The Fight to Abolish Human Trafficking Within the United States

By Paul M. Weyrich
Jul 23, 2008
Without doubt the Federal appointee who was most effective dealing with sex-trafficking was former Representative John R. Miller (R-WA). President George W. Bush has sought to end sex slavery within the United States and provide international leadership on the issue. Miller was appointed Director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons for the U.S. State Department and became an Ambassador-at-large on the issue of modern slavery. Miller elevated the fight to a high priority in the Bush Administration.

The Fight to Abolish Human Trafficking Within the United States

Recently, Miller wrote an op-ed in THE NEW YORK TIMES which suggested that the effort to oppose sex slavery has met opposition in the Department of Justice (DOJ). Miller also made a presentation to a group with which I am involved. Upon hearing Miller’s presentation I realized that the situation is worse than he described in THE NEW YORK TIMES.

After nurturing the 21st-Century abolitionist movement from 2002 to 2006, Miller believed that President Bush supported him despite objection to his efforts from numerous Ambassadors who did not want their host countries criticized. Miller stated that the President made it clear that his work was important. While he did not win every battle, he prevailed, often thanks to White House support.

One could imagine Miller’s surprise when he learned that DOJ initiated a campaign to oppose a new Congressional bill which would strengthen the Federal Government’s anti-trafficking efforts. In a 13-page letter, DOJ blasted nearly every aspect of the proposed legislation. In its annual report which rates how well countries are combating sex slavery, DOJ does not want to consider whether governments put traffickers in jail, nor does it want the Departments of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services to streamline their efforts to help the victims of sex-trafficking acquire visas and assistance. DOJ does not want to pool data with the Departments of State, Homeland Security and Health and Human Services on sex-trafficking and to devise prevention strategies.

DOJ opposes the creation of Presidential awards for groups leading the struggle against this modern-day slavery. It is against a citizens’ task force to develop a pamphlet for victims. It does not want the State Department to give the telephone numbers of American anti-trafficking organizations to visa applicants at American Consulates worldwide.

Miller believes the vehement opposition by DOJ to this proposed legislation goes far beyond the usual turf battle which usually rears its ugly head in Washington, D.C.

Miller states that DOJ opposes changes which would expand its own authority to combat trafficking.

For example: Should they prosecute American tourists who create the demand for sex-trafficking in foreign countries?

Should Congress provide increased penalties for Americans who sexually abuse children abroad?

Should American jurisdiction extend to Americans who traffic human beings aboard?

Should the Attorney General include information in his annual report on his department’s efforts to enforce anti-trafficking laws against federal contractors and employees?

No, it should not do any of these.

Miller believes this letter is the product of the mostly male DOJ staff working with the Erotic Service Providers Union and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

He does not believe the President saw or approved the 13-page letter. In the House of Representatives there is a Caucus on Human Trafficking, co-chaired by Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Debbie Price (R-OH). They have been trying to coordinate a meeting with the President but have been unsuccessful.

Regardless of one’s opinion of President Bush, it is impossible to dismiss his sincerity and determination on such issues. I am willing to wager that this letter went to Capitol Hill without his approval. There is time for President Bush to reverse this injustice.

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

Waukesha WI BEWARE

For an analysis of WI oppressive laws disalloing suits by rape victims-go here. See also: Wisconsin SNAP and National SNAP

Leafleting focuses on former United Church of Christ, Methodist minister
By Tom Heinen
Tuesday, Jul 22 2008, 03:18 PM


Members of a victims' advocacy group distributed fliers over the weekend at First United Methodist Church of Waukesha to call attention to the fact that a minister who served as the church's pastor in the mid-1980s was convicted and sentenced last week for sexually assaulting a 17-year-old boy in 1987 while pastor of First United Methodist Church of Rice Lake. He has not been accused in Waukesha.

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests(SNAP)wanted to point out, among other things, that child sexual crimes are "not just a Catholic problem" as the group continues to seek support for a Wisconsin Assembly bill that would require all religious denominations to provide the identities and case summaries of clergy, lay teachers, and employees who had sexually assaulted children but were not reported to the police.

The minister, Angel R. Toro, is noteworthy for another reason. After leaving Wisconsin in about 1989, he was granted ministerial standing in the United Church of Christ in 1997 and rose to national leadership positions in that denomination while serving as pastor of Chapel on the Hill in Seminole, near St. Petersburg, Fla. Acclaimed for increasing attendance there from about 30 people to 500 people, Toro served on the denomination's 90-member executive council, was on the team that implemented the "God is still speaking" national identity campaign in 2004 and is a past president of the Local Church Ministries Board, one of the denomination's four national ministry boards.

Toro was placed on a leave of absence from the Florida church in late January of 2007 and resigned both his ministerial standing in the denomination and his position of pastor at the church in March of that year.

After pleading guilty to four counts of fourth-degree sexual assault, Toro, 57, was sentenced last week to two nine-month jail sentences for two of the counts and two three-year probation terms for the others.

-------------------------------
Clergy-abuse prosecution limits clarified
Court rules against priest who left Wisconsin
Associated Press and Journal Sentinel st
Posted: June 26, 2008

Madison - Clergy can be prosecuted for decades-old sexual abuse in Wisconsin if they left the state before a six-year statute of limitations expired, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Archdiocese Case
Recent Coverage
1/31/08: Archdiocese in the red
1/31/08: Documents detail church cover up

Background
7/12/07: Abuse victims can sue for fraud
9/2/06: $17 million settles 10 abuse cases
8/30/06: Court rebuffs clergy abuse suit
7/20/06: Editorial: Where, sadly, the buck stops
7/7/06: Dolan braces archdiocese for priest sex abuse costs
4/7/06: Cousins Center may be sold
7/10/04: Milwaukee archdiocese releases names of 'restricted' priests
5/11/03: Priest arrested on sexual assault charges
10/28/02: Victims' testimony may lead to 2 criminal cases
8/22/02: 2 more priests to be removed

The decision came in an appeal brought by Father Bruce Duncan MacArthur, 86, who was charged in 2006 with sexually assaulting girls who were patients at a Beaver Dam hospital where he was a chaplain between 1965 and 1972.

The court ruled that the statute of limitations is in effect for all crimes that happened before 1989, when the law was changed, but that the clock stops ticking when someone no longer lives in Wisconsin.

MacArthur is retired and living in a community for abusive priests near St. Louis.

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, an organization that assists victims of clergy abuse, said in a news release Thursday that the decision upholds about 15 cases brought against clergy who fled Wisconsin, including three cases awaiting trial.

Earlier this week, the group announced that it is suing the Milwaukee Catholic Archdiocese for fraud in connection with the sexual abuse of an altar boy in the 1970s by a now-defrocked priest.

According to a draft of the lawsuit, the archdiocese knew or suspected that Franklyn Becker was a child molester and a danger to children before he molested a child at St. John de Nepomuc parish in Milwaukee and Holy Family parish in Whitefish Bay between 1971 and 1973.

By placing Becker at those parishes, the archdiocese, through its agents, including the late Archbishop William Cousins, affirmatively represented that Becker was not a danger to children and that it had no knowledge of his history of abusing children, the suit claims.

The lawsuit demands a judgment in an amount to be determined at trial, according to the draft.

Last year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the church could be sued for fraud for not telling the public about abusive priests before placing them in public ministry.

Becker, 70, who is accused of assaulting children in California and Wisconsin, lives in Mayville.

See also:The Wisconsin and New Hampshire Supreme Courts Rule Against Clergy Abuse Victims:
Two Decisions That Illustrate Why the Law in This Area Must Change

This is the way Obama will defend Sharia; he will use women to attack rights for Muslim women

I received this message below from WAMI today and I am in despair. This is the left' cultural relativism which will be used to gain the acceptance of Muslim's oppression of women. The way has been prepared by the endorsement of BO by women's groups and the refusal to report on his associations to radical Islam here in Chicago and there, in Kenya. The Apostate has also posted on this here.

Obama used race baiting and sexism to destroy Hillary because he IS a misogynist at heart. He hates women and surrounds himself with women who destroy other women for him (Samantha Powers, M Dowd, Donna Brazile, NARAL, Peelosi). Obama sets his storm troopers out to use race baiting and sexism to destroy his female opposition. He never seems to get his hands dirty. This is the first tactic of the patriarchal theologies (and pimps). Love, money and light comes from the man while punishment comes from his women who are competing for the status of being first in his harem.

This is very serious for feminists. Notice that only now the females in congress organize protests for Roe and Equal Pay to frighten us into voting for the Chosen One. Where were they with their protests the last four years when they had the majority in the house and senate and lost the rights they are protesting NOW? Nowhere -- did you get any organizing letters from these women except from NOW on the eve of the equal pay vote?

But now they use our issues to frighten us. Where were they when Hillary was running for president based on these issues? They were endorsing Obama.

Now they act as if they care but their only care is that the Obama money keeps coming to fund their careers. BO has control of all DNC funds in Chicago and will have that control for the next four years just as H. Dean had whether he wins or not. None of them are brave enough to say No. Not even Hillary.

Please get ready to fight this misogynist Islamic politico dogma (and to be ostracized and shamed for fighting it). They will drag out their Islamic and AA professors to call us white middle class xenophobic racists bla bla bla - you heard it all from their clones in Women's Studies.

Stand firm for what is done to Muslim women will be done to you. Believe it. That is the plan.

I show the roots of Obama's support for the subordination of women under Sharia below this WAMI post. I originally wrote it in a comment I left on Alegre's Journal. All feminists should be reading Alegre's Journal everyday. You will see why. Women there asked me to post my comment in a "dairy". I do not know what a diary is so I post it below this news from WAMI. It was my comment on the New Yorker cover. Ha!

But first listen to WAMI and hear the news of how Obama will justify Sharia.

WAMI writes:"and its coming now from the Obama camp, from Obama himself. Obama will hire a "Muslim liaison," who insists that "American women need to understand that what is best for them is not necessarily what is best for Muslim women"

Since American women consider freedom, equality, and independence to be "best for them," does that mean Muslim women don't, or rather, wouldn't, if given the chance?

From Politico, July 21 "Obama campaign hires Muslim liaison," :

"Obama's campaign has created a Muslim liaison, according to two sources familiar with the move.

The sources said the job was likely to be filled by Haim Nawas, a Jordanian-American who filled a similar role for the campaign of General Wesley Clark in 2004.

The job is complicated by the fact that Obama has been forced repeatedly to deny that he is Muslim, a situation that grates on some Muslim-Americans.

Nawas wrote in 2005 that the Bush Administration should take a more nuanced approach to public diplomacy directed at Muslim women.

"We need to recognize that the social structure in the Muslim world is very different from America's," she wrote. "American women need to understand that what is best for them is not necessarily what is best for Muslim women. Advocacy of women's rights in the Muslim world must show sensitivity to local political realities." "

Posted by Raymond

Natasha wrote:
We in (or having been in) the far left recognize this strategy and rhetoric and its NOT good, its a means to force intimidation and clamp down on women's human rights activists when confronting Islam.

THIS IS MY COMMENT ON THE NEW YORKER COVER from Alegre's Journal.

New Yorker cover as Indicator

I am SOOOO glad to read this. Thought I was the only one. Active in NOW from 1972 to 1980. For the past 5 years I saw it was corrupted at the national level and just the ladies left auxiliary. I got their email using words like horrific and racist about the New Yorker cover. All the left identity language which has been used to divide women in our movement when the left could not co opt us any other way.

I had never seen the national NOW so upset about the women living under sharia. NOW never voiced any outrage at the slave status of those women. During the war, NOW had a chance to influence the reconstruction in favor of Muslim women's rights if they had worked with the Office of International Womens Issues in the State Dept. There one lone Republican woman, single childless pro choice Condi Rice, has set up a network of Muslim women working to destroy Sharia throughout many Muslim countries. This includes more then 8 regional women's centers in Afghanistan. underground domestic violence centers and women's police forces to defend them. There are lots of problems but my point is not to get into that discussion.

My point is to compare it to what Barack Obama has done for Muslim women. BO supports his brother in Kenya, Abongo Obama a politician who wants to bring back Sharia and his cousin, Odinga, who made campaign promises to bring back Sharia. Obama campaigned for Odinga to such an extent that Kenya made a formal complaint to the state dept. Both are Muslim extremist who hate Israel with all the craziness of that breed. Yet, NOW goes into full war mode to defend BO, outraged and fainting over the "horrific" insult, the monstrous indignity to the Chosen One.

There is a chart called the Club of Bo's connections with political Islam here. Just Click on the Chart to enlarge it and then click on the individual boxes to enlarge them.

When I saw that NY cover I did not take it as the insult to the so called ignorant bitter small town hicks it was meant to be. I took it to as a sign that there was so much evidence and red flags about Obama's true politics out in the world that it is being noticed by the boy's club at the New Yorker. You know the boy's club that managed to get through an entire war without once noticing the women, their slave status and their struggle to be free of male intimidation.

So I wrote back to Ms that I would like to see all this drama at poor persecuted Obama applied to the women he used and is still using to gain personal power. The women hatred he gins up in the boys to gain their support. The contempt he shows for women such as his grandmother, who are afraid to walk the streets because of assault and abuse. Let them stay home then is the Sharia answer. Why should I be offended when his wife is shown as a leftist hater and he as a Muslim? No I am not at all offended.

HE IS WHAT OFFENDS ME. And the men's club, the patriarchy that brings him to rule over us in this country that has no equal rights amendment - that has no constitutional safeguards for women's rights.

Afghan Woman Athlete Seeks Political Asylum

WHY ISN'T THE BUSH ADM DOING MORE FOR WOMEN'S RIGHTS IF THEY EXPECT US TO SUPPORT THIS WAR? IF KARZAI WANTS TO STAY IN POWER HE HAD BETTER ACT TO PROTECT WOMEN'S RIGHTS OR GET THE F OUT OF THE WAY. FOR A START HE CAN FREE THE JOURNALIST SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR DISTRIBUTING WOMEN'S RIGHTS LITERATURE. WHAT IS BO'S POSITION ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS? NO DIFFERENT THAN BUSH.

Mehbooba Andyar, Afghan's only female athlete scheduled to compete at the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, disappeared from her training facility in Formia, Italy, on July 4, just weeks before the opening ceremonies. According to Spiegel International, Andyar told her parents she is seeking political asylum in Europe due to death threats spread by extremists who disapprove of women taking part in sports.Andyar, who has always been seen in a head scarf and full-length body covering, was an Olympic Solidarity Scholarship athlete, paid for by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), according to TIME. The 19-year-old was training with the International Association of Athletics Federation in Italy before she vanished with her bags and passport.

The IOC states that they have had no contact with the runner. The Spiegel International reports that the Afghan Olympic Committee's deputy chairman Sayed Mahmoud Zia Dashti told the Associated Press last week that Andyar injured her leg. However, Andyar’s family said that the runner feared reprisal for her internationally recognized sports career and did not plan to return to Afghanistan. Afghan Olympic Committee members have reportedly threatened to hold Andyar's family responsible if she does not return and possibly throw them in jail.

According to the TIME, Afghanistan was banned from the 2000 games due to the Taliban's policy of prohibiting women from participating. The 2004 Olympics marked the first time female Afghan athletes competed in the games since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Two female athletes, Robina Muqimyar who ran the 100 meters and Frida Rezihi who competed in judo, were among those competing in 2004. Spiegel International said that while these women were happy to return to Afghanistan, Andyar decided to flee for safety sacrificing her chance to compete in the 2008 summer games.
Media Resources: TIME 7/9/08; Spiegel International 7/14/08

SUPPORT GENDER GAPPERS

FIGHT BACK FOR GENDER GAP
Right at the very beginning of recorded and spoken history, a cast system based on gender was propagated and enforced that exists to this day. It is evidenced today by the vitriolic manner of the victorious over the vanquished.

While the Democratic leadership is singing Kum-bay-yah and urging unity, the blogistani have continued their attempt to wipe any and all opposition to their candidate off the Net. Women’s blogs are a target and our right to dissent is the first victim of the yeswecanshutyouup,bitch! New BOrder.

Blogs that do not conform to the New Democratic Party are being flooded with so much nasty garbage that the administrators are forced to shut down or spend all their time sifting through for intelligent discussion comments to publish.

Anglachel’s Journal reports: “I know a number of pro-Hillary bloggers have been targeted for shut down by reporting them as spam sites.” Gendergappers is under such an attack right now.

Remember these are Democrats that are doing this. As we have mentioned before, the Republicans DO NOT DERROGATE THEIR WOMEN CANDIDATES OR WIVES. It’s the Party that claims to be FOR WOMEN’S rights that savages their own.

"The new name for the Democratic National Committee: Obama Idolaters National Committee – OINC. “Chicago corruption: decades of sleeze” – Anglachel"

I believe it's called the "Hells Angel rule"

“Just because you started the bar fight doesn’t mean you get to decide when it’s over.”

From: Virginia Rose
To: don@fowlercommunications.com
Cc: germonda@dnc.org
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 12:58 PM
Subject: November surprise

Letter from the Party Bosses Don Fowler and Alice Germond. Read the whole letter in the link here."I must confess a bit of fatigue and irritation with people who continue to carp, complain, and criticize the results of the primary and lay down conditions for their support," it reads. "It is time to act in a mature and resourceful fashion. It's time to put the primaries behind us. It's time to support Barack Obama without conditions or demands."

No. Did you hear me ? NO.
I have no intention of supporting the empty suit you FORCED on us instead of a superior woman with a resume. Moreover I will NEVER again vote for ANY democrat until the damned dems implement primary reform which includes the following:

caucuses are eliminated,

republican crossover voting is eliminated,

the (super) delegate system is eliminated and every vote counts,

the convention delegates vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in their state by a majority of the votes counted excluding caucuses.

And before you start your usual crap calling me a republican, I am 62, a feminist organizer and have never voted for any other party. I even voted for (gag) Kerry who you also forced on us. I heard Brazil's crap at the rules meeting and I was puked to be in the same party with you heavy handed fascists.

We don't want your wealthy rich bozs with their divorced from reality sense of entitlement and their youth storm troopers. We despise the left of center arrogant gum chewing morons to whom you give unearned votes you steal from women. We refuse your sexism and misogyny and your contempt for the working class. You think you can use the working class the way the Repubs use fundamentalist Christians? Well you are in for a shock in November, boss. You and your self important pig DNC.

We are paying $60.00 to fill our gas tanks - what good are you to us? Want to scare me with ROE ?Look around --even with a majority you could not save equal pay for equal work much less Roe. You have made abortion rare by allowing doctors to be killed and clinics closed or put under a million state imposed restrictions ON WOMEN'S RIGHT to control our own bodies. You have nothing to offer decent women. The only women who support you are women you pay or women you can still intimidate.

Less of them every day.

I am "writing in" Hillary Clinton. So is my 90 year old mother. Laughing all the way. It is the most mature and resourceful thing we have done since Bill Clinton left the White House.

ESAD.

Flashbacks to Dodgeville

Recently it all came flooding back, the pain, the unjust persecution, the isolation, the horror and despair. Anglache gave me comfort in her last post here....
....
The high school girls my friend talked about, one of them has created a story to explain away a parent who won't be there, preferring this person be dead to the fact of abandonment, betrayal, failure. It hurts to have a parent who fails you, and every one of us who has felt such a sting makes up a story to make sense of that unpalatable fact, make it more noble, less painful, displace its shame, deny its damage.

Isak Dineson said that any pain can be borne if you put it into a story or tell a story about it.

What matters is what kind of story you tell. Is it a story of reclaiming what never was? Is it a story that acknowledges pain, but makes it a thing that is done and dealt with? Is it a tale that talks about dysfunction with clear-eyed honesty and compassion for all involved? Does it [e]limn[ate] an unfulfillable wish, or instead create a foundation on which to build?

I suspect most of us recount a mix of such things.

I'm interested in the dreams of our daughters, the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves, and how they can frame a future that is not just drugs, gangs, babies, and relentless second-class status.

Maybe one of the reasons the lady in the pantsuit connects with so many daughters is the story she can tell us about herself, and about us as well.

Maybe what we need are better stories of the indignities and tragedies of ordinary life that don't have Daddy in another country, but permanently incarcerated, or a blow-hard abusive bastard, or wandering the streets as a bum looking for his next fix, and how you are not condemned to a similar fate.

A dream that looks forward, not back.

Anglachel

Nelson's Democrat Primary Reform

I did not see these points in Nelson's plan and yet these are what most of us objected to:
No reform is complete unless caucuses are eliminated, republican crossover voting is eliminated, the (super) delegate system is eliminated and every vote counts, the convention delegates voting for the candidate who won the popular vote in their state by a majority of the votes counted.

Congress confronted with major election reform
Senator proposes to end Electoral College
June 6, 2008

WASHINGON, D.C. – A U.S. senator from a state known for election snafus today filed a package of reforms to change national voting procedures, including proposals to abolish the Electoral College in favor of direct popular election of the president and to allow voters, not party bosses, to select presidential candidates.

The legislation, by Florida Democrat Bill Nelson, comes at the end of a long primary season in which major rules disputes threatened to exclude Florida and Michigan from having a say in the selection of a Democratic presidential nominee. It could be the opening bid in the first significant attempt in Congress to overhaul the core of the presidential election and primary systems since then-Indiana Sen. Birch Bayh narrowly lost two separate tries to abolish the Electoral College in 1970 and 1979.

Nelson said it’s time for Congress to reconsider such a direct election plan, noting that just eight years ago a president was elected with only a minority of the popular vote. He also cited Florida and Michigan’s brush this year with having their primary results dismissed in a dispute with political party officials over election dates.

“It’s time for Congress to really give Americans the power of one-person, one-vote, instead of the political machinery selecting candidates and electing our president,” said Nelson, an outspoken advocate of election reform since suing his party last year over its initial refusal to count Florida’s 2008 Democratic presidential primary.

A centerpiece of Nelson’s three-part initiative is the proposed constitutional amendment to abolish the 18th-century Electoral College, plus the establishment of regional primaries and other reforms. His principal argument for getting rid of the Electoral College is the system permits a candidate with fewer votes nationally to win the presidency by capturing narrow victories in big states.

In 2000, George W. Bush actually lost the nationwide popular election to Al Gore by nearly 544,000 votes, yet won the presidency in a Supreme Court showdown over Florida’s Electoral College votes that hinged on far fewer disputed state ballots.

The second part of Nelson’s initiative, which he previously filed with Michigan Democrat Carl Levin, gives voters more say than political party bosses in picking the presidential candidates. It does so by establishing six rotating, interregional primaries beginning in March and ending in June every four years. It pairs large and small states into six different regions; and, the states in each region take turns going first — removing exclusive power from the nation’s first primary and caucus states, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and Iowa and Nevada, respectively. U.S. Rep Sander Levin has been a champion of a companion regional-primary measure the House.

Under the third part of Nelson’s broader election plan, all voters would get to vote early and could cast absentee ballots on demand - something a number of states already allow. Also, all voting machines would have to produce a paper trail, and states that develop mail-in balloting would be eligible for federal grants.

The package is drawing positive reaction from several voting rights groups that seek to make election reform a national priority, among them, WhyTuesday?, which opposes inconvenient voting on Tuesdays.

"We applaud Sen. Nelson for taking a bold step, which not many have in Washington: acknowledging that our voting system is broken," said Norman Ornstein, a leading constitutional scholar and board member of the nonprofit group. “Given that American voter participation ranks near the bottom of all countries, we encourage other members of Congress to join in an open and honest debate about making voting as accessible, reliable, and secure as possible."

Various voters’ rights groups were consulted on the legislation – called the One Person, One Vote Initiative - including WhyTuesday and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization formed at the request of President John F. Kennedy.

The next step in the process, Nelson said, is to gain support from enough lawmakers, while also pushing hard for congressional hearings.

One Person, One Vote Initiative

I. A resolution providing for the direct election of the president:

Abolish the Electoral College: A resolution for a constitutional amendment will be filed to abolish the Electoral College and allow direct election of the president by popular vote. If the principle of one person, one vote is to mean anything, the candidate who wins a majority of the votes should win the presidency; or,

II. A bill providing for the voters’ selection of presidential candidates:

Establish rotating primaries: The 2008 election has demonstrated our primary system is broken. This legislation will give both large and small states a fair say in selecting presidential nominees, and will do away with unrepresentative caucuses controlled by party bosses. It divides the nation into six regions and establishes six primary dates beginning in March and ending in June. On each of the six dates, states in each region of the country will be represented on a rotating basis.

III. A bill making it easier for everyone to vote:

Allow nationwide early voting: Restricting voting to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November unduly restricts many voters from getting to the polls. The bill will take what has been instituted successfully in Florida – early voting – and expand it to cover the entire nation, so that voters can go to a designated polling place before Election Day and cast their vote. [www.whytuesday.org ]

Allow absentee ballot on demand: Some states still require a voter attest to an inability to get to the polls on Election Day in order to obtain an absentee ballot. The legislation would remove this barrier to voting to impose a nationwide requirement that states issue qualified voters an absentee ballot on demand.

Encourage vote-by-mail: The bill would provide grants to jurisdictions that wish to institute pilot programs for full-fledged vote-by-mail elections, based on Oregon’s successful model. Any such pilot program would need to contain adequate safeguards to ensure full inclusion of all voters regardless of race, language, or disability, and guard against fraud.

Require vote verification: The legislation takes nationwide the voting technology reforms instituted last year in Florida. It would require there be a verifiable paper ballot to accompany every vote that is cast, which now is required in Florida and in several other states.

Improve voter registration lists: States currently must maintain electronic voter registration lists. But the quality, accuracy and completeness vary greatly. These lists sometimes serve as a barrier to the polls, because qualified voters can be excluded due to inaccurate or incomplete lists. The bill would establish uniform criteria for voter registration lists nationwide. Among other things, it also would let teenagers preregister to vote when they get their driver’s license, so they’re automatically added to the voting rolls when they turn 18 years old.

Democractic Reform before the Election or No Votes and Nobama

Mark at "Democrat in Exile" has done an analysis of current appeasement primary reform offerings here. And here "Feinstein just fiddling while the DNC burns democracy to the ground".

But he suggests and I agree that we take a good look at the plan he thinks offers the most to the rank and file by J Soros. However, no reform is complete unless caucuses are eliminated, republican crossover voting is eliminated, the (super) delegate system is eliminated and every vote counts, the convention delegates voting for the candidate who won the popular vote in their state by a majority of the votes counted.

"Vote Early, Count Often" By JONATHAN SOROS Published: October 30, 2007. Jonathan Soros is a lawyer and the president of an investment firm. Democrat in Exile is doing an analysis of this plan from Soros. Here it is:

"THE system we use to select the major-party presidential nominees in this country is badly broken. That New Hampshire may move its primary into 2007 should be evidence enough. But focusing on the absurdity of the primary calendar obscures a problem of greater significance: not all voters are equal. To correct that sad truth we must change the way we select candidates.

The only solution that treats every voter equally would be to establish a true national primary, with every state voting on the same day. Unfortunately, this format would eliminate the essential “retail” politics of small-state primaries and turn the contest into a nasty televised slugfest among the candidates with the most money.
There is, however, a simple way to establish a national primary and yet still allow retail politicking to meaningfully affect the course of the campaign over several months: allow early voting, with regular reporting of the tally.

Here’s one way it could work. Set a national primary date of June 30 and create a window for early voting that opens on Jan. 1. The early votes would be counted and reported at the end of each month from January through May.

More than 30 states already allow early voting, and every state allows absentee voting. But under the current system, those votes sit around until Election Day and often don’t get counted at all if the race isn’t close.

If we began counting and reporting the interim results in advance of a national primary, the voters who cast early ballots would play the same role as voters in Iowa and New Hampshire do now: they could signal viability or create momentum for their favored candidates. These early voters would be self-selecting, trading the opportunity to watch the campaign unfold for the ability to demonstrate early conviction.

Most important, every voter, no matter where he or she lived, would have the freedom to make this choice. Right now, when one votes is determined by where one lives.

In 2008, more than 20 states will hold primaries or caucuses on Feb. 5, the most crowded primary day in history. The candidates who emerge from that so-called Super-Duper Tuesday will likely gain an unstoppable momentum. Votes cast in later primaries will probably be irrelevant.

The rush to the front of the calendar has further increased the value of voting early. Several states have moved their primaries and caucuses into January in order to share in the spotlight typically reserved for Iowa and New Hampshire. Even so, candidates this year have held more public events in those two states than in all other states combined.

Congress has held hearings on the problem with the primary calendar, and several creative ideas have surfaced. Most call for dividing the country into regions and then allowing small states to vote first or rotating which region votes first from election to election. Some have even proposed assigning the order in which states vote by lottery.

Each of these solutions would be better than the current mess, but they also share an important flaw: they all mistake randomness for fairness. Only a national primary would make every vote — at least those cast on the official primary date — equally meaningful regardless of where it was cast.

Early voting would allow positive campaigning and direct contact with voters, often cited as justifications for the special role of Iowa and New Hampshire in the process, to retain their importance during the six months before the national primary (at least until the very end). The choice to vote early would more likely be driven by strong positive attitudes toward a candidate than negative feelings toward the competition.

Voters would have to be highly motivated to cast their votes early. Candidates would have to prove their vote-getting ability in all regions to establish viability for the general election, but a lesser-known candidate with strong regional support or dynamic appeal would have time and opportunity to build momentum.

Sadly, campaigns would still pay attention to campaign contributions. Only a robust public financing system can change that. But the horse-race significance of donations would diminish. Actual votes, rather than money-raising totals, pundits or polls, would identify the front-runners.

Best of all, a national primary preceded by a window of regularly reported early voting would likely enhance voter participation from the paltry 20 percent typically seen in presidential primaries. Call it the “American Idol” effect. When everyone gets to participate equally in the voting, millions of people tune in. "

Democratic Party Primary Reform (DPPP)

The blog is Democract in Exile (FKA Men for Hillary) and Mark has worked in the party all his adult life. Many of us will not vote for any democrat until the party reforms itself. The traitor Feinsten proposed the usual democrat idea of reform which is reform in name only. She submitted a bill which is appeasement verbiage but insignificant change, much like what Obama is doing now with Hillary Clinton. So far his fundraisers have donated $100,000, to reduce her thirty million dollar campaign debt.

In terms of Democratic Party Primary reform we need caucuses eliminated. They exclude the old and the working class. They shout people down and bully the vote. We insist there is no monopoly on certain states always going first. We do not want republicans voting in democrat primaries.

If the links do not work on my blog, go over to Mark's blog. You should go to his blog to leave a comment anyway. He wants your ideas for reform.

This PUMA says "Hold the Hearings Now!"
on 7/12/2008 10:26:50 AM, written by Mark on Dem In Exile.

If you have been to the links I provided in my last post -- Will Senator Feinstein Follow Through with Hearings on Primary Reform? -- here and here, you should know by now that Senator Feinstein's primary reform bill sucks. Am I being too harsh? Just Say No Deal! and PUMA seek primary reform. Ed Rendell promises it as bait for the disenchanted. Time's a' wasting'!
Before Senator Nelson introduced his primary reform legislation on June 6, the only recent primary reform legislation pending in the Senate was Feinstein's. The BIG PROBLEM with Feinstein's legislation is that it continues to allow caucuses and it continues to allow Iowa and New Hampshire to be first in the nation. Memo to Feinstein: Not a chance!
The BIG QUESTION now is whether Feinstein will follow through on her promises to have hearings on primary reform this month.
You can write to Senator Feinstein here.

SAVE OUR SWANS: DNR Keeps Killing at Taxpayer's Expense - Racine Referendum

I just received this message. I want to know how many job positions are doing this work and how much state money goes to this stupid wasteful program? Ever since the DNR stopped wasting money trying to kill all the deer to stop CWD, it focused it's blood lust on swans. Everything beautiful, the DNR wants to kill. They have the kind of employees who are thrilled when they can kill beautiful creatures.

The people who have lived with families of swans on their lakes for generations have organized after the DNR arrogantly refused their requests to get off their land and leave their swans be. A woman watching her old friends raising their babies saw them shot as she was taking pictures for children. She is suing the DNR whose sharpshooters came out of nowhere to kill her swan friends in front of her.

Here is their message:

Racine County Board will vote this month on a proposed referendum we have initiated. We want to protect the remaining mute swans since the DNR has continued with their "kill all free flying mute swans in Wisconsin" policy. This Spring they oiled the eggs and the young were suffocated. This is cruel and inhumane treatment! We still need your help!

BINGO

Analysis from Anglachel's Journal, No Where Else to Go

...What was Hillary offering that rallied this constituency behind her and which has remained an amazingly strong identification?

She offered material improvements to ordinary lives, and an explicit commitment to use the power of the state to achieve those ends. The two most prominent examples are her lifelong commitment t health care and her current response to the mortgage crisis. It is a difference of political style, but also of political philosophy.

Hillary has demonstrated that she believes a politician is someone who has to earn people’s votes by understanding where they are coming from and being on their side. “You are not invisible to me.”

It is also a way of diffusing social grievances by substituting festering resentment which can be channeled into resentment-fueled backlash (the hallmark of movement conservatism) with amelioration of socio-economic threat through practical policy to stabilize conditions for the working class.

In contrast, Obama has run as a conversion experience (You are not Democrat or Republican, you are an Obamacan.), calling people to their better selves, which inherently presupposes that what they currently are doing is wrong, corrupt, and unworthy. It substitutes morality for interests, focuses on the inner-life of the voter rather than on the material needs of the population, and individualizes broad social concerns. If only you racist hicks would improve yourselves we would have a wonderful nation.

It is a top-down approach that dictates behavior rather than provides solutions, which is why it ends up sounding very conservative....

Symptomatic of the deep problem of the party as a whole is the turn by the leadership towards privatization of social risk. Health insurance is not a mandate, and thus a right, but a choice to be exercised if desired. This ignores power, especially the power of the state to defend the citizen against the encroachment of moneyed interests. The well-off Stevensonians are no longer interested in defending the material needs of those who are not a part of Whole Foods Nation, and they hide their abandonment under the guise of rejecting racism. If the problem is the state of your soul and not the condition of your medical care, then you must heal yourself, and they can smugly pat themselves on the back for having defended the right moral stance.

But Mom, Everybody 's Doing It

Here is something I wish our better writers would post about. Is anyone as insulted as I am over this meme of "all candidates move to the right in the general election" as an excuse for Nobama actually changing his previous primary positions? Moving to the right used as a cover, as an excuse for actually lying to the base in order to defeat your primary opponent?

I did not see the kind of extreme changes after a primary in past elections as are put forth by Obama in this election.

Kerry "flip flopped " to explain a vote previous to the Primary. Obama is not doing what other candidates have done. He adopted radical positions before and during the primary in order to defeat Hillary; positions Hillary bravely refused because she knew they were impossible.

Hillary would not have needed to change positions in the general election because she had the Center and the working class with the platform she was honest enough to put forth in the debates. Her ideas, most of which Nobama parroted, were sensible, radical and acceptable to the working class in the US. Hillary would have known how to sell them as is but BO only knows how to pander. So his minions go forth to tell us betrayal is the norm.

And now after, Change, Believe, cultists, Wall Street, and political opportunists, along with the corporate party bo$$es, stole the primary for him, Nobama immediately begins to lie to the Right to gain a new source of votes and revenue.

BO flip flop lies are a new evil in terms of the US political history. And those who lie about history and previous norms in order to support him and excuse Bo's behavior are part of that evil.

I cross posted this at Reclusive Leftist here.

Hey NARAL and Planned Parenthood: For this You Betrayed a Feminist : Not Another Dime For Corporate Non-Profits !

There is simply nothing to say except we are going to elect BO, a man whose mother was in a polygamous marriage with a Muslim who treated her like an animal. She abandoned Obama for another Muslim who also treated her as an animal is treated whereupon she abandoned Obama again. Obama has shown that he hates women by tricking his first female mentor and defrauding her of her political position which he then took. He has shown his hatred of women by the campaign he ran against Hillary Clinton. He has shown his hatred of women by the all male strategist who run his campaign and the condescending way he referred to female reporters and Hillary Clinton. Shown his hatred of women by expecting his grandmother to enjoy assault by a black panhandler and blaming her for his grandfather's racism. We are going to elect a man who supports Kenyan politicians who have stated they want to bring back Sharia law. And Obama has shown his love of power by choosing to marry his superior at his place of employment.

PUMA women need to form a strong feminist PUMA Committee.


!!#@$!!!@*!&*#$*&@

posted by Melissa McEwan Thursday, July 03, 2008 at Shakesville
Everyone in the world has sent me the link to this AP story about an interview Obama did with Relevant Magazine, a Christian publication, in which he reportedly said that "mental distress" shouldn't qualify as part of the mother's health exception to late-term abortion bans. I quite honestly could not believe this was being reported correctly, so I looked out the original article.

And, sure enough, that's what he says all right.

Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate's stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don't believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

I just honestly don't even know what to say. Part of me wants to explore the bloody fucking obvious hypotheticals that make this position totally untenable (e.g. a pregnant woman under such psychological distress that she is a danger to herself and ergo necessarily the fetus), and another part of me just wants to point out how gobsmackingly offensive (and misogynist) this is.

That is, unless Obama believes that psychological health doesn't "qualify" as an intrinsic part of every human's health—a position so extraordinary I cannot believe he would hold it. (Would he also argue that psychological care should not be covered under his universal health insurance plan?)

And, if he doesn't believe that, then he evidently believes acute psychological distress "qualifies" as a serious health issue for everyone except pregnant women.

Certainly his defenders will say he didn't mean it that way, and of course he didn't. What he meant is that he doesn't think all those irresponsible, fickle, ninny-brained straw-women who decide willy-nilly they want abortions in their third trimester shouldn't be allowed to get one by claiming "mental distress" swoon swan get thee to a fainting couch. He's breathing life into the damnable lie that there are legions of women who seek out late-term abortions just because they've changed their silly little minds and make up lies about "mental distress" to get them.

Unfuckingbelievable. I am absolutely furious.

View Comments Here

Be sure to see what the Reclusive Leftist has to say HERE

The Road To Denver

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2008 Democratic National Convention

Date August 25 - August 28

Presidential Nominee
Barack Obama of Illinois (Presumptive)
Vice Presidential Nominee
TBD of TBA

The 2008 Democratic National Convention will be held from August 25 to August 28 at the Pepsi Center, and possibly Invesco Field[1], in Denver, Colorado. At its convention, the Democratic Party will nominate its candidates for President and Vice President of the United States. By virtue of his lead among elected delegates and superdelegates, it is presumed Barack Obama will receive the nomination for President.

By custom, the incumbent president's party holds its convention after the challenging party, with the first party's convention in July and the second party's in August. This year, the Democrats' convention is first, and will be held in late August because they want to hold the convention after the 2008 Summer Olympics and want to "maximize momentum for our Democratic ticket in the final months of the Presidential election".[2]

P.U.M.A. UPDATE DENVER, JULY 4TH, 2008 AT 12:00PM:

Step One of Puma PAC’s planning for Denver is now underway. We will be posting updates and details OFTEN over the next week, so don’t fret.

First, if you are interested in joining us in Denver, please send an email today to gotodenver@pumapac.org.

Please include the following info: Your real name; your blog user name if you have one; the closest major city and your state; how many in your party; and very important: whether you are DEFINITELY going, might be going, want to go but have problems.

ALSO, PLEASE PLEASE include your cell phone number.

Obviously we will only call you if absolutely necessary and would NEVER give the number away; this is a safety precaution.

IMPORTANT: Puma PAC cannot provide housing. We will be providing links and tips for accommodations, but housing all the Pumas is beyond our scope. We WILL help people get there.

Please let us know in your email HOW you plan to get to Denver: car, plane, train, bus, or Puma PAC bus. We will do our VERY BEST to help everyone get there.

Friends and family members WELCOME!

Remember to Join Puma PAC if you haven’t already. JOIN HERE

Contribute to the BUSES TO DENVER FUND (suggested donation is $10 or $20)

DENVER UPDATE, July 3, 2008 at 10:30pm:

ORGANIZE UPDATE! Wow, Pumas — the response is overwhelming. We will be spending the weekend hammering out details and updating everyone. Remember, the most important thing is that you come to Denver. We’ll be there — with signs and banners and cameras. Don’t be anxious or insecure. It’s a big city — they can handle a few extras. Start making your plans to be there — especially on the 27th and 28th.

DENVER UPDATE, July 3, 2008 at 12:35pm:

TRAVEL UPDATE! Puma PAC will be providing buses from New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, Jacksonville, and Washington DC to bring Pumas from all across the country to Denver, starting on August 24th.

Please help pay for these buses. Many Pumas will find it difficult to pay for getting the time off, motels, food etc. Let’s help as many Puma PAC members as we can join us in Denver. This is a special BUSES TO DENVER FUND.

All donations made here will go EXCLUSIVELY to paying for buses. If we can raise enough to hire 100 buses, then hell yes we’ll do it. If 20,000 members each throw in $10 bucks for a free ride to Denver for a fellow Puma we’ll have enough for 500 buses.

Grab your fanny packs and get your days off from work Pumas. We’ll have a mighty convoy to Denver rolling on August 24th!

Posted at Reclusive Leftist

Reclusive Leftist (unlike other blogs at which I have been censored) has never lost my respect. I think Violet is one of the finest feminist minds (and writers) on the internet. For example here is a sample, Violet speaks:

I’m feeling it especially today, with the news that Obama is planning to keep Bush’s faith-based programs. God almighty. How much clearer can it get? Coming on top of the FISA immunity thing, the campaign finance reversal, and the trial balloon about keeping Gates on as Secretary of Defense, it’s a miracle of nature that the possums can’t see what this guy is about. If he started showing up at press conferences wearing a flight suit, do you think they’d get it then? (Answering self: no; see insanity, mass.)

But she, like Woman Space, was overly protective of her left friend's positions and always defended them from my confrontations. I got tired of it and thought it was stupid to argue with people who were not ready to look at what had become a sacred cow in their life. Now, I think the blinders were removed by force and to Violet's credit, she has become very very aware of what is being done to women by the corporate left and MSM. I suggest you go to her blog and read, A Note on PUMA and Sexism

Here is my comment.

I left this blog some time ago and now I am back to ask you to reconsider the issue that caused me to leave. The belief that the political left is a credible ally to women as compared to the right and its' publications are more acceptable in terms of credibility.

I am speaking to the women who consider them self "leftists" I am asking you NOT to see Obama as some aberration that "chipped socialism" but as the symbol of the aggregate left positions.

Positions which are packaged in very attractive wrapping but are not generally in the interests of women globally. The left both within and without the Democratic party which proposed and supports Obama never moved us one step closer to women's liberation or even basic human rights. Because they are controlled by corporate globalism as is the right.

Corporate money buys non profit organizations, gets appointed to NGO boards, hires staff and then adopts positions which favor corporations. They label these positions "progressive" and market them to the masses through the non profits like the progressive state network. Now they have even started to canvass neighborhoods asking for donations.

Independent organizations actually elevate the rights of those they represent. The corporate left never is clear about who they represent.

The left is mainly the corporate left and its' policies will keep the class balance intact regardless of the beautiful soaring speeches made during campaigns. That is how the left has functioned for 40 years in the US. Women must wake up and look at the results from a democratic majority in Congress. Do you really believe the left Democrat majority has kept abortion safe, legal and available? Did they pass the Equal Pay Act?

The left view the UN as superior to the US. Obama sponsored the Global Poverty Act which gives one in three foreign aid dollars to the UN. The UN's Human Rights Committee just ruled that Muslim practices such as FGM and child marriage are religious practices not human rights violations. It forbade women's advocates from presenting action resolutions to the H R committee concerning these and other "religious" practices. That is where US foreign aid will go under BO's legislation.

Feminists should be insisting that no country nor the UN get FA dollars except that they are used to fight sharia abuse of women and children and promote gender and ethnoreligious equality. The US Office of International Women's Issues should be solely responsible for distributing these funds and USAID for relief efforts. The UN cannot show fiscal responsibility and women should not approve funds going to maintain thug theocracies.

All of the left's positions, just like the rights, should only be adopted by an INDEPENDENT feminist movement and PUMA's feminists when we can see a direct feminist benefit to the women they affect. Not rhetoric about how this or that is better for women because we say so but adopted because we can see on the ground improvement in women's lives.

17 women's center have been built in Afghanistan, some of them underground domestic violence women's shelters. All of them have economic development programs. Women Police Corps are being armed to protect them. We are building schools and hospitals for women and girls. That work must continue. That is where the US foreign aid dollars must go - not to the corrupt Muslim majority UN. If the UN were to take over these projects women will be raped, imprisoned and die.

That Afghan women's rights work must continue - it should have happened in Iraq but did not.

If the Repubs get in 2009,we will still have the State Dept Office of Womens Issues (OIWI)but without Condi Rice and her band of feminists, I do not know how strong it will be -- Rice is a single, childless, pro choice woman who never wore a veil while visiting with the theocrats. She is the one who built the shelters and made violence against women an issue.

I don't want to respond to anyone who has not gone to that website and reviewed what those women have done. It is a shame feminists did not support them.
http://www.state.gov/g/wi/

Feminists were too busy supporting the DNC and the left to reach out to oppressed women in Iraq and Afghanistan through US soldiers. We might have become a powerful independent movement in the process.

If BO gets in 2009,Sen.Biden has pledged to replace OIWI with this:
http://www.greenconsciousness.org/weblog/2007/11/international-violence-against-women.html

Dems always think if you change the by-laws things will improve. So they spend all their time changing the rules and when push comes to shove they ignore the rules they wasted all our time and money arguing about anyway (see May 31 rules com meeting).

So women will lose two years while this new office gets set up in the state dept and the Muslim women who believed us, and left their homes, will be left to the mercy of the theocrats during that time. UNLESS we start demanding now that does not happen and make it part of the PUMA priorities along with rejection of provisions of the Global Poverty Act.

Anger is not enough.

Feminist must realize that BO is a corporate tool. The wealthy are both the right and the left. They use race, religion, gender and identity politics to control and divide the working class.

3/4 of Bo's contributors are Wall St companies like Goldman Sacks,and their employees - trust fund babies like the Kennedys and Kerrys, George Soros and other Billionaires, and all these people have always supported thug theocracies regardless of how they treated women or rather perhaps because there is an affinity between the corporate left and how women are treated under sharia.

An independent women's movement must work with the left and the right on different issues. Our allegiance must be only to what is helpful to women in achieving their liberation which is not always a safe thing to struggle toward.

Right now we should be demanding of both McCain and Obama that they bring that Afghan journalist who was sentenced to death for distributing feminist literature back to the US. We should demand they hold talks with the Afghan government on freedom for Afghans to organize for women's rights without interference from the religious police. The Afghans want protection from the Taliban so they must stop acting like the Taliban

Additionally, Obama supported relatives in Kenya who want to bring back sharia. His cousin and his half brothers - he donated funds to their political campaigns. His half-brother is calling for a return to Sharia. We must raise this as an issue and ask if Obama will intervene for women's rights. We must ask if BO will refrain from contributing to the UN until they show by results on the ground that they can use the money they have to successfully end human rights abuses.

PUMA feminists must ask for a public audit of what happened over the past ten years to the money in the UN Trust Fund to End Violence Against Against Women. To my knowledge not one shelter has been built.

Be it a vision of a "Christian Nation"
as seen by the far-right,
or "Political Correctness" by the far-left,
both are dangerous visions of the future, and
both are a threat to democracy
and the esoteric ideals
of individual responsibility, liberty,
and living spirituality
as has been outlined in Hermeticism’s
utopian texts of the last 400 years.
http://www.pagannews.com/cgi-bin/articles1.pl?110

Are we going to Denver? You bet your ass we're going to Denver

Today is PUMA's one month birthday. It was Tuesday evening, June 3, when I pressed "publish" on the first blog post and Puma PAC was born. Overnight I watched as 35,000 people clicked on the post. Since then we've had 600,000 visitors, thousands of members officially join us, and thousands of women and men from around the country (and the world) flood our mailboxes and comment threads with offers to help.

In our first month we have sent THOUSANDS of letters to the DNC, the Obama Campaign, and elected officials around the country. We have handed out flyers, brought home-made signs to Unity, New Hampshire, and spread our message like wild-fire on national and local TV. We have faxed, emailed, and called our leaders on the phone to give them one, unequivocal message: We are the VOTERS. This is OUR party. Stop dividing us; start leading us; and RESPECT THE VOICE OF THE VOTERS.

Here's the lesson the DNC and the Obama campaign have taken away from our phenomenally successful efforts in our FIRST 30 days: "Holy smokes, Howard! They're going to swing this election! What are we going to doooo?!!"

This ever-hardening conviction is the reason the trolls are up in arms. It's why Obama dragged Hillary to Unity NH for the Clown Show.

It's why the Bots have been furiously trying to shut down blogs, email accounts, and web pages; scurrilously purging and attacking political dissenters like angry, desperate rats.

It's why the less shady and slimy bloggers like Amanda Marcotte and Huffington Post have launched a personal humiliation and ridicule campaign against people like Riverdaughter, Will Bower, Diane Montavoulos, Paula Abeles, and me.

In the next month we have the opportunity for thousands more to join us. As tensions and hopes rise in the run-up to the August convention there will be confusion, anger, and a growing will to ACTION in the hearts of millions of Democrats around the country who are astonished at how cynically, hypocritically, and flat-out cravenly the DNC and the Obama campaign have tried to play us.

Race-baiting? Check. Class-warfare? Check. Voter suppression? Check. Sexism and misogyny? Check. Voting irregularities? Check. Back room deals? Check. Pandering and purging? Check. Disenfranchisement? Check.

The only entry in the Karl Rove playbook that David Axelrod and Barack Obama have not yet used (but hold onto your hats, folks! It's a comin') is outright STEALING of the election.

Our only protection against the Obama Movement's plan to force this election using any means possible is to MAKE IT TOO HARD TO STEAL. We must stay united in our Protest of the Election or they will seize their opportunity to tip the scales once again. Remember, this is Chicago-style politics.

Win at any cost is the mantra. Small "irregularities" that are hard to trace and nearly impossible to prove are the means. In a CLOSE ELECTION they will PLAY THEIR ACE CARD.

If you don't believe David Axelrod and Barack Obama don't have both the intention and the means to steal a close election, you haven't been paying attention. You did watch the elections of 2000 and 2004, right? You do remember that the only reason the Republicans couldn't steal the 2006 midterms is because for once, for once!, the damn thing was NOT too close to steal.

For the first time in a VERY LONG time, the Democratic Party was NOT divided. We were united. We attracted fed-up Republicans. Swing voters supported our candidates by the millions.

And we swept into Congress, state capitols, and Governors' mansions around the country.
We were UNITED.

The fact that the inept leadership of the DNC had less influence in the individual state elections also helped.

The only way the Democratic Party wins elections is when its coalition members are UNITED.

The Obama campaign DIVIDED the party and they and their Movement Followers comfort themselves with the Hope that they have won the crown.

Every day the realization becomes clearer to them that have lost and that they will lose.

Barack Obama agreed to David Axelrod's plan to win the battle and lose the war: to ruthlessly split the party in two in order to SEIZE the nomination from the person who had won the hearts and the VOTES of more Democrats in the history of primary campaigns.
Shakespeare anyone?

Hundreds of people ask us if we're going to Denver. Are we going to march on the convention; demand that Hillary's delegates are allowed to vote; demand that Hillary Clinton be allowed to deliver a free and honest speech.

Are we going to Denver? You bet your ass we're going to Denver.

I don't care if there are only 50 middle-aged women like me standing in the rain with fanny packs and homemade signs. I don't care if the inept, elitist clowns who have the audacity to believe they in any way deserve to be called leaders continue to pretend to ignore us; continue to attack us like dogs; continue to undermine, ridicule, bully, and harass us.

Are we going to Denver? Will we be there to witness the final act in the Shakespearean tragedy that Axelrod, Obama, and Dean have staged for us against our will and without our permission?

We wouldn't miss it for the world.

If you want to go to Denver for front-row seats to the tragedy, pick up your tickets here. We'll provide a plan, signs, permits, and a film crew. You provide yourself, your fanny pack, your righteous indignation, and your voice.

Darragh C. Murphy
Executive Director
Puma PAC

PUMA PAC FACT SHEET
By now you have heard about the PUMA movement: People United Means Action (which grew out of Party Unity My Ass).

Darragh Murphy, 39 year old, woman, from Boston, MA, email Murphy@pumapac.org.

Murphy on Fox and Friends
Murphy on New England Cable News

Murphy is the Founder and Executive Director of PUMApac.org, a political action committee (PAC) registered with the FEC and organized as a 527 Organization with the IRS.

Murphy brought the blog site www.blog.pumapac.org up on June 3, 2008 and had 30,000 hits in the first 8 hours and has maintained that intensity with ½ million hits in first 4 weeks.

Murphy and PUMApac have already raised tens of thousands of dollars and are on target to reach the $100,000 mark in July, 2008.

PUMApac is growing daily and transforming casual browsers into devoted members by the thousands. Within three days, members joined from every state (50 not 57), Washington DC and Puerto Rico.

Goals:
1. Changing the leadership of the Democratic National Committee
2. Reforming the primary system so that it reflects the principle of ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE
3. Supporting tho