Here's an interesting email I just received from Democrats.com

Let's Escrow Our Money to Keep Obama Progressive

Last week, we asked 1,000 of you to contribute $10 to raise $10,000 to help progressive Democrats like State Senator Regina Thomas defeat "Bush Democrats" like Rep. John Barrow (GA12) in upcoming primaries. Your response was amazing: over 1,300 of you contributed over $60,000! Senator Thomas and our other "Replace Bush Democrats" candidates were thrilled by your support, and so are we!!

Now we are asking you to use your money to ensure that Barack Obama lives up to his promise to deliver "change we can believe in. "

How? By creating a progressive "escrow" fund that you control.

Cross posted at MyBarackObama.com, on Xysea's blog:

Hi,

I've only blogged once on MyBarackObama before, but this time I'm on a mission.  I have something to say to Senator Obama.

DON'T PLAY THE MIDDLE.

Someone wrote me this, and it really made me think.  Not about whether or not I'm clueless, because I'm not, but rather about what 'my planet' is all about.

What pathology (0+ / 0-)
is necessary for one to equate the forced taking of one's income by government for redistribution as "compassion"? Do you have any inkling of what true compassion is?

I really cannot believe someone could be so clueless. I may as well be asking the color of the sky on your planet.

A new MSNBC article today deals with some of the 'tax and spend' myths we've been hearing about Senator barack Obama.  Specifically, that his economic proposal will increase taxes.

Here's what the economists profiled for the NY Times had to say about that:

Economists of various ideological persuasions, however, view Mr. McCain’s assessment as inaccurate or exaggerated. Some question whether Mr. Obama’s tax plan can even be characterized as an increase. Some also argue that contrary to Mr. McCain’s assertions, the Democrat’s proposals, if enacted, would actually reduce taxes for the middle class — the voters both candidates see as the key to victory.

The original NYTimes article is here:

Will The Real Tax and Spender Please 'Fess Up?

Here we have a seemingly innocuous story about the housing crisis.  On the face of it, you might actually agree somewhat with the premise that Ed McMahon should not be the face of the housing crisis.  I know I do.  

I agree, Ed has a lot of resources.  But what's also true is nothing in this country addresses problems like a celebrity or a senator who feels the pinch himself. Ed McMahon probably isn't the best choice, but he's a celebrity (of sorts) and he attracts attention. So I guess I can understand the basis of his argument, as far as that goes.

Until you get to this buried nugget:

A lot of people hear the word "foreclosure" and immediately picture a family living in an alleyway or in a city shelter, but that's not usually the reality.

Hello, everyone!

I've been in a discussion with someone who states that 'felons vote Democratic, overwhelmingly'.  And I'm curious about it.  Where did this line start?  When I google it, all I get are right wing news outlets.  So, it sounds like an oft-repeated but unsupported conservative meme.

Does anyone have an idea of where this came from, and/or how to debunk it?  It seems to be the only thing the GOP can come up with to attempt a reclamation of 'higher moral ground'.

Sounds crazy, and desperate, I know.  But I'd rather be armed than unarmed, if I elect to pursue the destruction of this meme.

I'm not knocking Barack's victory.  In fact, I am quite pleased that a country that so many around the world felt was irredeemably racist could choose an African American to lead the party and expect him to win in November.  

Even in the 1990s, that was unthinkable.  Laughable for some, even.  Eddie Murphy did a famous bit about Jesse Jackson, wherein  drunk white people go to the polls and pull the lever for Rev. Jackson, wake up the next day, look at each other and say, "What?  He f***ing won?!!"

Yet no one can say this about Barack Obama.  We wouldn't dare.  He's earned it, and he deserves it and he got there fair and square.  It isn't about being a black man running for President; it morphed into being about the best person to run for President.

But this diary isn't about Barack Obama.

This will be a short diary, but I just wanted to say what a great exchange I had with a person who I thought - in a million years! - would never listen to me re: Barack and Michelle Obama.

The original post by this person?

Just goes to show you that the Democrats are as crooked as the nazi's (a.k.a. republicans) ...when it comes to SIEZING power as dictated by the media.......... who now run our country. (The lowly scum they are). If Hillary really wants change, maybe she has to disconnect from this bunch of hooligans and run as a third party candidate. I think she would win. Who wants a choice between a muslim extremist moron with his white hating wife... and John (alzheimers, Bush ) McCain? Not me. Not you. Not alot of people.Florida..... a chance to redeem. Failed attempt. It is Bull@#$@ .......... and now it's demo bull@$%@.  
Stinks the same, doesn't it?
d.

The generation gap, the age gap - whatever you want to call it.

I was perusing the NYTimes and commenting, as I usually do, and came across a post on Paul Krugman's blog; #5 by Elizabeth, that had me flabbergasted.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/...

In it, she stated that people of her age group (50+) were not interested in handing 'the keys' to Barack Obama.  Pure and simple, it was reverse age discrimination - and it may be a real problem, come election time.

Is this possible?  Yes.  Just use less.  

Keep tires properly inflated, oil changed, fuel filter clean.  Oh?

And just. use. less.  Group errands.  Give your car a 'Sabbath'.  Proclaim each Sunday as 'no driving day'.  Carpool to church, if you go.  A lot of them have vans that will pick you up, if you express an interest, especially for the elderly, poor and disabled.

Make a personal commitment and stick to it; every little bit you don't use helps keep the price down, and/or under control.

http://www.cnn.com/...

Read it and weep, folks.

This makes me feel especially bad today because a family member of mine has been laid off her job, and will be moving out of the area.  I will not relay too many details because she wants to keep it private for now, but suffice to say this 59 year old woman, mother of four, is going to live with her 80 year old mother because it's all she can afford to do.

I wish I could help her, but I am barely making it myself.

Sea-change.  I think this change is a good thing.  That is what we are seeing amongst the Democrats these days, and it's about freakin' time.  But, the Republicans aren't the only ones not 'getting it.'

This topic came up today in a conversation I had with a co-worker who is a male, unmarried Boomer.  It pissed me off, as a single parent who busts her butt ever day to keep out of poverty and who works just as hard as he does, probably harder.   He isn't going to retire for five more years, he says, because if he stays he can make an extra $350,000.   Geebus!  I'll be lucky if my pension is intact in 15 years when it's my turn to retire.  I'll be lucky if someone just like this guy doesn't gut it while I am still here so he can float down to the Bahamas in his golden freakin' parachute.   It made me want to cry and alternately pull my hair out!

A lot of these Boomers were also Republicans, who managed to 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' only to make it impossible for anyone else do to it in their lifetime.   A Boomer is president now, and while not representative of all Boomers, he's certainly not atypical.  

I was just thinking of this, in light of the Indiana voter ID issue.  I know that there are many objections to the use of ID to vote; I've never understood that since it seems that making sure the person voting is who they say they are makes perfect sense to me (but that is neither here nor there).  No, what I propose is a different solution.

A lot of the arguments against it are that lower income people cannot afford IDs with which to vote, that it is an unfair burden to place on them or they can't afford a copy of a birth certificate (which is required), or they have certain convictions or obligations that don't permit them to vote.

I'm not sure what we can do about people who owe the state they live in a lot of money.  That would be beyond the scope I envision, but why not create a fund to help poor people who can't afford documentation costs and IDs to purchase an ID to vote with (presuming their state doesn't give them out for free)?  In Florida, where I live, a regular ID is $3 bucks.  

It's just the germ of an idea, and I Googled it to see if there are similar programs out there.  If such a thing could help someone on a tight budget participate in the election, regardless of party affiliation, then I think it should be arranged.

I had this conversation last night with my SO - he's British.  And he doesn't understand why the US Constitution is considered sacrosanct and 'not amendable.'

I'm not the best person to ask this of, because I don't believe it is.  After all, we've added and repealed Amendments, including the Civil Rights Act in 1964, etc.  Clearly it is amendable.  If we want it to be.  But we don't seem to often want it to be.

What amendments are okay?  Additions only?  Subtractions?  Are we able to look back over the Constitution and see items that are in need of amending to currently reflect society's values?  

I'm tired of the GOP and its diehard supporters.  You know the ones I'm talking about, right?  The ones who can't see the quickly eroding forests on this planet because they're too busy chopping down trees, but who will tell people to not squander their resources and end up dependent on the government's tax dollars for a bailout.  (As we all know, those bailouts are reserved for corporations and more 'deserving' individuals...lol)

This Reverend Hagee debacle with Senator McCain is not just another political scandal in an already scandal-ridden world; it is indicative of the GOP's unspoken assertion that (a) the rules don't apply to them and (b) that they live and practice the politics of 'do as I say, not as I do'.

It's this mentality that is ruining the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/...

This diary is an expansion on comments I've made, and seen, time and time again.    

I've long made this assertion:  The American people will only go so far in protecting their own rights in this country, which is why the government invariably wins in the end.  They know we will only go so far, so all they have to do is be willing to go one step beyond that to shut us down.  Which is what they do, time and time again, while we cling to our grand notions of honorable debate, following the process and ineffective protesting.

This is not a diary advocating riots as a means of protest, it is merely to explore the particularly American reticence towards engaging with the government through such means, despite our vocal or hidden admiration for other societies and cultures who do choose to use riot as a legitimate means of taking back or seizing power from a government that has long overrun its checks and balances.  (See Tibet, France, Sweden, UK, Poland, Australia...with the exception of Tibet, these are NOT Third World countries!)

I knew it would happen soon enough, a glut of articles on frugal living, how to clip coupons and make a dollar stretch.  I wonder if this information is truly new to anyone?  

I've been living frugally for most of my life, not just in times of economic downturn; that includes limiting any eating out, buying things secondhand, buying store brands or growing my own veggies and herbs.  It's always been financially necessary for me to live within or voluntarily below my means; I couldn't afford credit because I couldn't afford to pay back anything I borrowed (other than my mortgage), especially with interest.   That's no longer true, but I lost my taste for mortaging my future.  

Being thoughtful and thrifty should not be a crisis-response tool, but a crisis-prevention tool.  This kind of standard of living adjustment is long overdue.

Moms' new battle: The food price bulge

How I learned to stop worrying and love the recession

A while ago, I left this community for a variety of reasons, personal and political.  I wasn't sure if I would be back, but I knew I needed a break from what I viewed as some extremely heavy-handed jockeying and outright nastiness.  I felt divided from the community, a failure, burnt-out and that I couldn't carry on under those burdens.

It's not that I couldn't take the heat, it's that I didn't want to.

See, I have this thing.  It's called a life.  And some of you folks out there, going into apoplexy about this candidate, or that injustice, really should consider getting one, too.  I mean that more kindly than it came out, but something's gotta give because we're doing a whole lotta flapping of the lips and our actions are betraying our words.

Because we need unity, balance, perspective, and something away from the PC - all of which are invaluable tools in a protracted fight.