All posts by Todd Beeton

Religious Groups Leading The Way Toward Compassionate Immigration Reform

(cross-posted from Courage Campaign)

Steve Maviligio and Robert Salladay post today on a new coalition that has united in favor of compassionate immigration reform.

More than a dozen California evangelical churches have joined a coordinated nationwide effort, Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, to call for humane treatment of illegal immigrants, stronger border enforcement, guest worker programs and smoother paths to citizenship.

The group has begun an advertising campaign in Washington, DC this week and has sent 200,000 letters to members of congress.

This news comes on the same day as the launch of a new sanctuary program for illegal immigrants. Several churches around the country plan to take part, although it will start modestly in Los Angeles today with an area Catholic church and Lutheran church each sheltering one person from the threat of deportation, operating under one key assumption:

Organizers don't believe immigration agents will make arrests inside the churches.

Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform put this new activism on the part of churches, which actually borders on civil disobedience, this way:

"We believe in the rule of law, but we also believe that we are to oppose unjust laws and systems that harm and oppress people made in God's image, especially the vulnerable."

Maviglio takes glee in pointing out the politics of it, namely that it splits the Republican base and creates a dilemma for Republican strategists torn between the anti-immigrant base and the growing latino electorate, a tension that has already riven the party with Bush’s allegiance leaning toward the latter. But ultimately it's much bigger than that. What we're seeing is the emergence of a new coalition where the progressive view and the Christian view are increasingly merging into one. Bush et al did a great job in his first term of driving wedges between the two groups, leading conservative Christians to believe that Republicans had a monopoly on values. But the confluence of several recent developments is contributing to the destruction of that facade:

1. Progressives are framing issues in terms of values, ie Al Gore and John Edwards talking about fighting global warming and eradicating poverty as moral imperatives;

2. Prominent Republican conservatives are framing the progressive (ie mainstream) point of view in terms of faith, ie Gov. Huckabee talking about the environment in terms of stewardship over the earth at the debate last week;

3.Progressive faith groups such as Clergy and Laity Uniting for Economic Justice (CLUE) are emerging as a political force.

These developments are extremely significant for the progressive movement and for immigration reform specifically as the next few months promise to be decisive both in terms of moving the message as well as legislatively.

Local Opposition To Blackwater Training Camp in CA Grows

(cross-posted from Courage Campaign also at dailyKos)

If you've been following the story up to now, you know that Blackwater USA, the war profiteering private mercenary firm currently under investigation by Congress, has plans to open a mercenary training camp outside of the tiny, peaceful rural town of Potrero in San Diego County. Luckily, many community members and activist groups around the state have other plans entirely.

Since we launched our petition calling on our governor and senators to do whatever is in their power to block this project, I've been amazed at the diverse coalition that has united in opposition to Blackwater West. Everyone from anti-war groups such as Code Pink, to environmental groups such as The Sierra Club to progressive faith groups such as United For Peace and Justice have been fighting Blackwater's  invasion of California. But truly the most moving appeals I've heard in opposition of this training camp have been from people who actually live there, who would actually have to live with a mercenary training camp in their backyard. 

Some local perspective over the flip…

Anne in Jamul, CA signed our petition and offers this plea:

I moved to Jamul, CA to be in a peaceful, quiet place. I can see where the proposed "Blackwater" site will be built from my front window. However, I'm most concerned with the possiblity for fire that keeping many bunkers of amunition create. There have already been at least 4 fires that required evacuation from my area since I have lived there and I do not believe that corporation will take the measures necessary to keep the civilians in the area out of harms way, if they can make some money.

And this from Cheryl, also in Jamul:

I am opposed to this project on many levels. Locally, it would be an environmental disaster and would destroy the community character of Potero forever. Traffic and other environmental impacts would have far reaching effects. Every community along scenic Hwy 94 would be impacted negatively. Communities would likely suffer from the influence of and potential harm from the unsavory characters that this project would attract.

And Coral:

I am vehemently opposed to the training center being built there. I am afraid that one of the last family oriented back country communities will be destroyed by noise and war training by Blackwater. This will be devestating to our peaceful living environment. We moved out here 6 years ago to live in the peace and tranquility of natural suroundings. Please don't destroy our community and don't devalue our property.

You probably won't be shocked to learn that starting in May of last year, Blackwater began to infiltrate the local planning board, which is an elected advisory committee. Between May and October, there were meetings where local residents were largely left in the dark to the point that once the community began to rise up in protest of the proposed training camp that fall, it was too late to prevent the planning group from voting 7-0 in favor of Blackwater moving forward. Well, they may come to regret that vote.

Terry at TerryFacePlace has a great post about what's going on locally on this issue. She informs us that…uh oh, one of the planning group members who voted in favor of Blackwater isn't even eligible for the post.

A little bit of digging has revealed that Potrero Planning Group member Emil Susu is not a registered voter and not eligible to hold the elected office. The County has declared his seat vacant. Susu is registered to vote in Florida, not California. Mr Hammers says when Susu reregisters in Potrero, he'll appoint him to the PPG. Sounds like a nice little kingdom he's got out there.

Terry also informs us that local residents have launched a recall movement against several members of the Potrero Planning Group and one resident has filed suit to have the 7-0 vote thrown out.

The suit alleges several violations of the Brown Act, the open government mandate in California, including issues involving the inadequate public notice, and the right to anonymous comment. The Brown Act states that citizens may not be compelled to sign in at a public meeting in order to be allowed to speak. Hammers would not allow this individual to comment at the March meeting because she didn't feel comfortable signing in and wanted her name off the written record. Raymond Lutz of Citizen Oversight was attending that meeting, and read the provision of the Brown Act aloud to the PPG and they still would not allow her to speak.

Additionally, In their December 14, 2006 meeting, the PPG mandated certain conditions for their endorsement of this project, including satisfactory results in a "live fire" noise test in the valley. That noise test has not occurred, because the current owner of the property would not allow it. Additionally, a review of the County records reveal the vote record that was turned in to the County reflecting the PPGs approval of the Blackwater West project is blank, and there is nothing in the record documenting the PPG's noise test requirement. There are also no meeting minutes, nor a transcript of that meeting. Based on the written record, you'd never know that anyone in Potrero was opposed to Blackwater USA setting up camp in their backyard.

And speaking of that live fire test, this is classic:

I understand that Mr Hammers took his gun out to the valley, and shot off a few rounds and is satisfied noise won't be an issue.

Unfortunately, his private and personal live fire test made enough noise that a resident across the valley called Jan Hedlun, another PPG member (and the ONLY one opposed to this training camp) and said, "someone is firing a gun in the valley".

As for Ms. Hedlun, she has been a forceful voice as the lone planning group member opposed to Blackwater West (it should be noted that she was elected to the planning group in November and was not made aware that she was eligible for the Blackwater vote; she would have voted against it.) I had the pleasure of meeting her when I was in San Diego for the CDP convention and she told me that some of the other members of the planning group were flown to Blackwater's home base in North Carolina to see first hand just what a pleasant place a Blackwater training camp can be. Funny, Jan wasn't invited.

Here's video I took of Jan at a press conference down in SD:

So where does Blackwater West stand now? Well, because the 824-acre plot of land that Blackwater wants to build on is currently zoned for agriculture, there are a bunch of hoops that they need to jump through before this can go forward in any meaningful way. The first is an environmental impact report, public comment for which is being taken until the end of the month. Ultimately it will be up to the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, which may not take up the issue until 2009, but that's why we need to work to defeat it now.

In addition, Congressman Filner has vowed to do whatever he can at the federal level to stop Blackwater in their tracks. He has sent letters to Congressman Waxman and thinks the way to stop them is put a hold on any private development until the investigations into the waste and fraud charges currently under way in the House are resolved. Thank you, Congressman for all your hard work. And thanks to everyone who has signed and forwarded our petition. In just ten days, it's gotten over 2,300 signatures and steadily climbing every day. Please add your name to it today to let California's statewide leaders know you oppose Blackwater in California and let the local community know you're standing with them. It is, after all, their backyard.

LA Times Acknowledges Friedman Unit Is Up

As you no doubt have read by now, on Sunday The LA Times editorial board, in an editorial titled “Bring Them Home,” belatedly called for an end to American troop presence in Iraq.

The U.S. should immediately declare its intention to begin a gradual troop drawdown, starting no later than the fall. The pace of the withdrawal must be flexible, to reflect progress or requests by the Iraqis and the military’s commanders. The precise date for completing the withdrawal need not be announced, but the assumption should be that combat troops would depart by the end of 2009.

Don’t ya love when the Times issues these strong declarative statements about what the U.S. SHOULD do in times of war as though a. they’re the first to even consider such a thing and b. they have any credibility left?

Over…

First of all, where the f- have you been? You make statements like:

it seems increasingly obvious that an Iraqi political settlement cannot be achieved in the shadow of an indefinite foreign occupation.

and

there is no reason to believe that the surge will help bring about an end to what is, in fact, a multifaceted civil war.

as though these conclusions are surprising. For months principled elected officials in Washington who are sick at the toll this war has taken in blood and treasure, having come to these conclusions long ago, have been trying to do pretty much what you recommend, albeit on a faster schedule.

And where were you? March, 12:

By interfering with the discretion of the commander in chief and military leaders in order to fulfill domestic political needs, Congress undermines whatever prospects remain of a successful outcome. It’s absurd for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) to try to micromanage the conflict, and the evolution of Iraqi society, with arbitrary timetables and benchmarks.

Incredibly, even now, in what is essentially a reversal of your support for the surge, you can’t bring yourself to give any credit to Democrats.

No, to the LA Times editorial board, Democrats’ motivations are nothing more than “domestic political needs,” hence the call for a late 2009 end date. Their judgment is that because 2008 is an election year, the Democrats’ desire for withdrawal is merely political and, hence, by definition hasty.

Better to begin planning a careful, strategic withdrawal from Iraq now, based on the strategies laid out by the Iraq Study Group, than allow for the 2008 campaign season to create a precipitous pullout.

In yet another of the editorial’s if-it-weren’t-so-sad-it-would-be-funny statements, the board states:

Having invested so much in Iraq, Americans are likely to find disengagement almost as painful as war.

Are you kidding me? The people want out. Now. They’ve been calling for it for months. What is an editorial board’s function if not a forum to reflect the sensibilities of its readership? On that score, you have proven a miserable failure.

You are however absolutely right when you say:

But the longer we delay planning for the inevitable, the worse the outcome is likely to be. The time has come to leave.

Which begs the question why do you call for yet another Friedman Unit by demanding the withdrawal begin no later than the fall? On what planet are you living if you think the administration will heed a measured recommendation such as yours? You apparently, and foolishly, still see an inherent virtue in deference to the commander in chief in a time of war without acknowledging what to most observers is obvious: a. that you’ve been duped before; b. that the administration has long since squandered any trust or benefit of the doubt on this war; and c. that it is about time the Democrats were given a little leeway and deference of their own.

Survey USA Polls California GOP Debate Watchers

(cross-posted from ATM Watch)

In Survey USA's post-debate poll of 317 California adults who watched the GOP debate on Thursday (h/t The Right's Field), a full 30% felt that Giuliani had won the debate; Romney and McCain were essentially tied for second place with 12% and 11% respectively; and 16% of respondents weren't sure who had won. The partisan breakdown of respondents was 45% Republican, 30% Democratic and 22% Decline to State.

What I find more interesting than winners and losers though is the fact that Survey USA had to poll 2,400 Californians to find 317 who'd actually seen the debate. That's a paltry 13% response rate. Compare that to the survey of South Carolina adults after the Democrats debated there a week prior. There, of the 1,250 SC adults interviewed, 403 said they had listened to the debate, or an enviable 32%. Survey USA draws an interesting conclusion:

For comparison purposes, 1 in 3 South Carolinians watched the Democratic debate, compared to 1 in 8 Californians who watched the Republican debate. Californians are far less engaged in political process than Carolinians, at this stage.

More (including a look at the poll’s crosstabs) over the flip…

On one hand this shouldn't come as too much of a shock considering South Carolina is used to being one of the early primary states and Californians are clearly electioned out after at least one election a year since 2002. But this conclusion implies that the two things are equivalent when really they're apples and oranges.

I'd argue that what Survey USA really should have concluded is that:

Californians are far less engaged in the political process when it comes to Republican field than Carolinians are when it comes to the Democratic field.

California is a blue state, Arnold notwithstanding, so it follows that we'd be less interested in the Republican field. And while South Carolina is a red state, over half the voting population is African American, so certainly a field that includes arguably the first viable African American presidential candidate would inspire more excitement there. And hell, 28% more people watched the Democratic debate nationwide anyway. There is clearly more excitement about the Democratic presidential candidates than their Republican counterparts in general, so it follows that that trend would be replicated at the state level. 

One of the key arguments in favor of the early primary has been that actually having a say in the process will increase voter engagement, something California desperately needs and I still think it will. But the extent to which there is truth to Survey USA's conclusion, we need to watch this question over the coming months. If this year's Democratic field can't excite a disillusioned California electorate, we're worse off than I thought.

An inspection of the poll's full cross-tabs reveals some interesting findings:

– Former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore showed signs of life in CA with an unusually strong 8% of the vote, beating even California's own Duncan Hunter. Gilmore was particularly strong among respondents who considered themselves "liberal" and those between 18-34 years of age. In fact, among both those groups, Gilmore's plan for Iraq ties McCain for second best behind Giuliani's. And on the question of whose immigration plan was best, Gilmore ties Tancredo, Romney and Hunter (8%) for 3rd place behind Giuliani (31%) and McCain (11%.) Does anyone even remember Gilmore's plans for Iraq or immigration?

– Giuliani enjoys more support from self-described conservatives than he does overall. While Giuliani was chosen as winner by 30% of the respondents, 32% of conservatives polled said Giuliani won the debate. Interestingly, when broken down by party affiliation, Giuliani enjoys 30+% support among both Republicans and Democrats but that number plummets to 19% among those that consider themselves Independents.

– While illegal immigration crusader Tom Tancredo only polled at 4% overall, the groups he did show strength among were conservatives (5%), Independents (9%) and, perhaps most interestingly, Asian-Americans (10%.)   

– As for the gender gap, women were more likely to support Gilmore than men were (11% to 7%) and were less likely to support Romney (10% to 13%) or McCain (9% to 12%) than their male counterparts were. But perhaps most telling, women were much more likely to be unsure as to who won the debate (25%) than men were (13%.)

The Republicans Debate (and John Edwards wants in)

The Republican candidates for president are in Simi Valley, CA at the Reagan library today for the first Republican debate of the 2008 presidential season. And while the location has more to do with the conservative icon whose library is playing host than the fact that it's in California, we at ATMWatch will be watching for references to California's primary and the issues Californians care about.

The debate will start at 5pm PDT (webcast available HERE) and is co-sponsored by MSNBC and politico.com, which asked people to submit questions online to be asked of the candidates during the debate, much as we are asking regular voters for questions to ask the candidates HERE. We're getting your questions to the campaigns and we'll have our first candidate response video next week.

Now, while we're used to asking candidates questions, we're not so used to candidates asking other candidates questions but that's exactly what John Edwards has done in advance of tonight's debate. His question for the Republican candidates:

"Has the Bush doctrine of a Global War on Terror backfired? Does the president's focus suggest a fixed enemy that can be defeated through a permanent military campaign or do you think we need a broader approach as many military leaders believe?"

1/3 of tonight's debate will be devoted to answering questions submitted online and will be voted on by readers. Hopefully we'll be able to rate Edwards's question up so it gets asked. Would love to hear them defend Bush's war strategy or even claim with a straight face that  there is one. Consider this an open thread.

CA-42: Just When You Thought Gary Miller Couldn’t Get Any Dirtier…

(cross-posted at Trash Dirty Gary)

In 2005, Rep. Gary Miller was the only California Republican on the House panel that shaped the 2005 transportation bill. It would be expected, therefore, that Miller would do everything he could to maximize the amount of money the bill steered to California. But The Hill newspaper is reporting that several of the earmarks he attained benefitted not just his state, but were also quite a boon to his business partner and top campaign donor Lewis Operating Corp.

Join me over the flip for connections between Miller and Lewis Operating and how the company benefitted from the 2005 bill.

So how tight are Miller and Lewis Operating exactly? Well, how much time do you have?

The year before the transportation bill passed, Miller borrowed $7.5 million from Lewis Operating to purchase land from it. Lewis Operating Corp. is also one of Miller’s top campaign contributors; employees of the company have donated $22,150 to Miller’s campaign committee since his election to Congress in 1998.

Miller also has partnered or been involved with a number of real-estate transactions with the company in the past five years, making $1.1 million to $6 million in profits from deals involving Lewis Operating in some part of the transaction, according to the lawmaker’s financial disclosure reports.

In addition, you’ll recall the infamous 2002 Monrovia deal that has piqued the FBI’s interest. Well guess who else was involved.

[Miller] has faced scrutiny for avoiding paying capital gains taxes on the land by telling the IRS that the city had threatened to seize the land through eminent domain, and subsequently reinvesting the profit into land purchased from Lewis Operating.

Now check out the ridiculously long list of ways in which Lewis Operating benefitted from the 2005 transportation bill.

• Miller helped secure several earmarks for the town of Fontana, where he has recently bought land owned by Lewis Operating and sold it to the city’s redevelopment agency. Fontana also is home to one of Lewis Operating’s largest planned communities, Sierra Lakes, encompassing 700 acres that includes 1,850 homes surrounding an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse, a 62-acre shopping center and a 20-acre park.

• Sierra Lakes is just over a mile away from the former Rialto Municipal Airport, which Miller helped close through a provision in the same transportation bill, the first time an airport was closed by an act of Congress. Before the provision closed the airport, the city of Rialto – where the airport is located –  already had granted Lewis Operating an exclusive agreement to develop the airport land into Renaissance, a community consisting of 2,500 homes, parks and 80 acres of retail space on the former airport property and adjacent land.

• $6.8 million for Pine Avenue extension from Route 71 to Euclid Ave. in the city of Chino. The extension is less than a mile from the Preserve, a Lewis Operating planned community, and less than two miles from Parkside, another Lewis Operating planned community.

• $1.2 million to establish an Interstate 15 interchange at Nisqualli and Mojave River Crossing in Victorville, Calif. The interchange is about a half a mile from Parkview, a Lewis Operating planned community.

• $400,000 to widen and realign U.S. 395 in the city of Hesperia. Lewis Operating lists The Promontory as one of its planned communities on its website. A city official said the company has not submitted a formal application for the project.

What does Lewis Operating have to say for itself?

In a written statement, Randall Lewis, the executive vice president for Lewis Operating Corp., defended the company’s relationship with Miller and other government officials:  “For three generations, Lewis Group has been committed to acting according to the highest and strictest ethical standards.”

Yeah right. If that were true, you wouldn’t be joined at the hip with Dirty Gary, would ya now?

And as for Miller…

A spokesmen for Miller did not return a call seeking comment.

Gee, shocker.

Miller is feeling the heat and this Hill article just further solidifies the momentum developing against him. As Andrew wrote at Trash Dirty Gary, there was a good amount of buzz about this race down in San Diego. As more reports of Milller’s corruption are brought to light, the more the DCCC is likely to invest in an emerging people-powered candidate to turn this particular red district of CA blue.

ATM Watch: The Candidates Talk California At The Convention

The speeches the candidates gave on the floor of the CDP convention this weekend were peppered with allusions to California but rarely in any substantive way. The “good morning, California Democrats!” here and the “We need to make sure Nancy Pelosi remains Speaker of the House!” there. Not surprisingly, the speeches were variations on their stump speeches, which they give everywhere.

That’s where the post-speech press conferences came in. Many of the journalists asking questions were local and were interested in how the primary being moved up impacted the candidates’ campaign strategies. The candidates’ responses said a lot about each of them as candidates. You had the extremely disciplined Hillary Clinton rave about California when it came to discussing the endorsements of local Assemblymembers but when it came to answering a specific California-based question (from our friends at Speak Out CA!), she shifted to standard stump speech talking points. John Edwards, who has a healthy skepticism of the media (I wonder why, he was asked about hedge funds and haircuts for crying out loud) was less forthcoming and even a bit dismissive, although he did engage in some primary strategy speculation. And the down in the polls Bill Richardson was the most eager to engage with the local press in hopes of gaining some traction. He had some great answers including referring to California as an “ATM machine” ( we didn’t pay him to do it, I swear!), offering solutions for California’s transportation problem and the gem “if I go to every living room in California I’d be dead.”

The videos are over the flip and of course at ATM Watch as well.

Governor Richardson:

 

Senator Edwards:

Senator Clinton:

Blackwater West Update (now w/video)

(cross-posted from Courage Campaign)

On Friday, Raymond Lutz, intrepid President of the East County Democratic Club, presented a late resolution opposing Blackwater West to the resolutions committee at the California Democratic Convention. That committee meeting started at 3:30pm and didn't end until they got through all 104 timely resolutions and then finally got to the late ones. Raymond wasn't up until after 7pm. Unfortunately, after he presented his resolution, there was an objection from the committee, which rendered the resolution dead. They wouldn't even hear it. The committee member who objected cited the fact that California has dealings with Blackwater (do we now?) and he had an issue with the second resolved phrase of the resolution. The only reason we know the objector's reasoning was that Raymond got up after the objection and passionately pleaded to be able to take the resolution to the floor. The committee chair was moved enough to dig into it deeper but the objection stood. Join me…

That didn't stop Raymond's planned press conference the next morning, which featured the lone Potrero Planning Board member who opposes Blackwater West, Jan Hedlun and the congressman representing the area, Bob Filner. Remarkably, during the press conference, Congressman Filner promised to take the resolution and turn it into federal legislation. Here’s the video:

Raymond remarked to me in the aftermath of all of this that he had really underestimated the lack of knowledge about the issue among people at the convention. That's what we're trying to turn around with our petition. After sending it out on Thursday, in two days we had received almost 1,500 signatures. Please sign it today and let's get that number up over 2,000.

We'll follow the progress of the resolution as it hopefully at least gets debated on the floor of the House of Representatives. But in the meantime, the resolution Raymond wrote has been referred to the July e-board meeting up in Sacramento. 

Look forward to an upcoming post about the latest Potrero drama: the recall election of the 7 planning group members who are in favor of Blackwater West. A few of them reportedly were flown to North Carolina to see the main Blackwater training camp and apparently Filner was wined and dined on Blackwater's yacht in San Diego Harbor this weekend. The one planning group member who opposes the deal, Jan Hedlun, was at the protest as well and it was a pleasure to meet her. Watch her speak out here:

Blackwater is desperate to have this training camp pass through the Board of Supervisors and we're going to have some work to do in order to stop it.

Visit stopblackwater.net for more and as always, visit Terry at Terry Face Place, a great local blog. She’s been following this way longer than I have.

Richardson Is Speaking On The Floor

As expected, he is mostly playing up his diplomatic experience. He’s also laying out his priorities of what he’ll do as president. 1st day in office: out of Iraq, no residual troops. 2nd day in office: announce an Apollo energy program. 3rd day in office: plan to revitalize education. Minimum wage for teachers: $40,000/year. 4th day in office: universal healthcare. 5th day: jobs program.

More over the fold and in the comments…

“I would tear down that wall between America and Mexico!” He’s good on immigration. He’s calling for earned citizenship and compassion.

He just spoke out against the Supreme Court ruling and declared his support for a woman’s right to choose.

“I will be a president who promotes civil unions and domestic partnerships.”

“I love you all, not just because you’re important and you moved up your primary. I ask you California, vote on the basis of who has the most experience, not on who’s the biggest rock star or who has the most money. Vote on who can change America”

He’s making his case:

“I have experience. We tried someone who didn’t have experience…”

“I’m a governor. We elect governors in this country.”

John Edwards Liveblog

John Edwards has just been introduced. As you might expect for a Sunday at 10am timeslot, the crowds and energy that accompanied Obama to the stage are not present for Edwards, but it also allows him to work the delegate crowd as Barack was not able to. He just took the stage and he’s being greeted by a standing ovation. This place loves this guy.

The place is now chanting “Edwards! Edwards!”


More over the flip…

UPDATE: Edwards called for a US-led global campaign to provide free primary education for every child…in the world.

And he said:

“When I am president of the United States, on the first day I’m in office, you have my word that Guantanamo will be closed!”

UPDATE2: You should see how quickly the press is running to the press conference. There’s the feeling that something important just happened here. Still have chills. Going to the press conference. And by the way, he left the stage to “There goes My Hero” by Foo Fighters. Indeed.

He is recognizing the loss of Rep. Millender-Macdonald.

Personal thank you from Elizabeth: “thank you for your support.”

What’s at stake in this election. “I have such a strong belief in what the Dem party is suppossed to represent. It is time for us to lead again…bravely, boldly to take AMerica where it needs to go.”

He referred to Iraq as a “bleeding sore” again. He just apologized for his vote. “I am speaking out with every fiber of my being to get out of Iraq.”

“WE OUGHT TO START PULLING OUT TODAY, NOT TWO MONTHS FROM NOW.”

Ahh, he used Barbara Boxer’s line: “And by the way, elections have consequences, don’t they?”

“If the president vetoes that bill, it’s George Bush not supporting the troops, not Congress. We need the Congress to stand strong and firm. If he vetoes that they should send the bill bakc to him again!”

“We have to show strength and courage, this is about life and death, this is about war and WE HAVE TO BE STRONG!”

He’s talking about restoring America’s moral standing in the world.

“The president needs to travel the world…he needs to say America is not just a place, it’s an idea.”

“The world needs to see our commitment to humanity.”

He says we need to address the Darfur genocide. “The world sees that the most powerful country in the world has declared that genocide is occuring and stepped aside and did nothing.”

“WE ARE BETTER THAN THIS, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS BETTER THAN THIS.”

“I have no idea how popular this is politically but I stand for this…we need to launch a campaign to provide primary education to every child in the world!”

“When I am president of the United States, on the first day I’m in office, you have my word that Guantanamo will be closed!”


“We need the US to build fuel efficient cars with union workers.”

“We need the president of the United States to call on Americans to be patriotic about something other than war!”

“People say ‘Why do you keep talking about 37 million people in poverty? No one else is talking about it.’ I’ll tell you why:

“BECAUSE IT’S WRONG!”

“If my party can’t be the party of the poor, the elderly, the disenfranchised, why else do we exist?”

His repeated refrain: “WE’RE BETTER THAN THIS.”

He just called for a living wage in America.

“You want to know what movement built the American middle class: THE LABOR MOVEMENT.”

“I’m proud to have walked picket lines, I’m proud to help workers organize.”

“If you can join the Republican Party by putting your name on a card, you should be able to join a union by doing the same thing.”

“We ought to ban the hiring of permanent replacements for strikers and make that the law of the land.”

“We ought to make it easier for kids to go to college.”

College for everyone: kids get through high school, eligible for college, commit to working 10 hours a week while there and college is free.

Now he’s on Healthcare:

“It’s not enough to say you’re for universal healthcare without laying out how you’re going to do it.”

He’s talking about his plan and says “it may end up with single payer if that’s what the country wants.”

The whole place is chanting “EDWARDS!”.

“We know what needs to be done. Getting out of Iraq, universal healthcare, lifting millions of famililes out of poverty…WE JUST NEED TO DO IT!”

“The one thing we need to face up to is that race plays an enormous role in the growing economic inequality.”

“Those pictures coming out of the ninth ward in New Orleans…that is not OK.”

“All these things that we want to do will not happen unless and until we have a Democrat in the White House in 2008.”

The place is chanting his name again. The energy is growing.

“All my brothers and sisters here in California who can campaign and compete hard in CA and NY, but also New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Georgia…all over the country.”

“All the good we want to do requires that Nancy Pelosi remains Speaker of the House.”

He’s talking about the importance of winning even more congressional and senate seats. He’s  essentially endorsing the 50-state strategy. Challenging EVERYWHERE.


“What are YOU willing to do? The great movements in our history didn’t start in Washington DC, they started right here. We need you again, we need you to speak out and change this country.”