Lynette Long

NEW MEXICO SPEECH - AUGUST 18,2008 As Delivered

NEW MEXICO SPEECH – AUGUST 18, 2008

Women’s Victory Tour

My name is Lynette Long. I am a feminist, a mother, a Democrat and an ardent Hillary Clinton supporter and I am voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin on November 4.

I want to start by saying something about the Democratic Primary. First let me say that I have a Master’s Degree in mathematics and I am the author of 14 math books. I’m a numbers girl and I naturally calculate and extrapolate numbers in my head.  The primary process consisted of fourteen caucuses and thirty-nine primaries.  Obama only lost one out of fourteen caucuses yet he lost twenty-one out of thirty-nine primaries.  You don’t have to be a mathematician to realize something smells fishy.   I first noticed something was wrong when I watched the returns from Texas come in.  Texas is unique in the Primary world because it has both a primary and a caucus - affectionately called the Texas Two-Step.  Hillary Clinton won the primary by four points, yet she lost the caucus which was held on the same day by twelve points. That’s a sixteen point swing with the same pool of voters on the same day. Almost four million people participated in both the primary and the caucuses.  If a poll with only 700 participants the margin of error is usually 3 or 4, then in a primary and a caucus, with millions of participants a sixteen point swing would be highly unlikely, very highly unlikely. What’s even more astounding, Obama came out five pledged delegates ahead in a state she won.  After questioning the likelihood of the Texas two step results, I decided to analyze the rest of the caucus results.  Washington State, Nebraska, and Idaho also held a primary and a caucus and the results were even more divergent than Texas results.  In Washington State, Clinton did thirty-two points better in the primary than the caucus, but all delegates were based on the caucus only.  In Nebraska, Clinton did thirty-four points better in the primary than the caucus, but the delegates again were only based on the caucus results. And finally in Idaho, Clinton lost the caucus by 62 points but lost the primary by 19 points.  And again delegates were awarded only based on the caucus results.  The divergent results in all four of these contests were partially the result of the disenfranchisement that is inherent in the caucus process since the elderly, mothers of school aged children and shift workers are less likely to attend caucuses.  But they are also the result of voter fraud intentionally perpetrated by the Obama campaign and voter intimidation by Obama supporters.   The result is that the primary was stolen from Senator Clinton.  Even without factoring in the caucus results, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama were only 4 pledged delegates apart at the end of the primary process.  Obama, Pelosi, and other senior Democrats paid superdelegates to cast their votes for Obama. Clearly the will of the people was ignored. The Selection of Obama over Hillary Clinton by the Democratic Hierarchy was a miscarriage of justice and my reason for my original contact with the McCain Campaign.

After the last Democratic Primary was over and it was clear Senator Clinton was not going to get the Democratic nomination, myself, and a small group of Clinton supporters met with Senator McCain.  I personally explained to Senator McCain that women comprise well over half of the population, yet you will not see a single picture of a woman on paper currency. Women are underrepresented in every branch of government and there has never been a female president or vice president. I personally asked Senator McCain to choose a woman for the Vice Presidential slot and to increase the number of women in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court. Senator McCain listened respectfully to my request. Little did I know then that he heard me and the millions of women of this country who have gone unrepresented in the Executive branch of government for far too long.

When I made similar requests of the Obama campaign, I was laughed at by the canvassers outside my home, told there weren’t enough qualified women by a member of his Finance Committee, and asked by a member of a policy committee why I was making such a stupid request. Gender is the most fundamental human characteristic. The first comment made when a child is born is either, “It’s a girl” or “It’s a boy.” From that second on, boys and girls live in parallel universes in the same culture. You can’t learn what it is to be a woman, unless you are one. You can’t have a government essentially devoid of women that knows what’s best for women. You can’t legislate for women, without women.

But by choosing Governor Palin as his running mate, Senator McCain acknowledged that men can fully never know what it is like to be a woman, a mother, a daughter, a sister - things Governor Palin knows all too well. Senator McCain chose the second only bi-gender ticket in American history reinforcing his image as a maverick. Choosing a Vice-President, was the first significant decision Senator McCain and Senator Obama had to make. Senator Obama talks about change but picked a running mate who is part of the Washington establishment. Senator McCain’s choice speaks for itself.

Obama is a brand just like any other brand.  Obama the Brand has a logo, a tag line, and a song.  But Obama the man is not the same as Obama the Brand.  Obama the Brand talks about new style politics, while Obama the man used Chicago style politics in every election.  Obama the brand is for women’s rights while Obama the man pays the women in his office 77 cents on the dollar compared to men.  And Joe Biden pays women 73 cents on the dollar.   Obama the brand is pro-Israel, Obama the man is not.  Obama the brand touts leadership while Obama the man voted present 130 times in the US Senate.  Obama the Brand claims change, while Obama the man picks a Washington Insider as his running mate. Obama the Brand is a post-racial candidate while Obama the man plays the race card at every turn, listens for 20 years to the racial teachings of Rev. Wright, and makes contributions exclusively to Trinity United Church of Christ, the NAACP and Care Africa.  Obama the man and Obama the brand are not one in the same.

I have given my loyalty to the Democratic Party for decades. My party, which is comprised primarily of women, has not put a woman on a presidential ticket for 24 years. My party was disrespectful to all women when they refused to nominate my candidate, Hillary Clinton, for president or vice president, even though she received more votes than any other Democratic or Republican candidate in history. My party stood silently by as Hillary Clinton was eviscerated by the sexist attacks of the mainstream media. My party’s candidate was mute when Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger openly mocked Senator Clinton from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ. My party’s candidate was silent when the rapper Ludacris released a new song calling Hillary a bitch. My party’s candidate choose Larry Summers, the former President of Harvard, who said women can’t do science and math. Well here I am Mr. Summers, let’s talk. Neither my party nor its candidate has demonstrated in this election that they hold women in high esteem.

When it comes to women, sixteen is a special number. Did you ever hear the song 16 candles.  Or the phrase “Sweet sixteen and never been kissed.”  Eight plus Eight is sixteen, four times four is sixteen, and 2 x 2 x 2 x 2.   But sixteen is special for other reasons. 

• Guess what percentage of the members of the House of Representatives are women?
• Guess what percentage of the members of the Senate are women?
• Guess what percentage of the governors are women?
• Guess what percentage of equity partners in Law Firms are women?
• Guess what percentage of Science Professors at MIT are women?
• And guess what percentage of US Presidents or Vice-presidents were women?
• Not 16.

How can having a country composed of 52% women with only 16% representation be fair?  How can it accurately represent the will of the people?  In fact, the United States ranks 69^th in the world with regard to women in government.

Sarah Palin is good for women.  She has kept the debate about women in government and feminism alive. She is helping us define a new brand of feminism that unites both Republican and Democratic women.  She has a chance to put a sledge hammer to the ceiling that Hillary Clinton put eighteen million cracks in.   I happened to be on an Alaskan Cruise when Governor Palin was nominated for Vice-President.  When we docked in Ketchikan my Blackberry was buzzing away with emails shouting, “It’s a girl.”  I thought, “Who is a girl?”  My friends are too old to be pregnant and I didn’t think my daughter would hold out on me.  As soon as I stepped on-shore, my tour guide told me their governor, Sarah Palin was the VP pick.  I can testify here today, that every person that I met in Alaska loved her.  Alaskans are proud of their Governor. 

I heard many people say they don’t think Sarah Palin is ready to be one heartbeat away from the presidency since Alaska has only 750,000 people.  Let’s get this straight.  Sarah Palin is only one of only fifty governors in the entire country.   If Alaska was a country, it would be the twentieth largest country in the world.  The unique topography, economy, population, and climate of Alaska, all make Alaska a challenging state to govern.  Home of the Alaska pipeline, Alaska hosts the majority of our oil resources and some of the largest fiscal projects in the country.  Alaska is home to indigenous peoples and remote towns that are not on the electrical grid.  Alaska is the only state in the Arctic climate zone and is profoundly impacted by global warming.  Alaska is home to diverse wildlife and consequently management issues. International relations are a major issue Alaska and I’m not talking about cab drivers. Alaska shares a border with Canada and ten miles across the Bearing Strait is Russia. Consequently it has a standing National Guard.  I don’t want to hear Sarah Palin is only governor of Alaska.  There is nothing only about Alaska.   

I do not agree with Senator McCain and Governor Palin on all the issues, but I don’t agree with any candidate on all the issues. I am emphatically pro-choice.  Being pro-choice doesn’t mean I am pro-abortion.  I would not want to trade places with any woman trying to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy or any mother trying to advise her teenage daughter on the same issue. It is not a choice most women make lightly.  But even though I will defend a woman’s right to choose, I will not surrender by vote to the Democratic Party out of fear of losing that choice.   I will not vote for a Democratic candidate I feel is unfit to lead, just to protect Roe V. Wade. The Democratic Party has blackmailed and bludgeoned women with Roe v. Wade for decades nullifying their power.   Women’s votes cannot belong to a single party, because if they do we are hostage to that party. Women make up 52% of the population and 56% of the electorate.  If Democratic and Republican women ban together we can elect any candidate or pass any bill.  We can change the world. 

No one knows what is going to happen during the next four years. In the recent past, the challenges to each President have been enormous.

When he took office, Harry Truman did not know that he would have to decide whether or not to drop the atomic bomb on Japan.

Lyndon Baines Johnson didn’t know that on April 4,1968, Martin Luther King would be assassinated, propelling the country into racial unrest.

George Walker Bush didn’t know that on September 11, 2001, terrorists would wage the greatest attack on US soil.

We need a President that is prepared to lead on day one - ready to handle any attack, any crisis, any financial emergency.

I cannot vote based on POLITICAL PROMISES and POLITICAL PANDERING.   But I can vote based on PRICIPLES and PATRIOTISM.  In Senator McCain and Governor Palin, I find two people with personal integrity and a love of their county --- individuals who not only talk the talk but walk the walk. I can work with that. I will vote for McCain-Palin. In fact, I’ve decided to try to win one vote a day for the McCain-Palin ticket. My new personal mantra is, “A vote a day, keeps Obama away.” 

Make no mistake about it, we are in a war.  I am not talking about the Korean conflict where our soldiers literally stand shoulder to shoulder with the troops from South Korea starring at the demilitarized zone the most heavily armed strip of land I the world.  I am not talking about Afghanistan where our troops search for Osama Bin Laden and the other terrorists that perpetrated nine-eleven.  I am not talking about Iraq, where over 100,000 of our young men and women are embroiled in a civil war.  I am talking about a war on our own soil, a fight for our way of life.  This war pits socialism against capitalism. Barack Obama may call it “income redistribution” but socialism by any other name does not smell sweet.  If we lose this war what we know as our way of life will disappear. This is a war between Barack Obama and John McCain.  You are the foot soldiers in this war.  Are you willing to fight for economic freedom or do you want to live in a socialist country?  Will you vote for John McCain and encourage everyone you know to do the same?  Our country needs you.  John McCain and Sarah Palin need you.  Join me on Election Day and save our country.  God’s speed.

I AM A FEMINIST AND I AM VOTING REPUBLICAN

Two weeks ago I published an article on my blog entitled, “THE X FACTOR.”   The article went viral and is posted on dozens of blogs.  I have received over 1000 emails commenting on my position as a liberal Democrat voting for McCain-Palin.  Most of the emails agreed with my position, but others called me Benedict Arnold, Lipstick Lady or Bill O’Reilly’s new squeeze.  My loyalty to the progressive women’s movement has been challenged because I have chosen to try a different approach to fight for women’s rights. I want to start by squashing all rumors.  No I am not stupid.  No I am not a closet Republican. And yes I understand the possible implications on Roe v. Wade by supporting a McCain-Palin ticket. 

A few days after posting the article I delivered a shortened version of the speech at a McCain-Palin Rally. An executive member of the National Organization for Women contacted me the very next day.  It was a friendly conversation tinted with sarcasm.  “How do you feel about your speech?” she asked me.  “Great.” I responded. “Why shouldn’t I feel great?  I gave a speech about women’s rights in front of a large audience.  I highlighted the underrepresentation of women in every branch of government, the sexism in the media, and the unfair treatment of Hillary Clinton by the Democratic Party.” “Where did you give your speech?” A rhetorical question deserved a quip answer, “Before thirty-thousand Americans.”  Republicans are Americans, aren’t they?   “By speaking at a McCain-Palin event people will think you are endorsing McCain.”  That’s the point, I am endorsing McCain-Palin.

I tried to explain to my comrade in arms that we have the same goals and that I stand on the same side of the issues with most other feminists. I am strongly pro-choice and will fight anyone who tries to interfere with a woman’s reproductive freedom. I believe in the economic and educational advancement of women.  I believe in equal opportunity and equal pay for equal work.  I believe in equal representation for women at all levels of government. I believe that only by achieving gender parity in the House, the Senate, the President’s cabinet and on the Supreme Court can women achieve real equality.  The problem is not where we want to end up, but how we are going to get there. 

I take offense that people think if I vote McCain-Palin that I am not a feminist.  If I am anything, I am a feminist.

• I have worked an entire lifetime to further feminist causes.  My first professional job was teaching remedial high school math to girls.  I stared a web-based business called color Math Pink to promote math achievement for girls and I was selected by the American Girl company to write Mathsmarts, a math strategy book for girls.    If I am anything, I am a feminist.
• I have researched sex-role stereotyping and gender issues and published dozens of articles in trade and professional journals including Working Mother, Essence, and Ms.   If I am anything, I am a feminist.
• I have fought for the rights of women rights every single day of my life.  I point out the dearth of photos of women in the New York Times to the lucky person who sits next to me on an airplane, the lack of pictures of women on money to the wait staff at a diner, and I have been in a decade long fight with the United States Post Office to put more pictures of women on postage stamps. If I am anything, I am a feminist.
• I coined the term “latchkey children” and defended the rights of women to work on national level.   I have assisted numerous projects to improve the quality of childcare so that mothers could work and not worry about the safety of their children.  If I am anything, I am a feminist. 
• I am passionately pro-choice but I also think that it is not always a psychologically free choice. I have written a play which deals with the psychological complexities of abortion entitled, One in Two, which has been performed in New York, New Jersey, and Washington DC. If I am anything, I am a feminist.
• I have spent decades coaching women on how to achieve more power in their personal relationships and in the workplace.  If I am anything, I am a feminist.

I am voting for McCain-Palin and I am a feminist.  Many feminists can’t understand my choice.  I am not betraying the cause, the fight, the mission, because I don’t want to vote Democratic.  The Democratic Party is not our ally. The Democratic Party is 60% women but it has only once selected a woman as a vice-presidential candidate and that was nearly a quarter of a century ago.  We are chattel in our own party. The head of the Democratic National Committee has never been a woman.  Money donated to the Women’s Leadership Fund is funneled into the Obama Victory Fund. We cannot give dominion over our bodies or ourselves to one party.   Current feminist groups have no teeth because they are part and parcel of the Democratic Party.  They are held hostage by Roe v. Wade.  They know it and the Democratic Party knows it.   The only way to regain our power is to regain our vote. The Democratic Party has no reason to earn our vote. We’ve sacrificed one choice for another. 

I will by not be held hostage by the Democratic Party that turned a blind eye to the corruption in the Democratic primaries and Democratic caucuses. 

I will not be held hostage by the Democratic Party that ignored a woman who got 18 million votes. 

I will not be held hostage by the Democratic Party a party that was deaf, dumb and blind to the persistent and pervasive sexist attacks against Hillary Clinton.

I will not be held hostage by a Democratic Party that has never had a female head of the DNC.

I will not be threatened into submission.  I will not cast my vote based on fear.  

The Democratic Party cannot be rewarded for it’s pervasive disrespect of women.  Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.  Sometimes you have to tear down a house before you can rebuild it.  Most feminists think the Democratic Party will treat them differently during the next election. There is no next time.  There is only this time.  Reinforcing abuse only perpetuates abuse.  In any abusive relationship, you have to leave to get respect.   Abusers are often charming and apologetic and hold out the hope of better behavior.  But there is no then, there is only now. 

I am a woman and I am a feminist.  To the other feminists out there I ask, “Where is your pride or are you a victim of your own misogyny?”

I am a woman and right now I am ashamed to say, I am a feminist.

PRINCIPLE OVER POLICY

by Lynette Long

People wonder how I could vote Republican when I am a lifelong Democrat and I don’t agree with the Republicans on many key issues.   This election I’m voting on Principle over Policy and Patriotism over Promises. Politicians pander to the electorate to win votes.  Obama is no different.  I don’t care what he says he is going to do for America, as my grandmother used to say, “Talk is Cheap.”  What I care more about is “Who is Barack Obama?” and “What has the Democratic Party become?”  So in a clear effort to explain my position, here are 14 reasons I will not vote for Obama, my party’s nominee.

The Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee has never been a woman. How can I support a party that is primarily composed on women but run by men?

Obama sat for 20 years inside Trinity United Church of Christ which exposes Black Liberation Theology and listened to Rev. Wright his mentor trash America and white Americans.  How can I support a candidate that goes to a church that preaches hatred in any form?

Obama casts himself as a candidate of change but he is an old Chicago-style politician.  He won his first State Senate race by eliminating all other candidates on technicalities and his U.S. Senate race by opening the sealed divorce file of his opponent and forcing his opponent to withdraw.  How can I vote for a candidate who is not who is says he is?

The Democratic Party was silent to the rampant sexism that occurred during the primary process.   How can I support a party that did not acknowledge the rampant sexism in the campaign and consequently ignored me as a woman?

Obama did not stand up for Senator Clinton when Rev. Wright and Father Pflaeger trashed her from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ.  When Ludacris called Hillary an irrelevant bitch, Obama was mute.  How can I support a nominee, without the courage to stand up against blatant racism and sexism?

Nancy Pelosi, in conjunction with other Democratic leaders, paid off superdelegates to get them to vote for Obama.  How can I support a party that pre-selected its nominee?

Obama only lost one out of fourteen caucuses.  Obama lost twenty-one out of thirty-eight primaries.  This discrepancy is due to voter fraud, voter intimidation, busing, and voter suppression in the caucuses.  How can I support an illegal nominee, a nominee who will use any means necessary to win?

Democratic insiders knew about the caucus fraud and voter fraud during the primary process.  How can I support a party that turned a blind eye to the blatant irregularities during the primary process?

Obama is inexperienced.  He has served less than one term in the United States Senate of which he has spent most the time campaigning. How can I support a candidate that does not have the experience to lead this country?

Obama has numerous questionable associations.   There is an old expression, “By his friends, shall ye know him.”  How can I vote for someone I don’t trust?

Obama ignored the will of 18 million voters did not choose Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate.   How can I support a nominee who brushed aside the will of 18 million voters?

The Democratic Party which is composed of 60% women has not put a woman on the Democratic Ticket for 24 years.   How can I support a party that takes the votes of the women of the party for granted? 

Barack Obama had a sham of a roll call at the Democratic National Convention in Denver and strong armed delegates to cast their votes for him.  Clinton Delegates, were shouted down, threatened with their jobs, and replaced.  How can I support a nominee who does not support democracy?

How can I vote for a candidate I don’t trust, whose character is questionable, who I believe obtained the nomination illegally, who ignored the blatant sexism leveled a Senator Clinton and Governor Palin, and is too inexperienced to do the job?   I can’t.

VOTE DEMOCRATIC IN 2008?  NEVER!  RETURN TO THE PARTY IN 2012?  NOT SURE!

READY TO RUMBLE?

by Lynette Long

This my response to a letter from Eve Ensler, pictured above, who wrote The Vagina Monologues. Her letter is in black.  My comments are in blue:

Drill, Drill, Drill

I am having Sarah Palin nightmares. I dreamt last night that she was a member of a club where they rode snowmobiles and wore the claws of drowned and starved polar bears around their necks. I have a particular thing for Polar Bears. Maybe it's their snowy whiteness or their bigness or the fact that they live in the arctic or that I have never seen one in person or touched one.  Maybe it is the fact that they live so comfortably on ice.  Whatever it is, I need the polar bears.

I don't like raging at women. But you are about to do it. I am a Feminist and have spent my life trying to build community, help empower women and stop violence against them. True. It is hard to write about Sarah Palin. This is why the Sarah Palin choice was all the more insidious and cynical. I personally met with John McCain and asked him to pick a woman for the VP slot which he did and he has committed to putting more women in the cabinet than any other President in history. The people who made this choice count on the goodness and solidarity of Feminists. And since the Palin announcement the feminist community has shown the solidarity of a pack of wolves, ready to eviscerate another women who is about to make history.  Did you know wolves and wild dogs eat their prey alive?

But everything Sarah Palin believes in and practices is antithetical to Feminism  Working and raising a family is not antithetical to feminism. Playing competitive basketball is not antithetical to feminism.   which for me is part of one story -- connected to saving the earth, I am sure Sarah Palin knows more about the earth living in Alaska than the New York City feminists who think Central Park is a separate ecological zone and a deer is a dangerous animal,  ending racism, everyone is on that page, empowering women, Palin’s nomination has empowered women, giving young girls options, is this a euphemism for pro-choice, opening our minds, deepening tolerance, Where is your tolerance? and ending violence and war.  Senator McCain and Governor Palin want to end the war since each of their sons are in Iraq.  Who has a greater stake in the game than they do?

I believe that the McCain/Palin ticket is one of the most dangerous choices of my lifetime, I believe the Obama/Biden is the most dangerous ticket in history. and should this country chose those candidates, the fall-out may be so great the country will be run the destruction so vast in so many areas, that America may never recover. If the country elects Obama-Biden they will have put in office a candidate that won the Democratic nomination though voter fraud, caucus fraud, thuggery, and large payouts. Women, tge swing voters in this election, will have elected the man that stood silently by as his minions, Father Pflaeger, Rev. Wright, and Ludicras, trashed a fellow feminist and member of the Senate. Where were you then? But what is equally disturbing is the impact that duo would have on the rest of the world. Unfortunately, this is not a joke. And what is even more disturbing is that Obama was deaf to the voices of 18 million voters, many of whom rallied hard for him to put Hillary on the ticket. What message did that one act send to American women?  You are invisible. 18 million votes is not enough, nothing will ever be enough.

In my lifetime I have seen the clownish, the inept, the bizarre be elected to the presidency with regularity.  Sarah Palin does not believe in evolution. According to factcheck.org, Palin said creationism has no place in the curriculum.  Barack Obama does not believe in fair play. I take this as a metaphor. In her world and the world of Fundamentalists nothing changes or gets better or evolves. She does not believe in global warming. In his first election for state senate he eliminated the four other candidates on the ticket using back door politics, so he could run unopposed in the Democratic Primary in a predominantly Democratic District which ensured his election. The melting of the arctic, the storms that are destroying our cities, the pollution and rise of cancers, are all part of God's plan. In his run for the United States Senate, Obama eliminated his Republican opponent, who was ahead in the polls, by opening his opponents sealed divorce file, and embarrassing his opponent into withdrawal.  Again he ran unopposed.  She is fighting to take the polar bears off the endangered species list. The earth, in Palin's view, is here to be taken and plundered. The wolves and the bears are here to be shot and plundered. The oil is here to be taken and plundered. Iraq is here to be taken and plundered.  As she said herself of the Iraqi war, "It was a task from God." 

Sarah Palin does not believe in abortion. Is that not her choice?  Isn't it called choice?  Governor Palin's actions were consistent with her beliefs. She does not believe women who are raped and incested and ripped open against their will should have a right to determine whether they have their rapist's baby or not.  We currently have the right to choose and brandishing Roe v. Wade over the heads of women is fear mongering.

She obviously does not believe in sex education or birth control. I imagine her daughter was practicing abstinence and we know how many babies that makes. Eve, this goes way below the belt and you know it.  Approximately 750,000 American teenagers get pregnant each year.  Is this because of abstinence education, impulsive teenagers, raging hormones, or a lack of condom compliance by young women?  You are not privy to the private conversations Senator Palin had with her daughter, and to imply so is outrageous.  Governor Palin believes in birth control and sex education and to imply otherwise is scandalous.  In addition she did not decrease special needs spending 62% but rather increased it.

Sarah Palin does not much believe in thinking. How can you say that with a straight face?  From what I gather she has tried to ban books from the library, that is not true, in fact some of the books on the widely circulated list were not even in print at the time has a tendency to dispense with people who think independently. Stop the lies. She cannot tolerate an environment of ambiguity and difference. When did you become a psychologist?  This is a woman who could and might very well be the next president of the United States. This is a woman who is the Governor of Alaska, the largest state in the United States.  She would govern one of the most diverse populations on the earth. Alaska is ten miles from the Russian border and has unique and complex challenges.  She has the highest popularity rating of any seated governor.  Could all those Alaskans be wrong about Governor Palin, or could the group feminists brandishing their indignation possibly be wrong about her?  I coincidently was in Alaska when Sarah was nominated and to a person everyone loved her.

Sarah believes in guns. She has her own custom Austrian hunting rifle. She has been known to kill 40 caribou at a clip. She has shot hundreds of wolves from the air. The same wolves that are attacking people at such a high rate that parents are afraid to let their children go outside to play and that are eating dogs left outside alive.   Don’t talk about what you don’t know.

Sarah believes in God. That is of course her right, her private right. Every elected President has believed in God and has called himself a Christian. But when God and Guns come together in the public sector, when war is declared in God's name, Stop the fear mongering.  This is a misquote.   Her exact quote is "we should pray we are doing God's will in Iraq.   when the rights of women are denied in his name, Sarah Palin moved to a more moderate church six years ago,that is the end of separation of church and state and the undoing of everything America has ever tried to be.  I am far more concerned about the religious views of Obama, Trinity United Church of Christ and Black Liberation Theology than I am about anything said in Sarah Palin's church. 

I write to my sisters. I write because I believe we hold this election in our hands. I agree with you.  This vote is a vote that will determine the future not just of the U.S., but of the planet. This vote is a vote about integrity.  It will determine whether we create policies to save the earth or make it forever uninhabitable for humans.  It will determine whether we move towards dialog and diplomacy in the world or whether we escalate violence through invasion, undermining and attack. No one hates war more than someone who has been to war.  It will determine whether we go for oil, strip mining, coal burning or invest our money in alternatives that will free us from dependency and destruction. Every candidate knows and understands the importance of renewable energy such as wind and solar. It will determine if money gets spent on education and health care or whether we build more and more methods of killing. It will determine whether America is a free open tolerant society or a closed place of fear, fundamentalism and aggression.

I could not agree more about the purpose and importance of this election, but you have missed the most significant issue.  Integrity.  I cannot vote for a candidate with no personal integrity.  You cannot teach integrity. This is a vote about a Democratic Party that selected it's nominee and ignored the will of the people.  Where is your righteous indignation? This is a vote about a Democratic party that is over 60% women but has failed to put a woman on the ticket for a quarter of a century.  Where is your righteous indignation? This is a vote about a party and a candidate that that paid off super delegates so that they would vote for Barack Obama.  Where is your righteous indignation? This is a vote about a party that failed to have a legitimate roll call at the Democratic Convention but instead executed a sham of a roll call to dupe the American public.  Where is your righteous indignation? This is an election about the National Organization of Women which was totally ineffective in protecting Hillary Clinton from blatant sexist attacks and about Kim Gandy, its president, who was secretly advising Obama on pro-choice language while Hillary Clinton was still in the race.  I suggest they rename themselves the National Organization of Democratic Women.  Where is your righteous indignation? This is an election about democracy of which there is none in the Democratic Party.  This is also an election about feminists and the future of feminism. The feminists have come out with their knives and have betrayed the very thing they were supposed to protect - respect for other women.   I've had enough.  If you girls want to fight let's rumble, but stop the vicious attacks and lies about Sarah Palin. Stop the cat fight.  It doesn't become you.

THE X FACTOR

by Lynette Long

Gloria Steinem, in her September 4th editorial in the Los Angeles Times, came out strongly against Governor Palin claiming the only thing women have in common with Palin is an X chromosome. I respectfully disagree. Governor Palin knows what it is like to be a woman, a mother, a daughter, a sister - things the two men on the Democratic ticket can never fully understand. She knows what it is like to grow up invisible in an incredibly sexist society, to be stared at, groped, and sexually harassed. She knows what it is like to be smaller in stature than men and physically vulnerable. She knows what it’s like to worry that you are pregnant when you don’t want to be or that you are not pregnant when you want to be. Sarah Palin knows what it is to experience the joys and sorrows of motherhood, to nurse a baby while holding down a job, to leave for work in the morning with a toddler tugging at your pant leg, or to have your children calling you at work to diffuse squabbles or ask for help with homework. She knows that once you get to work you have to speak twice as loud and twice as often to be heard and work twice a hard to go half as far. She knows what it is to be a member of the second sex.

Gender is the most fundamental human characteristic. The first comment made when a child is born is either, “It’s a girl” or “It’s a boy.” From that second on, boys and girls live in parallel universes in the same culture. From the nursery room to the board room, boys and girls are given different messages about their respective roles in the world. At the hospital they are given different types of names and wrapped in different colored blankets. Once home, baby girls and boys wear fundamentally different clothes and play with different toys. This differentiation extends through school where girls are given less attention, picked less frequently to answer questions and placed less often in advanced science and math classes. Once in the workforce, women are steered into lower-paying careers, paid less for the same work, and forced to juggle the responsibilities of work and home. You can’t learn what it is to be a woman, unless you are one. You can’t have a government essentially devoid of women that knows what’s best for women. You can’t legislate for women, without women.

After the last Democratic Primary was over and it was clear Senator Clinton was not going to get the Democratic nomination, myself, and a small group of Clinton supporters met with Senator McCain and Carly Fiorina. I personally explained to Senator McCain that women comprise well over half of the population, yet are underrepresented in every branch of government. I asked him loudly and clearly to choose a woman for the VP slot and to increase the number of women in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court. Senator McCain listened respectfully to my request. Representatives of The New Agenda also met with Carly Fiorina as well as members of the Obama campaign to make similar requests.

After the Democratic Primary, I was personally in contact with a member of Obama’s Finance Committee. He left several messages on my office phone, “urging” me to support Senator Obama. We had numerous contentious conversations and I finally told him I would be happy to vote for Senator Obama and rally other Hillary supporters to vote for Obama but in return I wanted Obama to pledge gender parity in the cabinet. I foolishly thought equal representation in government was a reasonable request. “What if there aren’t qualified women you still expect us to appoint half women to the cabinet?” he replied. I was confused. “There are 300 million people in this country; you’re telling me you can’t find ten qualified women?” He responded, “You can’t have that.” We had no further conversations. There was nothing more to say.

Weeks later I approached a training session for DNC canvassers at a park in my neighborhood. Eager to practice their new skills, they all ran up to me, “Do you support Senator Obama? Do you want to donate money to the DNC?” After explaining that I was a Hillary supporter, I again made my request. I will support Senator Obama if he will pick a woman as his running mate and promise gender parity in the cabinet. The men in the group openly laughed at me and found my request ridiculous. I looked at the horrified faces of the newly minted female canvassers. “They’re laughing at you too,” I muttered.

Not one to give up, I contacted a daughter of a  late-friend of mine who is a member of one of Obama's policy committees. She assured me Obama was a good guy, so I posed my request to her. She generously responded, “I’ll ask him.” When I did not hear back from her in a few days, I shot her another email. She told me how disappointed she was in me for making such a stupid request. Obama was on the “right” side of the issues. Why did it matter whether men or women legislated those issues? I guess the answer from Obama was No. What saddened me was her mother was one of this nation’s greatest champions of Title IX, educational equity and gender parity. Her mother and I counted the number of pictures of boys and girls in text books, male and female cartoon characters, and documented the underrepresentation of girls in math classes in our nation’s schools. Yes, policy is important but who decides and delivers that policy is even more important. As Marshall McLuhan profoundly noted, “The medium is the message.” Children incorporate many of their perceptions about gender by age five. Little girls won’t understand if Sarah Palin is pro-life or pro-choice, believes in gun control or is a member of the NRA, but they will know the Vice-President of the United States of America is a girl and that alone will alter their perceptions of themselves.

I have given my loyalty to the Democratic Party for decades. My party, which is comprised primarily of women, has not put a woman on a presidential ticket for 24 years. My party refused to nominate my candidate, Hillary Clinton, for president or vice president, even though she received more votes than any other candidate in history. My party stood silently by as Hillary Clinton was eviscerated by the mainstream media. My party was mute while the main stream media repeatedly called Clinton a bitch and symbolically called me and every other woman in this country a bitch. My party was disturbingly silent when the main stream media commented on Hillary’s body or the shrillness of her voice, reminding me and every other woman the fundamental disrespect we endure on a daily basis. My party’s candidate was mute when Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger openly mocked Senator Clinton from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ. My party’s candidate was silent when the rapper Ludicrous released a new song calling Hillary a bitch. My party and it’s candidate gave their tacit approval for the attacks on Senator Hillary Clinton and consequently women in general.

I have a choice. I can vote for my party and it’s candidates which have demonstrated a blatant disrespect for women and a fundamental lack of integrity or I can vote for the Republican ticket which has heard our concerns and put a woman on the ticket but with whom I fundamentally don’t agree on most issues. If Democratic women wait for the perfect woman to come along, we will never elect a woman. We have to seize opportunity where it presents itself. Besides, the Democratic Party is no longer my home. I have no home, but this election I will make my bed somewhere else.

I respect Gloria Steinem’s right to support the presidential ticket of her choice but she is openly trying to derail Sarah Palin’s historic candidacy. As Madeleine Albright said, “There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women.”  I will vote for McCain-Palin. I urge other women to do the same. I might not personally agree with Palin on every issue and I promise to the first person knocking on her door, if Roe v. Wade, or any other legislation that goes against the rights of women is threatened. But in Governor Palin I find a woman of integrity, who not only talks the talk but walks the walk. I can work with that. I will work with that. When I walk down the street, I don’t have Democrat printed on my forehead, but my gender is obvious to everyone and impacts every interaction in my life. Since my country is far from gender neutral, right now for me gender trumps everything else. I urge other women to join me in this fight for equality. Sometimes opportunities occur where you least expect them.

www.lynettelong.com is a proud partner of www.justsaynodeal.com

THE TRAVESTY CONTINUED

by Lynette Long

A review of the caucuses has yielded reports of thousands of irregularities that resulted in 13 out of 14 caucus victories for Obama, a candidate who lost 21 out of 39 primaries. Tales of intimidation where Clinton supporters were literally locked out of the caucus room, where handicapped voters were tipped over in wheel chairs, and confrontations where Obama supporters bullied Clinton loyalists are frequent. Endless chanting by Team Obama to intimidate less stalwartly Clinton supporters was ubiquitous. There were thousands of accusations of voter fraud in which voter preferences were written on scraps of paper or post-it notes, making it impossible to ascertain the legitimacy of these votes. Out-of-state voters were bused into caucus states where no identification was required en-masse, and caucus preference forms were filled in with the names of Obama supporters even before the caucus started.

Inherent in the caucus process is voter disenfranchisement. The elderly are less likely to go out at night, women with children cannot take hours away from their families to vote, shift workers are likely to be working during caucus times, and service men and women who are overseas cannot participate in a caucus. Long lines, frigid temperatures and hours of delay, also kept millions of potential primary voters away from the caucus sites. The precinct caucuses were, by most accounts, a horrific experience with little or no control or accountability, yielding results that were neither accurate nor valid.

The travesty called “Democratic caucus” did not end at the precinct caucus. Delegates were chosen at the precinct level to represent each candidate at the district level, proportional to the number of people who caucused for each candidate at the precinct level. At the district caucuses, delegates were chosen to go to the county caucuses, and at the county caucuses delegates were chosen to represent their candidates at the State Convention, where the final delegates were selected to attend the Democratic National Convention. During this three or four tiered process (Some states did not have district caucuses), a shift often occurred in the number of delegates awarded each candidate at each level. Ultimately the number of delegates awarded to each candidate at the state convention is often different than the number of delegates awarded to a candidate at the precinct caucus. In the 2008 Democratic Primary, every time there was a shift in delegates from the precinct to the state level, the shift was in favorable of Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton lost delegates to Barack in five out of the fourteen caucus states at the state and country level conventions. Obama did not lose any delegates to Clinton during the transition from the precinct caucus to the state and national convention. A closer look at these five states will make problem clearer.

1. Alaska Caucus

The Alaska Precinct Caucuses were on February 5, 2008. It was estimated that Obama would receive nine national delegates and Clinton would receive four National delegates. At the Alaska State Democratic Convention on May 24, 2008, Obama received ten pledged national delegates and Clinton received three pledged national delegates. One Clinton delegate was given to Obama, creating a two delegate net loss for Clinton.

2. Colorado Caucus

The Colorado Precinct Caucuses were on February 5, 2008.  It was estimated that Obama would receive thirty-five pledged national delegates and Clinton would receive twenty pledged national Delegates. At the State Convention on May 20, 2008, Obama was awarded thirty-six pledged national delegates and Clinton was awarded nineteen pledged national delegates. One Clinton delegate was given to Obama, creating a two delegate net loss for Clinton.

3. Iowa Caucus

The Iowa Precinct Caucuses were on January 3, 2008. It was estimated that Obama would receive sixteen pledged national delegates, Clinton awarded fifteen pledged national delegates, and Edwards was awarded fourteen pledged national delegates. At the County Conventions on March 15, 2008, Obama was awarded 25 pledged National Delegates, Clinton was awarded 14 pledged National Delegates and Edwards was awarded 6 pledged National Delegates. One of Clinton’s delegates was given to Obama and eight of Edwards delegates were given to Obama. None of Edwards delegates were given to Hillary. At the State Level Convention on June 14, 2008, three more of Edwards delegates were given to Obama. The result was that Obama was awarded 28 pledged national delegates, Clinton received 14 pledged national delegates and Edwards was awarded 3 pledged national delegates. One Clinton delegate was given to Obama and eleven of Edward’s delegates were given to Obama, creating a thirteen delegate net loss for Clinton.

4. Nevada Caucus

The Nevada Precinct Caucuses were on January 19, 2008. It was estimated that Clinton, who was supported by 51% of the caucus goers, would be awarded thirteen pledged delegates and Obama, who was supported by 45% of the caucus goers, would get 12 pledged delegates. At the State Convention on May 17, 2008, Obama was awarded fourteen pledged national delegates and Clinton was awarded eleven pledged national delegates. She got three fewer delegates in a state that she won. Two Clinton delegates were given to Obama, creating a four pledged delegate loss for Clinton.

5. Washington State Caucus

The Washington State Precinct Caucus was on February 9, 2008. It was estimated that Obama would receive fifty-two pledged national delegates and Clinton would receive twenty-six estimated national delegates. At the State Convention on June 13-15, 2008, Obama got fifty-three pledged national delegates and Clinton got 25 pledged national delegates. There was a two delegate net loss for Clinton.

If you added the net loss for Clinton from all five of these caucus states, the result is a twenty-three delegate loss for Clinton. A twenty-three delegate swing is a significant shift in a race where, before Florida and Michigan were awarded full status, 123 pledged delegates separated the two candidates. Numerous factors are responsible for this one-way swing of pledged delegates, including the intimidation of convention delegates, systematic removal of delegates from the list, pressure from the party hierarchy, and replacement of pro-Clinton delegates with pro-Obama delegates. This twenty-three delegate shift only represents the delegates taken at the district and state convention levels. It does not include the delegates stolen at the precinct level by voter fraud, voter suppression, busing and voter intimidation. If all the delegates stolen from Clinton within the precinct caucuses, the district conventions and the state level conventions; if the Florida and Michigan delegates, stripped by the DNC Rules Committee, were awarded back to Clinton, Hillary Clinton would be the nominee.

In a race as close as the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary, the caucus fraud and the redistribution of delegates at the district, county and state level conventions resulted in the selection of a candidate contrary to the will of We the People.

BOUGHT AND PAID FOR!

   

By Lynette Long

As Americans sat glued to their television sets watching the most hotly contested presidential primary in American history, pundits counted pledged delegates won in caucuses and primaries and discussed the highly prized superdelegates’ endorsements. Eventually it would be these superdelegates, Democratic officials, governors, and members of congress, who would determine the nominee, since neither contestant won enough pledged delegates in the 52 primary contests.  What the pundits forgot to tell the American public was that these superdelegates were doing some counting of their own.  They weren’t counting how many of their constituents had voted for Senator Clinton or Senator Obama, but rather how much money was being put into their war chests by the Obama campaign and the Democratic hierarchy.  This money, moved from one candidate to another via PAC’s, would determine their endorsements and ultimately the nomination.

Since 1987, Nancy Pelosi has represented California’s eighth district-- including most of San Francisco. An Italian American, Pelosi was raised on politics. Her father was a Congressman from Maryland and the Mayor of Baltimore. Pelosi was elected as Democratic Speaker of the House 2002.   Pelosi shattered the glass ceiling in the House of Representatives when she was elected the first female speaker in 2007.  A shrewd politician, Madame Speaker exercises a lot of influence over the members of congress.  She determines Committee assignments and in conjunction with the DNC and Howard Dean decides how much money and support the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee gives to each member of congress in their bid for re-election.

In addition, Pelosi also contributes money directly to the congressional campaigns of certain candidates through her Political Action Committee “PAC to the FUTURE.”  Her PAC receives money from other PAC’s such as Service Employees International Union $10,000, American Bankers Assn $10,000, Sheet Metal Workers Union $10,000, International Association of Fire Fighters, $10,000, and Goldman Sachs 10,000.  It also receives money from individuals. In the 2008 election cycle, the Center for Responsive Politics (www.opensecrets.org) reports that Nancy Pelosi’s PAC received 585,400 and contributed more than $445,000 of this to 59 congressional candidates. PAC to the FUTURE gave money to 38 incumbents and 21 challengers. Of the 435 members in the house, Pelosi gave money to 8.5% of them. Of the members who received money from Pelosi, 71% were men; only 29% were women.  Only eleven percent of the female members of congress received support from Pelosi’s PAC.  It’s disappointing that a female speaker did not symbolically make some contribution to all Democratic women in the house. 

But even more important than the gender implications of Pelosi’s behavior was her impact on the Presidential election.  Publically Madame Speaker did not endorse either Obama or Clinton in the Democratic Primary, but she was anything but neutral. Pelosi gave money to the campaigns of thirty-eight members of congress, twenty-eight of these endorsed Obama; ten endorsed Clinton. Pelosi contributed to the campaigns of Obama endorsers almost three to one.  Pelosi not only gave to a greater number of Obama supporters, she collectively gave them more money.  Pelosi gave 250,000 to the campaigns of superdelegates that endorsed Obama and only 80,000 to the campaigns of superdelegates that endorsed Clinton. Money talks and Pelosi and her PAC spoke volumes….in shorthand.   She may not have publicly endorsed a candidate, but the members of the House of Representatives knew she supported Obama.

Of the thirty-eight Members of Congress Pelosi gave money to, sixteen went against the grain for Obama.  Their state voted for Hillary, their district voted for Hillary, yet they endorsed Obama.  Why? Follow the money.

JOHN ALDER              NJ        $2500 from PELOSI     ALDER  endorses OBAMA

JASON ALTMIRE          PA        $10k FROM PELOSI     ALTMIRE endorses OBAMA

ANDRE CARSON          IN         $10k FROM PELOSI     CARSON endorses OBAMA

JOE DONNELLY           IN         $10k FROM PELOSI     DONNNELLY endorses OBAMA

GABRIELLE  GIFFORDS AZ      $10k FROM PELOSI     GIFFORDS endorses OBAMA

BARON HILL               IN         $10k FROM PELOSI     HILL endorses OBAMA

RON KLEIN                 FL         $10k FROM PELOSI     KLEIN endorses OBAMA

NICK LAMPSON           TX        $7500 FROM PELOSI   LAMPSON endorses OBAMA

TIM MAHONEY          FL         $10k FROM PELOSI     MAHONEY endorses OBAMA

JERRY MCNERNEY      CA        $10 FROM PELOSI       MCNERNEY endorses OBAMA

HARRY MITCHELL       AZ        $10k FROM PELOSI     MITCHELL endorses OBAMA

PATRICK MURPHY       PA        10k FROM PELOSI       MURPHY endorses OBAMA

JOE SESTAK                 PA        $10k FROM PELOSI     SESTAK endorses OBAMA

CAROL SHEA PORTER             NH       $10k FROM PELOSI    SHEA PORTER endorses OBAMA

ZACHARY SPACE         OH       $10k FROM PELOSI     SPACE endorses OBAMA

               

NIKI TSONGAS             MA      $10k FROM PELOSI     TSONGAS endorses OBAMA

By endorsing Obama, all of these Members of Congress went against the will of their constituents, twice, at the state level and at the district level.  Only two members who received money from Pelosi’s PAC went against the grain and endorsed Hillary. Is sixteen against the grain for Hillary and two against the grain for Obama a coincidence? Pelosi’s contributions to the campaigns of state representatives followed a similar pattern.  Sixty-three percent of the state representatives to whom Pelosi gave money, endorsed Obama in a state won by Clinton.

Ten thousand dollars, PAC to the FUTURE’s typical contribution, doesn’t seem like a lot of money but besides getting money from PAC TO THE FUTURE, most of these members got contributions from other PACs.  These contributions were most likely orchestrated by Pelosi and company since the overlap is too startling.  Congressman James Clyburn from South Carolina has BRIDGE PAC.  BRIDGE PAC gave money to all but two of these same members of congress.  Steny Hoyer from Maryland has AMERIPAC.  AMERIPAC gave money to almost every single one of these same members of congress.  Typical donations from both of these PAC’S were $10,000.  And let's not forget HOPE FUND owned by Barack Obama.  All of these PAC’s donated an average of $10,000 to most of their campaigns.  These young representatives got a lot of pressure to endorse Obama no matter which way their district or state voted. The voices of their constituents were irrelevant.

It seems Obama was just posing as a Washington outsider.  But in reality—all the real Washington insiders Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Clyburn, Hoyer, and Kerry were on his team all along.  Pelosi’s Pac might be named PAC to the Future, but it took direct action to purposely undermine the first significant female candidate for the presidency in history. In so doing, she pushed women back decades.  Call Pelosi’s office at 415-556-4862 and let her know how you feel.  Let’s not just call her biased against women; let’s call her finished.   

FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY, BEFORE IT DISAPPEARS. 

ARE SUPERDELEGATES FOR SALE?

by Lynette Long

In a few weeks the historic 2008 Democratic Party Presidential Primary between an African American Man and a White Woman will end. The two candidates competed in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and Guam. At the end of these contests, neither candidate had earned enough pledged delegates to garner the necessary 2118 needed to win the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. Hillary Clinton earned 1640 pledged delegates while Barack Obama earned 1763 pledged delegates. A paltry 123 pledged separated the two candidates at the end of the primary season. Since there was no clear winner, the superdelegates would determine the Democratic nominee.

Approximately 800 superdelegates will make up around 20% of the 4000 delegates at the convention. These superdelegates are Democratic Party leaders, Democratic governors, and Democratic members of congress. They have the right to endorse either candidate without reason and can change their endorsement from one candidate to another at any time. The superdelegates are very powerful and highly sought after by candidates. One superdelegate is equal to one pledged delegate or 11,361 voters in California or 7,220 voters in New York. Many factors influence which candidate a superdelegate endorses but they usually vote the way their constituents vote. Some superdelegates have intense personal relationships with particular candidates that may influence their endorsement. Members of congress may also be influenced by money given or promised by party leaders, the DNC or the candidates themselves.

Politicians collect money for their campaigns but most American’s don’t realize that politicians collect a separate a pot of money called a Leadership Political Action Committee or PAC. These PACs are used to hire additional staff and pay for additional perks such as limos and first class flights. But one of the major reasons for these PAC’s is to donate to the campaigns of other candidates. Nancy Pelosi’s PAC is called PAC to the Future, Barack Obama’s PAC is called Hope Fund, and Hillary Clinton’s PAC is called Hillpac. Money was distributed by these PAC’s to the superdelegates to influence their voting. The Federal Elections Commission requires scrupulous reporting of how PAC money is obtained and how it is spent. This data can be retrieved at www.opensecrets.org.

In 2007, Obama distributed 299,000 from his PAC to superdelegates. He especially targeted the states of Iowa and New Hampshire. On July 25, 2007, the Hope Fund made $1000 donations to each of the following groups: Hillsborough County Democrats, Hudson, NH; Martha Fuller Clark for State Senate, Portsmouth, NH; Merrimack County Democrats, Chichester, NH; New Hampshire for John Lynch, Manchester, NH; Sgambati 4 NH Senate, Tilton, NH; Stafford County Democratic Committee, Durham, NH and Sullivan County Democrats, Claremont, NH. Obama also gave $5000 contributions to New Hampshire Democratic Party, Concord, New Hampshire, on July 26,2007; New Hampshire for John Lynch on July 25, 2007, and New Hampshire Democratic State Committee, Concord, New Hampshire on November 3, 2006. Obama did not announce his candidacy until May 2, 2007.

Obama also gave New Hampshire Democratic State Senator Jacalyn Cilley $1000 on July 25, 2007. She endorsed Obama on July 31, 2007, just six days after his contribution to her campaign. On July 26, 2007, first term New Hampshire Congressman Paul Hodes of New Hampshire endorsed Obama. The New Hampshire Primary was not until January 8, 2008 and Hillary won New Hampshire.

By March 28, 2008, Hope Fund donated $710,900 to superdelegates, more than three times as much as Hillpac. ($236,100). A study by the Center for Responsive Politics showed that presidential candidates who gave more money to a superdelegate received their endorsement 82% of the time. This is especially disturbing when the superdelegates endorse a candidate that is decidedly contrary to the will of the voters in their state and their districts.

After reviewing state and congressional voting records as well as PAC donations, members of congress were identified that fulfilled the following four criteria: 1. These members endorsed Barack Obama. 2. The constituents of their state preferred Hillary Clinton. 3. The constituents of their district preferred Hillary Clinton. 4. They got more PAC money from Hope Fund than from HillPac. These senators are Jeff Bingaman, Frank Lautenberg, and Jay Rockefeller. The members of the house are Jason Altmire, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Joe Donelly, Gabrielle Giffords, Baron Hill, Ron Klein, Patrick Murphy, Gerald Mc Nerney, Carol She-Porter, Zack Space, Niki Tsongas, and Charlie Wilson.

Charlie Wilson is the perfect example. He ran in Ohio’s District 6 in 2006. His seat was the seat of the former governor and is located in Southern Ohio. Wilson was a last minute candidate for his seat and because of this was a write-in candidate. The governor and the party worked hard to get Wilson elected.  President Clinton made an audio recording endorsing Wilson that went out to 50,000 homes.  The governor of Ohio is a big Clinton supporter, the voters of Ohio voted 54-44% percent in favor of Clinton, and District 6, Wilson’s District, voted for Clinton 70% - 27%. Yet Wilson endorsed Obama. It looks like there is no loyalty in politics to either your constituents or your friends. Wilson got $7,000 of PAC money from Barack Obama, but no money from Hillary Clinton. Was this a factor in his choice?

THE TITLE BOUT

by Lynette Long

Don Fowler, the former head of the DNC sent a letter to Democratic leaders and major contributors this week urging party unity. Intended to get resistant Hillary supporters on board, the unity letter is likely to produce the opposite effect. The letter repeatedly stated, “Barack Obama won. It’s over!” In other words, “Get over it,” or as an astute Clinton supporter put it, “Get in line, it’s not your time.” Mr. Fowler chided Hillary supporters, “I must confess a bit of fatigue and irritation with the people who continue to carp, complain and criticize the results of the primary and lay down conditions for their support.” The paternalistic nature of this statement and the implication that the issues raised by Hillary supporters are trivial is troubling. “It’s time to act in a mature fashion,” Fowler implored. Demographics will prove that if Hillary supporters are anything, they are mature. Maybe there is wisdom in old age since they did not select Obama.

To illustrate that Clinton supporters are sore losers, Fowler compared the Democratic Primary to men’s basketball and men’s tennis. Attempting to appeal to the broadest base of Hillary’s supporters, women, by comparing the primary to men’s sports illustrates a continuing insensitivity to women and women’s issues by the DNC. In fact the DNC, the party of the people, has never had a female chair.

If sports were the metaphor of choice, the Democratic Primary is more like boxing than tennis or basketball. One could equate the primary to the World Heavyweight Boxing Championship. The two fighters in the ring, Senator’s Clinton and Obama, went the distance, 15 rounds, or in this case 52 primaries, but neither candidate scored a knockout blow. The fight will be decided by decision. The judges in this fight are the superdelegates and they will announce their decision at the Democratic Convention. There is one caveat however. These superdelegates are not impartial and both a carrot and a stick have been used to get them to declare for Obama. Many superdelegates have had large sums of money donated to their campaigns by Barack Obama under the guise of the Hope Fund or the Hope Pac. Others have received warnings that the DNC will not support their next campaign if they do not support Obama and still others have had death threats from the African American community.

The referee in this title bout, the person entrusted by the people to ensure a fair fight is Howard Dean, Chairman of the DNC. Dean stood silently by as Dodd, Kennedy and Kerry called for Clinton to throw in the towel early in the contest. He was mute when the main stream media called Hillary a bitch or said she should be taken out behind the barn. Dean did not enforce with the full authority of his office voting regulations to ensure a fair shot at the title for both candidates. Dean turned his back on the fight while Obama threw numerous sucker punches in the early rounds of the bout. Obama won 93% (13 out of 14) of the caucuses and only 46% (18 out of 39) of the primaries. It is impossible to explain the disparity in primary vs. caucus results due to superior organization or demographics alone. Dean and the DNC turned a blind eye to the fraud, busing and data manipulation by Camp Obama at the caucuses. Not only did Dean not investigate voter fraud, suppression and intimidation, he further engineered Obama’s nomination by giving the Florida delegates, a state where Clinton had a commanding lead, half a vote each. In Michigan Dean orchestrated the decision that gave Obama delegates for punches Clinton landed and gave Obama credit for votes logged as undecided. When Clinton Camp tried to raise some of these concerns they were labeled whiners.

The bout is not over until the judges officially announce their scoring of the fight in Denver in August. The DNC wants to deny Hillary’s name being put in nomination and to prohibit a state roll call that reflected the results of the primary. The DNC wants the judges, in this case the state delegations and the superdelegates, to declare that all votes went to Obama. But there was no knock out blow. In face based on the results in the swing states, the primary states, the blue states, the largest states, and by winning the popular vote, Hillary Clinton won the fight by decision. The referee can hold Senator Obama’s arm up in the center of the ring, but everyone watching the primary knows who won. If a football game is decided by an unfair penalty, a soccer game lost by an undeserved red card, a title match lost by a sucker punch, fans typically become embittered and resentful. Senator Clinton was the first significant female candidate to run for the presidency and her nomination was stolen by a corrupt party. No letter chiding Clinton’s supporters is going to change that. Red Sox fans will never become Yankee fans, and Clinton supporters are not coming home.

www.lynettelong.com is a proud partner of www.justsaynodeal.com

THE PROPOSITION

by Lynette Long

A member of the Obama campaign keeps calling my office phone and leaving me messages. He often leaves ten minute rants on my phone exasperated that I am not supporting Obama.  "What's wrong with you? Why are you so irrational?"  Finally, tired of the constant calls, I called him back, "Guess Who?" I made him and Camp Obama a proposition.  "I will vote for Obama.  I will tell my friends to vote for Obama.  I will campaign for Obama."  He was eager for the rest.  "I only want one thing."  "What's that?" "I want gender parity.  I want Obama to go on National television and announce the he will select a female running mate and that half of his cabinet will be women."  He was silent for a second and then sheepishly replied,  "We can't do that?" "Why not?" I asked.  "We are over half the population?" "We can't do that!  What if there isn't a competent woman?" I was stunned. "There are 300 million people in this country, and you can't find a handful of competent women for the cabinet?" I chided.  "You want affirmative action.  I don't believe in affirmative action."  "That's my offer, take it or leave it."  He left it and guess what, he hasn't called me any more.

Obama doesn't believe in supporting women.  I'll use a recent NYT article as evidence.  It cited that Obama has 300 foreign policy advisers.  The times posted pictures of the top twenty-one of them.  Two were women. That's less than ten percent.  So much for parity.  So much for the politics of change.