Democrats.com

DEMS UNITE!

redhed67 — Wed, 28 May 2008 07:18:17 -0400

Well, as we all know, election season is once again upon us. Our choices are, as always, a great source of controversy and strife among the American people. This is understandable as not every candidate fits our ideals of the perfect President.

However, I've noticed some very disturbing trends among voters and, most glaringly, the Democrats. Frankly, it's appalling. I can't get through a blog or a chat room without seeing Democrats at each other's throats, each bashing the views and private lives of one another's pick as the Dem candidate.

You know what, people?? Knock it off. I'm not particularly wild about Hillary nor Obama either, to be honest... but all have a common goal here. That goal is to do everything we can to keep the GOP out of the White House.

Haven't the GOP done enough damage already? For the past 7 years, we've been subjected to two recessions, the invasion of a sovereign country with no violent designs on us, over 935 lies from this administration ABOUT IRAQ ALONE, and the blatant trampling of our civil rights such as our privacy with the warrantless surveillance and with free speech with arrests of peacful protestors and even people whose only "crime" was merely wearing an anti-war or anti-Bush T-shirt.

John McCain has stated that he plans on continuing our occupation of Iraq. He has also stated that he not only wants us to stay in Iraq for 100 years, but is already planning on attacking Iran, as he so playfully reiterated in his rousing rendition of the Beach Boys song "Barbara Ann" titled "Bomb Bomb Iran."

Obama and Hillary's ideas are really not so different from one another. They have similiar ideas on health care, Iraq, national security in general, etc. There are subtle nuances that make their plans slightly different but when it comes down to it, one is really just as good as the other.

It's bothersome that people are saying things like "Hillary is a warmonger"... or "Obama is a Muslim sympathizer." These same lines that Rightwingers were using against the two of them just a few short months ago and the Dems were scolding them for, the Dems are now using. I, personally, never chose a particular party with which to label myself. I consider myself an Independent even though I never formally even declared myself as such... and this is why. Both sides seem to go off the deep end when elections come up and I am so disappointed that Dems have allowed themselved to stoop to the level of "The Righties."

I don't like any party spreading lies and innuendo about any candidate, whether he or she be Republican or Democrat. It's juvenile and ignorant. I don't approve of McCain's policies but I'm not going to perpetuate the rumor that he committed treason while in the service. I have no proof that he did. On the same token, I won't perpetuate the rumor that Barack Obama is a Muslim terrorist sympathizer. We have more than ample evidence that he is not.

Let's think about that particular rumor for a moment. George W. Bush has been more in the pocket of Muslim terrorist sympathizers than anyone else. Despite the fact that the Saudis not only have an appalling track record on human rights but they're also funding terrorists and helping to fund the insurgency which is killing our soldiers... Bush calls them "friend." Not only that but he's also given them weapons which are in turn being used against our troops in Iraq.

Same with Pakistan who has openly harbored Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden for a couple of decades. Then there's Uzbekistan, a nation with a record of committing unspeakable atrocities against its citizens...again, Bush calls them "friend."

So to say anything about Obama is not only stupid but incredibly hypocritical if you're Bush supporter. If you're a Dem, it's insincere and ridiculous. We need to pull together in these elections this year and vote for whomever the Dem nominee turns out to be, even if we have to hold out collective noses to do it. I know I will. If a GOP president gets in again, I would hate to look back and know that my missing vote helped to get him in.

So come on... remember that common goal we have to do something good for this country and keep the GOP out.

VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!!!
_________________
Don't blame this mess on me... I'm an Independent!

3 House Judiciary Members Call for Impeachment of Cheney NOW

dlindorff — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:52:24 -0500

Faced with an obstructionist leadership in the House, and a mainstream media that have forsaken their role as a Fourth Estate monitor of government abuse, three Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee are calling on the public to demand that the Congress initiate impeachment hearings immediately against Vice President Dick Cheney.

Speaking at a telephone press conference Friday organized by Democrats.com, Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL) said that following a bi-partisan vote Nov. 7 by the full House to send Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s Cheney impeachment bill (H Res 799, formerly H Res 333)opinion article penned by himself and two Judiciary Committee colleagues, Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), which was sent to a number of leading newspapers, including the Miami Herald, the Washington Post and the New York Times, was rejected for publication—an astonishing act of censorship for a document authored by three members of congress on an issue of such significance as impeachment of the vice president.

In that article, Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin write:

The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution. The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.

Now that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan has indicated that the Vice President and his staff purposefully gave him false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert agent to report to the American people, it is even more important for Congress to investigate what may have been an intentional obstruction of justice. Congress should call Mr. McClellan to testify about what he described as being asked to “unknowingly [pass] along false information.” In addition, recent revelations have shown that the Administration including Vice President Cheney may have again manipulated and exaggerated evidence about weapons of mass destruction -- this time about Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Asked why he thought leading publications had refused to publish the op-ed piece calling for an immediate start to impeachment hearings, Wexler says, “I think the mainstream media, at least thus far, have bought the notion that impeachment hearings are outside the bounds of what Congress ought to be doing.”

He adds that there may be a fear, on the part of corporate media executives and editors, and on the part of Democratic Party congressional leaders, of having been “complicit” in many of the administration’s constitutional crimes. “There may be some significant conflicts of interest,” he says, that could make them feel uncomfortable about the idea of impeachment hearings.

To push back against this unseemly resistance Rep. Wexler and his two House colleagues have decided to go public with their message. Wexler has set up a website, called WexlerWantsHearings. He is urging Americans from across the country to go to the sign and sign on to his call for an immediate start to hearings. “I want to be able to go to my colleagues in the house and say I have 55,000 people calling for hearings,” he says.

People should also be contacting their local and national media outlets—and especially the New York Times, Washington Post and Miami Herald—demanding that they report openly and honestly on the growing impeachment movement, and that they publish the Wexler, Gutierrez Baldwin op-ed.

While he does not say where he thinks House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) stands at this point on the subject of starting hearings on the long-stalled Kucinich impeachment bill, which has languished in a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee for over half a year, Rep. Wexler said he has spoken with Conyers about the matter. “I have a lot of confidence in John,” he says.

Wexler’s, Gutierrez’s and Baldwin’s new push on impeachment comes just as Kucinich, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, has announced that he is preparing to file a major bill of impeachment against President Bush. Kucinich is reportedly working on a sweeping 50-page impeachment bill containing over 20 counts of high crimes and misdemeanors against the president.

Asked about this, and whether it would alter his push for early hearings on Cheney’s impeachable crimes, Wexler says no. While pointedly agreeing that the president is likely guilty of the same abuses of power that are being alleged against Cheney, “and probably others in addition,” he says it makes sense to focus first on the vice president. “Strategically, I think we are on stronger ground pursuing the vice president.”
________________

DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based investigative journalist and columnist. His latest book, co-authored by Barbara Olshansky, is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006, and available now in paperback edition). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

More Horsesh*t

Bob Fertik — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 11:02:07 -0500

So far 3,341 of you have joined our Democratic Donor Strike against the DSCC (Senate Democrats) and DCCC (House Democrats).

And it must be scaring the bejeezus out of Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer, because the DSCC just sent out an email from "virtual James Carville" to try to convince progressives that we should put aside our rage at Senate Democrats and give them our hard-earned money anyway.

From: James Carville info@dscc.org
Subject: More horses

Dear X,

I'm not going to sugarcoat it. I'm as frustrated as you are that more hasn't gotten done in this Congress. Like you, I want to see more progress on getting us out of this mess in Iraq, getting more folks health care, and kicking our oil habit.

I'll give the DSCC credit, this letter is punchy. And it's clever to have "virtual Carville" pretending to be on our side, feeling our pain.

Of course real Carville spends his time on TV selling Hillary Clinton and trashing her Democratic opponents. He never demands an exit from Iraq, universal health care, or "kicking our oil habit" because the Corporate Media would never let a Democrat say such anti-Corporate things. And if he tried to slip something past the Corporate Censors, Cheney's enforcer Mary Matalin would cut off his ~~dick~~ head when he got home.

But I want to be clear: That's not the fault of the horses we have. It's because we need more horses. Fifty-one Democrats in the Senate just isn't enough. Don't just take it from me. Stu Rothenberg is the gold standard of political analysts and he just said "Sixty seats is what it's about. And if the Democrats can get close to that, then they really can do things."

Stu Rothenberg's "gold" is painted Republican poop - just ask Kos, Stoller, Kos, or Stoller. Shame on "virtual Carville" for quoting him. But I digress.

Sure it would be nice to have more horses. But if those horses are trained by Carville, all we'll get is more horsesh*t.

Let's get this straight: we have all the horses we need right now to get out of Iraq and do a whole lot more.

We have a majority of the Senate, which means Majority Leader Harry Reid controls the Senate calendar and every bill that gets on that calendar or - equally important - doesn't get on that calendar.

Sure, Republicans can filibuster bills they don't like if they can get 40 votes. But it takes just one vote - Harry Reid's - to stop a bill Democrats don't like.

One vote - Harry Reid's - could stop all funding for Iraq, except what is needed to bring our troops safely home.

One vote - Harry Reid's - could stop the bill to allow warrantless wiretapping with retroactive telecom immunity.

One vote - Harry Reid's - could instruct the Democratic majority to send the Sargeant-at-Arms to arrest Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Joshua Bolten, and other former and current White House officials, for contempt of Congress in refusing to testify pursuant to subpoenas.

And on and on it goes.

If we had 60 Senate votes, Harry Reid's one vote would still decide whether to allow a vote to fund the Iraq Occupation or not. If we had 70 votes, 80 votes, 90 votes, or even 100 votes, Harry Reid would still control the calendar.

We're not stupid, and we're not sheep. We're not in the Senate so we don't know every arcane rule, but we have lawyers and we know history and we're watching every move they make - including Harry Reid's "midnight massacre" to confirm Waterboarding Mike Mukasey as Attorney General when all four anti-Mukasey Senators running for President were out of town.

The bottom line is simple: once you get past 50 in the Senate, values matter more than votes.

Our Democratic Donor Strike has four conditions:

1. Restrict any new Iraq funds to a safe withdrawal of U.S. troops - not another penny for occupation or the Bush-Maliki "enduring security guarantees"
2. Prohibit any use of funds to plan or execute a pre-emptive attack on Iran, and repeal the
post-9/11 Authorization of Use of Military Force that Bush and Cheney believe authorizes
them to attack Iran or any other country they please, as well as to wiretap all our calls
and emails without warrants

3. Fully restore the Constitution by strictly outlawing warrantless wiretapping and torture,
closing Guantanamo, and restoring habeas corpus

4. Complete the investigation of White House crimes by using "inherent contempt" to
compel testimony by current and former White House officials

If Harry Reid wants our money, he can stop hiding behind "virtual Carville" and just do it.

And while we're waiting for Godot, you can join our Democratic Donor Strike.

1988-2004: The Submerging Democratic Majority

Gore4US — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 22:24:26 -0400

1988-2004 Election Analysis: The Submerging Democratic Majority http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#HistoricalElections

The Democrats actually won all FIVE elections by an average 8.9 MILLION vote margin. That’s the True Emerging Democratic Majority. Don't believe it? Run the numbers yourself.

This analysis is based on the 1988-2004 Election Calculator model. The model first estimates the number of returning voters by adjusting prior election recorded vote totals for uncounted votes and mortality. An estimated turnout percentage is applied to this value. As preliminary NEP vote shares were not available for 1988-2000, Final National Exit Poll shares (which were matched to the recorded vote) were assumed for the base case. In 2004, however, preliminary 12:22am "pristine" vote shares were available, so these were used instead.

The model used Census-reported total votes cast as the base case assumption. The pool of potential returning voters was assumed to include all who cast votes, rather than just those whose votes were recorded. Uncounted vote rates based on the Census are much higher than the assumed 3.0% rate in prior models. Another assumption change is the mortality rate. Annual voter mortality, estimated as 1.22-1.30%, is more accurate than prior models which assumed the total US 0.87% mortality rate.

The new base case assumptions had the effect of increasing Democratic vote shares compared to prior models. For example, the Election Calculator indicates that Kerry won by 53.0- 45.9%, a 9 million vote margin. The prior True Vote Model had Kerry winning by 52.6-46.4%.

Following are the key results based on AVERAGE CALCULATED 1988-2004 Vote shares:

- The Dem share was 3.8% HIGHER than the RECORDED share.

- The GOP share was 3.2% LOWER than the RECORDED share.

- The Dem share was 1.4% HIGHER than the PRELIMINARY Exit Poll.

- The GOP share was 0.1% HIGHER than the PRELIMINARY Exit Poll.

Voter turnout of prior election Dem, GOP and Other voters is calculated as:

Turnout = prior election (recorded vote + uncounted votes - voter deaths)* voter turnout percentage

The True vote for the Dem, GOP and Other candidate is calculated as:

True Vote = shares of returning (Dem + GOP + Other + New voters)

Summary Statistics (1988-2004)


	Calculated
	TRUE Vote			Exit Poll		Recorded			Calculated Dem
	Dem	Rep		Dem	Rep	Dem	Rep		Margin (mil)
Average	50.9%	43.0%		49.5%	42.9%	47.1%	46.2%		8.86

2004	53.0%	45.9%		50.8%	48.2%	48.3%	50.7%		8.96
2000	51.1%	46.0%		48.5%	46.2%	48.4%	47.9%		5.66
1996	52.0%	39.3%		52.2%	37.5%	49.9%	41.4%		13.36
1992	47.9%	35.0%		46.0%	33.1%	43.3%	37.7%		14.71
1988	50.2%	48.7%		49.8%	49.3%	45.6%	53.4%		1.61


1988-2004 Avg	Total	Dem	Rep	Other	Margin	Dem	Rep	Other	Margin
Calculated	111.5	56.76	47.90	6.86	8.86	50.9%	43.0%	6.2%	7.9%
Recorded	102.9	48.47	47.66	6.74	0.81	47.1%	46.2%	6.7%	0.9%
Prelim Exit poll	102.9	50.84	44.28	7.93	6.56	49.5%	42.9%	7.9%	6.6%
Discrepancies
Calc - Recorded	8.7	8.29	0.24	0.12	8.05	3.8%	-3.2%	-0.5%	7.0%
Calc - Exit poll		5.92	3.62	-1.07	2.30	1.4%	0.1%	-1.7%	1.3%
Exit - Recorded		2.38	-3.38	1.19	5.76	2.4%	-3.4%	1.2%	5.7%

Make Them Steal Your Vote - Election Protection

CactusPat — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 06:30:49 -0500

There's been much wringing of hand and gnashing of tooth over the impending 2006 Stolen Elections (myself included). With stories breaking into the corporate MSM (esp. Lou Dobbs on CNN) of Dieblod's voting machine vulnerabilities, touch screen machines flipping votes to repubs in S FL, and voting machine "sleep-overs" in San Diego,CA.

While not, perhaps, the intended effect, this news has the psychological effect of discouraging and dissuading active participation in our democratic process (ie: Voter Suppression). The wife, however, in her infinite wisdom, has a simple answer to these developments - "I'm going to vote, they're not going to stop me, I'm going to make them steal my vote". So what can we do to catch the Republican Dirty Tricksters trying to steal our votes? Below are listed several Election Protection initiatives to help stop the disenfranchisement by the Republican election suppression machine and maybe catch them red-handed. Make them steal your vote....

There are several ways to participate in Election Protection activities. One of the latest is called Video the Vote. Our own Bob Fertik has started a Blue Revolution slated for election night. There are toll-free hotlines to call in problems. Even do-it yourself exit polling...

Election Protection Hotline. If you encounter any problem in the voting process call 1-866-OUR-VOTE (1-866-687-8683) for English or 1-888-VEY-VOTA (1-888-839-8682 para la ayuda en espanol).
Working Asset's Voter Protection Immediate Response Network. We may not have enough time to email you, but we can deliver a text message or place a call straight to your phone with a short and easy action that could help save the election. Signing up takes only a moment, and you'll be a great service in helping protect the election. We may need to urge the local election offices to keep the polls open to compensate for delayed poll openings, such as what happened in Maryland's primary this year. We might push for more voting machines to be delivered to precincts with very long lines. We may need to show up in person and witness poll-closing procedures. We might also need to show up in person at our county election offices to protest voter fraud or voter intimidation at the polls. And we may need people to go with video cameras in hand, interview voters who've had problems, and then post that video to the web. You can also sign-up with WA partner, the Ruckus Society...
People for the American Way's Election Protection 365. National, state, and local members of the Election Protection coalition are working at a fever pitch to get this historic voter protection program's Election Day components ready to go. Are you part of the effort? People For the American Way Foundation has taken responsibility inside the coalition to help in five key states: Ohio, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Florida and New Jersey. We need you to help us there. Can you volunteer?
Election Verification Exit Poll. To protect the vote count, we must have an independent way to assess the will of the voters. For this reason, the Vote Count Protection Project includes an Election Verification Exit Poll. In selected precincts, we will interview a representative sample of voters to determine their choices of candidates. The raw data, precinct by precinct, will be publicly posted. This transparency will allow statisticians of every political stripe to perform independent analyses. Note that media-sponsored exit polls, such as the 2004 US Presidential exit poll, do not make their raw data available in this way, and are not Election Verification Exit Polls. Read the Election Verification Exit Poll plan details (PDF, 104Kb).
Do Your Own Exit Poll: While we cannot take responsibility for exit polls that we do not supervise ourselves, there is no harm in your doing a poll in your own region. Here are instructions for doing your own election verification exit poll...
Election Defense Alliance. The purpose of EDA is to help build and coordinate a comprehensive, cohesive national strategy for the election integrity movement, in order to regain public control of the voting process in the United States, and to insure that the process is honest, transparent, secure, subject to unambiguous verification, and worthy of the public trust.
Verified Voting.org's Election Transparency Project. Do you wonder whether your vote counts? Are you losing faith in our electoral process? Do you think our elections are as accurate as they should be? Are you concerned that the results might be vulnerable to fraud or machine failure?
VotersUnite.org. A non-partisan national grassroots resource for fair and accurate elections! We believe in the power of facts.
Video the Vote. In 2000 and 2004, problems plagued the polls in different parts of the country: long lines, eligible voters turned away, voter intimidation, misallocation and malfunctioning of voting equipment. They were underreported on Election Day. Days and weeks later, a more complete picture of voter disenfranchisement emerged—but it was too late. The elections were over and the media had moved on. Starting this election, citizen journalists—people like you and I—will document problems as they occur. We'll play them online, spread word through blogs and partner websites, doing our part to make sure the full story of our elections is told.
VelvetRevolution.us has launched an Election Protection Strike Force as a new approach to grassroots action, a multi-pronged campaign to put elections back in the hands of the people. The Election Protection Strike Force will target electronic voting problems and voter disenfranchisement schemes through: $250,000 ELECTION FRAUD REWARD FUND to encourage whistleblowers to share information about election rigging. This reward will be paid for information about election fraud leading to overturning a House or Senate. Hotline - call: 1-888 VOTETIP

If you know of any other Election Protection initiatives please list them below in comments. Also check Alternet editor Don Hazen's excellent article "How to Stop the November Elections from Being Stolen" quoting democrats.com's own Bob Fertik...

...So what do you tell voters to help them combat this psychological problem that could depress voting? "I tell voters we have to win by such an overwhelming margin that it isn't close enough to steal," says Bob Fertik, the head of Democrats.com, an activist web site not part of the Democratic party, that calls themselves aggressive progressives...

...Democrats.com's Bob Fertik says, "We have to get involved in organized efforts to audit the elections by groups like www.ElectionDefenseAlliance.org, www.VelvetRevolution.us, www.BlackBoxVoting.org, etc. I'd also like to see Democratic voters hold candlelight vigils outside each county's board of elections after the polls close, holding signs saying 'Count Every Vote' and 'No More Stolen Elections!' Imagine a Blue Revolution, every bit as joyous and historic as the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Cedar Revolution Lebanon, the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia -- right here in the United States of America...."

WeDemocrats.org

wedemocrats — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 13:35:15 -0500

WeDemocrats In order to stimulate an active interest in government affairs, to restore TRUST of our government, to foster and perpetuate the idea of FREEDOM and principles of a Democratic Nation and to provide for our people through administration of the highest degree of justice, FAIRNESS and social welfare, do associate ourselves together as an official progressive grassroots organization, of the Progressives' Democratic Party. Auxilary groups on Democrats.org and BarackObama.com.
What will help Democrats win elections will be a surge in grassroots energy and a reengaged corps of activists who are working to take their party and country back. 6,236 - IN ALL 50 STATES AND DC!!! It’s a Fantastic Start.
Join this group!

Ron McBride

http://www.WeDemocrats.org

ron@wedemocrats.org

Join WeDemocrats at: http://www.wedemocrats.org/dadamail/mail.cgi/list/maillist/

My History With Democrats.com

CactusPat — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:00:06 -0400

Recently a few folks have inquired as to my status at Democrats.com and how I came to be a blogger here. In the course of answering these inquiries I realized that in the process I have created a bio of sorts. So without further ado here's how it all happened...

What a long strange trip it's been (someone once said)... startin' shortly after I became politically active back in the post coup madness that was Tallahassee in Nov./Dec. 2000.... An aquaintance pointed me to democrats.com to get on the mailing list for daily news updates of the ongoing coup.

In Jan. '01, days before Smirk's coronation, Dems.com sent out a form letter to send to local newspaper letters to the editor in protest of the illegal appointment of said small shrub by the SCOTUS (or as my wife calls them the 'Criminal 5'). I did so w/o changing the letter and it was published in the Tally Democrat (our local toilet paper alternative).

A day or two later some wingnuts caught on to the the letter campaign and made a stink. I was then summarily banned for life from the TD in a scathing op-ed by the Letters Editor. At which point Dems.com co-founder David Lytel (former Gore and Clinton WH staffer - he designed the first WH website) stepped in and came down on the Tally Democrat like a ton of bricks.

We both got our rebuttals to the Letter Editor's article that "exposed" the "hoax" letter campaign. So that was my introduction to democtats.com and online political activism.

After that experience I joined many newsgroups and proceeded to learn web skills and start my first website for a yr. or so. That led to volunteering to help develop the website www.falloutsheltersnews.com (a wholly-owned subsidiary of CLG's Mgr. Lori Price - www.legitgov.org). Along the way I developed an eye for politically pertinent and over-looked, under-reported news. Which I then started submitting to Bob Fertik at Democrats.com, along with www.Buzzflash.com, www.UnKnownNews.net, CLG, www.MakeThemAccountable.com, etc., etc.

After about a year or so of this activity, Bob Fertik invited me to join the democrats.com newshound team sometime in the beginning of 2003. Which was a small group of dedicated volunteers (5-10) pounding out the daily news of the Bush Junta. Which I did for nearly two yrs. off and on as time and motivation permitted. The searchable archive of our efforts stands in memorial exposing the crimes of the first term of the Bush Junta at http://archive.democrats.com/

Then, on election day - Nov. 4th, 2004, Bob Fertik unrolled the new blogging website on us. We, the volunteer newshounds, were then invited to begin blogging. Most demurred, having burnt out in the frenzy leading up to the (S)election of '04 and shocked by the surprise change of format.

It was a big step to start blogging for me, having one's identity attached to posts, after years of anonymous volunteer servitude and political activism behind the scenes. I didn't take up the blogging mantle for a month or so after the Stolen Election of 2004. At that time it was mainly Bob Fertik and Ted Kahl, site editor, who were blogging regularly. There were a couple of others occaisionally lending their efforts.

So there it is. My history with www.democrats.com. I still blog here from time to time...

CP ;>)

Platform

Bob Fertik — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:50:09 -0400

The Democrats.com Platform:

Immigration

We support comprehensive immigration reform that strengthens our borders, protects U.S. workers and their wages, reunites families, and allows those who pay taxes and obey the law to earn the opportunity to apply for the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

Catch Me on BlogCall and WakeUpCall

davidswanson — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:43:52 -0400

Catch me today on BlogCall:
http://www.democrats.com/blogcall

And tomorrow at 8 a.m. CT in St Louis on the Wake Up Call:
http://thewakeupcall.cjb.net/

The Latest News

Ted Kahl — Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:18:49 -0500

Be sure to check out the latest news posted by our diligent Democrats.com newswatchers. See "Forum Topics" box in the left hand column of this page.