The Tide is Turning - Video

Bosnian Vet Accuses Hillary of Valor Theft

A veteran of Bosnia who was at the event in Tuzla where Hillary Clinton falsely claimed to have landed under sniper fire is accusing the Senator of theft of valor. I would like to see Sen. Clinton stand up and explain herself to Tammi, her comrades and the Bosnian people. To build yourself up - smugly smiling with an air of cavalier bravery - on the backs of people who risked their actual lives to help those who suffered horrible loss...Frankly, it staggers me to find words for how low an act of self-serving disrespect this is.This is a moving story. Read it and consider whether you want the Senator from New York to lead your children.-chris

read more | digg story

2GETHER by DANIEL for Obama

This is a beautiful song, written, produced, arranged, performed and video edited by the artist DANIEL. What a song and what a message! It's the perfect song for the millions of American's who support Barack Obama's campaign and believe in the spirit of togetherness.I remember one of my college English professors saying that the biggest thing the Civil War changed was that before the war the people said "The United States *are*..." and after the war we now say "The United States *is*..."Plural became Singular.The United States *is* the home of Unity.-chris blask

read more | digg story

Chicago Tribune: Obama Addresses Rezko in Uncommon Detail

"The most remarkable facet of Obama's 92-minute discussion was that, at the outset, he pledged to answer every question the three dozen Tribune journalists crammed into the room would put to him. And he did."

read more | digg story

Obama's Remarks: "We are one America!"

"I just want to say to everybody here that as somebody who was born into a diverse family, as somebody who has little pieces of America all in me, I will not allow us to lose this moment. ""Let me just close my initial remarks by talking about bringing this country together. You know, Bobby Kennedy gave one of his most — gave one of his most famous speeches on a dark night in Indianapolis. Right after Dr. King was shot. Some of you remember reading about this speech. Some of you were alive when this speech was given. He stood on top of a car. He was in a crowd mostly of African Americans. And he delivered the news that Dr. King had been shot and killed. And he said, at that moment of anguish, he said, we’ve got a choice. He said, we’ve got a choice in taking the rage and bitterness and disappointment and letting it fester and dividing us further so that we no longer see each other as Americans but we see each other as separate and apart and at odds with each other. Or we can take a different path that says we have different stories, but we have common dreams and common hopes. And we can decide to walk down this road together. And remake America once again. And, you know, I think about those words often, especially in the last several weeks - because this campaign started on the basis that we are one America."

read more | digg story

Media Hold McCain, Obama to Different Standards

The press has devoted significant time to raising questions about Obama’s associations or connections with various public figures, but it is something the press seems far less interested in doing with John McCain.McCain actively solicited John Hagee's support, and did not initially repudiate Hagee's intolerant remarks. On February 29, McCain stated that Hagee "supports what I stand for and believe in." He added that he was "proud" of Hagee's spiritual leadership. Hagge called Catholicism: ‘A Godless theology of hate that no one dared try to stop for a thousand years produced a harvest of hate.’ Hagee stated that Hurricane Katrina was an act of God, punishing New Orleans for "a level of sin that was offensive to God".For tax year 2003, Hagee received almost a million dollars in compensation for his work for GETV that year, which amounted to approximately 16 hours per week. (The GETV Board of Directors, which determines his pay, consisted of John Hagee himself, his wife, his son, and a Cornerstone Church member.)

read more | digg story

Obama Denounces His Pastor’s Statements

The statements played are outliers, taken out of context, and that he is not anti-white. The United Church of Christ, the denomination of the Chicago church, is overwhelmingly white. And Mr. Wright is an equal opportunity critic, often delivering scorching lectures about black society, telling audiences to improve their educations and work ethic.

read more | digg story

Obama wins A+ in Middle Class voting record

The non-partisan DMI evaluates Members of Congress based on how their votes help the US Middle Class. They have issued an A+ grade for Senator Barack Obama's role in helping middle class America.

read more | digg story

Clinton-backer Gov. Rendell: OBAMA WOULD BEAT MCCAIN

Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, a staunch Clinton supporter, said that he believes Obama would defeat McCain in the general election.

read more | digg story

Clinton Delegate Caucusing for Obama In Seattle

"Sen. Clinton, I can no longer count myself in your ranks. I've decided that, barring some stunning revelation, Barack Obama has earned the Democratic nomination, fair and square. More importantly, I've decided that your campaign's tactics have crossed a line that should never be crossed. I no longer want to be associated with your effort..."

read more | digg story

Geraldine Ferraro on Superdelegates - and the Rush Factor

Hi folks!

I am still trying to decide what Ms. Ferraro is saying about Superdelegates. Let's see what I can make of this, the (paranthetical) comments are mine:

Geraldine Ferraro, in an article in the New York Times on Feb 25, 2008, explained the reason for the superdelegate process that she helped create.

By. Geraldine Ferraro
New York Times, Feb 25, 2008

It gets a little bit long, so let me see if I can parse out the pertinent points:

o Ms. Ferraro: "That decision, (who to nominate in a close race) they say, should rest with the rank-and-file Democrats who went to the polls and voted."

OK, I can follow that. I suppose "they" is me and everyone else who went to the polls and voted. Go on, I'm on the edge of my seat.

o "But the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow."

....?

Like, "follow the will of the voters?"

o "..the delegate totals from primaries and caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of (the) rank-and-file"

Er. OK, let me try to get with you here. You are saying that maybe not all Democrat voters would come out to the primaries and caucuses? And *that* would invalidate the vote?

Uh, well, have you seen the percentage of voters who turn out in the past general elections? Does that mean, since the majority of potential voters did not vote in the past general elections, that the will of the "rank-and-file" of the American population was not represented in the general elections? Should we then, um, have a set of Super-Duper-Delegates who can decide whether the "rank and file" of the American public are right or wrong in November?

There has to be more to this, let's see what comes next.

o "More important, "

Oh, good! Glad we're onto the More Important issues than voters repesentation and such!

Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt. I mean, not to say you are volatile and likely to lash out or anything, just didn't mean to ... er... Sorry, go on. please?

o "although many states like New York have closed primaries in which only enrolled Democrats are allowed to vote, in many other states Republicans and independents can make the difference by voting in Democratic primaries or caucuses."

AHA!! You *were* right! That was the *much* more important point!!

What you *mean* to say - correct me if I'm missing something here - but what you *mean* to say - what the "superdelegate system is setup to do "Most important"ly, is to correct for any OUTSIDE INFLUENCES that SUBVERT THE WILL OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!!!!

I am *so* with you on this one!!

I mean, just imagine if some Evil Outside Influence - say some Extremist Radio Talkshow Host for example (just a strawman you know - just a thought exercise - kinda going out on a Limb, augh [sorry, phlegm]) with a "ditto"ing horde of millions of slavering listeners, some Far Right Fanatic, were to - I dunno how to put this - RUSH into the middle of a highly contested Democratic Primary and try to get his listeners to switch their voter registrations to Democrat and go and actually *vote* for one candidate or the other - *that's* what superdelegates are for!!!

So, if it were to come to a Convention, and it were - like you said - a close thing, and one of the candidates could be shown to have gotten a sudden (let's just pick a number) 100% increase in Republican votes in (say) - Texas, just to pick one out of the air - *right* after this theoretical RUSHing talk-show host urged his listeners to go vote for her (wouldn't want to be sexist - candidates can be women, too) - THAT'S where superdelegates would step in and say: "Hey! That's just not fair play!" and OVERRIDE those votes!

That is *so* *cool*!

You'd want to be really really sure that you weren't jumping the gun, of course. There'd have to be other evidence. Lemme see if I can make up another one. I dunno, let's pick Mississippi just for kicks:

OK, then comes Mississippi, and this same Democratic Candidate, who hadn't been getting many Republican votes prior to Texas and this Evil Radio Show hosts call for Repulicans to Rush out and vote for her, say she suddenly gets - pick a number? - why not 24% of her votes from people willing to call themselves Republican.

NOW you have a case for the superdelegates to step in!

Case Closed!

Strip the candidate of a whole pile of credibility, the Democratic voters didn't make her a close match to the other candidate at all! It was a *subversion* of the will of the rank-and-file of the Democratic party!!

Wow! You did a *great* job setting up that superdelegate system!

Sure, this is just a wild thought exercise. A situation like this wouldn't come up in a million years! It's crazy!

But it sure is good to know that you and the other Democrats put a system in place two decades ago so that if anything so far fetched ever *did* happen, we can count on those superdelegates to make it alright.

Whew!

Thanks for setting that all straight, Ms. Ferraro. You always have such a level-headed way of explaining these complex issues.

Thanks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/mississippi-limbaugh-ef_b_91112.html

A Letter to Ms. Ferraro on Behalf of My Children

I sent this letter to Ms. Ferraro on March 10.

Dear Ms. Ferraro,

I am personally hurt by your recent words. As a young man I watched your candidacy with youthful hope that I was watching the change from the Old Ways of judging people by their skin, by their gender, by their biology.

Now I am a father of two girls and a boy. Your words make me flinch with the fears and the guilt that I have gotten over as an adult. They make me want to protect my children from the accusations and sick memes that refuse to die off – the sick memes that you just inserted back into the public consciousness on behalf of a politician who cannot seem to do enough to ensure that my children integrate those thoughts, that they too suffer as their parents did.

I want to apologize for my skin. For being male. But I can’t.

You see, my children are “white”, too, whatever that word even means to them. Not much, really, unless you and I make sure that they carry the burden of guilt you wish to gift them.
One of my children is male. He is a boy.

I regret that at twelve he has already picked up some of the guilt that your generation and my generation were so eager to accept, so eager to share. To inflict on one another.

So you see, I cannot apologize for myself because if I did I would have to apologize for my children as well.

And they are still innocent. Do you see?

I do not support your candidate because I disagree with her qualifications to lead my children’s path to adulthood. Not because I want my girls to have a Woman or my boy to have a Man as president – because I want them not to have to think along those lines, but to think about whether the person is good at their job, and I can’t see your candidate being as good at the job as the one I support.

I do not support my candidate because I want my children to grow to adulthood with a leader who matches their skin, nor to see how gracious Daddy is in supporting one whose skin does not match theirs. I want them to not understand that this is even an issue that Mommies and Daddies think about.

And I don’t think about these things, except for the boy inside me that was excited when *you*, Ms. Ferraro, ran for Vice President. That boy lived in a world defined by race and gender differences. He wanted you to win – to break down the barriers of biology. That boy would be happy to have anyone win who wasn’t a biological match for all his predecessors.

But that boy is grown up now. The man that boy became knows that it is more important to elect qualified – even, when we can, *great* - leaders than it is to elect leaders because we want them to break barriers that have already dissolved all on their own.

You helped begin the dissolution of those barriers – can’t you see that you won? They are gone! Margaret Thatcher, Nelson Mandela and many others attest to that already, and so long as you and your candidate don’t succeed in destroying Senator Obama and with him the Democratic party, another proof will be at hand that biology is off the table in choosing the leadership of our species. The leadership of our children.

Please, Ms. Ferraro. Not only do I think you should publicly renounce your own words – words that are doing more to perpetuate the sick thoughts you stood against many years ago than anything your opponents of that day could hope for – but I ask that you repeal your support for Senator Clinton. You are both feeding the dragon you once sought to slay, and it will come out of its cave and damage my children if you don’t stop.

Best Regards,

Chris Blask

Poem/message: The Experience of Me and We

Mar 8th, 2008 at 2:27 pm EST

(In response to a previous Poem/Message by Sue Shields)

Sue, that is a poem well read.

I, like you, worked in the Internet Adolescence to create the Boom of the 90s. Those frenetic years that stretched like centuries where the accomplishments of a month were achieved in a week, where the work of a lifetime was the matter of lunchtime and the team never slept.

We did not require a President and First Lady to lead us tothe Gates.

We were on the path - we built it, painted the signs and carved out rest-stops and restaurants along the way - Just In Time as the people wandered, then jogged, then rushed down in a fray.

It is to question the value of all of us who spread the gravel and planted the shrubs to assume that we would not have achieved our goal had it not been for the magnanimous Few - or Two - who, deigning to gift us their wisdom granted us their permission.

We are the Experience we seek - take a peek inside and you will find that what we need is all of our MEs, and that wehave had Us all along.

To say it was Them is to take away our pride in our workand allow us to shirk the responsibilities that came with changing the world. There is no one else who did what we did nor deserves either the fame or the blame for the fallout. It is time to callout Ourselves and to stand up to our burden. We cannot allow the past or the present to remove what's unpleasant without giving up life and the joy of the future, which I, for one, plan not to squander for my son or my daughters.

Now is the time for a leader who follows, who cheers us togo where we know shows the promise of prosperity and the wealth for posterity.

Our riches are We, and we are already here.

-chris

Letter to the Author - Refutation of Article: "Obama’s Communist Mentor"

Mar 1st, 2008 at 6:46 pm EST

My letter to Mr. Kincaid:

NOTE: In this letter and elsewhere I voice my criticism of left-ish politics. I am sincere with these opinions but simultaneously realize that some of you would likely disagree strongly with me on some of them. Please be aware that my opinions are *not* a condemnation of you or your intentions. It is my opinion that virtually everyone shares the same goals (peace, prosperity and the improvement of the Human Lot in Life), we only differ on the best path to achieve these ends. Happy to debate all those points offline... ;~)

-cheers!

-chris

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/

Hello Mr. Kincaid,

I read your recent article with the aforementioned title. For beginners, I appreciate every opinion (which is kinda the point of this entire letter), and commend you for speaking yours regardless of my – or anyone else’s – opinion of it. Hopefully you share this view on free speech and the consideration of opposing views, which from your stated stance should be the case.

For my part, I disagree fundamentally with your article. If I understand the positions you espouse, you are stating that 1/ the media is “giving Obama a pass” on his political past, and 2/ that Sen. Obama has a hidden agenda of communist/socialist subversion of the United States government.

As a preface to my opinions, first let me explain my background.

• I am a registered Independent who has voted right-of-center for most of my adult life.

• I have been a vocal opponent of “modern liberalism” and socialism for more than ten years.

• I am a supporter/volunteer for Sen. Obama.

Born in 1965, I grew up in Colorado, Chicago and Toronto being a firm supporter of Left-ish ideals. In my late twenties in Canada I spent a lot of time working around politicians (TV production crew) which, combined with other evolutions drove me far away from the nanny-state superior condescension I perceived among Liberal politicians. Since then I have been a frequent debater on the side of personal freedoms and responsibility and against the actual socialism in place in Canada and Europe and latent in American Democratic positions and leaders (like Sen. Clinton, in my opinion). Today I live in Florida, but have lived as an adult in many regions of the country (SC, UT, IL, WA) and have travelled the world extensively and always engaged in discussion on all of these topics wherever I go.

Sen. Obama first crossed my path in the early 2000’s when my mother (a staunch left-winger with whom I have spirited debates ;~) brought him to my attention. Since then I have followed his career with skeptical interest, looking for the signs of left-wing demagoguery that I find so common among members of his party. It is specifically the lack thereof that has drawn me to support his campaign for President. While I certainly do not know everything about the man, I have consumed a great deal of data about his actions and positions. Not only do I not come to the conclusion implied by your article, the position you take strikes me as a set of points that could be used against myself should anyone choose to question my views – and this is what spurs me to write this note.

I, too, have had a varied background.

I, too, have and continue to seek conversations with all sorts of people – particularly those I disagree with.

While I cannot speak for Sen. Obama, I have inhabited several posts along the political perching-line in my life. Some, perhaps, a reflection of my age at the time, others due to ongoing examination of issues and ideologies. Today I will describe myself as “Libertarian” if forced to pick from the limited selection of political party labels, but in reality my views are a more complicated matrix including an absolute belief in individual independence and a pragmatic insistence on moving forward by available means rather than ineffectual circling around ideological totem poles.

If I for one moment believed that my choice for President actually embodied the beliefs that you appear to claim, then I would not support that person. However, based on more diligence than I have ever pursued in determining my choice (and I’m a tad obsessive about these sorts of things at the best of times), I cannot begin to agree with your assessment. Neither the plans put forward by Sen. Obama nor the words and intent displayed by his statements support the types of Big Government socialism I have seen firsthand in several stints of living in Canada. Nothing about his actions in government indicate the kind of extreme-left leanings that I identify with his Democratic opponent.

In contrast to the picture your article paints of an extremist fifth-columnist communist sleeper, the Barack Obama I see is a pragmatic effective diplomat who combines the positive social values of the left with the results-oriented personal responsibility of the right. Given my own not-insignificant successful use of these traits to attain global capitalist aims (I built a ~$3B business unit for Cisco Systems, for example), I see the pragmatic application of the opportunity to leverage this man’s own complex capabilities to be in the best interest of those of us who wish for the advancement of this country and its founding ideals.

I hope your stated position as a questioning individual will lead you to an examination of the data that brings you to a similar conclusion. For my part, I look forward to a point in two or three years time when we will all have more current and empirical evidence to prove one of us correct. I am betting more than the value of a simple sporting wager that neither of us will be disappointed with the real actions of a President Obama by that time, and look forward to debating this issue with you then.

Best regards,

-chris

A Betrayal of Conservative Fundamentals - Republicans Voting for Clinton to Beat Obama

Mar 5th, 2008 at 11:27 am EST

Hi folks,

Sen. Clinton won the Texas Primary (but lost the state, in the end) in large part due to Republicans following Rush's advice to insincerely vote for Sen. Clinton "because she will be easier to beat in November." Sen. Clinton got 10% of her vote Tuesday from Republicans, and while many of us right-wingers are supporting Obama based on actual support for him, I dare say there are few (if any) to right of center who are supporting Clinton.

Within a ten-minute period on the Sean Hannity show last night (around 7:10pm ET), two out of three callers bragged about switching and voting for Clinton to help bring Obama down and thereby win the general election for Sen. McCain (one in Ohio, one in Texas). The third caller was debating it.

Tiffany in Austin, after laughing at Democrats about it, went on to say that she was going to go out and caucus as well. She noted that her firefighter husband said he "couldn't bring himself to do it", for which I give him points for moral character.

Even Sean Hannity spent a good bit of time voicing his discomfort with the idea. "Ask yourself how you would feel if the Democrats were doing that to our primary," he asked the undecided election subverter in Ohio.

I think the entire episode is sordid. On the part of democracy-subverting Republicans - I'm ashamed of you. This is the antithesis of what core conservative political values are about. On the part of Sen. Clinton in supporting the action (and recommending McCain over Obama), the whole implication of turning on your party to serve your own ends is perhaps the lowest form of betrayal of trust.

I don't mind losing a fair fight, but this aspect of the contest makes me feel soiled and disappointed.

-chris

MyBO on CNN, and my "Obama Rapid Response" Rapid Response

Hi folks!

Below is my letter to CNN in regards to their coverage of MyBO.

Ironically, their little web-mail-response page barfed, so Lisa in Buffalo FAXED it to them for me (thanks, Lisa!).

As Charlie Brown would say: "Good grief." ;~)

-enjoy!

-chris

-----------------------------------------------
TO: Rick Sanchez - CNN
FROM: Chris Blask - Obama Rapid Response

Hi Rick et al!

I just watched your coverage of Barack Obama's Internet campaign. Bless their hearts, but your panel just embarassed themselves in front of the entire American population under 45 (and quite a few over) with their complete lack of understanding of modern communication. I got the impression of a group of county elders gathered on a porch trying to give comment on the New Fangled Teler-Fone down at Mable's place and how it "wasn't the same as just goin' down there and chawin' with a man".

barackobama.com is not a "new-fangled Internet thing" - it is a use of communications methods to promote messages and connect people. No different than a printing press and a coffee social - just a billion times more effective. To use geek terms you could say it is "an application of communications technology" - and frankly you folks are, too, so it shouldn't stump your Talent to discuss it - but that is to miss the whole point. I *am* a geek - but a geek who has moved more than $3B worth of hard goods - because I understand that all of this Internet stuff does not matter when it is all about geeks. It matters when my mother (and to her grave at 96, my grandmother) adopt it for *their* purposes - and that is what has happened with Barack Obama's campaign.

Let me give you an example. Obama Rapid Response (ORR) is a group of volunteers who monitor the media - we monitor you - and the opposition campaigns, discuss how to respond to spin we preceive in the media, attacks by other candidates and statements for/against our candidate around the country and around the world, and deliver our message effectively to appropriate venues and individuals.

Obama Rapid Response was setup by Neil in Vermont almost a year ago. Neil is not a technical person, but he wanted to get involved so he went to barackobama.com and created the group - everything was there for him to do it.

Lisa in Buffalo has trouble getting her caps-lock key off and her browser working, a fax machine and two cats. Lisa is passionate about her candidate, and despite the fact that she knows less about computers than you do about cold fusion, she was part of a team that picked up the Lord Trimble story (that I still haven't seen you folks pick up on) that hit the UK wire late Friday night ET and pushed it out to *every* newspaper, radio station and TV station in Wyoming before the polls opened (here's that story, in case you are still sorting through your lithographs for it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml ;~).

This past week, the site got so much traffic that the email server slowed down. This impacted the ORR since emails were not able to get out to the membership fast enough. Without prompting from the campaign (who are understandably rather busy), I created a Google group (http://googlegroups.com/orr-backup), dropped the key ORR membership into it and got all of the activity up and going again.

Your panel pointed out how the MyBO site allows volunteers to organize shoe-leather activities - which is true and impossible to overstate the effectiveness of - but their handling of the story underlined the complete lack of understanding of what is going on with MyBO and in fact the entire Obama campaign.

It is not only about delivering bumper-stickers and T-shirts faster (the graphics of which are online and can be sent directly to the printers). It is not just about drawing people to coffee-socials (thousands of which are organized through the site for every primary day, as one small example). It is not even just about enlisting and organizing door-to-door and phone campaigns (those, too: 1.5M calls from people at home to Wisconsin voters, as another small example).
It is about doing everything you've even seen being done by the handfull of people in a campaign office in Docudramas recounting past campaigns with a cast of thousands instead of dozens. It is about creating a center-less operation that enables free people to assume responsibility for themselves and act on their beliefs. It is about implementing on the largest scale the fundamental and foundational beliefs of America, namely:

o That all people are created equal.

o That Freedom of speech and freedom of action are the key to personal, national and global success.

o That Free Enterpise in business and thought enable the Individuals who make up the Population to be more powerful than the established Powers that hold all the advantages out of the gate.

Obama's success is not "cheating" as you asked on the show. Obama's success is an acting-out of the basic principles that underly every success in American history. Obama's success is a re-enactment of the founding of the country, where citizens met and decided to stand up to massively disproportional powers and tradition based on their belief in themselves and in the strength of individual freedom. Obama's success is the tactical and tangible proof that this country is, in fact, based on the strongest set of ideals in human history.

-best regards

-chris

PS - CNN is, oddly enough, the least available media outlet online. All of your competitors provide actual email addresses - for example - not just these silly boxes.