Democrats.com News

Obama Escrow Campaign Hits NY Times

Bob Fertik — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 09:56:13 -0400

A week ago, our Obama Escrow Pledge campaign made the Wall St. Journal. Today we made the NY Times:

Bob Fertik, president of Democrats.com, a progressive Web site, started asking his readers last month to pledge money to an escrow fund for Mr. Obama, as opposed to contributing to him outright. The idea was to make Mr. Obama rethink his decision to support the Bush administration’s wiretapping measure.

Mr. Obama initially said he would try to filibuster a vote, but on Wednesday he was among 69 senators who voted for the measure, which to many liberals represents a flagrant abuse of privacy rights. The legislation grants legal immunity to telecommunications companies that cooperated with the wiretapping program.

So far, 675 people have pledged $101,375 to Mr. Fertik’s escrow fund, money that theoretically would be donated to Mr. Obama once he showed a firm commitment to progressive values, Mr. Fertik said.

But Mr. Fertik also said that while Mr. Obama’s change on the spying issue upset some supporters, it was not necessarily emblematic of a troubling shift to the center. He said he continued to support the senator, though he added, “We don’t see the need to close our eyes and hold our noses until November.”

The article is bizarrely framed by the title, "Obama Supporters on the Far Left Cry Foul." Since when is it a "far left" position to support the 4th Amendment?

It was the NY Times which first broke the story about Bush's warrantless wiretapping - although the Times held the story for more than a year to let Bush steal his second term. And the Times recently published several editorials against immunity.

The NY Times is a case study in ideological schizophrenia. Its editorials advocate "liberal" positions, but its op-ed and news pages publish rightwing lies from the likes of William Kristol and Judy Miller.

The core problem of the NY Times is that it has no convictions whatsoever - just like the current Pelosi-Reid misleadership of the Democratic Party. If they did, Democrats.com would have no reason to exist.

Democrats.com Joins TheStrangeBedfellows To Stop Wiretap Immunity

Bob Fertik — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:31:29 -0400

Over at Salon.com, Glenn Greenwald is mobilizing blogs to block House "Democratic" leader Steny Hoyer's corrupt deal with George Bush and the Telecoms for warrantless wiretapping immunity. Democrats.com is proud to join the effort, which is called TheStrangeBedfellows because it includes progressive blogs like ours and Ron Paul-supporting libertarian blogs. The money raised will be used for hard-hitting ads against Hoyer and two key Bush Democrats, Chris Carney (PA-10) and John Barrow (GA-12). What makes the anti-Barrow campaign especially potent is that he faces a strong primary challenge from progressive State Sen. Regina Thomas, who also happens to be black - in a district where 70% of primary voters are black.

Glenn adds,

Phase I, to begin immediately, will focus on ad campaigns against two Democratic pro-amnesty incumbents with no primary challenger (Hoyer and Carney), and one pro-amnesty Democratic incumbent with a credible primary challenge very shortly. Phase II will involve a massive money bomb, to be planned by the same people who were behind the money bombs that raised millions and millions of dollars for the Ron Paul presidential campaign. The dates and other details for that will be announced shortly.

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!

Introduce Sam...

aztsmom — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:55:38 -0500

I just received an email from democrats.com asking me to introduce "Sam" to Barak, Hillary, John & Mike. Sam is a pre-k who doesn't have government subsidized pre-k.

I'm an elementary educator. Add to that prestigious title, babysitter, part-time mother, social worker, tutor, disciplinarian and food provider. These are just some of the hats I'm asked to wear both by my administration and parents who leave their kids at school from 7am - 6pm.

It's bad enough to see a 1st grader at school that many hours a day, but now, you're asking me to support a government subsidized pre-k program to allow parents to leave the little ones at school from 7am - 6pm? Good grief, why are people having children? Is it OK to abdicate almost all of your parental duties and require that the schools take over for you? What other "responsibilities" are lurking in the shadows, soon to show up on the plates of educators nationwide? And, no, I don't care if you have to go to work. If your situation is such that you can't manage children, then make informed decisions about when and whether to have them, period.

I'd really like to introduce "Sam" to his mother and father. I'd like for "Sam's" mother and father to sit down and spend time with him, teaching him his ABC's, singing songs with him, teaching him how to tie his shoes, talking to him about what's right and what's wrong and why (I guess that's assuming mom & dad know the difference), and heaven forbid...reading with him everyday!!

This job can't be delegated to "someone else", namely the schools, especially when you're talking about pre-k kids. These kids need the care and guidance of their parents, grandparents, family.

And before you slam me for not supporting this pre-k program, let me just ask you how many hours you've spent in a school in the last month? If your answer is under 10, then you have no standing to respond. You have no idea what's going on in our schools, no idea what teachers are up against and no idea of the magnitude of the problems our young (and potentially younger) children face on a daily basis.

It's just a shame we can't legislate "informed parenthood".

Inspirational Leadership

Tom_Whitcum — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:30:24 -0500

The new war:

I believe that the American people will finally realize that Hillary is a very powerful force never seen in politics before.

Hillary is capable of producing tremendous progress. She already has! But when progress is made within herself AND the people of this country, then real change occurs. All in the spirit of progress, and progress means progress for all.

The generator behind all this is Hillary’s natural talent of Inspirational Leadership, that can lift all kinds of people out of the ashes and into the future era of fulfilling their dreams, not just at home but worldwide.

Hillary Clinton is the leader, the most powerful leader in our generation.

It’s our job to spread the word. Override the miss informed and show what has been done and what will be done. The time is now to get to work, real work, not just promises!

This time, it’s more than change, it’s hard work, and it’s time to feel good again!

Moveon Clones MyDem

Bob Fertik — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:41:03 -0500

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then I am most sincerely flattered that Moveon unveiled VotePoke.org as a clone of the voter registration verification system we created before the 2006 election at MyDem.com.

Our system was a big success and nearly 20,000 voters used it despite little publicity.

If you read carefully enough, you'll discover Moveon even plagiarized our exact language: "Are you registered to vote? Are you sure?"

Of course Moveon raises million$$ each year and we raise ... ten$$. But who's counting?

Still it would have been nice if Moveon had credited us with showing them how to do it, or sent a personal note of thanks. Just sayin'.

Moveon has copied Democrats.com many times on many issues, but there is one issue they simply refuse to touch - impeachment. This is a good opportunity to ask them once again to do what their members overwhelmingly want:
http://www.democrats.com/moveon-impeachment-petition

Brand new member but been here in spirit for years

Tommy Y. — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:14:12 -0400

I need someone to teach me a little on navigating this site and the administrator to change my county personal info. When I joined, the site automatically entered Catawba as my county of residence, but that is wrong. I lve in Lincoln county. The district is correct on my profile, as is everything else. The COUNTY is incorrect. How do I get it changed?

Democrats.com Poll Finds Overwhelming Opposition to Bush's Warrantless Wiretapping

Bob Fertik — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:46:06 -0400

Petition: Tell your Representatives to Stop Bush's Warrantless Wiretapping!

By a 73%-22% margin, Americans overwhelmingly oppose George Bush's efforts to wiretap Americans' phone calls and emails without a search warrant, according to a Democrats.com telephone poll of 1,006 adults conducted from August 8-12, 2007 by ICR.

Wiretapping	All	Dem	Ind	Rep
Approve	22%	11%	17%	42%
-strongly	10%	3%	8%	23%
-somewhat	12%	8%	9%	19%
Disapprove	73%	87%	80%	51%
-somewhat	12%	10%	14%	15%
-strongly	60%	77%	66%	36%

This is the first national poll since September 2006 asking Americans about warrantless wiretapping of Americans, which has been ignored by corporate media polls despite headline coverage. Democrats.com has also conducted several polls about impeachment, another topic corporate media pollsters refuse to touch because of opposition from the Bush Administration.

The question asked whether respondents approved or disapproved:

President Bush wants the power to wiretap the phone calls and emails of Americans without a search warrant from a judge.

George Bush demanded Congressional authorization of the program one week before Congress left for its August vacation. Bush officials claimed the legislation only permits wiretaps of terrorist-related communications outside the U.S., but legal experts and editorial writers insist gaping loopholes allow wiretaps of many Americans. Despite strong opposition from Democratic and progressive leaders, conservative Democrats joined Republicans in authorizing the program for six months. Democratic leaders promised to review the controversial program in the fall.

The existence of Bush's warrantless wiretapping program was first reported by the New York Times in December 2005, although they had uncovered the story before the 2004 election. They withheld the story at the request of the Bush Administration, even though many voters would have been outraged to learn of the warrantless wiretapping. When the Times finally published the story long after the election, many conservatives called for the Times to be prosecuted, and the Justice Department opened a criminal investigation.

The American people have never learned the details of the top-secret program. Only eight Members of Congress were briefed on its technology, but they were prohibited from sharing details with anyone, including other Members and their staffs, under threat of criminal penalties. At least three of the four Democrats privately told the White House they objected to the program.

Not a single Member of Congress has learned what legal authority allowed the warrantless wiretaps, which violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Fourth Amendment, according to the only Federal judge who reviewed the program. The Senate Judiciary Committee has demanded authorizing documents for two years but the Bush Administration has refused to provide them, most recently by defying subpoenas by Chairman Pat Leahy.

In 2003, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andy Card visited Attorney General John Ashcroft in the hospital in a failed attempt to get his approval for the program in a now-famous scene described by former Acting Attorney General James Comey before the Senate Judiciary Committee in May. Comey said he, Ashcroft, and other top Justice Department officials threatened to resign over the program, contradicting Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' claim that there was no dispute among senior officials. Gonzales could face perjury charges, censure, and impeachment for misleading Congress about the FISA dispute as well as the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys.

Democrats.com Poll Finds Libby Commutation Boosted Support for Impeachment

Bob Fertik — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:48:08 -0400

Note: This poll inaugurates Impeach.TV, a new blog on impeachment strategy edited by Bob Fertik. For recent impeachment analysis, click here.

The commutation of Scooter Libby's prison sentence backfired politically on Bush and Cheney and greatly increased support for impeachment, according to a Democrats.com telephone poll of 1,014 adults conducted by ICR.

Before the commutation on July 2, Americans 34% of Americans supported impeachment hearings for Bush, while 55% opposed. After the commutation, support increased to 43% and opposition dropped to 50% - a net increase in 14% for impeachment hearings.

Bush	Yes	No	Net
6/27-7/1	34%	55%	-21%
7/5-7/8	43%	50%	-7%

The political consequences were even worse for Cheney, who was Scooter Libby's boss. Before the commutation, 33% of Americans supported impeachment hearings for Cheney, while 51% opposed. After the commutation, support increased to 45% and opposition dropped to 44% - a net increase in 19% for impeachment hearings.

Cheney	Yes	No	Net
6/27-7/1	33%	51%	-18%
7/5-7/8	45%	44%	+1%

Despite Republican efforts to dampen public anger over the commutation by invoking Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, Americans solidly opposed the commutation by 69%-21%.

Commutation	All	Dem	Ind	Rep
Approve	21%	7%	15%	45%
-strongly	11%	5%	7%	23%
-somewhat	10%	2%	8%	22%
Disapprove	69%	87%	73%	43%
-somewhat	18%	17%	19%	21%
-strongly	51%	70%	54%	22%

While Democrats were nearly unanimous (87%-7%) in their disapproval of the commutation, Independents weren't far behind (73%-15%), and Republicans split right down the middle (43%-45%).

Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol explained Bush's strategy on Fox News Sunday:

“Here’s why the president acted the way he did. He knew Bill Clinton was joining Hillary in Iowa on July 4th. No, I’m serious,” Kristol said. “So on July 2d, Ed Gillespie, who’s a very canny Republican operator, said, Let’s pardon Libby. Clinton will rise to the bait, and we could spend the last half of the week debating the unbelievable Clinton pardons against the defensible Bush pardon.”

Kristol concluded, “I regard this as an extremely clever Machiavellian move by the president. It cheers me up about the Bush White House, and I’m really heartened.”

According to Democrats.com president Bob Fertik, "Republicans like Bill Kristol who celebrated Bush's 'extremely clever Machiavellian move' were utterly wrong about public opinion, just as they have been wrong about everything from Iraq to Social Security to Terry Schiavo. The American people recognize a coverup when they see one, and they understand that Libby's sentence was commuted to stop him from testifying against Cheney and Bush."

Libby's commutation had little impact on Republican support for impeachment, but it greatly increased support for impeachment among Independents and Democrats.

Bush	Dem	Ind	Rep
6/27-7/1	55%	34%	10%
7/5-7/8	66%	45%	10%
Net	+11%	+11%	0%

Cheney	Dem	Ind	Rep
6/27-7/1	57%	30%	9%
7/5-7/8	64%	50%	15%
Net	+7%	+20%	+6%

The impeachment results in the Democrats.com poll fell between two other post-commutation polls by American Research Group and Rasmussen Reports, and reflected the wording of the impeachment question. Polls asking about impeachment hearings get approximately 10% more support than polls asking about impeachment and removal; the Democrats.com poll was more precise in referring to "impeachment hearings that could lead to removal."

Bush	Question	Yes	No	Net
ARG	Impeachment proceedings	45%	46%	-1%
Democrats.com	Impeachment hearings that could lead to removal	43%	50%	-7%
Rasmussen	Impeach and remove	39%	49%	-10%

Support for Bush's impeachment has topped 50% in several polls over the past two years, most recently in October 2006 when a Newsweek poll found a 51%-44% majority. But the impeachment movement was undercut when Nancy Pelosi declared impeachment "off the table."

Before Republicans began impeachment hearings for President Clinton, polls showed only 26% supported impeachment and removal, while 36% supported impeachment hearings. Despite the lack of public support, Republicans impeached Clinton in the House and put him on trial in the Senate, where he was acquitted.

Democrats.com is a community of 300,000 Democratic and progressive activists that was founded in 2000 and is funded by members and advertisers, not by the Democratic Party. The Democrats.com poll had a margin of error of +/- 3%.

Democrats.com led the first protest against the Iraq War on September 12, 2002 and began its current campaign for impeachment after the publication of the Downing Street Memos in May 2005 revealed the Bush Administration had deliberately "fixed the intelligence and facts around the policy" of invading Iraq. Democrats.com joined with Progressive Democrats of America to create AfterDowningStreet.org, which sponsored four impeachment polls in 2005 by Ipsos Public Affairs, Zogby, Rasmussen, and Zogby.

Democrats.com worked with Rep. John Conyers on the famous "basement hearings" in June 2005 and helped organize hundreds of town hall meetings on impeachment over the past two years. Democrats.com has created Impeachment Committees in over 150 Congressional Districts. After hundreds of thousands marched in Washington DC on January 27 to end the war and impeach Bush, Democrats.com joined with other pro-impeachment groups to launch Impeach07.org, which organized over 100 gatherings at beaches and parks to spell I-M-P-E-A-C-H on April 28.

Last Friday, Democrats.com joined Brave New Films and other pro-impeachment groups to launch a video calling for the impeachment of Cheney which rose to #1 on the Youtube most-watched list. Democrats.com is currently trying to persuade the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on H.Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Cheney, authored by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, which has 14 co-sponsors. On July 23, Democrats.com will join Cindy Sheehan and former CIA analyst Ray McGovern in a march from Arlington Cemetary to Rep. Conyers' office to urge him start hearings on H.Res. 333.

Keith Olbermann Is 'Indebted' to David Swanson!

Bob Fertik — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 23:27:25 -0500

John Amato of CrooksAndLiars has the video of Keith Olbermann's Special Comment in which he fact-checks Bush's bogus SOTU claims about thwarted terrorists plots. And guess whose work Olbermann found most persuasive? Our very own David Swanson! Here is David's article - you go, David!!!

I am indebted to David Swanson, press secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 Presidential campaign, who has blogged about the dubious 96 words in Mr. Bush's address this year and who has concluded that of the four counter-terror claims the President made, he went 0 for 4.