you can’t call me a racist.
from Xena, Charlotte Front and Center
I was the most naïve little girl in the world when I moved to NYC from Raleigh , NC . It was a huge revelation to me to realize how segregated most neighborhoods were in NYC. People worked together and commuted together, but they went home separate. However, for 20 years I owned a two-family house in a neighborhood that was about half African-American, some Latino, and recent immigrants from Poland, Kenya, Russia, Egypt, Nigeria, UK, St. Martin, Albania, you name it. I rented to people who were straight, gay, black, white, latino, male and female. My son went to elementary school in Chinatown . You get the idea.
The thing is, before this election, I didn’t go around consciously thinking about people in this way. That’s the real tragedy of Obama’s campaign: how they have used race to divide people.
The people most inclined to support Hillary Clinton are the people who’ve been bridging the gap for a long time. The ones who can remember Martin Luther King. He said (this may not be an exact quote) that someday “a man would be judged by the content of his character, and not by the color of his skin…..” So why am I called a racist when I look at Barack Obama like that? Some of us already “got it.” I’m looking at him like anybody running for President. What has he done? How can I trust him? Who does he take advice from? What’s his wife like? The answer always comes back the same. I just don’t trust him to be President.
from Fox News
As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were kissing and making up last Friday, Bill Clinton might have had other ideas, according to a report in The (London) Telegraph.
The paper reports that even as the former president and the current presumptive Democratic nominee prepare to meet to make their own amends, Bill Clinton reportedly told close friends Obama can “kiss my ass” to get his support.
The paper cited an anonymous Democratic source who provided the quote. That source also said Clinton is not making the primary effort to bridge the chasm between himself and Obama.
“He’s saying he’s not going to reach out, that Obama has to come to him. One person told me that Bill said Obama would have to quote, ‘kiss my ass,’ close quote, if he wants his support.
“You can’t talk like that about Obama — he’s the nominee of your party, not some house boy you can order around.
“Hillary’s just getting on with it and so should Bill.”...Read More
Question/comment: Do you know what you really are? You are part of a
demographic which is conservative leaning and generally ignorant...
Hillary knew very well that such a demographic existed and knew that she
would be able to gain their support by pandering to them, which she did
endlessly over the course of her campaign. She brought up her love of
guns and god over and over again, after Obama's comment, because she
knew that it would be politically expedient to do so. She seized upon
Obama's comment because she knew that it created a political divide that
she would exploit for her gain. She doesn't really care about guns or
god. All she really cares about is winning. So she kept talking about
those things to appeal to people like you. And it WORKED! Clinton did
what Republican's have been doing for generations: appealing to
socially conservative, ignorant "value-voters" such as yourself.
Republican's rely on rich people and stupid ignorant hicks for their votes. They
pander to ignorant hicks by talking about guns and god. You see, THEY
are the one's who are belittling the real meaning of religion and the
real significance of firearms by turning them into tools for
manipulating and appealing to the demographic of ignorant conservatives. It's
that simple. Obama recognizes the stupidity and cynicism inherent in this
pattern and rises above it, because you see, he is an intelligent
person who spends time analyzing real data and real information because he
understands what is necessary to actually help our country... Did you
know that if he wins, he will actually help people like yourself?
So Hillary seized upon her chance to gain these voter's support, which
she did. And now people like you want to vote for McCain. Well, let
me put it this way. You are stupid. You are very very very very very
sad and stupid. You were manipulated by Hillary's political scheme to
gain the support of white racist stupid hicks. Did you know that
Hillary is actually very liberal? Did you know that she and Obama actually
believe many of the same things? You wouldn't know, because you never
were interested in politics before she started talking about guns and
god. Before that happened, you were happy to sit around shooting guns
and pretending to understand your Bible and not reading about politics.
You are ignorant. Am I enlightening you yet? Do you understand that
politicians just love idiots like you because they can mold you so
easily? Republicans tend to have the upper hand with folks like you. But
clearly Democrats can go after you too if they think it will help them,
but most intelligent Democrats tend not to go after folks like you
because they are too busy trying to get real things done.
(Reply to “F”) Gee, F, I bet you feel better after spewing that Obama-type venom. We are use to such harangues from his supporters. Yet, I think that as of now, you are not serving Obambi’s purposes as he tries to “unite” the party.
If you were cognizant of N.C. demographics (especially since 2003) you wouldn’t make such inane remarks. Remember, we have dictionaries here and can look up anything you “call us”.
The disappointing thing for you is the number of Hillary supporters that won’t accept the hope-hype Kool-aid you have swallowed. Thank God for that!
During the years I have voted democratic, never have I received the nastiness of attacks such as I have witnessed from the Obamatrons. I think you and your kind have surpassed the Rovian Republicans.
Take a week off, chill out, and then help us send NoBAMA back to Chicago, or if you decide not to, I can only quote Annie Oakley: “Get out of my way, Sister, yer crowdin’ my shootin’ arm”.
Charlotte Front and Center
(that’s in Red N.C.)
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting that an avid supporter of Hillary Clinton, Debra Bartoshevich has looked at the candidates for President and made her choice. She’s voting for John McCain.
Debra is an elected delegate to the Democratic National Convention this fall – an emergency room nurse from Racine County, Wisconsin who did not make this decision lightly. Debra made her decision to support John McCain not on the basis of loyalty to a political party, but based on a higher loyalty to her country. She is not alone.
Democrats and Independents from all over the country and from all walks of life are signing up as “Citizens for McCain” here at JohnMcCain.com. Citizens for McCain is an organization within the campaign headed by Senator Joseph Lieberman for people just like Debra, who chose to place their country above political party and support the candidate for President who has a proven record of bipartisan leadership.
You may know Democrats and Independents who want to support John McCain – be sure to invite them to sign up today at www.JohnMcCain.com/Citizens
This particular site is for Independents and Democrats not voting for OBAMA
At no time in the history of the Democratic party has a nominee so close in votes been strongarmed out of a race before the nominating convention. Going to the convention is a right that every candidate has whether they have a million votes or 18 million. We are incensed that party insiders are tampering with the process, with the overt help of a biased media, to shut down the process and nominate a candidate before the convention. Superdelegate endorsements are only valid at the convention. Pledged delegates may even change their minds in the face of persuasive information.
The economy is softening and gas prices are skyrocketing, giving Obama an opening to court conservative value voters who are hurting economically. Fortunately, Hillary Clinton has driven a wedge between these competing constituencies, keeping them in play at the Presidential level. It begs the question of how these voters will vote in Congressional races.
Moreover, John McCain is not a polarizing figure. One could argue he is the opposite - moderate, bi-partisan, and unifying, which makes his claim on value voters different from Bush. How these lunch-bucket Democrats, who are culturally more conservative, vote this fall is the key to victory.
The wine and Chablis culturally liberal voters have made their pick...Obama. They, along with African Americans, form the nucleus of the money, the organization and the energy for Democrats this year. His talk of hope and change at 30,000 feet (I call it "Happy Talk"), though short on specifics, captures liberal anxiety about the direction of the country.
The coalition of cultural liberals and African Americans assembled by Obama has left out vast swaths of middle Americans concerned about the war, gas prices and the economy. But they are hardly ready to embrace McCain, let alone Congressional Republicans. Harsh cultural appeals on abortion and guns may have less to do with bringing these Democrats and Independents on board, than reassuring them that we have answers to these other issues.
But now Obama has pulled through and, by hook or by crook, has secured the Democratic nomination. Some of us abhor the tactics he used. But I have a strong suspicion that he knows how to repair the damage and get himself elected. As Brooks puts it:
Just try to imagine Mister Rogers playing the agent Ari in "Entourage" and it all falls into place.
This article explains why I will never vote for Barack Obama. Perhaps one must live in Chicago in order to understand the enormity of the problem outlined in this investigative report. And by the way, the victims of Obama's collusion with unscrupulous developers who misspent government funds are African-Americans. Some will rationalize this as they mindlessly vote for him in the name of party unity, but I refuse, as I am a person who believes in social justice.Author: Charlotte For Hillary
By Binyamin Appelbaum
Globe Staff / June 27, 2008
CHICAGO - The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can't afford to live anywhere else.
But it's not safe to live here.
About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale - a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.
Grove Parc has become a symbol for some in Chicago of the broader failures of giving public subsidies to private companies to build and manage affordable housing - an approach strongly backed by Obama as the best replacement for public housing.
As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.
But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.
Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.
Some of the residents of Grove Parc say they are angry that Obama did not notice their plight. The development straddles the boundary of Obama's state Senate district. Many of the tenants have been his constituents for more than a decade.
"No one should have to live like this, and no one did anything about it," said Cynthia Ashley, who has lived at Grove Parc since 1994.
Barack Obama is making a fresh appeal to Hillary Clinton’s supporters, part of a strategy to expand and dominate the general election battlefield and put his Republican rival on the defensive nationwide.
Polls show Clinton’s primary election supporters are still very much up for grabs. Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain is actively targeting them — but the Obama campaign is confident it will eventually win over the voter bases that carried Clinton in contests from January to June.
The first big step happened Thursday evening, as Obama and Clinton headed to Washington, D.C., to meet with dozens of her top donors at the Mayflower Hotel. The two senators then travel to Unity, N.H., for their first joint campaign stop Friday. Read More From Fox
from No Quarter USA regarding "I Own My Vote Pledge"
When you read the I Own My Vote Pledge, keep in mind that the demands it contains are not admissions of defeat, nor are they conditions precedent to your vote. Hillary's campaign is only suspended, not ended. And only you can decide when your vote has been earned. Whether you are a PUMA activist, a WomenCountPAC donor, a Just Say No Deal blogger, a Clinton Democrat for McCain, a yellow dog Democrat for VoteBoth, or simply a Hillary Clinton supporter who feels like the Party leaders and their presumptive nominee are ignoring everything that you value, the most powerful statement you can make right now is that YOU OWN YOUR VOTE. Only in finding that common ground will we be counted, for only in that common ground will we be able to count ourselves.
* * * * *
On Saturday, June 7, 2008, Hillary Clinton suspended her historic campaign for President. To her 18 million voters, it may have seemed like an end, but I pledge to make it a beginning … a beginning of a movement to achieve the democratic and just country that Hillary has envisioned for America.
I stand together with Hillary Clinton's 18 million voters to demand that Senator Obama and the Democratic Party:
Bring us together by seating 100% of the Florida and Michigan delegations in Denver with 100% of their votes, allocated in accordance with the popular vote of each state.
Bring us together by adopting policies on the Platform Committee that Hillary Clinton has championed.
Bring us together through reform of the primary and caucus system to reflect the basic principle of one person/one vote.
Bring us together through outspoken denunciation of all gender bias, racism and other forms of discrimination.
Bring us together by fairly and respectfully including Hillary and her supporters at the Democratic National Convention in Denver by, among other things, placing her name in nomination for President, conducting a roll call vote, and providing her a prominent speaking role during prime time on August 26th, the 88th anniversary of women's suffrage.
I own my vote. It does not belong to any party. It does not belong to any candidate. It does not belong to any mob that would impose its will on me. Only I can decide how to use my vote, and I can decide based on any criteria I choose. Therefore I pledge not to give my vote to anyone who does not earn it.
What do Taylor Marsh and other democrats not get about our anger and disillusionment with the DNC? No one signed on to the party with the old Viet Nam mantra of "right or wrong". We have always looked to our party to do the right thing. The strong-arming and selection of Obama is not the democratic process we signed up for. The party is split- and rightfully so. Now the DNC and party ring-leaders compliment Senator Clinton after the primary season has ended. Yes, we are angry, but it isn't sour grapes. The party and its ring-leaders are corrupt, and many will never return until some house-keeping is done.
(updated June 15, 2008)
Corral Women Voters
Evidence from an unidentified source and leaked Obama campaign memorandums have confirmed that Senator Obama's campaign is intensifying their program to corral the female vote.
Reportedly, a huge number of female Clinton supporters are opting out of the Democratic Party after a very contentious primary contest in which Senator Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) stood by while sexism was used to repeatedly diminish Senator Clinton, among other things.
Just Sit On It!
Greta Van Sustern is famous for her brilliant questioning, but no matter how intelligent she is, nothing could help Nancy Pelosi look anything but "lame". I especially noted this when Greta asked Mrs. Pelosi why she was backing Obama who had such a weak resume. The answer will floor you. The word "lame" is forever applied to this inept Speaker of the House. Webster defines it best: lacking needful or desirable substance : weak, ineffectual....that's Nancy.
Author: Mary Ann in Ohio-A Swing State
Since I have been hearing this a lot--threat/blackmail about Roe v Wade, and since for once I have heard it without the more usual ad hominem (feminem?) arguments, I will try to respond.
(And by the way, what has distressed me the most in this contentious period--since most of my friends were/are Obama supporters, is my friends' inability to argue without using ad hominem arguments. One "friend," whom I can barely tolerate now, accused me of being paranoid when I complained about the sexism in the campaign. Another said I read too much about the primary--mostly rumor of course on the internet, and it was making me "irrational," she being a typical low information voter, who in my opinion decided early to vote for the cute Black guy as a way to "erase" her years of white privilege. And where is one supposed to get information if the MSM is in the tank for Obama.) But I digress.
First of all, I am not worried about Roe v Wade. If elected, McCain would have a Democratic Congress and would have to pay some attention to Congress in terms of appointment of judges. Furthermore, I'm not even convinced he is that opposed to Roe v Wade. In the past he has taken some less conservative positions and if elected (one term presumably), then he could do what he wanted. He can't be all bad since Kerry wanted him as his VP.
And in some ways I am less concerned about the effect of the Supreme Court on Roe v Wade than I am on some other issues. (Odd for this long-time unapologetic feminist to say.) Other decisions might have more far-reaching effects--decisions which consistently favor business over the little guy--a preview of which we have had in the past two years. So for a liberal, this is as scary a scenario as undoing Roe v Wade.
In my meanest moods, I don't give a shit about Roe v Wade. All those Obama girls should but they have supported the rock star rather than the candidate who was truly for women's issues. And if they can't get abortions because too many of said no we won't vote for BO, then they have backed the wrong horse and have to pay for their ignorance. I guess I can say this easily because I don't need an abortion and I have no daughter or granddaughter who might want one.
Still, as I understand it, even if Roe v Wade were overturned states might still have the option of allowing abortion. Since blacks and Hispanics don’t get abortions as often, that might only mean that poor white girls would have to have these babies or put them up for adoption. Not all bad since I know a lot of people who have gone to Vietnam and China to adopt babies. Young women with means always were able to get safe abortions--I knew two who actually got them hospitals, where the operation was listed as a D and C (Probably this paragraph is a weak argument--I just can't get too upset about this.)
But there is for me a much much bigger issue. I believe the Democratic party is corrupt and that the fix was in much earlier than most of us were aware of. They front-loaded the primaries (Dean admits to wanting to have minority states voting early--SC.); they allowed 3 states to vote early without penalty; they discounted FLA and MI votes (and didn't let them vote early because they knew Hillary would win and that would have given her momentum); they allowed undemocratic caucuses and never bothered to investigate the numerous instances of fraud (not to mention the unfairness in general of caucuses for people who have to work, care for children or others, or who are disabled since many caucus sites weren't handicapped accessible); they seemingly weren't bothered by the enormous discrepancies between caucus results and unbinding primary results (note Nebraska, for example, where BO barely won in the primary and won overwhelmingly in the caucus); they aren't concerned about the fact that a win of a mere 12000 votes in a caucus state landed BO with 12 delegates whereas a win of several hundred thousand for Hillary in a primary state only gave her 12 delegates; the DNC and Dean never once commented on the incredible misogyny in the campaign; and the crowning blow--the rules committee and Donna Brazille, that fraud and incompetent, who lost Gore the election, who dared to quote her mother about cheating, cheated, giving votes to BO he never won--based on exit polls for God's sake. Had FLA and MI been counted, Hillary would have led in the pledged delegates. Had BO agreed to have a revote in those states she would probably have had the lead as well.
So this is a fraudulent election in which we have apparently ended up with the weaker, unvetted candidate. (I say "apparently" since there's a miniscule chance that something dreadful will come out before the convention which might turn the supers toward Hillary--although it's much more likely there will be an October surprise.) I cannot reward the party for corruption, for "selecting" this candidate rather than letting the best candidate be elected. My husband, a Hillary supporter, but with nothing close to my passion, said after the rules committee debacle that he would never vote Democratic again until they cleaned up their act. (He probably won't vote for McCain, however.)
So why don't I sit it out. I don’t want the party to win. If I don't vote, I deprive BO of one vote. If I vote for McCain, I deprive him of 2 votes. I want to punish the DNC for unethical behavior first. (And I have been a Democrat for more than 40 years because I always thought it was more ethical to be a Democrat than a self-serving Repug.) But in addition, I truly believe that BO would be a terrible choice. Initially, it was just that he was inexperienced (so I would have championed a Hillary-Obama ticket--with her at the top of course--as a way of giving him much needed experience). Now I don't want him any where close to power. I don't think he has the character, the judgment, the maturity to be president. I could go on about this but won't. So for this reason as well I will vote for McCain, knowing that I disagree with many of his policies, but believing as well that he would be a better leader for my country. Today my country is more important than the party. And parenthetically, I think McCain would do a better job getting us out of Iraq than BO.
And I suppose I should add, that McCain's VP choice might alter my thinking. I'd have to stay out of the voting booth if Huckaby (or as Dolly call calls him--Flat-earth-aby) were the VP. And I would not vote for BO if Hillary were his VP (which won't happen). I don't want the terrific candidate subservient to the thin resume.
On the basis of rather inchoate thoughts (now somewhat more articulated) I signed up with Citizens for McCain. I also gave his campaign $10.44--the 44 being symbolic for Hillary. The campaign called me and asked if I would be the spokesperson for this group in northwest Ohio . I asked them to call again in a month. It's one thing to be anathema on the internet. But I'm not sure I could stand to have so many of my friends hating me for outright public support of McCain. So maybe he'll only get my vote (and no more money).
And finally, I have to say that this has been one of the most trying times of my life (surpassed lately only by my cancer). Every insult to Hillary seemed like an insult to me. I thought our society had progressed only to learn that media commentators could say any adolescent, sexist thing they wanted to say--crossing his legs indeed! Or that all the men I know would never say anything so unprofessional and demeaning as "sweetie" and yet a presidential candidate got by with being a "charming" sexist. Every time I saw that raised head of BO looking "down" on Hillary and heard the "you're likeable enough" or saw him give her the finger and make the rap star motions, I was physically ill. My response is only equaled to way I feel every time I see that cocky macho walk of Dubya. I honestly think that BO would be worse than Bush, who at least had executive experience. And Laura seems like a decent person while Michelle (Jackie O in training to the contrary not withstanding) would make Hillary's first ladyship a lesson in politesse.
The smoked-filled room, a secret political gathering for stealth decision-making has long since gone, but the party bosses still weave their silent webs of deceit. It was President Andrew Jackson who headed the public call for the first national convention with delegates.
This year the National Democratic Convention will be held Aug. 25-28 in Denver, Colo., with the primary goals to nominate a candidate for president and vice president, adopt a comprehensive party platform and unite the party. Some previous conventions have been contentious. In 1924, there was a brawl between the “Wets” and the “Drys.” In 1968, there erupted a highly emotional battle between the conventioneers and the Vietnam war protesters.
In 2008, the division is between liberals and the more conservative wing of the party. In working for party unity, the goal is to shut down the fracas. The powerbrokers want a good show, like “American Idol.” They have long since forgotten that conventions are not to ratify nominees.
Conventions are to elect, through the people’s choice, their delegates. Delegates are chosen in a series of individual state caucuses and primary elections. They come from communities across the nation to carry out our constitutional mandate.
Superdelegates, anointed, are elected officials such as governors and congressmen and other party bigwigs. These honorables, vested with the responsibility of voting for a presidential candidate, can be bought with cash, donations to their PACs, contributions to an organization, a project dear to their hearts or commit to a backroom grand bargain. It might be unseemly for a candidate to hand out money to a voter, but almost a million dollars has been handed out by Obama and Clinton in political contributions over the past three years.
Tracking the money
At the state and local level, these contributions are difficult to trace. At the federal level, contributions are reported and traceable. There is a lengthy lag time. Recent figures may take weeks to be reported and analyzed; however, February records can be examined. Obama had donated to delegates more than $700,000; Clinton more than $236,000. Studies have found that a presidential candidate who gives the most money to superdelegates receives their endorsement 82 percent of the time.
The Weekly Standard commented “... if 82 percent of the superdelegates are endorsing the candidate who donated more to them, that’s indicative of something other than a belief in the ‘audacity of hope.’ It sounds like old-fashioned bribery.”
The new politics: candidates lobbying for votes.
Superdelegate power has created skullduggery in our political selection process. The system is an affront to voters, undemocratic and misconstrues the selection process. It thwarts the one- man, one-vote rule. Will we know by August the names of the bought delegates? Should they be seated? Should they acknowledge their 30 pieces of silver? Should they own up to their grand bargain? Should they vote their pockets or vote their convictions? The antiquated superdelegate system should go before the Rules and ByLaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee, be presented to the delegates at the convention and repealed.
The 2000 election was decided by judges acting as delegates. The 2008 election should be decided by delegates acting as judges in open convention. Contentious? A fracas? So what. It would film well.
Francella Poston has been active in community, civic and political affairs, and works actively on governmental fiscal policy. She lives in Asheville.
From US News and World
Obama Looking To Shape Image
On its front page, the Washington Post reports Sen. Barack Obama has "moved aggressively to shape his campaign and offered a clear road map for the kind of candidate he is likely to become in the months ahead: an ambitious gamer of the electoral map, a ruthless fundraiser and a scrupulous manager of his own biography in the face of persistent concerns about how he is perceived." With his first general election ad focusing on his biography, Obama "acknowledged ongoing concerns among his advisers that voters do not know whether he shares the values and beliefs of ordinary Americans, a potentially critical vulnerability." The Washington Times also says that "nearly all U.S. voters recognize" Obama's name, but "the problem is, many don't know much about his background or where he stands on the issues, and Republicans and groups working for his defeat in November are working to define him on their terms." In the Washington Post, Howard Kurtz says Obama "has demonstrated an ability to mesmerize 20,000 people in an arena, but for all his sudden fame, most voters know little about the texture of his life. Now, in ways large and small, he and his staff are trying to add some dabs of color to a gauzy portrait, using media coverage to convey the sense of a down-to-earth fellow." On NBC Nightly News, Kevin Corke reported, "For Barack Obama, two key general election strategies are emerging, as the Illinois senator looks to build on momentum following his tough primary fight. ... First, Obama hopes to blanket the airways with TV ads, reintroducing himself to the American people, part of a 50-state strategy Democrats hope will force the Republicans to fork out big dollars in places they hadn't planned to. ... Another Obama strategy? Equate a McCain presidency with a third Bush term."
The good thing? You know Obama's tricks.
From Fox News
Barack Obama’s campaign has canned its use of an emblem that critics had panned as a theft of the official U.S. presidential seal.
The new seal was trotted out Friday at a round-table discussion with Democratic governors. It had a blue background and an eagle in the center clutching arrows and an olive branch, similar to the president’s logo.
The Elian Gonzalez controversy is resurfacing on the 2008 campaign trail, as a great-uncle of the Cuban boy speaks out against two Barack Obama advisers who played a role in the dispute eight years ago.
The Miami Herald reported that Delfin Gonzalez planned to hold a news conference Friday in Miami to coincide with Obama’s arrival in the state, where the presumptive Democratic nominee is holding a fundraising event Friday night. Read More
Larry Sinclair to Meet with NPC
cross-posted: Change and Experience
Washington, D.C. - Despite death threats and an organized campaign to prevent him from speaking publicly, Larry Sinclair -- on June 18, 2008, at 2:00 PM (Sign in begins at 1:00 PM) in the Holeman Lounge of the National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC 20045, will for the first time reveal the corroborating evidence for his claim that on November 6 + 7, 1999, Larry: (i) met Obama at a gay bar where Barrack Obama arranged for the purchase of federal Schedule II drugs, (ii) which Larry and Obama thereafter ingested and (iii) then engaged in hi-risk, homosexual activities.
Larry's story burst on to the scene on January 18, 2008, when Larry released a short video containing these allegations on YouTube.com. That video has had close to a million views yet the mainstream media has completely ignored Larry's serious allegations. Thereafter, a clearly orchestrated campaign to discredit Larry began on the internet which forced Larry to resort to federal court to protect his reputation.
At the press conference, Larry will (i) reveal the corroborating evidence for his allegations regarding Obama, (ii) address the time-line of the response of the Obama campaign to his allegations and the murder of Donald Young, the openly gay choir director of Trinity United Church of Christ, Obama's now-former church and (iii) the significance of the refusal of U.S. District Court Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. to allow Larry's case to proceed.
Two Muslim women were prohibited from sitting behind the podium at Barack Obama’s Monday rally in Detroit, apparently so their headscarves would not appear in photographs with him, according to a report Wednesday in the Politico.com.
The Washington-based Web site reported that Obama campaign volunteers said the women could not wear the hijabs behind the candidate, though they gave different reasons for the rule.
One volunteer said that one of the women could not be seen on TV with Obama “because of the political climate and what’s going on in the world and what’s going on with Muslim Americans,” according to the Muslim woman’s friend.
You Have to be kidding...read on