Open Thread

Tell us what's on your mind.

How's the campaign going in your neck of the woods?

Ever hear Hillary speak in person?

Ever meet either of the Clintons?

What brought you to Hillary's campaign? Why do you support her historic run for the White House? In other words - what's your story?

Hillary Strong with LGB Voters

A new poll, conducted by Hunter College, finds Hillary Clinton is the strong favorite among LGB voters. The poll, a first of it's kind "ever conducted by a university-based team of scholars with a nationally representative sample of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGBs) Americans", shows Clinton with 63% of the vote, a full 41 points ahead of her closest rival. The poll was conducted with 768 respondents by from November 15th through November 26th, 2007.
Here is some of the sample's demographic information:

SEXUAL ORIENTATION: GENDER: Female Gay, lesbian, homosexual 51.2 51.1 Male Bisexual 48.8 48.9 AGE 18-29 30-44 45-59 60+ 30.2 32.2 28.6 8.9

The study found LGB voters were engaged in the political process. About a third of respondents said they were "very interested" in politics, while just over a fifth of the studies general population characterized themselves in kind. Over a third said they became more interested in politics during their "coming out" period.

LGBs were more likely than the general population to have contacted a government official in the past 12 months (23 percent to 16 percent). “These levels of civic engagement indicate that gay people can have a bigger influence on public policy than suggested by their relatively small share of the population,” said Patrick J. Egan, an assistant professor at New York University and another of the study’s investigators.

This level of involvement is important because these voters plan overwhemingly plan to participate in the primary process.

Nine in 10 LGB likely voters will vote in the Democratic primaries and 21 percent say that lesbian and gay rights will be the most important issue influencing their vote in 2008.

The three leading Democrats all score higher as viewed by the sample as supporters of gay rights than the Republicans.

72 percent of LGB likely voters consider Senator Clinton a supporter of gay rights, with Senator Obama at 52 percent and former Senator Edwards at 41 percent. On the Republican side, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was at 37 percent, followed by Senator John McCain at 13 percent. “These findings suggest opportunities. Clinton benefits from a high turnout in this very Democratic bloc; her opponents would benefit from making their stated support for gay rights more visible to LGB voters,” said Murray Edelman, a distinguished scholar at Rutgers University’s Eagleton Institute and one of the study’s investigators.

Indeed, in a potential match up between Hillary and so-called socially liberal Giuliani, Hillary wins in a landslide, though he does slightly better than a generic Republican vs. a generic Democrat.

If the 2008 election for president were being held today, would you probably vote for the ROTATE: Republican candidate or would you probably vote for the Democratic candidate? % of likely LGB voters % of likely LGB voters Hillary Clinton The Democratic candidate 88.4 90.8 Rudy Giuliani The Republican candidate 11.0 7.9

Over all, Hillary is strongly supported by LGB voters, with her Democratic counterparts trailing far behind.

Hillary Clinton 62.8 Barack Obama 22.3 John Edwards 6.5 Dennis Kucinich 4.5 Bill Richardson 1.2 Chris Dodd 1.1 Joe Biden 1.0 Refused 0.6

The study had a number of interesting statistics. For example, respondents by a large margin (by a margin of 60 to 37 percent) said it was wrong to remove transgendered americans from discrimination legislation to get it through Congress. While enacting employment non-discrimination laws was one of the two most important policies for these LGB voters (59% ranked it as an extremely important goal, along with securing spousal benefits), surprisingly 40% of respondents believed there is a national law making it illegal to fire someone for being gay, lesbian or bisexual.

The study finds these voters are one of the most engaged social groups in american politics. Clinton's support from these active voters could help her immensely in the nominating process and beyond.

*This study was made possible by a grant from the Human Rights Campaign.

Setting the Record Straight AGAIN (UHC & Mandates)

I’ve been writing about the dust-up between Hillary & Obama over their health care plans lately (more than I expected to) – mainly because there seems to be something new each day that needs to be set right. Today’s no exception.

The Chicago Tribune had a good article up Tuesday about the latest round in this dust-up.

The two Democratic candidates have been sparring in recent days over health care, with Clinton charging that Obama's health plan would not offer true universal coverage because he would not require all Americans to buy into a plan as she would. Obama has countered that his proposal offers guaranteed access at lower costs.

"One of the things Sen. Obama takes credit for as a state senator is a health care task force that looked into the question of how do you provide universal health care in Illinois," Clinton said. "[That report] was clear: if you want universal health care you have to have a mandate."

So here’s what caught my attention this evening...

Source

In Wednesday's Chicago Tribune, the Obama campaign claims that Hillary opposed an individual mandate for health care in the 1990s:

Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said Clinton was opposed to an individual mandate when she was pushing for health care reform in the 1990s.

That's false. In fact, Hillary’s 1993 plan—the Health Security Act—included an individual mandate.

That link just above? That’s Hillary’s health care plan from 1993. Read it guys – you might learn somethin’ ;o)

More from that Chicago Tribune article...

Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said Clinton was opposed to an individual mandate when she was pushing for health care reform in the 1990s.

snip

Clinton's campaign later challenged any suggestion that she ever wavered in supporting a mandate.

"The Obama campaign is flat wrong," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. "Sen. Clinton has always believed that an individual mandate is key to achieving universal coverage which is why the Clinton administration's 1993 health security act contained an individual requirement."

Clinton, meanwhile, pointed out that Obama's proposal does require parents to provide coverage for their children.

"So, it's not that he's against mandates and doesn't understand that there are a number of ways of implementing them," she said. "He got up to the edge of whether or not to support universal coverage and backed down because it is a more difficult goal to achieve."

Clinton said she is puzzled by Obama's approach.

"Sen. Obama now criticizing a mandate, when he has one in his own plan, when he helped to set up a task force that says there has to be a mandate," she said. "And there are lots of ways to do it, through default enrollment, through going to schools, workplaces to enroll people."

(emphasis mine)

Now I’ve also heard quite a bit about Hillary’s recent switch to a more aggressive campaign style. Here’s what she had to say about all that...

"I have for months tried to stay positively on the issues, to talk about what I will do as president, to set forth my credentials and experience, the strengths that I think I bring to the position," she said. "But I have been attacked pretty regularly by my two leading opponents, and it's gone on for months. So, at some point, as we get toward the end of these campaigns, you have to stand up and rebut what people are saying and put out the contrasts and that is what I intend to do."

Not a bad article – thought it was worth sharing here. Check out the whole thing – it’s long but it’s well worth taking a look.

I wrote most of the above last night but there’ve been a few new developments between saving the draft, and my coming back to it this evening...

Marc Ambinder at that Atlantic had this to say about Obama’s continued instance on repeating the lies about Hillary’s position on mandates back in the ‘90s...

What Clinton opposed was an a la carte mandate proposed by John Chafee, one that would have scrapped the entire employer based system in favor of a government mandate that everyone purchase insurance -- without a government guarantee of help to those who couldn't afford it.

Snip

Chafee's plan was called by Democrats the "individual mandate" plan, which sounds enticing to today's ears... but it's not the same as the plan Clinton proposed in September of 2007, which includes generous government subsidies for the poor and a menu of options for small businesses (a very modified version of "pay or play").

Snip

"For that is how most of my colleagues, Republican and Democrat, enter the Senate...their words distorted, and their motives questioned," Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope. As Senator Clinton might today say: "Indeed."

And finally, they wrap this all up on Fact Hub by pointing to something that’s got me more than a little steamed. People have been spending the past two days correcting Obama’s claims about Hillary’s stand on mandates back in 1994. Hillary did not oppose mandates back in the 90s, and yet here we see that Obama’s repeating his lies about her on his website. From Fact Hub...

A rival campaign is circulating a speech Hillary gave on February 15, 1994 and falsely claiming she opposed an individual mandate. In fact, her 1993 legislation included an individual mandate. Hillary learned a lot from her experience fighting for universal healthcare in 1993, and has changed some of the ways she approaches the issue to reflect that experience. But she has never wavered from her belief that you simply cannot cover all Americans without including an individual requirement.

In 1994, there was a Republican plan by the late John Chafee that would have replaced the employer-based health care system with individual market insurance and a stand-alone individual mandate. At the time, people commonly used the term "individual mandate" to refer to Chafee's plan. Her criticisms were of the Chafee plan – and the challenges of abandoning the employer based system that insured most Americans -- not of the concept of individual mandate itself.

Notwithstanding these concerns, Hillary praised the late Senator for having the goal of covering all Americans. This stands in contrast to Sen. Obama's plan, which leaves out millions of Americans.

UPDATE: The Obama campaign has posted these inaccurate claims about Hillary on its website. Hillary supported an individual mandate in the 1990s; that's why she included it in her plan that built on the employer-based system. Here's then Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos appearing on CNN on February 3, 1994:

The problem is that there are very few ways to guarantee that every American can get insurance. You could go for a tax, which the president doesn't want to do. He thinks that's wrong. Pretty much the only other way to guarantee that is some combination of an employer mandate and an individual mandate, some way to guarantee that people get their insurance coverage. We think that that's essential.

As explained above, all of the quotes listed on the Obama campaign’s website refer to the late Sen. Chafee's stand-alone individual mandate. Hillary's plan today has an individual mandate but, unlike Chafee's, builds on the employer-based system.

Ahem... she was talking about CHAFEE’s PLAN for feck sake! How many times does someone have to explain that to him???? How many people have to point that out to him?

HULLO????

Ya know... its one thing to go after your opponent by “pointing out the differences” between your plans, records and proposals. But in this case, Obama’s trying to excuse his lack of courage in failing to make sure we’re ALL covered by his health reform plan by pointing to Hillary and claiming she did it too.

And dammit – that’s just flat out wrong.

He’s wrong on the facts.

And he’s wrong in that he’s perpetuating this lie on his website.

Cross-posted at DailyKos, MyDD & Booman Tribune

Hillary and the Granny Vote

Through out the campaign season, Hillary has reached out to a natural constituency, older women voters. She's vowed to strengthen and protect social security, improve health care, and crack down on con artists who prey on older americans. In Iowa, anecdotally atleast, it seems Hillary's outreach is working.



Now, I'm partial to Grannies. I was close to my Granny(Granny Ida). And, when I read about these little old ladies coming out to see Hillary, I think of her. Granny Ida was a tiny, white-haired, midwestern, big hearted woman. Lot's of energy. Always cooking or baking for the family, though she never would share her recipes. She gave me these prayer books every month, some of which I still have. She probably wasn't politically active, but she was smart. A good investor. There was a wildness of spirit to her. She was a notorious lead foot, and kept cruising well into her 80's. I tend to think she might have liked Hillary's spunk. But I digress.

So what about these Grannies in Iowa? Patrick Healy, of the New York Times, sets the stage:

"They usually sit in the front row — to hear her better, to see her better and to make sure they have a chance to shake her hand. Some lean on canes. Some have traveled a great distance. Some have never been to a political event before."

Apparently, Hillary's campaign has been careful to recruit older women voters in Iowa, and currently boast 479 of these voters, ages 90 to 110. The campaign believes these women, often the oldest among a family, could help recruit more voters. According to Ann Lewis:

"These women are the heart of their family network. The 90-year-old mother or grandmother whose opinions really resonate all the way through the family.” Ms. Lewis added that they had come out for Mrs. Clinton in other states with early nominating contests."

Despite that Hillary has targeted these voters with specific plans, in interviews with nearly 20 voters in their 70's to 80's, it was the qualities these women saw in Hillary, her "intelligence, confidence and capability", that are at the heart of their support. These women feel those attributes will help Hillary deal with the challenges that await the next President.:

"I think a woman, as head of the military, would be more apt to keep our boys at home than a man,” said Dorothy Weddell, 85, who attended a Clinton event Saturday in Sac City, Iowa. “I’m a Republican, but I vote for the person. And she seems more willing to work things out and compromise."

The historical sigfinicance of her candidacy also drives support among these voters. 87 year old Ruth Smith, who traveled 160 miles to see Hillary speak, touched on this, saying:

"I told her that my grandmother was the first person in town to vote, and my mother was the second,” said Mrs. Smith, who was born three months before the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920. “And I told her I was born before women could vote, and I want to live long enough to see a woman in the White House."

Some of these women have never caucused or have not in several years, even decades, but Hillary inspires them:

"I’ve never caucused before, but I never felt motivated — and then here comes Hillary,” said Gwen Whitehill, 78, of Shenandoah, Iowa. “Women have brains, just like men, and sometimes they have attributes that kind of outshine a man."

The Clinton campaign asserts they are taking nothing for granted. New caucus goers often don't show. And, there are other older women voters who are not comfortable voting for a woman. But, for now atleast, Hillary seems to have an edge with the Granny vote:

"A lot of them believe a woman’s place is by the cookstove, Mrs. Smith said. “But I think Hillary’s a very capable girl."

Individual Mandates and Universal Health Insurance

The most important difference between the health plans put forth by Obama, on the one hand, and Edwards and Clinton, on the other hand, is that of individual mandates. Simply put, Edwards and Clinton would mandate that individuals purchase health insurance, whereas Obama would not. Are individual mandates a good thing or a bad thing?

I believe that individual mandates are highly advantageous, for the following reasons:

Universality

If one of the goals of health reform is to ensure universal health coverage, then why abandon that goal before you even start? It is sometimes argued that individual mandates won't ensure universality, pointing to the examples of mandated auto insurance. This, however, is a faulty comparison: auto insurance is not sold on a sliding scale basis.  Both the Edwards plan and the Clinton plan suggest tax credits that would in effect make health insurance less expensive for people with lower income. Besides, the question that should be asked is not "do individual mandates guarantee 100% coverage" but rather "do individual mandates guarantee substantially higher coverage than lack of such mandates".  I don't think you could argue in good faith that substantially higher coverage couldn't occur.

People also question how individual mandates might be enforced.  A commenter at Bleeding Heartland suggests that this could easily be tied to the income tax structure, as is done in Canada:

One way on how it could be done is if you have purchased a plan it shows up on the income tax form, if not, then you pay for a public plan.  If your income is at a certain level you get subsidies or you don't pay.  There are a number of ways to deal with it without it becoming an enforcement nightmare.

(Of course even Obama's plan will have to address the issue of enforcement, as it too includes a mandate, but only for children. Nevertheless there would need to be some way to enforce that.)

Others have pointed out that any universal health plan includes an individual mandate, whether paid to an insurance company or through taxes.  While discussing plans debated in California, Ezra Klein addresses the issues of universality thusly,

I'm hearing a lot of hating on the individual mandate* -- and I don't get it. Some are complaining that the mandate "criminalizes the uninsured," others are saying "The uninsured shouldn't have a financial penalty onto top of the health and financial consequences of being uninsured." So let me try and say this clearly: Single-payer health care is an individual mandate. The enforcement mechanism, in that case, is taxation. If you don't pay your taxes, you're breaking the law. If you decide to withhold the portion of your taxes that go towards health care, you're a criminal. In fact, there is absolutely no universal health care system that wouldn't include a mandate of some kind -- that's how you make it universal.

Some plans put forth by Republicans that include individual mandates have failed to provide enough relief to low-income families.  However, if such relief is offered, individual mandates are both fair and important toward achieving universality and affordability.

Affordability

A major challenge for any health reform is making coverage more affordable.  This becomes much more difficult if you allow the young and healthy to opt out.  Again, I defer to Ezra Klein's simple explanation of the matter:

Indeed, without a mandate, you can't have a decent health system: If the healthy can opt-out until they get sick, coverage will be unaffordable for everyone. For a risk pool to work, it needs members at low risk.

The same principle would be at play in a single payer system.  People would have to support the system through their taxes even if they are young and healthy.  It is this principle of mandatory inclusion of all, both the healthy and the unhealthy, that makes universal health insurance affordable.

Getting a Plan Through

Of course the most important element of any plan is getting it passed.  Some might think that Obama's plan would be easier to achieve because it is less ambitious.  But, ironically, in this case it would likely be easier to get the more ambitious Edwards and Clinton plans through.  Why?  Because the high demands they make on the insurance companies (i.e., that they guarantee a certain level of coverage to everyone, no matter what there pre-existing conditions) are offset by a benefit to insurance companies (a much larger pool of insured, due to individual mandates).  If you remove this "carrot" of a much larger pool, you will have insurance companies fighting this tooth and nail, and it will be much more difficult to get up to 60 votes in the Senate without otherwise further weakening the program.  Interestingly, though, as pointed out above, this is not just a benefit to the insurance companies, but it is an overall advantage to the program as it helps bring us closer to universality and brings down costs for everyone.

Experts Speak Out

Numerous health care experts have spoken out about the need for an individual mandate. Here are just a few excerpts:

Kaiser Family Foundation's Diane Rowland: 'An individual mandate is the only alternative to government provision of coverage if you hope to achieve universal healthcare.'

Urban Institute's John Holahan: 'Implementing universal coverage requires an individual mandate.'

New American Foundations' Len Nichols: ‘Programs that do not require participation will never approach universality.’

United Hospital Fund: 'An individual mandate is required to achieve universal coverage.'

California Medical Association: ‘There will be no significant improvement in health care coverage without some type of mandate.'

Summary

In summary, individual mandates are a win-win situation.  When accompanied by tax credits to individuals to make health insurance affordable (as the Edwards and Clinton plans do), the main opposition to them comes from right-wing groups such as CATO, which view them as a "slippery slope to national health care."  That's hardly a reason for progressives to oppose them.

People can judge for themselves whether this is an important enough issue to sway their support for a candidate.  And, left unsaid in this diary are the somewhat smaller differences between the Edwards and Clinton plan (are the differences between all three of these plans and Kucinich's single player plan).  Those will have to be discussed elsewhere.

I look forward to your comments.

NH First Lady Endorses Hillary

Today, Hillary recieved the endorsement of a fellow First Lady, Susan Lynch, wife of New Hampshire Governor John Lynch. Ms. Lynch is a pediatrician and child obesity activist. She sited Hillary's long standing commitment to children and families in her endorsement.



In a statement preceding an appearance with Hillary, Susan said:

As a mother and as a pediatrician, I share Hillary Clinton’s commitment to fighting for children and families. We face big challenges, and I believe Hillary Clinton is the best candidate to deliver the changes we need.

Ms. Lynch will serve as national co-chairwoman of Hillary's presidential campaign. She is a former Dean supporter who was a member of "Doctors for Dean," in 2004.

Governor Lynch plans to remain neutral in the race, but this endorsement from his wife is a good one for Hillary.

Iowan Paints Head for Hill

News from the Trail in Iowa:
According to the Desmoines Register, Hillary recieved a nice show of support in Sioux City, Iowa today, where she unveiled her plan to help children and families affected by autism. Iowan Mary Worden-Fiedler, who is undergoing chemotherapy, showed her support for Hillary quite literally, painting her head to replicate Hillary's logo with the help of friend and artist, Brenda Schoenherr-Thelen.


Worden-Fielder made the most of a bad experience, using her head(pun intended) to creatively support the candidate of her choice:

In August, doctors discovered cancer on one of the tonsils she'd had removed. Hoping to save her hair, she didn't shower for two weeks after her chemotherapy started. It didn't work. We both bawled when my hair fell out, she said, gesturing to her friend, Brenda Schoenherr-Thelen, an artist. Then I said, No, we're going to have fun with this. Whipping out some brushes and acrylic paint, Schoenherr-Thelen covered the dome of Worden-Fiedler's head in blue, then copied the Hillary striped logo.

Apparently, she has been personally affected with autism:

A mother of five who is divorcing her husband, Worden-Fielder has four adopted children and one is foster daughter she hopes to adopt. Two have autism and one has fetal-alcohol syndrome.

Mary likes Hillary's positions on a number of issues:

Worden-Fiedler was impressed with Sen. Hillary Clinton's speech today in Sioux City on autism research, expanding AmeriCorps, and tax credits for college.

She's not a usual at the Democratic caucus:

Taking a deep breath, Worden-Fiedler said after the event, I'm jumping the tracks. A registered Republican who has always voted straight-ticket Republican in the past, Worden-Fiedler said she now intends to caucus for Clinton.

Hillary is lucky to find such spirited support in Iowa.

Clinton addresses autism

Hillary Clinton unveiled a plan today to help children and families affected by autism. As I am both the father of a three-year-old son with autism and a professor of education, I took special note.

The number of U.S. children diagnosed with autism has skyrocketed from 1 in 10,000 in 1993 to 1 in 150 in 2007. It's unknown yet the extent to which that represents an expanded epidemic and the extent to which it simply represents changes in diagnosis. In either case, though, very large number of Americans and their families are affected by autism.

Clinton's plan, released today, calls for about $700 million a year to address autism through the following initiatives:

Expanding research to identify causes of autism and monitoring its impact across the country

Creating an Autism Task Force charged with investigating evidence-based treatments, interventions, and services

Providing planning and demonstration grants for services for adults

Improving access to post-diagnosis care

Providing teacher training

Creating a National Technical Assistance Center

Guaranteeing quality, affordable health care

Some of these initiatives had been announced previously by her campaign, such as her health care plan and her plan to double funding for the National Institute of Health (NIH). Others are new including creating Centers of Excellence in Autism Specrum Disorder Epidemiology, investigating possible environmental causes of autism, creating a national task force to provide recommendations on treatments, interventions, and services, and establishing state-based demonstration grants.

All in all, it's a comprehensive plan that deals with identification of causes, post-diagnosis treatment, new teacher training initiatives, and enhanced treatment of adults.

The plan demonstrates excellent knowledge of the precise issues required to address this problem. For example, with large numbers of children with autism entering schools, the teacher training initiative is especially important. Similarly, aspects of the plan that emphasize early intervention are consistent with everything we know about the value of addressing autism as early as possible.

As far as I know, no other presidential candidate has ever put forth such a comprehensive plan to address the challenge of autism. It speaks to many of the concerns of those of us in the autism community.

Autism experts and organizations spoke up loudly and clearly on behalf of the plan:

"The Autism Society of America welcomes Senator Clinton's integrated plan to support Americans with autism and their families throughout their lives. The United States is facing ballooning annual costs for a medical condition that is identified too late and treated incompletely. The investment our nation makes today in early identification, services and support will create opportunities for these individuals to contribute meaningfully in our society--as is their right. Senator Clinton's plan is a very important step in that direction.- Lee Grossman, President and CEO, Autism Society of America.

"Senator Clinton’s proposal is a comprehensive plan that will help children and adults living with autism and their families today and in the future. It’s not enough to support research aimed at finding the cause and cure for autism spectrum disorders. We must also increase the availability of services to help meet the needs of people with autism today." -James E. Williams, Jr., President and CEO, Easter Seals

"Recognizing the autism epidemic as a national public health priority deserving of Presidential attention, Senator Hillary Clinton today endorsed and detailed a number of policy positions long-supported by Autism Speaks and its predecessor organizations and long-needed by the many American families facing the challenge of autism." - Autism Speaks

The plan builds off of Hillary's lengthy history of commitment to issues effecting children, education, and public health. As Senator, she cosponsored the Combating Autism Act and introduced the Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act. She has consistently supported full funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, through which children with autism and other disabilities are eligible to receive special education services.

Her comprehensive plan on autism released today reconfirms that Hillary has the best understanding of, and the strongest commitment to, issues of concern to children and adults with special needs. I am proud to cast my vote for someone who I know will do her best to protect and defend the interests of my son and of all those with special needs in our society.

Hillary Favored by Small Business Leaders

According to Bloomberg News, Hillary Clinton is the favorite among small business leaders who normally lean Republican. This resonates with me as an MBA and a small business owner(actually, it's my husband's business, which I am in the process of stepping away from, but I helped him develop it, and plan to open my own business in the near future). Hillary has crafted plans that work for small business, particularly her health plan, which allows business owners access to affordable health care for themselves and their employees, while also exempting the truly small business from financing health care for their employees. The study also finds a majority of small business owners are in support of regulated health care.



According to the report:

MarketTools Inc.'s Zoomerang online survey about the 2008 presidential candidates drew more than 1,000 responses. Of those, 22 percent said they prefer Ms. Clinton over other candidates in either party. Republican Rudy Giuliani, a former New York mayor, was second, with 17 percent. The survey suggests a change in attitudes toward health care, a leading issue for Ms. Clinton, 60. As first lady in 1993, she encountered resistance from small-business owners when she led an effort to overhaul the nation's health care system. In the Inc.-Zoomerang survey, 57 percent of respondents said that a regulated system would be good for businesses. "More entrepreneurs are identifying as independents, and they are more open to Clinton and to regulated health care," Jane Berentson, editor of Inc., said in a statement.

Open Thread - Post-PigOut Edition

So how was your Thanksgiving holiday?

What's on your mind - talk to us!

One Hard-Working Lady

There’s a great article in today’s online version of the Concord Monitor about Hillary’s campaigns for the Senate in New York in 2000 and in 2006. In reading it, I noticed a great deal of parallels between her efforts in New York then, and her national campaign for the presidency now. I also think this speaks to the whole polarizing issue, and in looking at her past campaigns you’ll see how she’ll overcome the haters in the general election next year.

Hers was a simple strategy, designed to humanize a woman nearly everyone thought they knew: Go to out-of-the-way, overlooked reaches of the state. Make conversation with dairy farmers and small-town teachers, as well as big city movers-and-shakers and members of black churches. Plunge into the middle of crowds to sign autographs and shake hands - even if it means facing opponents. And listen.

The article goes on to describe how Hillary tackled her first run for the Senate...

Running for Senate, Clinton learned to talk dairy cows.

"She went to very, very rural places, and the thing that I think really struck people . . . was how hard she worked to know the subject," said Sue Montgomery Corey, chairwoman of New York's Essex County Democratic Committee. "My mother, she was shocked about how much Mrs. Clinton knew about dairy farming, the details of dairy farming."

Clinton's visits upstate showcased her inner student. The issues facing the upper reaches of the state - loss of manufacturing jobs - differed dramatically from those of New York City. She seemed to read up on it all: the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact, upstate job creation statistics and Medicaid financing.

In other words, she’s wonky when it comes to her attention to detail. She learns the issues inside and out. (How refreshing is that after all these years with bush in charge????).

And her hard work paid off – she won that first race and went on to be her opponent handily in her reelection bid.

In the end, Clinton won her first bid for elected office by a larger margin than either side anticipated. For Lazio, it was a costly loss: Together, Giuliani and Lazio spent roughly $55 million to Clinton's nearly $30 million, according to the New York Times. In five months, Lazio had raised $33 million.

Snip

Last year, Clinton trounced former Yonkers mayor John Spencer in her bid for re-election, earning nearly 67 percent of the vote and capturing some upstate counties that she lost in 2000. While she carried just 15 of New York's 62 counties in 2000, she won 58 last year.

"You probably won't find people in this area walking around talking about how much they love Hillary Clinton," said Feinberg-Duckett, the Allegany County Democratic chairwoman.

"But you will find people walking around and talking about how much she's done."

One thing that article left out regarding her win in 2006... she took 36 of the 40 counties won by Bush in 2004. She could have won reelection without her margin of victory in New York City, her victories upstate were that huge.

And in case you haven’t noticed, Hillary’s working 24/7 to get out there and shake as many hands as she possibly can. She’s learned from her NY campaigns – the best way to overcome the lies and distortion from the righties is to give folks the chance to meet her one-on-one and let them know who the real Hillary is.

It worked in upstate New York, and it’s working now as she travels the country in her historic run for the White House. This will prove useful in countering the BS by the haters should she make it past the primaries and into the general election.

Army to Wounded GIs – Get Hurt? Repay Signing Bonus

Talk about adding insult to injury. Literally! I thought I was beyond shock and disgust when it came to Bush & the folks at the Pentagon, but this one really is beyond the pale...

Source

PITTSBURGH (KDKA) ― The U.S. Military is demanding that thousands of wounded service personnel give back signing bonuses because they are unable to serve out their commitments.

To get people to sign up, the military gives enlistment bonuses up to $30,000 in some cases.

Now men and women who have lost arms, legs, eyesight, hearing and can no longer serve are being ordered to pay some of that money back.

The article then goes on to tell us about a young man who was hit by an IED, knocked out, suffered injuries to his back and lost his sight in one eye. And how do the jerks running this war thank this kid for his service?

A few months later Fox was sent home. His injuries prohibited him from fulfilling three months of his commitment. A few days ago, he received a letter from the military demanding nearly $3,000 of his signing bonus back.

Well Hillary must have heard about this kid in Pittsburgh and others like him, and I don’t think she’s impressed with the way our Vets are being treated by the Pentagon. She fired off a letter demanding the Army change it’s policy, as posted in the following press release...

Senator Clinton Calls on Pentagon to End Outrageous Requirement that Wounded Soldiers Return Signing Bonuses

Legislation to Guarantee Full Payment to Veterans to be Introduced by Clinton

Senator Hillary Clinton today called on the Pentagon to immediately end a policy that requires repayment of enlistment bonuses by medically discharged wounded soldiers. She also requested that the Army disclose the number of wounded soldiers who have been affected by this policy and promised to introduce new legislation to guarantee the fully payment of bonuses and incentives to wounded veterans.

In the wake of recent news reports of wounded combat veterans forced to repay thousands of dollars in signing bonuses to the Army because they could not complete their tour of duty (see: http://kdka.com/kdkainvestigators/military.signing.bonuses.2.571660.html), Senator Clinton sent a letter to Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, strongly urging a reversal of policy.

"Requiring soldiers who are being medically discharged to return their bonuses is outrageous. It dishonors their service and undermines the Army's solemn commitment to soldiers and their families," Senator Clinton said. "If the Administration does not reverse this misguided policy, Congress should pass legislation to set this right."

Senator Clinton announced that she will introduce legislation that requires the military services to continue to pay certain bonuses to a member of the Armed Forces who is medically retired or separated due to a combat-related injury. The legislation would amend Title 37 of the United States Code to guarantee full payment for various incentive payments for wounded servicemembers.

[A copy of Senator Clinton’s letter is attached].

November 21, 2007
The Honorable Pete Geren
Secretary of the Army
Department of the Army
Washington, D.C. 2031

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I write to request the immediate reversal of an Army policy that requires repayment of enlistment bonuses by medically discharged wounded soldiers. According to recent media reports, the Army is directing wounded soldiers who have been medically discharged to repay their enlistment bonuses because they are unable to complete their term of enlistment. This policy is outrageous and should be reversed immediately. Soldiers who have enlisted in the Army have made a commitment to serve our nation. With our nation at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should honor those who make that commitment. By agreeing to serve and then suffering wounds during their service, these soldiers have earned their bonuses. To ask soldiers who are being medically discharged to return their bonuses dishonors their service and undermines the Army's stated commitment to soldiers and their families.

Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, wounded soldiers have faced numerous bureaucratic hurdles that have resulted in treatment that does not measure up to their service and sacrifice. Whether it is the disgraceful treatment as outpatients at Walter Reed Army Medical center or the pay problems experienced by wounded soldiers, many wounded soldiers have been treated with indifference and neglect.

As a Senator on the Armed Services Committee, I have continuously raised the problems faced by wounded soldiers to Army leadership at hearings, meetings, through correspondence and by offering legislation. At each point, I have been assured by the Army and Defense Department leadership that they are working to improve the treatment of wounded soldiers. In light of this history, it shocks the conscience that the Army could demand that wounded soldiers return their enlistment bonuses.

Therefore, I again request a reversal of the flawed policy of requiring wounded soldiers to repay their enlistment bonuses. I also request any data that reflects the total number of medically discharged wounded soldiers who have been affected by this enlistment bonus repayment policy to date and the total amount of enlistment bonus repayment money collected to date.

With soldiers bravely serving every day in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, it is important that we demonstrate our commitment to soldiers and their families by reversing this flawed policy.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,
Hillary Rodham Clinton

Cc: The Honorable Robert M. Gates
Secretary of Defense
Admiral Mike Mullen
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Learn More About Hillary’s Plans Re Fulfilling Our Promises to Veterans

Hillary’s helping to pull in support & interest in a brand new blog dedicated to drawing attention to the issues faced by Vets and their families – it’s a project of VoteVets.org and it’s called VetVoice.com. Hillary’s posted a diary there and from what I’ve seen, there’ve been some fine responses to what she had to say there. She’s a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee so it’s probably a natural that she’d want to help draw in support and interest in this new effort by taking part in their forum. Go check it out if you get a chance.

I'm honored to have this opportunity to help launch VetVoice. This online community for our Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, I believe, will become one of the premiere sites on the Internet. There is no better use of time, energy, and space than providing a venue, a voice, to our Iraq and Afghanistan active duty, reserve, National Guard as well as the veterans and their families who give so much, everyday, for our nation.

To learn more and to get involved in efforts of vets & their families to help get Hillary elected, join National Veterans, Military Retirees and Families Steering Committee

The National Veterans, Military Retirees and Families Steering Committee comprises American military service veterans, military retirees, military families and survivors from across the United States. They are dedicated to electing Hillary Clinton President of the United States and are publicly supporting her around the country.

When I was a relative newbie at this whole candidate advocacy thing here, I posted a diary about an initiative of Hillary’s on behalf of our troops (Hillary Takes Action on Behalf of Our Troops (Lightening Round)). Like I said, I was still a newbie – the diary got all of 20 comments. In it, I talk about Hillary’s efforts to get FMLA coverage for family caring for wounded troops upon their return from their service. She took a report she’d received, crafted legislation to address a problem faced by thousands military families, and got that bill through the Senate in just a WEEK folks – quick action like that is nearly unheard of on the Hill but she got it done because she stands up for the people who stand up for us.



My diary also included links to some of Hillary’s other efforts on behalf of our troops and their families. Check it out – she’s been busy and it’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to her efforts on behalf of our troops.

Cross-posted at DailyKos.com

Standing Strong in the Weeks Before Iowa

Ok I know this is a relatively new site and this won’t get a lot of play on the net but on the off-chance that any of you see this, I just wanted to send a great big shout-out to the hard-workin’ folks on the ground in Iowa, New Hampshire and some of the other early caucus & primary states out there. You guys are kickin’ ass & taking names – knocking on doors, making the umpteenth phone call of the day, collecting signatures to get Hillary on the ballot, talking to friends & neighbors, showing up at campaign events and carrying Hillary signs in your local parades & at festivals.

With every sticker you hand out, every signature you collect, and every phone call you make you’re helping to win the day for Hillary in these early states. And those of us who can’t be there with you in person are there in spirit. So as the weather gets cooler and you dig out those mittens & hats as you head out to knock on doors or stand on queue waiting for your turn to step off in another parade, I thought I’d send this video out your way to help keep you all warm…



Consider this a huge "go-get-em" from your online flying monkey squad at HillarysBloggers.com

Stand strong folks! ;o)

By the way - Here's your chance to let the rest of us know how well things are going on the ground in your area. If you're helping out on the local level please leave us a note here in the comments. Use this forum to spead the word about how well the campaign's doing eh?

Hillary's Thanksgiving Message to Us All

Some of you might have noticed a new message on the homepage of Hillary’s campaign website. With the Thanksgiving holiday approaching, her thoughts (like ours) have turned to those who aren’t as fortunate as she is.

It takes a lot to run a presidential campaign and money's always an issue for her and the other candidates. But in this message, Hillary's not asking us to help her out with a donation. She's asking us to help people who are hungry.

Here’s her Thanksgiving message to all of us:

Dear Friend,

I hope that you and your family have a wonderful Thanksgiving. I love this holiday, and celebrating together with family and friends.

Thanksgiving is also a time to think of those in need. Every year I am inspired by the outpouring of generosity from all over the country. I hope that this year you'll share in that tradition, whether you volunteer your time or make a donation to help others.

At our campaign offices in California, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina as well as our headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, we're accepting donations of nonperishable food to help local efforts to fight hunger. If you're not near one of our offices in those states and would still like to give back this Thanksgiving, here are a few national organizations with information about how you can help.

America's Second Harvest - http://www.secondharvest.org/
1 800 Volunteer - http://www.1-800-volunteer.org/1800Vol/OpenIndexAction.do
End Hunger Network - http://www.endhunger.com/index.html
Hunger Free America – http://www.eifoundation.org/national/hfa/

This year, I'm so thankful to have you with me working for change. From my family to yours, have a very happy Thanksgiving.

Sincerely,

Hillary

You can also help out by dropping off food at her campaign offices – the addresses can be found at the following links…

California - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/hq/california/contact/
Iowa - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/hq/iowa/contact/
New Hampshire - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/hq/newhampshire/contact/
Nevada - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/hq/nevada/contact/
South Carolina – http://www.hillaryclinton.com/hq/southcarolina/contact/
And at her campaign headquarters in:
Arlington Virginia - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/

Here’s hoping you all have a warm, love-filled and safe Thanksgiving holiday. May we all have many things to be grateful for this time next year (especially a victory against the Republicans, and Hillary on her way to being the first woman president of our great land!).

An Evening w/ Hillary's Friend Lissa

I went to my first volunteers meeting in our county back in April, and the woman running the show told us about a former speech writer (and now friend) of Hillary's - Lissa Muscatine. Mary told us about how Lissa got loads of support from Hillary when she left her job briefly to have twins, and came back a tired new mom after her maternity leave. She's working on the campaign now and came to a coffee & dessert meet & greet one evening in Rockville MD. I went to lend support to the host - help her talk her friends & neighbors in to backing our gal.

Lissa expanded on that story about her work with Hillary in the White House. She talked about the way she got her job writing speeches for the First Lady - the exhaustive winnowing down of candidates, one sample speech after another... the works. And then she found out she was pregnant and let the head speechwriter (doing the hiring) know about her news. They told her she was still in the running if she still wanted the job.

She found out years later that at one point (I think it was after she found out she was going to have TWINS) they were sitting around trying to decide whether to bring her aboard (and very doubtful about choosing her), and Hillary walked in to the conversation. This was during her attempts to get health care reform through, and she's always been a huge advocate for women & kids. She said if the WH - HER OFFICE couldn't find a way to bring aboard a talented and dedicated staffer knowing she was going to be a mother - a working mom - then HOW could they expect other employers to hire women / working moms / moms to be?

She also told us a very personal story but since she’s discussing this at house parties I don’t think I’m telling tales by repeating some of it here…

Lissa talked about her dear friend Hillary – how after working and traveling together – after raising their kids together, Lissa got some bad news regarding her health. She had to go in for some tests and Hillary asked her to call her once she found out what was going on. When she hadn’t heard from Lissa she followed up and found out things were more serious than the doctors had first suspected. Hillary really showed Lissa what a friend she was – she told her “look I know you’re going through a rough time right now. I’m going to call you and check in each day but if you’re not up to talking just say the word and I’ll understand. Just know that I’m here if you need anything, and that I care.”

This is the kind of thing that goes on amongst the women of “Hillaryland”. The lady's not just talk - she's the real deal.

Lissa also told us about Hillary's trip to Beijing to speak before the UN Women's conference in 1995. Remember that speech she gave at that conference? Where she said ... that it would no longer be a novel idea "that women's rights are HUMAN rights'? Well this lady wrote that speech.

I couldn't wait to shake her hand after her speech and tell her what that speech has meant to me and millions of other women over the last 12 years. Lissa told me that they'd visit other nations in the years that followed, and she's lost count of the number of times women would come up to them with a battered and well-read / much-loved copy of Hillary's Beijing speech, and asked Hillary to sign it for them.

She reminded us that Hillary's visited some 82 nations around this world (Lissa's traveled to about 30 with her) and that without fail, Hillary makes a point of sitting down with people - regular folks like us - in each nation that she visits. Nations where the meeting I attended this evening were illegal and going to one could get you killed. She met with them and in some cases - still stays in touch with the people she's met in those nations.

Lissa's one heck of a speaker and she did Hillary proud as a surrogate in Carol's living room this evening. If you EVER get a chance to hear her - or any of Hillary's other many and dedicated staff or friends speak - take it ;o)

Open Thread

Have at it folks - talk to me ;o)

New Hillary Ad

Let's talk about the social security cap

I'm what you might call a "tax and spend" liberal. If I were running for office, my Republican opponents could accurately attack me for saying there was never a tax that I didn't like.

However, I have serious qualms about Barack Obama's proposal to lift the cap on the social security tax. And while I am a professed supporter of Hillary Clinton, I will do my best to analyze the issue objectively. I appreciate your thoughts on the issue too.

Obama's Proposal

Currently, workers pay 6.2% of their income into social security, and their employees add a 6.2% payroll tax. Together this comes up to 12.4% of income. Self-employed people pay all the 12.4% themselves (plus 2.9% for medicare). All of this, however, is only on the first $97,500 of income.

Barack Obama proposes to lift this cap, thus subjecting all income above $97,500 to the tax. This would infuse a huge amount of funding into social security, ending any talk of it running out of money. It would also have less impact on the poor than other measures, such as raising the retirement age.

In spite of these apparent advantages, I believe there are several serious problems with the proposal.

Ending the Tax-Benefit Relationship

Currently, the tax is capped at $97,500, but social security benefits are capped as well. Somebody who earned $200,000 a year in their life will likely get no more social security benefits than somebody who earned $100,000 a year.

What happens then if we uncap the tax? Well, there are two choices. First, we could uncap the benefits also, thus squandering much of the new revenue brought in and effectively defeating the purpose. (I've never heard Obama or anyone propose this first alternative.) Or, we could leave the benefits capped.

But, if the taxes were uncapped and benefits remained capped, social security would effectively be transformed from an insurance plan that is funded by workers to a welfare plan that is funded by taxes. And, it would thus lose its special status. It would increasingly be attacked from the right and probably eventually undermined.

The far right has been trying to get rid of social security for decades. The only thing that has prevented them from doing it is the extremely broad public support for the program. If taxes and benefits are delinked, it is unlikely that that broad public support would continue.

A Trillion Dollar Tax

Obama may have accused Hillary of speaking like Romney or Giuliani, but he didn't even attempt to deny her point that this would be a new trillion dollar tax. Even if we assume that the wealthy are currently undertaxed in the U.S., this still poses several major problems. First, we need to raise taxes on the wealthy to fund other essential programs, such as universal health care. That will be politically untenable if we also try to completely lift the cap on social security. For example, lifting the cap alone would raise the tax rate for someone at the 33% level to 39.4% on their income over $97,500.

Secondly, this tax would not effect only employees, but also employers. I work at the University of California, where many professors and administrators earn over $100,000 a year. Raising the payroll tax would thus seriously affect the university's budget. It would thus have to either raise tuition, or seek more money from general funds (in competition with other badly needed programs throughout the state.) Many other academic, professional, and research organizations across the country would be similarly hit.

It is partly to address this matter that Edwards has floated the idea of lifting the gap but keeping a "donut hole," so that income between $97,500 and $200,000 would not be effected. If the cap were to be lifted, that could be a more feasible way to do so (and neither Obama nor Clinton have disavowed that idea). However, that's the kind of suggestion that could come out of a bipartisan commission later on, if necessary, and I see no benefit to the Democrats of proposing it now.

Handing a Weapon to the Republicans

The social security program is projected to run a $200 billion a year budget for the next decade. It is not in crises, and the main way to strengthen the program is to gain some fiscal responsibility and grow our economy. These points are well covered by Paul Krugman.

Sometime within the next decade it may need some tweaking to remain on a sound basis. As Hillary and Obama both suggest, the best way to accomplish that is through a bipartisan commission which could review a number of options and make suggestions.

It's unclear whether any removal or revision of the cap on taxes will ever be necessary. However, if it does become necessary, wouldn't it be far better if it were proposed by a bilateral commission? Why in the world would Democrats want to propose that now? All that accomplishes is (a) giving the Republicans a huge club to wield against us in the general election, (b) potentially making it more difficult for us to accomplish other more immediate priorities, such as universal health care (which itself might require substantial tax increases), and (c) potentially undermining public support for maintaining our national commitment to the social security program.

The bottom line? Even though I'm a tax and spend liberal, I have to agree with Paul Krugman on this--there is no benefit in seeking a huge new tax in support of a currently solvent program. Let's deal with more pressing priorities and let a bipartisan commission address this matter in the years ahead.

Open Thread - Debate (or anything else) Edition

Sorry for the delay in getting this up guys. Feel free to use this to discuss Hillary's awesome performance in the CNN debate in Las Vegas.

Go Hillary!

Yeah!

By the way folks - this is our 100th post here on this site. Let's get to 1000 in the next month or two eh? Tell your friends & family and help grow this site!

Campaigning From MD to IA: Three Degrees of Separation

I tagged along with Mary B - one of our local campaign’s fearless leaders as she represented Hillary at a Democratic Club gathering last night. Mary did a remarkable job in mapping out Hillary’s record, and fielding questions regarding Hillary’s plans for getting our nation back on track come Jan, 2009.

I ran in to an old friend I hadn’t seen in 10 years. Last I’d heard he was living in a different part of the state so it was a nice surprise to see him. He was there with his new wife and both are big Hillary supporters. In fact – his wife used to work for Mary when she served in the MD state legislature – small world!

This old friend of mine (like me) is a transplant. He moved out here from of all places... the battleground state of IOWA. I may not be able to drop everything to go out to Iowa & knock on doors, but I might just help convince a few of his relatives back in Iowa to support our gal.



That whole six degrees of separation thing is actually true. Only in this case – it’s just three degrees. Just goes to show you how every little bit helps when it comes to advocating for a candidate. By reconnecting with this old friend I may just fire him up enough to where he can convince all his friends & relatives in Iowa to support Hillary.

I guess there was a reason for me to be at that event last night, eh? Not only reconnected with a dear friend, but I may have just helped to convince a few Iowa caucus-goers to show up and support Hillary! It’s so true - every little bits helps right. It’s all good.

I’ve heard it for years but every now and then something happens that reminds me of just how important it is... these one-on-one chance meetings and conversations are what win elections. Not the ads – not the big rallies or speeches. But friends, neighbors & family chatting on the sidewalk, over a cup of coffee, or at public forums like this one last night. Face to face contact among folks who know, like and maybe even respect one another. Not the hollering and bickering on sites like this one.

At any rate, I thought I’d share this as a reminder that every effort we make on behalf of our candidate has a ripple effect in this election. I talk to a friend and he turns around and talks to his friends & family back home in Iowa. This is true now during the primaries – and it will be even more vital for us to keep this in mind during the general election next year. Make a point of never leaving your house without wearing your button. Get a bumper sticker on your car and make sure folks know you’re backing your gal or guy. Take every opportunity to talk up your candidate and explain why you’re supporting them. Be the face of their campaign in your community.

Speaking of advocating for a candidate (and you had to have known this was coming!)...

As many of you know, there’s a debate tonight in Las Vegas and the campaign’s trying to raise a million bucks before Hillary steps on to that stage tonight. To help with that effort, Bill sent out the following email to Hillary’s million plus supporters this morning...

I'll be watching when Hillary steps onto the debate stage tonight, and I hope you will too. Because if you are, I know you'll see what I see.

You'll see the most experienced and best prepared candidate for president in my lifetime. You'll see a candidate who is ready to lead from the day she steps into the Oval Office. You'll see someone who will make us proud every day she's in the White House, because she'll fight for what's right every single day.

But all her experience, strength, and great ideas for the future won't matter if she isn't our nominee. Your help is key to making sure she secures the nomination and takes on the GOP in 2008.

When she stands on that stage tonight, she won't be alone. She'll know that you're standing right there with her, thanks to the incredible outpouring of support you've shown over the past few days.

You've almost hit the goal: $1 million by the start of tonight's debate. Will you be the one to put Hillary over the top by making a contribution?

Click here to help us reach our $1 million goal by 8 p.m. EST tonight.

I've been where Hillary is now, in the final weeks before the first primaries and caucuses start. And I can tell you from my personal experience that the one thing that matters most down the homestretch is knowing that there is a depth of support that matches the effort you make on the campaign trail.

You have shown that level of commitment to Hillary's campaign before, and now -- as we enter the final phase of the primary campaign -- Hillary needs your help again.

If you want real change, if you want to end the war in Iraq, restore America's reputation in the world, provide affordable health care for all, create millions of good jobs in clean energy, and build a strong and enduring middle class, then Hillary's the candidate for you. But now is the time to reach down, dig deep, and make a difference for her campaign.

Will you help put us over our $1 million goal and send Hillary to the debate knowing the depth of your support?

Click here to help us reach our $1 million goal by 8 p.m. EST tonight.

I'm really looking forward to watching her tonight -- I always am. And you should make sure to catch this one too. Because you'll know, watching her on that stage, that you're there with her, making a difference.

I know she appreciates everything that you do for her campaign. So from her, and from me, thank you.

Sincerely,

Bill Clinton

P.S. We're almost at that $1 million goal -- let's send Hillary to that debate knowing about your remarkable support. And don't forget that if you make a contribution today, you might be joining Hillary for lunch during a day out on the campaign trail.

They’ve topped the $800,000 mark – can you help put them over the top right now?

CLICK HERE TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION

Meanwhile, there are two new polls out of Iowa today – both of which show Hillary with a lead over her rivals. Here’s one from Rasmussen...

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll of the Iowa Democratic Caucus for 2008 finds Hillary Clinton on top with 29%
John Edwards with 25%
Barack Obama with 21%

And ARG’s new poll...

Hillary 27
Obama 21
Edwards 20

# 92% of those saying they support Clinton say their support is definite.
# 50% of those saying they support Edwards say their support is definite.
# 41% of those saying they support Obama say their support is definite.

Good news going in to tonight’s debate. I can’t wait to see Hillary take on her rivals tonight – I know she’ll stand tall, take no crap from Blitzer or her rivals, and come out standing stronger than ever in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses on January 3rd – where (hopefully!) my friend’s cousins and other family & friends will be standing in Hillary’s corner!

DON’T FORGET TO SEND SOME LOVE HILLARY’S WAY – LET HER KNOW YOU’VE GOT HER BACK!

Thanks ;o)

Barney Frank Endorses Hillary

Barney Frank is my Congressman (representing Massachusetts's fourth district) and a personal hero. Following the '06 elections, Frank became Chair of the House Financial Services Committee for the US House of Representatives. Today Barney endorsed Hillary for President!

Here's a bit of what he had to say:

I have from the beginning of this campaign believed that Hillary Clinton was the candidate best qualified to serve as President,” Rep. Frank said. “I am convinced that once elected, the qualities she will bring to the job - commitment, intellect, and political skills - will make her an extremely effective leader in our effort to reverse the badly flawed course on which George Bush and past Republican Congresses have set this country.“I am particularly pleased by her commitment to reverse the economic policies that have created a situation in which as the country progresses economically, only a small number of Americans benefit. Her understanding of the need to implement policies that provide fairness for middle and working class people is very important. She has shown an ability to fight for progressive values in a way that is capable of appealing to the majority of our fellow citizens, and I believe that she is both politically and substantively the candidate best qualified to be our nominee.

Frank is an extremely popular figure, known for his pragmatism, integrity and humor. Frank is an ardent proponent of medical marijuana and a leader in the LBGT community. As an aside, I recently got to meet Frank(and his man) by chance at Washington National Airport. He's as friendly and humorous in person as he always appears in t