Birthplace of a Political Career

I've been pondering Sarah Palin's words... (paraphrased) "Obama launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist and we're expected to believe he didn't know it? He had sat on a committee with the guy!"

The reason I've pondered this is because of the first person who offered to hold a fundraising coffee in her own living room, for my first bid for office in 2006. I'd known who she was since I was in Jr. High, because she was a teacher and she coached the pom squad at the high school. Everybody knew her. She was never one of my own teachers, so I never officially met her back then. But, it was a small town and a small school district, so I knew who she was and later learned that she remembered vaguely knowing who I was.

My first encounter with her, in a political sense, was, coincidentally enough, at a Barack the Vote event hosted in her living room.

I had attended that event for two reasons -- the first being the most obvious -- I was a supporter of Barack's Senate campaign. But I attended with an ulterior motive. The local party chair and much of the committee was to be there and I wanted to observe them in their natural habitat, without the committee/gallery split making my observation so obvious.

I'd been in e-mail contact with the chair of the local party for a few weeks, I'd spoken at length with a couple of precinct committee members in the party and I was in the process of determining whether I was ready to join my efforts with the party in a more "official" way and I was also trying to decide whether getting involved with the local party was the right path for me to take in that regard.

Prior to that event, I'd been "lone wolfing" it as an underground grass roots pro-labor liberal/dem for many years... writing and releasing anonymous political and labor humor pieces into the wild and letting them take on lives of their own, keeping up with current events, learning how the government functions and how it doesn't, talking with people, learning about mine and other parties, choosing carefully which "letter to the editor" local battles to take-on so as to not be a regular in the paper (becoming a regular contributer is the fast track to being read ONLY by the choir you're preaching to, which is a pointless exercise for an unpaid contributer.) Etc.

I liked what I saw and I started my time with them in the gallery as a volunteer "activist" in the local party. At first, I attended only when their meetings didn't conflict with my schedule. Over the next year or so, their importance in my scheduling priorities increased such that I rarely miss a meeting and shortly into my regular attendance, I accepted an appointed position as committeman of the precinct I'd grown up in, which had been vacant for some years.

It was upon accepting the committeeman appointment that I began sitting on committee with the aforementioned woman who'd hosted the Barack event. As an officer in the party and as one of the four precinct committeemen in the district I reside in, she later became a strong supporter of and offered to host a similar fundraising event for my own campaign. These events are known, at least in my little nook of the prairie, as "coffee"s.

She's still an officer and committeeman, I'm still a committeeman, thus I still sit on committee with her. But, what do I know about her? What have I learned about her in my time working with her on the committee? Not a whole lot. Almost nothing, really. Our personal lives really have nothing to do with the agenda points we cover between gavels. Pleasantries exchanged on either side of the gavels are just that -- pleasantries... "how was your weekend," "how do the (kids/grandkids) like school this year" "did you hear so-and-so passed away?"

The committee of the local Democrat Party is not the only committee I sit on or that I have ever attended, with regularity. Most of the people who've sat on committee with me or who've sat on committees I attended regularly in-gallery couldn't tell you how many kids I have, much less tell you the names of my husband and each of my children. Many of them, on the two committees I sit on right now, call me "Michelle" -- which is not my name -- I can only assume that I must look like a Michelle. My present is almost entirely unknown to most of them. My past is definitely a complete unknown to them. I could be anyone. The same is true in reverse, except that I know their first names... and that is only because I suck with names and thus intentionally worked hard at memorizing their names from the roll calls of meeting minutes.

But, back to the topic at hand...

I know the woman who offered to host that coffee for me had been an active Dem for a long time and I know that she worked, locally, for the JFK campaign. I don't know if she was active before that. I assume because she's a strong partisan Democrat, but I don't know conclusively, that she's been active in every Democratic campaign to appear on her ballot since then.

Was she an anti-war activist? Was she anti-war at all? I have no idea.

To be fair, neither did/does she know that I was against the Vietnam war...as a VERY small child, (note: I'm younger than both Palin and Obama,)who was in the process of being informed and shaped by the world going on around me -- a world I haven't been able to take my eyes or mind away from, since I first opened my eyes to it.

Could my strong supporter have been part of some subversive politically motivated underground group at some time in her past? I strongly doubt it, but the fact is... I have no clue. I'm just assuming. She seems very nice and she's never discussed bomb making techniques in my presence, but the news has taught us that it's almost always the ones the neighbors would have least suspected, right? So, who knows?

The fact is, I didn't run a background check on her... or on anyone else I've sat around a committee table with or on any of the people who supported my campaign -- nor will I. ...And, to my knowledge, none of them has ever run a background check on me. It's just not a common practice... and frankly, volunteers are too hard to come by for a new face and name on the ballot, to look that gift horse in the mouth with that kind of paranoia and suspicion. I doubt Ms. Palin demonstrated that level of suspicion in regards to her own early supporters.

I declined this woman's offer to host a coffee for me because of the small size of my campaign and the short time remaining before the election. But, I accepted her equally generous offer to host a strategy meeting of the Precinct committeeman in my district. Together, the five of us worked around her kitchen table for the better part of an evening, working the phones to get sign locations, signing up volunteers to work phone lists for me, etc. The local Chair also stopped in to check on our progress and help for a short time. I showed them the mailers I was about to send out and the fliers for the second knocking/littering of my district and they gave some valuable input, some of which I incorporated, some of which I did not. It was, far and away, the singlemost productive evening in my campaign.

I didn't win my election. I did, however, get 40% in a district where 16% would have been great for any Democrat, but particularly for a previously unknown Dem. I'm very proud of that accomplishment and I also know it was due only in part to my own hard work -- I didn't do it and absolutely could not have done it alone. I owe a lot to those who volunteered to help me -- particularly that one woman who first offered to host a fundraiser coffee for me and later helped to organize my campaign and secure the help I needed. As an unknown and an upstart, I was lucky to have any volunteers at all... and I have to say, I had the best.

But, in the event I later learn that she's not the wonderful, law abiding person she appears to be, I have to ask myself... what time and what place is to be credited with the launch of my political "career" - did I launch it in her home? I cannot answer this question without acknowledging my keen awareness that, even if I never run for office, again, my political "career" is not nearly over.

Did I launch it around the kitchen table of this woman whose political history I know almost nothing about on that night we strategised for my campaign with a group of people I know even less about?

Did I launch it when I became an official member of the local party committee, of which she is not only a fellow member, but an officer?

Did I launch it in her living room at a Barack the Vote event she hosted in 2004?

Did I launch it long before I met her, with my first letter to the editor or the first humor piece I wrote and sent circulating in the wild?

Or was it longer ago?

Did I launch it in the arms of my mother and father, before my earliest memories kick in... observing, asking about and figuring out the world going on around me and finding my own place in it?

Did I launch it watching the news I begged my parents to let me watch even as a toddler and caring deeply about what I saw and heard?

Did I launch it in Kindergarten when so many of my classmates show-n-tell was a military photo of a dad they'd never met who was about to return from 'Nam or did I launch it a week later on the reading rug as my classmates and I comforted them and dried their tears, when the dad they couldn't wait to meet only a week before turned out to be a funny smelling awkward stranger who was probably even more confused and afraid of them as they were of him?

Did I launch it when I began to speak or when I began to read or when I began to write?

The answer is so easy and obvious to me and I would bet my last dollar the same answer is true for both major party candidates for the Presidency...

I launched my political "career," dangling upside down from my ankles as I drew my first breath to cry out in protest of the stinging slap to my ass. ...And I'll likely end it when I draw my last breath.

Wrong on Iraq and Ruthless Ambition

He Votes To Condone Domestic Terrorism -- TWICE

Apparantly, some deadly domestic terrorism isn't so bad and should be given a pass...

Pallin' Around With Terrorists...

...and terrorist organizations. The founder of this anti-American terrorist organization was murdered in a plastic explosives sale gone bad:

Pre-Debate Confab?!?!

Something my husband noticed during Tuesday night's debate prompted me to go looking for video footage... and sure enough, I found it! I first broke this story, yesterday, on Twitter.

Footage of McCain and Brokaw, backstage together, getting ready for the debate in Nashville:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uklTrLopQ8

What Are They Smokin'?

I'm not running for office and I'm not on Obama's campaign payroll. I don't have to stay on any message or play nice with more of the same old bullshit McCain or lies through her lipstick Palin.

All of these down and dirty campaign slogans are available on t-shirts, bumperstickers, buttons, hats, undies and other swag. Get 'em before ruthless ambition Palin clears Yawn McAncient out of her way, like she did Stevens, when she was considering a Senate run and her predecessors in both the Alaskan governor's office and the Mayoral seat of Wasilla. Ahhhh... I can smell whistle blowing, scandal and disgrace in the air, already... ohhh... and is that a hint of resignation or impeachment I detect in that delicious aroma?

OMFG...

If you're a woman who still thinks Palin is swell... you need to read this news piece from 2000, when Palin was mayor of Wassila and the town's policy was to bill rape victims for the rape exam and processing of the rape kit.

www.frontiersman.com

That's change we don't want brought to the "outside."

MIA Candidates

Which candidate is more likely to show up for work and which is more likely to go on brush clearing expeditions?


Missed Votes 110th (current) Congress:
110th Vote Missers

McCain - missed 408 votes -- cast 231 votes - missed 63.8%
Ranked 1st of 100, in number of missed votes in the 110th Congress

Obama - missed 291 votes -- cast 348 votes - missed 45.5%
Ranked 3rd of 100, in number of missed votes in the 110th Congress

Some will gasp that the candidate who had his party's nomination in the bag fairly early on missed so many more votes than the candidate who was still in a tight race to the bitter end. Others will point out that both men were engaged in primary races and that it would be more fair to compare their records in the 109th Congress. So, without further ado...
109th Congress
109th Vote Missers

McCain - missed 58 votes -- cast 587 votes - missed 9%
Ranked 4th of 100, in number of missed votes in the 109th Congress

Obama - missed 11 votes -- cast 634 votes - missed 1.7%
Ranked 54th of 100, in number of missed votes in the 109th Congress

More Observations of the Surreal...

The Alaskan Queen of earmarks is co-running on an anti-earmark platform?

She's STILL touting herself as anti-choice and anti-abortion after telling the press, in no uncertain terms, that keeping the baby was her underage, unwed daughter's CHOICE and drove the point home that she was pro-her-daughter-having-that-choice by adding that she's proud of her daughter's choice?

Etc., etc., etc... Ooooh, LOTS of etcetera!

...And people are actually buying her act? Seriously?!
OMFGawww...

Promoting Change Is One Thing...

As Palin has repeated, ad nauseum, there are, indeed, some in politics who use change to promote their careers and some who use their careers to promote change.

But, she's leaving out a very important group that exists both inside and outside of the political arena...

...Those who, like Barack Obama, use their lives to EFFECT change.

In an exquisitely brilliant move by former Heart guitarist Roger Fisher, the McCain campaign is helping to fund the Obama campaign through its use of Heart's song "Barracuda" (co-written by Fisher.) McCain is using the song, legally, against the wishes of the band, under a blanket license fee. Fisher, a Barack supporter, is donating a portion of all royalties he receives from the McCain campaign's use of the song to the Obama campaign.

Daily Kos article

What Are a Few Broken Commandments?

Ok, so I've been hearing little murmered concerns about whether McCain might be a closet atheist. Frankly, I don't know if he is or isn't and don't care. He's not asking for the job of pastor, he's asking for the job of President. So, it shouldn't matter, but just as some people are concerned that Obama might be a Muslim, which we do know he is not, even though it shouldn't matter to anyone, it does to them and that means both candidates have to work at making it clear that they're not whatever people are worried they might be.

Obama, of course, pointed to his membership in a Christian congregation led by someone who certainly drew enough attention for people to notice... and then THAT became a major concern.

McCain, however, seems rather oblivious to the speculation concerning him and to the world going on around him... and to the difference between his own personal experiences and tales he read in a book. ...And he has no problem breaking the "thou shalt not lie" commandment, in a church.

This last weekend, both Obama and McCain (in that order) sat down with Rick Warren of the Saddleback church to answer some questions. Mr. Warren assured viewers that McCain was secured in a "cone of silence" during Obama's interview. McCain confirmed this, on the program. But, it was later discovered that McCain was not even in the building during Obama's portion of the interview. He was in his car.

Did he listen to Obama's interview, so he'd have the advantage in his own interview? A savvy viewer caught a flub on McCain's part, that proves he did! ...And before anyone points out that McCain would have had to have satellite or cable tv in his car to view the program -- forcing me to go into how every senior citizen with a motor home has had satellite in those since the 80s and that McCain isn't exactly struggling, financially, bear in mind that McCain needed no special equipment to listen to the live radio broadcast of the event.

But, McCain didn't limit his dishonesty to lying about cheating on the interview. Oh no. He had to trot out a lie he's been telling for awhile... the moving cross in the dirt story he lifted from Solzhenitsyn, an author McCain's often referenced and has made very clear is one of his favorites. According to McCain's own biography, he was being moved from one prison camp to another on the Christmas in question and did not spend the day in his cell except for a few moments standing across from a guard who drew a cross in the dirt to worship with him.

But hey, maybe he didn't lie or intentionally steal from Solzhenitsyn. Maybe McCain is genuinely confusing the events of his own life with the events in his favorite author's book. Cutting him that generous measure of slack on this, though, calls his mental fitness to lead into serious question.

All of that, plus his geographical confusion, his obscenity laden quick temper, one copyright/performance theft after another from various music artists, lifting speeches directly from Wikipedia, using celebs in his ads without securing likeness/publicity rights, advertising Obama's campaign by handing out Obama tire guages at his events, trying to pimp out his wife Cindy (she's the make-up plastered trollup McCain cheated on his first wife with and whom McCain has affectionately nicknamed "You Cunt.") at Sturgis, plus, plus, plus...

Sheesh, no wonder I'm hearing Barr's name whispering up from the red grass, with increasing frequency, despite his almost complete invisibility in the media. Mind you, I don't have any more use for Barr than I do for McCain and I'm more than a little perplexed as to how Barr went from being Libertarian enemy number one to being the Libertarian nominee, so quickly, but I gotta hand it to Barr, his campaign strategy seems to be working... just smile, keep his mouth shut and win votes by not being McCain... or Obama, for that matter.

It's My Party...

Recent events of nominal to no daily importance, have made me feel a need to make something about myself crystal clear... just for the sake of doing it.

I am a socially liberal to libertine, economically pro-labor progressive Democrat. ...And damned proud of it!!

I vote for Democrats.

I donate time, energy, skills and other resources to fielding and supporting my party's candidates, busting myths perpetuated about my party, raising funds for my party and our candidates and serving my party.

If I don't like one of my party's sitting politicians, I see it as a need for us to field a better candidate for that seat in our next primary, not as a reason to vote against everything I am by voting for a conservative.

I chose the Democratic party because it was and remains the best fit for who I already was and who I am, on my own... I don't bend to fit a party mold and I don't bend the party to fit me.

I won't support or vote for any candidate running on any conservative party's ticket and I won't support or vote for any conservative running on my party's ticket. I am not a conservative.

I will not vote for anyone who is too dishonest, too stupid or too wussy to run on the ticket of a party well-suited to his/her politics.

I will not support or vote for any single-issue, narrow-focus or axe-to-grind candidate.

I WILL support and vote for broad-focus liberal/progressive independents and liberal/progressive candidates running on the tickets of parties that are well suited to their politics when my party has failed to field a broad focus liberal/progressive candidate for that seat.

If there is no candidate suitable to my requirements in a candidate -- I abstain from voting in that race.

...And here's a fun fact for those of you who buy into the nauseating spin that the heartland is a wholesome conservative utopia while the west coast and upper north east are raunchy liberal hellholes -- this secular, liberal, progressive Democrat was born, bred and still resides in a small, rural county in America's heartland.

Election musings...

I keep hearing little murmers (heart murmers?) that to ensure 16 years of Democratic control of the executive branch, we should nominate Hillary, this election and Obama eight years, hence, because... get this... Hillary will be too old to run in eight years.

Here's the fun part: In eight years, Hillary will be about the same age McCain is now... so, if she'll be too old to run and serve in eight years, McCain is clearly too old to run and serve, NOW.

---

This morning, while surfing the TV dial, trying to get some local weather and news, I happened across the tail end of a morning show segment in which Tim Russert was just wrapping up an explanation of how it's likely, regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, that the general election could end in an electorate tie and the Presidency be decided by Congress.

Uh... Tim... I think you're VASTLY over-estimating how well McCain's going to fare in November. To get out the vote, he not only has to win over large swaths of the "middle" and sway some Dems to his side, he has to win over the voters in his OWN party, that SHOULD be, but aren't, guaranteed votes! ...And with this weird "bio" tour of his, he's boring even his own core constuency into a group coma. Yeah... nothing like a good nap to fire up the base!

----

Another little murmer from the grass... should Hillary drop out?

My primary has passed. I didn't vote for either Hillary or Obama... and I didn't abstain... I voted for someone else, whose idea of which direction is "forward" came closest to my own. This was the first primary in a long time, that my party's nomination wasn't decided before I got a chance to weigh in. The same thing that makes me a Democrat, makes that very important to me... and it was SUCH a good feeling to participate in the selection, again, after all this time.

We're hearing reports from voters in states who, if Hillary stays in the race, will get to participate for the first and possibly only time in their lives. I want that for them, so I hope Hillary stays in to the bitter end (or that if things swing very heavily to her favor in the remaining states, that Barack stays in 'til the bitter end.) While I don't love the idea of super delegates breaking a statistical tie -- it's the tie-breaker that's been written into procedure for a long time.

--------
Finally... a couple of rumblings that almost tickle me, because they come from a complete lack of knowledge about who's who, politically.

First -- the whole race/gender thing with Barack and Hillary. Yes, it's historic that whichever gets our nod will be a groundbreaking first. BUT, does race or gender affect November? NO. As I've said, before, anyone for whom that's a factor at all, much less a deciding factor won't vote for ANY Democrat, regardless of race or gender.

Second -- I keep hearing that the Dems are bitterly divided between Barack and Hillary and that this signals a self-destructive rift in the Democrat party that could result in the death of the party.

Uh... nope.

The Democrat party is, by the nature of its members, a diverse party of diverse ideas, vision, motivation, focus, skills, etc. We're at our best, strongest and most unified when we DON'T agree 100% on everything.

We have taken a LOT of flack (mostly from lock-stepping Republicans hoping to convince the middle we're floundering as a party) for failing to have and deliver a "core message" -- but we wouldn't be Democrats if we DID have a so-called core message. We don't run our party for office, individuals run on our party's ticket. Whether at the polls or in Congress, etc. we don't vote as a unified block, we decide and vote as individuals.

We are a party of individuals.

Gravel Exits Stage Left...and Stage Right...

I've been saying, since Gravel first blipped on my political radar, back in April of '06, when he became the first person of either major party to throw his hat into the 2008 ring, that I thought he might really lean more toward Libertarian than Democrat.

I got a heads-up, earlier today, that Mike Gravel is indeed officially switching parties from Democratic to Libertarian and will be making an announcement to that effect, today. (He may have already made it, by now.)

Not a big surprise. Left socially, Right economically... I think the Libertarian party will be a better fit for him.

So long and thanks for all the sales in my shops, Mike. (Curiously, to date, Gravel merch has far outsold Barack and Hillary merch, put together, in my shops.)

Promoting Abstinence...

There are lots of new goodies in the Melhi Ink shop I have on CafePress, since the last time I mentioned the shop. I try not to post much about my shops, since this blog isn't about the shops, but one political design is about as omni-partisan as it gets and I thought it might be of interest:



I'd rather abstain than vote for McCain

(on bumperstickers, t-shirts, yard signs and more.)

Frankly, I was shocked to discover that McCain is the true uniter! But, thanks to him, it looks like there's finally something on which Democrats & Rebuplicans, Liberals & Conservatives, the left & the right agree. Heh.

BassAckward Punditry...

The Republicans have their nominee in John McCain. Our nominee is not yet determined and so, the contest between Hillary and Barack continues.

If you listen to the pundits, media, party insiders in both major parties or even the average Joe flapping his jaws on the topic, you might believe this gives a clear competitive edge to McCain, in regards to the general election, in November.

Here's the theory behind that mindset:

1. John McCain knows he's the nominee for his party and can begin campaigning for the office he'll be seeking in the Nov. General Election.

2. Barack and Hillary must, instead, focus solely on the race FOR the nomination and against one another. Only after our eventual nominee is chosen, can our nominee begin campaigning for the office he or she will be seeking in the Nov. General Election.

Here's why that theory is backward.

1. Part of any candidate's campaign for his/her party's nomination already includes and must include campaigning for the office he/she hopes to be seeking in November. Knowing what kind of President Barack intends to be vs. what kind of President Hillary intends to be is vital to our deciding between them in the race for the nomination.

2. There are two parts to every campaign --
A. Running FOR the office and/or nomination you are seeking
B. Competing AGAINST your opponent(s.)

The edge for November clearly lies with Barack and Hillary. Not only is each already letting Americans know why they should be our next President, each already knows who the opponent will be in November. While only one of them will get the nomination, both of them will be campaigning for our nominee to defeat him. Each of them can begin campaigning specifically against McCain, now -- they both differ from McCain, but in different ways from one another and there's no law or point of rule to prevent either of them from making their differences from McCain a part of their campaigns, now.

By contrast, McCain no longer has to put any of his campaign focus on defeating a competitor for his party's nomination. But, that's been true for quite some time in this campaign season. He can certainly continue to campaign FOR the office of President.

But, but when it comes to competing against his eventual opponent, he has three options. He can put it off until he has an actual opponent. He can split his competitive focus between running against Barack and running against Hillary. ...Or he can turn it into a purely partisan "McCain vs Any Democrat."

We've had eight years of hearing that all Republicans are good Christian, America loving, straight, moral, decent, protectors of all that is good in the world and that all Democrats are evil terrorist-abetting American-hating, atheist, immoral, public-gay-orgy-having threats to everything decent. Voters of every political persuasion have seen that neither extreme is true. So, running against the evils of "any candidate" from an opposing party, instead of against a specific candidate, for any length of time, is likely only to damage a candidate's chances for a win in November.

That leaves only the options to put off competing or to spend precious campaing time and resources running against two different might-be opponents.

The advantage is clearly to the future Democratic nominee, if Barack and Hillary both adopt the following strategy: "Here's why I'm going to be a great President, here's how my Presidency would differ from my Democratic opponent's and this is why you shouldn't let McCain anywhere near the Oval Office." Don't give McCain any similarities to exploit, each should compete with McCain on areas where both differ from McCain, but also differ from one another.

The more schizophrenic McCain's efforts to compete against both, as potential opponents, the better for whichever eventually wins our nomination.

Will they both run brilliant gambits for the end game as they duke it out for control of the blue squares or will they just continue to play to the next move, ceding a portion of their advantage to the red king? My money's on the latter, but they're both smart, surrounded by smart people and ultimately on the same side, so there's at least a hair's breadth of a chance they'll wise up.

...And this is from his own party!

(I didn't make this... I found it on YouTube)

Props to George W. Bush

Until very recently, I would never have believed I'd be giving George W. Bush props, but I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't give credit where it's due.

George W. Bush (yes, the one in the Oval Office, not some dude with the same name) taught us one very valuable thing... showing us by example of a job (I'm almost choking on the words) well done.

He showed us exactly how to beat McCain.