for plunder, slavery, hatred, destruction, and war. Muhammad became the undisputed leader of a Mafia type criminal brotherhood. Just like most criminal societies throughout history, he and his fellow thugs started to prey on the weakest elements among their victims. He deceived them into thinking they were serving his created god-Allah by plundering outsiders.
Were they [Los Angeles Police] seeking a “militant and severe brand of Islam” because they do not know Islam?
They didn’t understand, for instance, that mosques are usually the wrong places to look for the Muslim terror perps. This was just a “roust” and nothing more. The central L.A. mosque has inter-connected tunnels UNDER the city!
L.A. [and it’s multiple mosques] is packed full of cells serving the false prophet Muhammad the Terrible. http://www.internetm…
Everyone has a specific role. The cell consists of the Mujahids {Jihadi warriors} but each of them needs support staff and funds. “The believers who did not join the Ghazwa [Islamic raid or invasion] and those who fought are not equal in reward.” Imam Bukhari
In reality, a mosque is a ‘cell’ [A fortress, refuge, hate distribution center] because they all follow the same criminal Muhammad the Muslim Mass Murderer, a known and celebrated criminal cult hero who pilfered information from the teachings of others and twisted and cobbled it together creating a ‘religious’ crime racket. Yet, they have Muslim Apologists to deal with authorities and run the “Peaceful Muslim” mantra on them. http://www.internetm…
They can be stopped. Stop Muslim immigration and control our nations borders, before they reach 3%. Any other method seems ludicrous. Death is an invitation and not a penalty to them.
Terrorist “cells” are frequently referenced but much less often defined.
The concept of the ‘terrorist cell’ may be mostly western, but it is based on a Middle-Eastern model dating back to the early 1920s. During that time in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood gained prominence as a leader in the fight against European colonialism. As an organization the Muslim Brothers divided itself into al quads, which is Arabic for a cluster of grapes (1924). The idea was that if you destroy a single grape, the others will not only survive but will be capable of carrying out the groups mission. Furthermore, only a single unit need survive, because all contain the seeds (of war) necessary for propagation; in theory a single unit could in time reconstitute the entire organization. The underlying principle here is that if you destroy 9 out of 10 existing cells, you’ve failed to eliminate the group. Modern Muslim terrorist al quads, or cells, are similar to the original Muslim Brothers model. How many cells are operating on college campuses across America with President Bush freely admitting 20,000 young male Muslim Wahabis on the Saudi Student Fas-trac program?
Like rats, they do multiply rapidly with four wives permitted and abortion punishable by death!
The Cell defines a Muslim terrorist cell as a group of 4-12 individuals working together for the purpose of either supporting or carrying out acts of violence against a specific target or an innocent populace.
“O Prophet Muhammad, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.” Qur’an:8:65
L.A. authorities already know that bridges and airports are in the Muslim sites with an horrific office building attack plot foiled. Just how many Jihadi cells there are, or where they are located, no one is sure, nor can the police hope to know.
But one thing that is certain is that cells are a vital component of all Muslim terrorist organizations.
There are many Muslim terrorist groups worldwide, but the focus is on Muslims inside America, and in L.A. proper: C.A.I.R., al-Qaeda, Fedayeen, Mufti Mujahideen, Turkey’s Special Organization, Ustashi, Taliban, Fatah, PLO, Islamic Jihad, HAMAS, Hizballah, Abu Nidal, Shamil Basayev, Army of Muhammad, Order of Holy Warriors, Salafia Jihadia, Tawhid & Jihad, Chechyna Jihadi, Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, etc. are ALL represented here.
What an absolute nightmare for Law Enforcement!
Cells are mobile, autonomous, and flexible in the range of targets or objectives in which they may engage. The 19 hijackers from September 11th were an example of one al-Qaeda cell, though operationally they divided even further into four groups, each one assigned a specific airliner. These cells had a massive support network; providing lodging, transportation, reservations, instructions, strategy changes, financial support, and, most importantly Muhammadan ‘spiritual’ repetition and bolstering. Still, several of the Muslims got drunk the night before the diabolical mission.
There are different types of cells, most notably operational and support. Operational cells are the pointed ends of the spear; they are comprised of the individuals who will actually conduct attacks or suicide-murder missions. Operational cells carried out the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, the bombings of the American embassies in Africa, and in the post-9/11 world the attacks on a housing complex outside of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, U.K. train murders, etc. Support cells are harder to quantify, but in a broad sense they facilitate the supply, training, and movement of operational cells. Here is where the mosque members can be useful and may never be apprehended. Remember. They all learn from the same book!
Operational cells will eventually carry out an attack thus revealing their existence if it wasn’t previously known. Because death is desirable in a major attack they will not be caught and punished, in this life.
Support cells will remain clandestine even after an attack, and will therefore be much harder to find. Overall the amount of information known about al-Qaeda cells and how they operate is fairly clear. Cut off the funding by controlling the oil that is the bank. Our “Partners in the War on ‘tare’ Saudi Arabia” are the financiers, expeditors and terror manpower providers funding the fortess (mosque) building across America.
Our leader is the facilitator because he has made legitimate what is actually a continuing criminal enterprise: Islam. “Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah’s Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: ‘You are not a believer!’ Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty.” Qur’an:4:94 http://www.prophetof…
——————–
“Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.”
– George Washington –
Well, maybe it was 8 months ago now, but I remember vividly saying, in print even, that primaries are important to the democratic process:
In American democracy, we are only guaranteed a few opportunities to truly speak our mind, and for most Californians, that is exclusively through the ballot box. If we only have meaningless general elections, and our primaries are uncontested, do we really live in a democracy at all? (Capitol Weekly 2/27/07)
In high political circles, the challenge of an incumbent in a party primary is considered the ultimate taboo.
It shouldn’t be that way. Democracy is supposed to be about the empowerment of the electorate, not entitlement of the powerful in Washington and Sacramento.
***
All of this competition is healthy, even if it’s generating angst among top Democrats in Sacramento and Washington. As Speier put it, “Unlike the Supreme Court, these are not lifetime appointments.”(SF Chron 11.25.07)
I’ll be waiting for my royalty check to arrive in the mail. Barring that, I suppose I appreciate the Chronicle underlining the importance of primaries.
December 1, 2007 – Des Moines, IA, Brown & Black Forum
December 1, 2007 – Des Moines, IA, Heartland Presidential Forum
December 4, 2007 – Des Moines, IA, NPR News/Iowa Public Radio Debate
December 10, 2007 – Los Angeles, California, CBS
December 13, 2007 – Johnston, Iowa, Des Moines Register Democratic Debate
December 17, 2007 – Boston, MA
January 15, 2008 – Las Vegas, Nevada
Obama Apperances and Campaign Events
November 26, 2007 – Rally with Barack, Littleton, NH
November 27, 2007 – The Obama Foreign Policy Summit, Live Streaming, 11:00 AM EST
November 29, 2007 – Barack Obama at The Apollo, New York, NY
November 30, 2007 – Barack Obama and Former Sec of Navy, Richard Danzig, Washington, D.C.
December 2, 2007 – Countdown to Change, Boston, MA
December 11, 2007 – Generation Obama in Seattle, Seattle, WA
Is Obama’s IowaSurgeFor Real? psericks,The Real Obama Generation?
Guess What??? Michelle Obama is to be a guest host on The View!!!Guess What??? Now, Michelle will not be a guest host on The View. Something called a Writers Strike is the reason to not cross any picket lines. Oh, and that little debate on CBS, December 10th? May be sacked, as well. Stay tuned.
Obama Working to GetSeniors ObamaTells Texas Real Change is Coming Andrew Sullivan on Last Week’sMud
obama in manchester, nh
Audio/Video
Council Bluffs Video, November 24th; barack, michelle and the kids; barack on teacher’s pay in harlan, ia; NPR, Obama/Clinton Campaign in Early States; NPR, Obama, Clinton Stop Pulling Punches; 45 Days Til Iowa; Hope and Change, Ad, South Carolina
Democrat Barack Obama sharply criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton on Sunday for her past support of NAFTA, saying the former first lady had changed her mind about the trade agreement only after becoming a presidential candidate.
“I think it’s important to note that Senator Clinton was a cheerleader for NAFTA for more than a decade,” Sen. Obama said at a news conference where he accepted the endorsement of a regional chapter of the United Auto Workers.
“I realize that changing your position to suit the politics of the moment might be smart campaign tactics but isn’t the kind of strong, principled leadership America needs right now,” Obama said. more
howardpark’s Must Read Diary on Canvassing inNew Hampshire OprahGoin’ to Iowa Iowan Finds New Loyalty inObama Mike Luxon Obama
Electabilityis Key Among Iowa Democrats
Well, it is shaping up to be a key of the argument. Not the total argument, but a great key. We have great candidates this cycle. But which one will emerge is the key.
Nearly half the Iowa Democrats in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll – and nearly seven in 10 New Hampshire Democrats – said New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the party’s most electable candidate.
Yes, that is in the CBS Poll. But, when you talk to Democrats, they are stating things vastly different. I wrote a diary called, “The Experience Game. Though, electability is a key, it is not the total winning key for this nomination. Especially, since Democrats are shifting to a new direction, with new ideas.
The top three candidates are electable. For me, Clinton is the most vulnerable. Yes, with baggage and all. The Clinton decision will be made by Democrats, knowing and accepting, that she is the most vulnerable candidate, and willing to fight for her, with baggage and all. John Edwards is very electable. His main problem is beyond Iowa. He of the top three has raised the least amount of money, but the one Democrat with fantastic plans. Many are wondering how he will fight February 5th and beyond, with possible limited resources. The Edwards decision will be made by Democrats knowing and accepting, that he is the one Democrat who accepted public financing, and that he will not be able to use any funds until September. Meaning he will beholden to whatever 527’s will step in and free publicity. Barack Obama is very electable. Out of all the Democrats he has a huge likeability factor and crosses over well with Independents and Republicans. His problem is the perceived lack of experience. The Obama decision will be made by Democrats, knowing and accepting that he is the one Democrat that will bring change to the ticket, and White House. And experience?
Hillary Clinton declared the other day — apropos of whom, she didn’t say, or need to — “We can’t afford on-the-job training for our next president.” Barack Obama immediately retorted, “My understanding is that she wasn’t Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration. I don’t know exactly what experience she’s claiming.” As wit, that round goes to Obama. Clinton was elected to the Senate in 2000, her first experience of public office. Obama was an Illinois state senator for seven years before being elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004. In terms of experience in elective office, this seems to be a wash.
But since she brought it up, how important is experience in a candidate for president? If experience were a matter of offices held, however briefly, the best candidate running would be Bill Richardson, the governor of New Mexico and former so many different things that you can hardly believe this is the same person popping up again. But that is ticket-punching, not experience.
This is correct. The only one with vast experience on paper, along with life, is Bill Richardson, period. So, experience has been used very loosely here. Just because one was in the White House does not mean anything, unless he/she was president. As I stated before, only former presidents and that present sitting one, are qualified to step into the role of President of the United States.
Clinton touts experience, but we ask “What experience?” We are still, waiting for that question to be answered, because she won’t answer it. Though she continuously provides it in speeches of what she did as First Lady. Her senate record is that of a junior senator, not used much. Especially, with these disastrous war votes, but if you are going to talk experience, provide the information so we, can examine it. Edwards was a one-term senator from North Carolina, whose record mirrors that of a conservative moderate, not like the populist campaign he is running now. Obama has been in the Illinois State Senate, along with his almost three years as a U.S. Senator. If anyone has more legislative experience, it is Barack Obama. But, the naysayers want Washington, D.C. experience, and I say, that is the problem.
In the end, all three candidates have the experience to walk into the White House and lead. Now, it is up to Democrats, what type of leadership they want.
It was the final question last night at a town meeting here for Senator Barack Obama. Of all the hands that were raised in the air, he called on a woman seated in the middle of the crowd.
From the moment she rose to speak, it was clear the exchange was going to be interesting.
“I want to know specifically what you would do to protect this country from terrorism,” said the woman, who later introduced herself as Jane Svoboda, 64. “And are you going to close the borders and get rid of the illegal immigrants?” NYT
Professor Lawrence Tribe inDes Moinesfor Barack Changevs. Status Quo
Sven, @ My Silver State, has a, “What I Like About…” series going for each of the Democratic Candidates. His take is short, sweet and to the point. Check it out, here.
Polls, Polls, Polls
Well, one week from December and crunch time. So, the polls are on the move. And it looks upward, for Barack. Ok, latest Iowa Washington Post/ABC Poll, has Obama 30, Clinton 26, Edwards 22. Now, another New Hampshire Poll, from CNN/WMUR continues to show Clinton sliding downward. My take is this. Folks are now listening, very closely to these candidates and the gap is narrowing for front runner, Hillary Clinton. Iowa the first state to set its mark. At this point, too close to call, a squeaker to the end.
* Reform No Child Left Behind. * Ensure access to high-quality early childhood education programs and child care opportunities so children enter kindergarten ready to learn. * Work to place effective teachers in every classroom in America, especially those in high-poverty, high-minority areas. * Reward effective teachers for taking on challenging assignments and helping children succeed. * Support highly-effective principals and school leaders. * Make science and math education a national priority. * Reduce the high school dropout rate by focusing on proven methods to improve student achievement and enhance graduation and higher education opportunities. * Close the achievement gap and invest in what works. * Empower parents to raise healthy and successful children by taking a greater role in their child’s education at home and at school.
For teacherken’s analysis of Obama’s plan, it is here. Well, worth the read.
Undecided Voters Give Obama Hope
David Tothill is neither a Republican nor a Democrat but he knows what he wants in the 2008 White House race — a fresh face.
“I like to believe that we can have a leader whose family name is not Bush or Clinton,” said the 53-year-old retired software engineer after hearing Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama speak. “I like what Obama had to say.”
The first-term Illinois senator is counting on voters like Tothill, one of many undecided independent voters who can cast ballots in either the Republican or Democratic primary in the influential early voting state of New Hampshire, well ahead of the November 2008 election. more
Obama Gets It With the Small Town Media
Last week, Senator Barack Obama appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” sitting in the venerable chair where presidential hopefuls have tested their mettle for 60 years. That, however, is not the only important interview Mr. Obama has conducted in recent days.
After delivering a speech and taking questions Monday from voters here in Clarion, a town of 3,000 people in north-central Iowa, Mr. Obama had one more item on his itinerary: a conversation with The Clarion Wright County Monitor.
As a dozen or so reporters for big-city papers, magazines and television networks packed their bags and headed to the next campaign stop, Mr. Obama lingered behind to chat with Barb Mussman, publisher of the weekly newspaper. For 17 years she has been putting out the paper, but never before has a presidential campaign offered an interview. more
ObamaTalks About Drugs
Everyone knows that Obama is candid and forthright. We also know by his admission that he talks frank about drug use. What I like about this honest admission, which he has written about, is that it shows all of us that no one is perfect. In fact, who doesn’t know someone that have been touched by drug usage and alcohol usage. And many reading this probably are still in recreational usage. The point is that sometimes you must walk through the fire, to find out who you are. To me, Barack Obama, is a role model. A role model of what is possible. So, many are told that it can not be done. So, many are not given help when needed. So, many just drift away. But, when you look at Barack Obama, he is what possiblity should be. Role model, you say? Damn right.
If you appreciate the weekly Obama Roundup, then Tip My Obama Jar!! Minimum five dollars. This contribution goes directly to the Obama Campaign. We are in the last stretch of fundraising, Quarter 4, it ends December 31st. Remember to make your contribution.
::
icebergslim’s last word: harold washington and barack obama
I woke up today and the first thing that caught my eye was this beautiful diary, remembering the former Chicago Mayor Harold Washington. Twenty years since his death.
This diary took me back down memory lane. 1983. My first vote was cast for Harold Washington, Mayor of Chicago, Illinois.
What made this race a national headline was that Washington was Black. But the real story was that Chicagoans voted for change.
As Nuisance describes Washington, I remember Chicago, back then. A very racially divided city, still is, but much better than 25 years ago.
This was the very first campaign I worked on, with my mother. We met in basements of churches all over Chicago. Getting trained, making sure we knew the talking points, Washington’s positions, and how to listen to folk.
My mother was a precinct captain in our neighborhood and knew everyone. I and my siblings were always dragged around to some political, something or the other, by my mother growing up. But this time, I marched with my mother through our neighborhood and many others, talking about Harold.
I can’t describe to you the feeling of hope and possibility. I can’t. Every time it seemed that one fire was out, sigh, another started. It was a heated campaign, and yes, racially charged. But you know what? We followed Harold’s lead. We said, “We must try to bring this city together.”
We saw Harold go into the very neighborhoods, you just don’t go into, talking to Whites, Hispanics, about something new. And it just seemed that when he went into hostility, he walked out with possibility.
That is how he won. That is how he became Mayor of Chicago.
I guess that is what is going on with Barack Obama. Many of us advocates, supporters that have worked tirelessly for various candidates had just given up hope. We just got tired of the same old thing. And then a tall, lanky, bi-racial, man walks on the scene and wakes us up to possibility.
Man, that possibility is a mother. Many of us have stayed wake, wondering, worrying, can he do it? Can he win the nomination? Can he become president? And guess what, many of us are back on the beat. Talking, walking, explaining, and donating to Barack Obama.
Like Harold Washington, Obama has woken us all up. Yep, to good, ol’ possibility. Possibility is something else, but in the end, if it wins? That’s some possibility that will be better for us, all.
burlington, ia
Like Barack Obama, we must remember to follow his lead. Yes, in a heated election cycle it can be rough, but we must remember, that we are advocates and supporters of Barack. He would expect nothing less of us.
::
well it is getting cold. snoop and hobbes are putting on their doggie coats for a cold fall walk, and as all things go, remember to focus on obama, and not the drama.
*FYI, ‘This Week With Barack Obama’ slated next Sunday, will be posted next Monday, December 3, 2007, a ‘Late Edition’. I will be in Iowa and a seperate diary will follow.
If the media and early states get their way, the presidential nomination finalists will be decided by the end of February before more than half the nation gets a chance to voice their opinions. Sound fair?
The stakes are high in the next election and we can’t sit idly. Join the National Presidential Caucus (NPC) effort to confront the heavily compressed primary schedule we’re facing today. NPC is hosting a National Caucus Day on Dec. 7th and we’d love if you’d join us in organizing caucuses in your area!
To encourage voters to form opinions before the early primary states and the media determine who the leading candidates will be, NPC is asking people like you to host caucuses in their communities. It’s a great way to get your candidate and issue out there.
Here’s how it works:
-Post a caucus on the website
-Meet offline on December 7th to talk about issues and candidates that matter TO YOU
-Post your results on our website with all the other caucuses from across the nation
Hosting a caucus is as simple as getting some friends, family, or whomever you want together. It’s really easy to do!
What if every state’s caucus and primary were weighted equally? I don’t know about you, but I’d call that democracy.
