tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-85659918772520954542024-03-12T16:18:33.643-07:00Understanding VeteransIf your a Veteran Lets Talk!Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-58942694112275822682011-12-23T17:04:00.000-08:002011-12-23T17:04:33.278-08:00Merry Christmas...It wouldn't be Christmas in a war zone without Bob Hope. I was in UTapao in 1969 when he brought his show through...<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BJWiMApO6ks" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
To those troops spending the holidays away from home whether it's states side or in the war zone this ones for you...Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-74368044539384294932011-12-13T21:39:00.000-08:002011-12-13T21:40:57.248-08:00Who would have thought that a monument could stir such emotion but if you have a heart at all you wont have a dry eye once you've made your way from end to end.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wNtEGNUnzhE" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
The crime is in the names that should be on that wall but will never be recognized for their sacrifice. Many men died over there, some we buried others were the walking dead. They came home but may as well have died there because that's where they left their souls<br />
<br />
It is good that our troops today are being shown the respect they deserve unlike the reception we got when we came home. Never fault the soldier for doing what he's told only blame the Commander ordering him to do it!<br />
<br />
My cousins name, Charles Arthur Davidson, should be on that wall, even though his date of death was just a few years ago. That war killed him just as much as if he'd taken an AK47 round to the heart because he was lost once came home. He died at an early age due to wounds he received in Vietnam, that shortened his life.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-72270115361038091412011-09-06T22:57:00.000-07:002011-09-06T22:57:38.807-07:00The Wall!<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center; width: 480px;">
<embed height="360" src="http://w473.photobucket.com/pbwidget.swf?pbwurl=http%3A%2F%2Fw473.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Frr92%2FAcebass_photos%2F1ab09732.pbw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" wmode="transparent"></embed><a href="http://photobucket.com/slideshows" target="_blank"><img src="http://pic.photobucket.com/slideshows/btn.gif" style="border-width: 0; float: left;" /></a><a href="http://s473.photobucket.com/albums/rr92/Acebass_photos/?action=view&current=1ab09732.pbw" target="_blank"><img src="http://pic.photobucket.com/slideshows/btn_viewallimages.gif" style="border-width: 0; float: left;" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I recently visited the Wall and I must say it was the most moving experience of my life. Rest easy Bros you will not be forgotten!Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-51509562646166825612009-06-01T10:50:00.001-07:002009-06-01T10:51:20.450-07:00The Silver Rose SocietyIf you know a veteran who is suffering from an Agent Orange related disease pass this along to them.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote>Our Mission ...<br /><br />To recognize the courage, heroism, and contributions of American service personnel found to have been exposed to Agent Orange in a combat zone ... whose lethal exposure to Agent Orange resulted in internal, invisible wounds, which are revealed only by the passage of time. </blockquote><br /><br />http://www.silverrose.info/main%20menu%20page.htmlAcebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-83298111130745028042009-02-10T00:33:00.000-08:002009-02-10T00:44:07.038-08:00A Prime Example of SwiftboatingIt's remarks like these, unfounded accusations, that make it so bad. These obsessive individuals who rant and rave without anything to prove their story. These individuals and forums who support them should be examined because it's one thing any veteran knows, when someone obsesses like this they are trying to take the heat off themselves. We most always find out they are the ones who are hiding a lie... :)<br /><br /><blockquote> 101Scout <br />Roastin' NeoCon Nuts<br /> <br />101Scout's Avatar<br /> <br />Join Date: Mar 2006<br />Location: Under Ohio<br />Posts: 7,140<br />Recipes: 0<br />Thanks: 419<br />Thanked 484 Times in 326 Posts<br /> <br />Re: CONFIRMED: Acebass Fake Military Veteran!!!<br />Now Acebass/LibLaw has me wondering what an Edwards Democrat is like now that I fairly know what a wasted lying slug Ronnie is. Seriously. I really want to know!<br /><br />Oh yeah, once again Acebass/LibLaw... your not a Vietnam Vet according to sources.<br /><br />Does this also mean that you understand how other wannabes like you feel? How about you write a story about wannabes like yourself. Simply title it 'confessions'<br /><br />Billy C from Cincinnati</blockquote>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-39695056497750161132008-08-22T15:30:00.000-07:002008-08-22T15:59:27.494-07:00Friendly Fire DeathsIt wasn't until my involvement in the Vietnam war that I realized that not all casualties were from enemy fire. Of course common sense will tell you that mistakes happen and in war things get out of hand in a hurry, but it seems that it was more prevalent in the Vietnam war.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote>The 1 percent rate is well below that of Operation Desert Storm when 17 percent of all service members who died were killed by friendly fire. Rates for World War II, <a href="http://www.military.com/Content/MoreContent1/?file=vn_index">Vietnam</a> and the invasions of Grenada and Panama were also higher than the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.<br /></blockquote><br /><a href="http://">http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,90677,00.html</a><br /><br />Examples of the Vietnam war;<br /><br /><ul><li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War" title="Vietnam War"></a><blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War" title="Vietnam War">Vietnam War</a>: 8,000 (14%) <ul><li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCG_Point_Welcome_%28WPB-82329%29" title="USCG Point Welcome (WPB-82329)" class="mw-redirect">USCGC <i>Point Welcome</i></a> was attacked by USAF aircraft, with two deaths resulting.</li><li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Boston_%28CA-69%29" title="USS Boston (CA-69)">USS <i>Boston</i></a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Edson" title="USS Edson" class="mw-redirect">USS <i>Edson</i></a>, USCGC <i>Point Dume</i>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Hobart_%28D39%29" title="HMAS Hobart (D39)" class="mw-redirect">HMAS <i>Hobart</i></a> and two U.S. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swift_Boats" title="Swift Boats" class="mw-redirect">Swift Boats</a>, <i>PCF-12</i> and <i>PCF-19</i> are attacked by US aircraft on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_17" title="June 17">June 17</a> 1968.<sup id="cite_ref-12" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#cite_note-12" title="">[13]</a></sup> Several sailors were killed and <i>PCF-19</i> was sunk.<sup id="cite_ref-13" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#cite_note-13" title="">[14]</a></sup></li><li>On May 11, 1969, during the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hamburger_Hill" title="Battle of Hamburger Hill">Battle of Hamburger Hill</a>, Lt. Col. Weldon Honeycutt directed Cobra helicopter gunships, known as Aerial Rocket Artillery (ARA), to support an infantry assault. In the heavy jungle, the Cobras mistook the command post of the 3/187th battalion for a Vietnamese unit and attacked, killing two and wounding thirty-five, including Honeycutt. This incident disrupted battalion command and control and forced 3/187th to withdraw into night defensive positions.</li><li>Sergeant Michael Eugene Mullen killed by American artillery on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_18" title="February 18">18 February</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970" title="1970">1970</a>.</li></ul></blockquote></li></ul><a href="http://">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire</a><br /><br />It's a tragedy to for any war but then the Vietnam war had it's own unigue form of friendly fire deaths. There were some who were killed intentionally by those individuals who would take things into their own hands. A 2nd Lt. fresh out of OTS might find himself with an M16 round in his back should he be deemed hazardous to his platoon or worse on the receiving end of a frag grenade. There are no statistics to show how many were killed on purpose but it happened. I can imagine and only hope that the ones responsible are eventually held responsible if by no one then their own conscience.<br /><blockquote><br />The second classification is "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder" title="Murder">murder</a>" where friendly fire incidents are premeditated. During the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War" title="Vietnam War">Vietnam War</a>, some officers who overtly risked the lives of their soldiers were murdered by those men in incidents known as “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frag_%28military%29" title="Frag (military)" class="mw-redirect">fragging</a>.”<sup id="cite_ref-Regan_0-0" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#cite_note-Regan-0" title="">[1]</a></sup></blockquote><br /><a href="http://">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire</a><br /><br />Any casualty of war is a tragedy, whether by friendly fire or by the enemy. Sometimes when trying to understand a veteran, specially a Vietnam Veteran, it might be well to consider that the person having problems with the war may be related to them having caused or being personally responsible for the death of one of your fellow soldiers. That would, to me, be something I would have a hard time dealing with.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-175075751100923052008-07-26T20:51:00.000-07:002008-07-26T21:54:02.636-07:00PTSDThis is something that until Vietnam we never really addressed but Vietnam was unigue in many ways. I found this article to be very informative.<br /><br /><blockquote>So it is no surprise that when military personnel have severe difficulty getting over the trauma of war, their psychological difficulties have been described as "soldier's heart" (in the Civil War), or "shell shock" (in World War I), or "combat fatigue" (in World War II). After World War II, psychiatrists realized that these problems usually were not an inborn "mental illness" like schizophrenia or manic depressive illness, but were a different form of psychological disease that resulted from too much war trauma: "traumatic war neurosis" or "post-traumatic stress disorder" (PTSD). Most war veterans are troubled by war memories, but were fortunate enough either not to have "too much" trauma to recover from or to have immediate and lasting help from family, friends, and spiritual and psychological counselors so that the memories became "liveable." A smaller number, probably about one in twenty among World War II veterans now, had so much war trauma and so many readjustment difficulties that they now suffer from PTSD.</blockquote><a href="http://www.ptsdsupport.net/ptsd_symptoms_oldervets.html">http://www.ptsdsupport.net/ptsd_symptoms_oldervets.html</a><br /><br /><br />However the Vietnam war wasn't popular and the veterans from that war were looked on with disdain and in some instances disgust. It was the first time in our history that a war veteran was not welcomed home with parades and thanks for a job well done. This made the pain of having gone to war that much worse.<br /><br />Not only did the Vietnam veteran experience the horrors of war but returned home to an unfriendly nation at war with itself. Many Vietnam veterans couldn't cope and went over the edge, others buried it deep inside and let it fester. Most are still reliving their horrors even today despite efforts by some to make it right for them.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nationaloperationwelcomehome.com/index.htm">http://www.nationaloperationwelcomehome.com/index.htm</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.whvvd.org/whvvdwebsite/homepage/homepage.html">http://www.whvvd.org/whvvdwebsite/homepage/homepage.html</a><br /><a href="http://www.whvvd.org/whvvdwebsite/homepage/homepage.html"></a><br /><br />to name a few.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">What is PTSD?</span><br /><br /><blockquote>What is Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)?<br /><br />Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is an anxiety disorder that can occur after you have been through a traumatic event. A traumatic event is something horrible and scary that you see or that happens to you. During this type of event, you think that your life or others' lives are in danger. You may feel afraid or feel that you have no control over what is happening.<br /><br />Anyone who has gone through a life-threatening event can develop PTSD. These events can include:<br /><br />* Combat or military exposure<br />* Child sexual or physical abuse<br />* Terrorist attacks<br />* Sexual or physical assault<br />* Serious accidents, such as a car wreck.<br />* Natural disasters, such as a fire, tornado, hurricane, flood, or earthquake.<br /><br />After the event, you may feel scared, confused, or angry. If these feelings don't go away or they get worse, you may have PTSD. These symptoms may disrupt your life, making it hard to continue with your daily activities.<br /><br /></blockquote><a href="http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html">http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html</a><br /><br /><br /><br />As you can see, by definition, it is not primarily a combat related illness but it is an illness none the less. War however is the primary cause of PTSD. The symptoms vary by the experience that brought on the PTSD.<br /><br /><blockquote>There are four types of symptoms: reliving the event, avoidance, numbing, and feeling keyed up.<br /><br />Reliving the event (also called re-experiencing symptoms):<br /><br />Bad memories of the traumatic event can come back at any time. You may feel the same fear and horror you did when the event took place. You may have nightmares. You even may feel like you're going through the event again. This is called a flashback. Sometimes there is a trigger: a sound or sight that causes you to relive the event. Triggers might include:<br /><br />* Hearing a car backfire, which can bring back memories of gunfire and war for a combat veteran<br />* Seeing a car accident, which can remind a crash survivor of his or her own accident<br />* Seeing a news report of a sexual assault, which may bring back memories of assault for a woman who was raped<br /><br />Avoiding situations that remind you of the event:<br /><br />You may try to avoid situations or people that trigger memories of the traumatic event. You may even avoid talking or thinking about the event.<br /><br />* A person who was in an earthquake may avoid watching television shows or movies in which there are earthquakes<br />* A person who was robbed at gunpoint while ordering at a hamburger drive-in may avoid fast-food restaurants<br />* Some people may keep very busy or avoid seeking help. This keeps them from having to think or talk about the event.<br /><br />Feeling numb:<br /><br />You may find it hard to express your feelings. This is another way to avoid memories.<br /><br />* You may not have positive or loving feelings toward other people and may stay away from relationships<br />* You may not be interested in activities you used to enjoy<br />* You may forget about parts of the traumatic event or not be able to talk about them.<br /><br />Feeling keyed up (also called hyperarousal):<br /><br />You may be jittery, or always alert and on the lookout for danger. This is known as hyperarousal. It can cause you to:<br /><br />* Suddenly become angry or irritable<br />* Have a hard time sleeping<br />* Have trouble concentrating<br />* Fear for your safety and always feel on guard<br />* Be very startled when someone surprises you<br /><br />What are other common problems?<br /><br />People with PTSD may also have other problems. These include:<br /><br />* Drinking or drug problems<br />* Feelings of hopelessness, shame, or despair<br />* Employment problems<br />* Relationships problems including divorce and violence<br />* Physical symptoms</blockquote><a href="http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html">http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html"></a><br /><br />and can last a life time.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">What can you do?</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">What treatments are available?<br /></span><br /><blockquote>When you have PTSD, dealing with the past can be hard. Instead of telling others how you feel, you may keep your feelings bottled up. But treatment can help you get better.<br /><br />There are good treatments available for PTSD. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is one type of counseling. It appears to be the most effective type of counseling for PTSD. There are different types of cognitive behavioral therapies such as cognitive therapy and exposure therapy. A similar kind of therapy called EMDR, or eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, is also used for PTSD. Medications can be effective too. A type of drug known as a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), which is also used for depression, is effective for PTSD.</blockquote><a href="http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html">http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/ncmain/ncdocs/fact_shts/fs_what_is_ptsd.html</a><br /><br /><br />The sad thing is we are creating a new crop of PTSD sufferers with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and we will have to have the treatment available for those men and women returning from this conflict. Maybe we've learned from Vietnam and we will be able to keep this new generation of Veterans from suffering what my generation has. At least I hope so.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-63488724345452793432008-07-19T22:22:00.000-07:002008-07-20T00:25:27.329-07:00Who's a Veteran?To start with I guess we should explain what a veteran actually is. Of course you can be a veteran without ever being in the military. Veteran just gives you a sense of purpose in what ever your a veteran in whether it be police, fireman, military, etc. It just highlights your experience.<br /><br />Anyone who has been in the military for any length of time is considered a military veteran and then the military awards status according to where you were stationed and what you did while you were there. WWII, Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq/Afghanistan, the men and women who participated in them were known also by the added distinction of their particular conflict.<br /><br />I'll discuss the Vietnam war because that was the one I was involved in. It was a war like this country had never seen before, brought into your living rooms nightly on the news and it seems to be tearing the country apart even to this day, some 35 years later, as it did then. I'm speaking of course about our current political campaigns and how anyone who served in the Vietnam war is suspect in using anything about their veterans status for an advantage. In fact I can't think of any other period in time when someone would have the gaul to guestion a candidates service to his country. Now we have coined a phase which should stand for honorable service but instead Swiftboats will have forever been cursed with the stigma of hate and lies.<br /><br />The Vietnam war has also brought out a new phenomenon. In all the other wars up to Vietnam there was no distinction as to what your service included. If you stormed the beaches at Normandy or supported the aircraft in England you were considered a WWII veteran. Now it seems there is a small movement who insist that if someone claims to be a Vietnam vet they'd better be able to show their DD214 to prove it and you'd best have served in combat, and in country. I'm not sure what drives their reasoning maybe it was the divisive nature of the war, it's hard to tell. I wrote to a few veterans organizations about it and they confirmed that, to their amazement, some were trying to make the distinction.<br /><br />To give you some insight into what I'm talking about. I personal served 6 months on Guam in 1968 and 12 months in Thailand at Utapao and Takhli RTAFB in 1969-70 all of these bases were considered as in the Vietnam Theater of operation. There are now some who would take offense at calling anyone who served in those country's as support of Air Operations in Vietnam supporting the troops on the ground, a Vietnam Veteran. It's petty, childish, unsubstantiated and divisive but that's what that war seemed to do best, divide us.<br /><br />It should be interesting from now on though. McCain is the last of the Vietnam era vets that will take a shot at the Presidency. With the new crowd coming up there's not a lot of military experience to be a factor so maybe we can forget about swiftboats and let them rest. Then the "In Country" crowd can just drink beer, fart, and pound their chest all they want. "Ain't Nothin But A thing!"Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-11993043398280164532008-07-02T16:19:00.000-07:002008-07-02T16:35:12.950-07:00Now that Johns out of the raceI will admit it was a shock to hear my favorite candidate was no longer in the race. I know that had John stayed in he would have made a difference but such is politics. I was thinking of shutting this blog down but I decided not to for now. I still consider myself an "Edwards Democrat" and I'm a Vietnam Veteran so I'm thinking of some ways to let this site grow for veterans who feel as I do. I'm not sure where I'll take it but you can believe it will be positive because thats the kind of person I am. I will make it helpful for veterans of all wars and who knows maybe something good will come from this. Keep checking back as I plan to up date on a weekly basis. <br /><br />My first installment will be the Vietnam war and how it has affected politics. Swiftboating, how that war more so than any other war divided a country and continues to do so to this day. Not only dividing the people but the veterans themselves. How some have been able to leave it behind and carry on with their lives while others still live it to this day. <br /><br />I'll probably be changing the name of the blog but for now I'll keep it as it is so people can still find it. Be sure and tell your friends and leave any suggestions you might have. Thanks and I'll see you next week.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-82682875942706014342008-02-08T10:14:00.000-08:002008-02-08T10:15:42.947-08:00Whats it for?<p>Some one made the comment last night what do I hope to gain? I had to laugh because that person just didn't understand an Idealist.</p><br /><p>An idealist is this...</p><br /><p><blockquote>1 a: an adherent of a philosophical theory of idealism b: an artist or author who advocates or practices idealism in art or writing2: one guided by ideals; especially : one that places ideals before practical considerations</blockquote></p><br /><p>Now see if you understand</p><br /><p>An idealist doesn't care about the outcome. Yes John has 26 delegates we hope to add to that total oblivious of the fact that there's not enough delegates left for him to win. What an idealist cares about is that they stood by what they believed in.</p><br /><p>An idealist leads a small rag tag army across a frozen river in hopes of beating a much larger force. An idealist doesn't care they'll get in trouble for throwing tea in the harbor because they know they are right. And an idealist will stand their ground till they are able to place their flower in the barrel of a weapon that would blow them to pieces.</p><br /><p>I'm an idealist. I know that Johns withdrawn and suspended his campaign but it hasn't suspended what I believe in. I believe in the same things John Edwards believes in. I plan to go to the polls here when I can and vote for John Edwards. It may be the only vote he'll get here in Kentucky but when it shows up on the screen know that it was me and know that I stood firm in my beliefs and I can rest at night knowing I did what I had to do.<br><br />A feeling of satisfaction. Thats what I hoep to get out of this. Thank you.</p>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-24682001150733911392008-02-07T00:52:00.001-08:002008-02-07T00:52:29.067-08:0012% live in poverty12% live in poverty<br /><br />user icon Acebass in Action Feed of<br />2/07/2008 at 2:32 AM EST<br /><br />The last I heard that was the figure. Those are Americans I'm talking about. A former industrialized country, filled with hope and promise. 12% of the population lives in poverty. Thats a disgrace. So what do we do about it?<br /><br />Don't get me wrong I don't begrudge a wealthy man anything he's rightfully earned, as long as he's willing to give back for his good fortune. Men like Warren Buffet, George Soros, John Yarmuth and John Edwards to name a few. However we still have 12% of our population living in poverty while the Forbes list of the wealthiest keeps growing larger.<br /><br />The problem could be that the 12% who live in poverty don't even know we're here talking about them. They don't know they have a chance to change things. Remember, the Republican party has convinced them they are responsible for their lot in life. Having to work 3 jobs to make ends meet had nothing to do with higher cost of living and a shrinking wage scale.<br /><br />These people may be able to stop and watch some television while they are lying on a table at the plasma bank giving blood. Chances are if it's news it's Fox News or their affiliate CNN. They may have time to read a paper but for the most part they get their politics from a co-worker at lunch break.<br /><br />These people are the ones we need to reach. If you see someone driving down the street in an old beat up (insert car here), with a vote Bush sticker on their car, you need to touch that person. You need to educate them in what we are doing. Take them to a library and show them how to operate a computer.<br /><br />Seriously, there are people, in their 30s and 40s who have never registered to vote. They have no idea they can make a difference, and change their lives. Those are the people we need to reach. I would propose that One Corp work on a project of neighborhood outreach centers to not only assist these people in learning how the system can work for them, but be proactive in contacting people so they at least have the opportunity to participate and an opportunity to make that choice.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-71782283798517248332008-02-02T12:10:00.001-08:002008-02-02T13:54:58.313-08:00John Edwards has my vote...Pass it On!<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://edwardshasmyvote.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/hello-world/#comment-344">http://edwardshasmyvote.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/hello-world/#comment-344</a>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-17171126234360641502008-02-01T22:29:00.000-08:002008-02-01T22:41:56.661-08:00This is Democracy!<p>I've been at the Edwards blog all day as you can imagine. There have been many inspiring things happen since John decided to suspend his campaign.</p><p>We've seen all the true liberal candidates either drop out or made ineffective by a big money machine that is grinding their way albeit not as easy, I'm sure, as they would have first imagined it would be, to a Nomination that the DLC has anointed.<br /></p><p>John Edwards was the reason it wasn't so easy. He sparked something in a lot of people that is not going to die. Like an ember glowing in the forest I feel this blaze sweeping across this country. Whatever happens on Feb. 5th John Edwards, and his voters will be a force to be dealt with.</p><br /><p>This was posted by one of his supporters. I'm passing it on verbatim as I wouldn't change a word.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>"One thing is clear... whichever candidate does get the nomination, his or her chance of victory will rest largely on the ideas Mr. Edwards brought to the campaign."</p> <p>And so I marvel at the rush to judgment and all the whispering: "Who are the Edwards people going to vote for now?" And I marvel as I watch the "Important People" circling to endorse - like vultures picking over the carcass of Edwards' campaign. </p> <p>But as an Edwards supporter, alive and still with my own mind, I'd like to say: Although I urge everyone to unite behind the Democratic nominee in November, no matter who he or she may be, what's more important now - in this primary, February 5th - is to vote your conscience. And if you believe in John Edwards, vote for John Edwards! Vote for him as a way to ensure that the ideas he and Elizabeth brought to the Party will endure. </p> <p>The other candidates have honored his platform by using his words and ideas. But united, they could turn their back on his progressive agenda unless we hold their feet to the fire. We need to shore up what he stands for. We need to show Hillary and Obama that we, the Edwards People, are still a force to be reckoned with. </p> <p>For although John Edwards is no longer a candidate, he - and those of us who believe in his ideals - are still voters in this election. And now more than ever, if we want to uphold grassroots democracy, it's important to show the money, the media, the Democratic Party - and especially the candidates - where we stand and what we expect them to honor as we go forward: </p> <p>the ideas, ideals, passion and platform John Edwards brought to a failing system and a failing party. </p> <p>This is our only chance and the only way we can show it. So if you believe in John Edwards and what he stands for, vote for him on Tuesday."</p><a href="http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2008/2/2/1717/24934#6">http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2008/2/2/1717/24934#6</a><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-56904755132433365272008-01-31T17:43:00.000-08:002008-01-31T17:56:47.377-08:00MSM vs John EdwardsMcCamy Taylor Wed Jan-30-08 07:48 PM<br /><br />The Press v. John Edwards Updated at 9:50 PM<br /><br />One year ago, when CBS polled Americans to see where likely Democratic presidential candidates stood in the public eye, John Edwards came in a solid second to Hillary Clinton.<br /><br />http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/CBSNews_polls/jana-candid...<br /><br />Thanks to her status as a former First Lady she had recognition similar to former Democratic candidates Gore and Kerry. Edwards was the most recognized Democrat who had never been a nominee. Obama’s recognition rates and favorability rates among Democrats and Independents were significantly lower than Edwards. Edwards’ unfavorability rating was better than Hillary’s, giving him a edge as a “uniter.”<br /><br />How did the nation go from knowing who Edwards was to not even knowing that he was running for president ? Where did this idea that he was “phony” start? Why, in the last couple of weeks, did we start to hear that Edwards was some kind of communist anarchist?<br /><br />It all started with the BFL, Big Fat Liars aka the corporate media.<br /><br />Here is the excellent analysis (with piece charts and block graphs) that forced the mainstream media to admit what we all had seen----they had deliberately inflated their coverage of two of the candidates, Hillary and Obama, while deliberately shutting out Edwards, who actually ranked high in the polls.<br /><br />http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/5/12286/27650/142/...<br /><br />They did this for a solid year. One example of the way that this bias permeated every aspect of election reporting: one night on Countdown the guest was E.J. Dionne. Poll numbers from Iowa were shown. The Dems were in a a dead heat. KO asked Dionne to comment. He launched into a discussion of Hillary and Obama and never said a word about Edwards, who was neck and neck with the other two. KO did not even notice.<br /><br />They did this even after Edwards came in second in Iowa, giving the lie to the Two Man Race Lie . Instead of suddenly noticing the Edwards campaign, as people across the country started to notice it, the MSM responded with another impromptu lie, which I call Who's On Second? because the pundits would talk about Obama's win and Hillary's third place finish while giving the impression that the old joke candidate Nobody for President must have taken second place. Or worse, television political reporters on all the news networks would announce that the Edwards campaign was finished, that he would resign soon. This at a time when his campaign was hoping to win new supporters and raise much needed cash. This had the effect of negating any boost his campaign might have received from the Iowa win. The lies that were told at this moment probably did more to destroy the Edwards campaign than any others.<br /><br />In this interview on Countdown Keith Olbermann asks John Edwards why the press at MSNBC said that his second place finish meant that Edwards was in trouble and not Hillary. Edwards replied bluntly that the media had been trying to frame it as a two person race between Hillary and Obama. To Olbermann's credit, after that interview, he began to feature Edwards more often on his show. However, by then the damage was done.<br /><br />http://takeaction.wordpress.com/2008/01/05/john-edwards... /<br /><br />When the report described in the DailyKos link above came out there was a backlash. The mainstream media had been caught attempting to "fix" the Democratic Primary. That was not good. They still had to "fix" the race between Hillary and Obama.In an effort to restore their tarnished honor, we finally saw the TV news networks and the major newspapers like the Washington Past and the New York Times devote some coverage to the Edwards campaign before the South Carolina primary. It was too little, too late. After a solid year of mainstream media attacks and blackouts, one week of coverage will not resurrect a presidential campaign.<br /><br />I have been writing about the corporate media conspiracy against John Edwards for almost a year in hopes the we, voters and consumers of the news media could put a stop to it. Looks like the CEOs at GE/NBC, NewsCorp./Fox, AOL/Time-Warner, Viacom-CBS, Disney-ABC won and we lost.<br /><br />Today, I am writing so that we will remember, and also so that the media lap dogs, the individual journalists---no, let’s call them what they are---the whores will not get away with doing their masters’ dirty work. I got the idea when I re read The Press v. Al Gore a couple of years ago and realized that with the exception of one sacrificial goat, Ceci Connelly of the Washington Post, the reporters who created the lie Gore is a Liar have all done very well for themselves.<br /><br />http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5920188/the_pres...<br /><br />Google and see where journalists like Walter Shapiro, Richard Berke , Chris Matthews, George Stephanopoulos, Bill Turque, Bob Woodward, Margaret Carlson have ended up. Hmmm. Some of them will feature in this journal. Guess they learned from Gore is a liar that there is good pay off and no accountability for telling lies about Democratic candidates.<br /><br />I recognized that the media fix was in a year ago. On February 7, 2007 I wrote a DailyKos diary called From the Corporate Media that Brought You Gore is a Liar, Edwards is a Phony When I got six responses, I knew it was going to be an uphill battle convincing people of what was going on.<br /><br />http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/8/1319/06023/495/2...<br /><br />A year ago the MSM blackout had not started yet. A year ago, it seemed like Edwards was getting more attention than all the other Dems combined, only it was not nice attention. John Solomon of the Washington Post lead the way with a series of article about Edwards house, his money, his hair, his hairdresser !!!! . Right wing sites began a coordinated action that seemed to be aiming towards “Edwards is a phony” and sure enough that is the word that they managed to get to stick. Hugh Hewitt and Michelle Malikan were among the right wingers who were singling him out for special attention. And the MSM was already showing selective hearing in that it would not cover Edwards policy statements but it would make mountains out of any wild rumor that might cause a rift within his camp or between his camp and traditional members of the Democratic base (Read my DailyKos entry. The details are all there.)<br /><br />John Solomon’s reputation was already trashed before he took this assignment, and after he finished Edwards is a phony no one would ever believe anything he wrote again. Certainly, no one would ever talk to him again. I guess that is why he had to take a job at the right wing ghetto of the Washington Times . So, one of the media whores has paid—sort of, if you count getting kicked upstairs into an editorial job retribution. I would rather see him working at a Thrifty Nickel .<br /><br />Here is la crème de la crème of Solomon’s important political “reporting”, the interview with the man who gave Edwards’ some haircuts.<br /><br />http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...<br /><br />This story was printed in July, 2007, long after I and other people had begun to complain about the obvious partisan nature of the stories that Solomon was writing and the Washington Post was running about Edwards. I feel that it is necessary to add the editors and owners of the Washington Post to the list of participants in the inquisition against Edwards, because they are the ones who hired the notorious John Solomon to write this tabloid silliness disguised as political news. This story, with its implied subtext of the stalker hairdresser with his unrequited gay crush (getting on planes day or night to race halfway across the country to make his man look good) was probably the purple-est prose I have seen in years. It also plays up Ann Coulter’s infamous comment from last spring. Lord only knows what Joseph Torrenueva thought of the article. Now that the Edwards campaign is over, he should hire Edwards to help him sue the WaPo for libel.<br /><br />If you think I am over reading the article, take a look at how the guys on TV spun it:<br /><br />http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/over-tipping-by-...<br /><br />Television gasbags have been gleefully recycling this Edwards nonsense all day, based upon the latest Soloman story and treating it like it's news. Matthews said "sometimes small stories can reveal big things." He pretends he's cleverly pointing out that Edwards is a phony populist for getting expensive haircuts but what he's really doing is pushing GOP propaganda that Edwards is effeminate and soft. Like all Democrats.<br /><br />Fox's Major Garrett just did a huge piece on this "controversy" ending with this:<br />"The stylist said 'I try to make the man handsome, strong, more mature and these are the things, as an expert, that's what we do.' For sheer irony, that Edwards seems to believe he needs all three, might be the sharpest cut of all."<br /><br /><br />Here is a link about George Stephanopoulos giving the un newsworthy WaPo story more coverage.<br /><br />http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh070607.shtml<br /><br />“But even more than that, it seems a little callous to be sort of pushing off on the hairdresser. When the hairdresser comes back and says, “Wait a second, I was a friend of yours, I worked hard for you," it can't help. More—more haircut headlines are not good news for John Edwards.”<br /><br /><br />Neither is another television news pundit yakking about haircuts. What an ass.<br /><br />Note that Chris Matthews and George Stephanopoulos are alumni from the Rolling Stone “Gore is a Liar” story, making them seasoned veteran media whores. Among Tweety’s many other Edward’s atrocities---after New Hampshire, when he wasn’t accusing the citizens of that state of being racists and E-vote hackers, he was accusing Edwards of being a spoiler who was costing Obama the race. This lie sounded so good to liberal commentator Lawrence O’Donnell that he destroyed his reputation by writing the unfortunate “John Edwards is a Loser” for the Huffington Post, proving that innocent liberals should never associate with former CREEP organizers like Pat Buchanan, who has been presiding over MSNBC the last few months like some kind of Ghost of Stolen Elections Past.<br /><br />http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/john-ed...<br /><br /><br />Thumbs up to Media Matters for catching another print journalist Carla Marinucci of the San Francisco Chronicle participating in the Edwards is a phony lie. Bonus points to Media Matters for spotting the fact that Carla also helped out big time with Gore is a liar making this reporter one of those seasoned veteran media whores I was talking about.<br /><br />http://mediamatters.org/items/200706020001<br /><br />Perhaps Marinucci was too modest to mention it, but that report by the Chronicle about Edwards' "hefty fees from university speeches" was written by ... Carla Marinucci. So we have a reporter who writes an article about a candidate, then two days later writes that "the pileup of headlines ... threatens to obliterate" the candidate's message -- without mentioning that she was responsible for one of those headlines that she uses as an example.<br /><br /><br />Oh my. Everyone, when you read anything by Carla Marinucci, remember to be skeptical for this may well be another John Solomon who hasn’t been tossed into the garbage heap of the Washington Times yet.<br /><br />The same Media Matters piece mentions Bill O’Reilly, Tucker Carlson and Dennis Miller as more vectors by which the newspaper’s Edwards is a phony lies began to get distributed to the public. Vectors is a polite, medical term for blood sucking insects that carry disease, like leeches or mosquitoes or ticks.<br /><br />Here is article about Fox News’ John Gibson describing Edwards as a “phony” in August.<br /><br />http://www.newshounds.us/2007/08/08/big_story_takes_a_s...<br /><br />I could fill an encyclopedia with Edwards is a phony lies of the rich and famous. However, there is more. As I noted above, the press did not stop at slandering and libeling Sen. Edwards. When they were not bad mouthing him, they were denying him the free publicity which they lavished on the other two senators. Here is another link about the blacklist.<br /><br />http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/11/wa...<br /><br />After all, the same WaPo reporters who chose to describe Edwards' speech as an effort to "elbow" his way into the Hillary-Obama rivalry also chose to devote the first eight paragraphs of their piece only to what Hillary and Obama said. They chose to wait until the ninth graf to tell us what Edwards said. This despite the fact that the reporters also acknowledge that polls show that in Iowa the race remains "a competitive three-way contest."<br /><br />So if by WaPo's own admission this is a competitive contest between all three candidates, why go to such extreme editorial lengths to frame it as a two-person race that Edwards is trying to "elbow" his way into?<br /><br />This might not have been worth bothering with if it didn't perfectly capture a lot about what's been wrong with so much of the reporting on Campaign 2008. What's bizarre is how blatant this has become -- in cases like this no one even bothers to conceal how unabashedly manufactured the chosen narrative of the moment is.<br /><br /><br /><br />Obama was elevated to Sen. Clinton’s level almost immediately, creating the fiction of the Two Man Race . Democrats were offered the Pyrrhic choice----pick the first woman and snub Blacks or pick the first Black and alienate women. And, just in case the two candidates might do the sensible thing and decide to run together, the mainstream media decided to mix things up and interject race into the race. (See my recent journals about the MSM’s attempts to position the Democrats into a circular firing squad). Since this journal is devoted to Edwards, I will not cite references to that other campaign here.<br /><br />With the New Year, things began to change. The public's concern turned towards the economy---Edwards’ special issue—and the MSM was now unable to deny him coverage completely as they have done before without getting caught. Therefore, in recent weeks, the corporate media began to unleash new lies against Edwards. One was specifically directed at Republicans and Independents, the Edwards is a red lie. This one was meant to keep his numbers down in polls which match Dems versus Republicans head to head. Ability to win in a general election had been one of Edwards’ strongest campaign points, so the MSM created this lie to undercut his strength. Check out this video link of CNN’s Glenn Beck calling Edwards a communist:<br /><br />http://broadcatching.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/glenn-bec... /<br /><br />If the corporate media could paint Edwards as a “red”, far left of Hillary and Obama, an extremist who would strip Americans of their goods and reduce us all to Soviet era drudgery, then they could neutralize him as a general election contender.<br /><br />A related lie is “Edwards is an anarchist”. This is where “Edwards is an angry white male” comes in. We have media whores like Wolf Blitzer to thank for this:<br /><br />http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/02/john-edwards-a... /<br /><br />What do you say to their criticisms that you are just running over around the state screaming and hollering and making a lot of noise, but you’re not ready to really get things done to work to get things done?<br /><br /><br />And some of them are able to combine all the lies together, as in Edwards is an angry, lying, phony by Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post writing this time for the National Review on-line<br /><br />http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDMxN2E1ZGYyOTYwZD...<br /><br />Today he plays the avenging angel, engaged in an “epic struggle” against the great economic malefactors that “have literally,” he assures us, “taken over the government.” He is angry, embodying the familiar zeal of the convert, ready to immolate anyone who benightedly holds to any revelation other than the zealot’s very latest.<br /><br />Nothing new about a convert. Nothing new about a zealous convert. What is different about Edwards is his endlessly repeated claim that the raging populist of today is what he has always been. That this has been the “cause of my life,” the very core of his being, ingrained in him on his father’s knee or at the mill or wherever, depending on the anecdote he’s telling.<br /><br />You must understand: This is not politics for him. “This fight is deeply personal to me. I’ve been engaged in it my whole life.”<br /><br />Except for his years as senator, the only public office he’s ever held. The audacity of the all-my-life trope is staggering. By his own endlessly self-confessed record, his current pose is a coat of paint newly acquired. His claim that it is an expression of his inner soul is a farce.<br /><br /><br />My! Such eloquence! This Krauthammer is a master of the anti-Democrat slur. Hmmm. I wonder if he has had practice. A quick Google will tell us the answer. (I really didn't know what he did back in 2000, but I started typing this as I was doing the on-line search because I had a pretty good hunch from the oiliness of the propaganda above. I have a nose for these things.)<br /><br />Oh lookie! Here is what Mr. Krauthammer was up to in 2000.<br /><br />http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh120302.shtml<br /><br />But someone else offended more grievously on last weekend’s Fox News Sunday. That was Charles Krauthammer, serving up a remarkable statement about Gore’s critique of the press. Gore had said that Fox, Rush and the Washington Times “are, truthfully speaking, part and parcel of the Republican Party” (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 11/29/02). And Gore had said this: “Most of the media been slow to recognize the pervasive impact of this fifth column in their ranks—that is, day after day, injecting the daily Republican talking points into the definition of what’s objective as stated by the news media as a whole.”<br />Snip<br /><br />Krauthammer decided to crawl in the slime. Try to believe that he said it:<br />LIASSON: But I think that’s a real kind of cry of frustration from Al Gore, and other Democratic leaders have said the same thing.<br />KRAUTHAMMER: Crying for help, you know. (LAUGHTER) I’m a psychiatrist. I don’t usually practice on camera. But this is the edge of looniness, this idea that there’s a vast conspiracy, it sits in a building, it emanates, it has these tentacles, is really at the edge. He could use a little help.<br />What a slimy man Krauthammer turns out to be! Krauthammer—a former and now misbehaving shrink—thinks Gore’s remarks on the press are “loony.” What a slimy—and deeply dishonorable—man this Great Pundit turns out to be.<br /><br /><br />To paraphrase Krauthammer’s own words about Edwards: You must understand: This is not journalism for him. “This fight is deeply business to me. I’ve been engaged in it my whole (reporting) life.”<br /><br />How did the Rolling Stone miss this guy? Be sure to note this name, Krauthammer (what a name!), so that you can take anything he writes about Democrats with a great big grain of salt. Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post veteran of the Gore is a liar and Edwards is an angry-phony Big Lies.<br /><br />I could go on and on with this, but I am just too damned fed up with what passes for journalism in this country. The only solution is to bust apart the telecommunications monopolies that have turned television news stations and newspapers into propaganda organs for major corporations. MSNBC no longer needs to get ratings (except for the vanity of a few celebrities). Not for money, anyway. Its job is now to change the way that America votes in order to benefit the corporate coffers of parent company GE. The same goes for ABC and Disney, CBS and Viacom and all the others.<br /><br />What we need is the US equivalent of the BBC, a fully funded independent set of public television channels that program news, entertainment for children and adults and educational program. Every industrialized country in the world except the U.S. has one. Everyone would pay a tax and no political party would have any control over it. We also need legislation to keep newspapers free of the influence of big money---like the $60million the US Chambers of Commerce have pledged to spend to defeat candidates who endorse “populists” issues this year.<br /><br />In order to do this, we need to get rid of this industry pandering Republican FCC which allows unlimited telecom media mergers and expansions. We need to investigate and prosecute the current chairman for taking over Congress’s role in writing legislation that affects the media.<br /><br />And most important of all, we need to protest and blacklist the individual media whores who do the dirty work for their corporate masters. I can not possibly keep track of or list all the individual players who have contributed to the lies Edwards is a phony , Two Man Race Edwards is a spoiler Edwards is a red . If you know of any specific “journalist” and can post a quote and link, please do so. I would love to see a hundred replies, each with the name of a different journalist caught in the act.<br /><br />It is important to hold the press accountable for their actions. Reporters think that they can get away with it by claiming that they are just getting swept away in the general narrative or are incompetent or just making a joke or "dumb asses". This is bullshit. I am a story teller. I know that it takes work to tell a story and make it believable. Big Lies do not spring out of nothing fully formed. A lot of effort goes into creating propaganda.<br /><br />It will do not good simply to accuse the press of attacking the John Edwards 2008 Campaign. They know what they did. They are gloating over their victory, counting their reward in advance while they flex their muscles, awaiting further orders from their corporate masters. As Goebbels wrote, those who create propaganda are not in search of a higher truth. They want results.<br /><br />Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right. I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin, and when I speak in Bayreuth, I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall . That is a matter of practice, not of theory.We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses.<br /><br /><br />http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb54.htm<br /><br />You can not shame them into stopping. So, the only way to fight this kind of opponent is to take away their ability to spread propaganda. That means revealing them to be liars in public, so that no one will talk to them to give them stories and no news consumer will believe them. Taking away the incentive of television news and newspapers to whore for big corporations also helps. And encouraging the public to become better consumers of the news by offering them alternative choices and by educating them to the signs of propaganda.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor">http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor</a>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-35787404800087677042008-01-26T13:22:00.000-08:002008-01-26T13:34:13.584-08:00Poll on Democrats.Com<a href="http://www.democrats.com/presidential-primary-poll-5">http://www.democrats.com/presidential-primary-poll-5</a><br /><br /> * 2008 President<br /> * Democrats.com Polls<br /><br />Which Democrat Do You Support for President?<br /><br />Joe Biden_____1% (6 votes)<br /><br />Hillary Clinton________19% (87 votes)<br /><br />Chris Dodd____1% (4 votes)<br /><br />John Edwards_________________________________40% (186 votes)<br /><br />Mike Gravel__0% (2 votes)<br /><br />Dennis Kucinich_________________25% (116 votes)<br /><br />Barack Obama__________12% (55 votes)<br /><br />Bill Richardson__2% (10 votes)<br /><br />Total votes: 466Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-43231001898116453132008-01-24T23:25:00.000-08:002008-01-24T23:27:03.674-08:00Latest poll results<blockquote>EDWARDS CLIMBS AGAIN<br /><br />Edwards, a former North Carolina senator who won South Carolina during his failed 2004 presidential bid, has climbed steadily each day of the poll. He started at 15 percent and is now at 21 percent.<br /><br />Edwards held a slight lead over Clinton among likely white voters at 36 percent to 33 percent. Obama had 18 percent.<br /><br />"Edwards is in a battle for second place," Zogby said. "He's getting the lion's share of the undecideds.</blockquote><br /><br />http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080125/pl_nm/usa_politics_poll_dc_4;_ylt=AmvXL_jw7DXQ.B26168w6rAE1vAIAcebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-43119055482150550252008-01-24T08:58:00.000-08:002008-01-24T08:59:57.733-08:00Please help JohnJohn Edwards needs help to get this message out. Please make a donation today, lets change things together!<br /><br /><object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q3RaYc3yM0M&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q3RaYc3yM0M&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-56154246783689431042008-01-23T21:43:00.001-08:002008-01-23T21:43:49.454-08:00Wake up America!This man deserves a listen...<br /><br /><object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2RYmR9ubM7A&rel=1&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2RYmR9ubM7A&rel=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-85385166183499451912008-01-21T21:15:00.000-08:002008-01-21T21:16:40.125-08:00Letter from Martin Luther King lllJanuary 20, 2008<br /><br />The Honorable John R. Edwards<br />410 Market Street<br />Suite 400<br />Chapel Hill, NC 27516<br /><br />Dear Senator Edwards:<br /><br />It was good meeting with you yesterday and discussing my father's legacy. On the day when the nation will honor my father, I wanted to follow up with a personal note.<br /><br />There has been, and will continue to be, a lot of back and forth in the political arena over my father's legacy. It is a commentary on the breadth and depth of his impact that so many people want to claim his legacy. I am concerned that we do not blur the lines and obscure the truth about what he stood for: speaking up for justice for those who have no voice.<br /><br />I appreciate that on the major issues of health care, the environment, and the economy, you have framed the issues for what they are - a struggle for justice. And, you have almost single-handedly made poverty an issue in this election.<br /><br />You know as well as anyone that the 37 million people living in poverty have no voice in our system. They don't have lobbyists in Washington and they don't get to go to lunch with members of Congress. Speaking up for them is not politically convenient. But, it is the right thing to do.<br /><br />I am disturbed by how little attention the topic of economic justice has received during this campaign. I want to challenge all candidates to follow your lead, and speak up loudly and forcefully on the issue of economic justice in America.<br /><br />From our conversation yesterday, I know this is personal for you. I know you know what it means to come from nothing. I know you know what it means to get the opportunities you need to build a better life. And, I know you know that injustice is alive and well in America, because millions of people will never get the same opportunities you had.<br /><br />I believe that now, more than ever, we need a leader who wakes up every morning with the knowledge of that injustice in the forefront of their minds, and who knows that when we commit ourselves to a cause as a nation, we can make major strides in our own lifetimes. My father was not driven by an illusory vision of a perfect society. He was driven by the certain knowledge that when people of good faith and strong principles commit to making things better, we can change hearts, we can change minds, and we can change lives.<br /><br />So, I urge you: keep going. Ignore the pundits, who think this is a horserace, not a fight for justice. My dad was a fighter. As a friend and a believer in my father's words that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, I say to you: keep going. Keep fighting. My father would be proud.<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />Martin L. King, IIIAcebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-72006339994593982602008-01-17T22:09:00.000-08:002008-01-17T22:10:35.391-08:00John EdwardsPass it on!...<br /><br /><object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LeSc3AS5z5M&rel=1&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LeSc3AS5z5M&rel=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-60503139410672077262008-01-16T00:05:00.000-08:002008-01-16T00:06:32.082-08:00From tonights debateJohn Edwards knows whats wrong with this country and how we can lead in the fight to save our environment...<br /><br /><object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ldvu4KFjyN4&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ldvu4KFjyN4&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-89944684885334894462008-01-14T22:49:00.000-08:002008-01-14T22:50:49.151-08:00John Edwards the Statesman!<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZGT_6iIHpfg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZGT_6iIHpfg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br /><br />I have never been so proud to back a candidate as I am John Edwards...Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-14546006978552156702008-01-14T21:21:00.000-08:002008-01-14T21:23:55.508-08:00Do we really want change?<span class="postbody">I got this letter in my e-mail from John Edwards campaign. I couldn't have said it better so I'm going to just copy it here...<br /><br /><br />Dear Edwards supporter;<br /><br />The choice in this election is simple. If we want a president who will lead America to the big, bold changes we need and change the conversation in America, Democrats should choose the candidate who has led the field in ideas and shaped the conversation in this race so far.<br /><br />In this campaign, John Edwards has led on the issues -- the other candidates have merely followed.<br /><br />But don't take it from me -- let me share with you some of the things people are saying about John.<br /><br />As Paul Krugman writes today in The New York Times: <br /><br />"On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party's policy agenda. He's done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures."<br />And as Christopher Hayes writes in The Nation: <br />"The fact remains that the Edwards campaign has set the domestic policy agenda for the entire field. He was the first with a bold universal health care plan, the first with an ambitious climate change proposal that called for cap-and-trade, and the leader on reforming predatory lending practices and raising the minimum wage to a level where it regains its lost purchasing power."<br />In this campaign, John Edwards has led the other candidates in standing up for progressive change.<br /><br />As Ezra Klein writes in The American Prospect: <br />"Much more so than Obama, it was Edwards who forced a new style of politics, untethered by the fear and timidity of the 90s, adamant that liberalism was an electoral boon and economic justice a popular sentiment. Knowing they had to defend against his challenge, both Hillary and Obama edged closer to his appeal.<br /><br />"It left the Democrats in a much stronger position overall, and forced them to argue for, and commit to, a much broader and more inspiring agenda than we otherwise might have seen."<br />In this campaign, the other candidates have followed John's lead in talking about the special interests -- but the special interests understand the difference between rhetoric and reality. That's why corporate lobbyists are united against John Edwards.<br /><br />As Kevin Drawbaugh reports for Reuters: <br />"Ask corporate lobbyists which presidential contender is most feared by their clients and the answer is almost always the same -- Democrat John Edwards. One business lobbyist said an Edwards presidency would be a 'disaster' for his well-heeled industrialist clients.<br /><br />'I think Hillary is approachable. She knows where a lot of her funding has come from to be blunt,' said Greg Valliere, chief political strategist at Stanford Group Co., a market and policy analysis group."<br />Want to help John's field-leading campaign for change? Then please take a moment to forward these quotes on to your friends and family who live in the 48 states that have yet to cast a vote for the Democratic nominee. Tell them that you are standing with John Edwards -- and ask them to join you.<br /><br />Here's the bottom line in this election. We need a president who has the vision to put forth bold, progressive solutions to the challenges facing America in the 21st century. John Edwards has shown he has that vision -- and he has led on it throughout this campaign.<br /><br />Thanks for taking action.<br /><br />--Jonathan Prince<br /> Deputy Campaign Manager, John Edwards for President<br /> January 14, 2008</span>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-41777163012067673022008-01-12T12:45:00.000-08:002008-01-12T14:55:03.185-08:00Why would John want to be our President?I'm sitting here at my computer, just having read a very disturbing assessment of my favorite Presidential candidates prospects for success and wondering why. He's come in second and third in the only two primary's held so far and all ready they are sending him to the scrap heap. The MSM is buying into the DLC contention that there are only two, viable, candidates left so it's virtually impossible (no pun intended) to find a story, not even a blurb, about the one true hope for the Democratic party, that is John Edwards.<br /><br />I'm thinking about the abuse he has taken, not for his message, but for his expensive hair cut, how he got his money and what he's done with it. Who he has consulted with in his private practice and even his sexual orientation, have come into question. Having lost a son, and who's wife is dying of cancer, this man, and his family, have shown great strength and courage in this endeavor. They campaigned hard and this man has stayed on his message.<br /><br />He's surly not doing it for the money.His family was set to live very comfortably, something Johns Parents didn't enjoy. John came from the same roots you and I did, hard working middle class. Unlike other candidates, with similar backgrounds, John hasn't forgotten where he came from and the hard working middle class that made it possible for him to achieve what he has. He has given and given up more than he will ever make, monetarily, as our President. He says he just wants to give back and I believe him!<br /><br />Is it for fame? Don't make me laugh. The John and Elizabeth Edwards family, aside from both being successful lawyers, are the most Mom and Apple pie family I know of in this race. This brings up a question that really bothers me. John is the average white man in the race. Not only that but a dreaded trial lawyer to boot. Is this the reason Johns message is not being heard? If John were a woman or black would that make a difference?<br /><br />John is a statesman. He has proven that time and again. Although his questions and answers have been pointed at times, he has stayed above the fray when it comes to negatives and only pointing out the obvious when necessary. He was gracious in accepting that his former running mate chose to endorse Senator Obama. He has not wilted or even slowed down. He and Elizabeth are in this to the end, you can believe that. Why? Because he wants to be our President.Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565991877252095454.post-47553386077176194762008-01-06T18:40:00.000-08:002008-01-06T18:41:02.690-08:00Support America, donate to John Edwards<object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3iumYWBSJL8&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3iumYWBSJL8&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>Acebasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09835278059694900970noreply@blogger.com0