All Children Matter and Democratic Candidates Part 2

I think the discussion needs to keep going about All Children Matter. It has come to my attention that some candidates are "claiming" they didn't know All Children Matter would send out mailings for them. If anyone believes that, I have some swamp land to sell them. I have never been a candidate for public office and only heard of ACM about 2 months ago and even I knew they would send mailings out for the candidates who responded to the questionnaire and were "endorsed." The question still remains, why did these candidates even respond?

Let's make up a new scenario. What if Georgia Right to Life sent questionnaires to all candidates who qualified for the state legislature and if they filled them out and interviewed they would get the same support as long as they were "open minded" and let's even go any further if they were open to limitations on abortions. Democrats and Pro-Choice activists would be outraged and the blogosphere would be lit up with the issue.

Although I'm disappointed by incumbents that were supported by the group, I am deeply troubled by new candidates who fell into the trap of bowing to special interests before the polls even close. We must hold our candidates and elected officials accountable for their actions.

All Children Matter and Democratic Candidates

The AJC reported today an issue that has been bothering me for a while. All Children Matter is a group that is led by Republicans that encourage candidates and elected officials to support school vouchers. They have dumped thousands of dollars into our democratic candidates coffers.

I have a few issues with the way the process has worked.

1. The group did independent expenditures for campaigns as well as campaign donations. The only way they were able to do that is if the candidate responded to the questionnaire that was sent to them. Why are our democratic candidates getting in bed with republican led voucher groups and where is GAE on this issue?

2. Are they trying to infiltrate the Democratic Caucus so that when these people get in office, they will be sympathetic to their issues?

I think we should hold our candidates and elected officials accountable on this matter.

Since everyone is on this full disclosure kick I must give mine. I worked against Joel Alvarado in State House District 55 in the primary and he was an All Children Matter's candidate as well as Rahn Mayo. I am also actively supporting Ralph Long in the Primary Runoff against Keisha Waites who is another All Children Matter's candidate however this issue is bigger than a handful of candidates. If they actively get involved in state races, what is next? School Board races on all level?

Note to candidates

Dear Candidates,

When you are placing yard signs in your various districts, please make sure you do not put them in abandoned homes, particularly ones that are boarded up or the yards are overgrown.  Also refrain from placing them in abandoned lots where you can barely see the sign because the grass hasn't been cut in years.

It makes you look as if you aren't in tune with the needs of your community.  With the mortgage crises and foreclosures as well as the lack of basic services in certain communities,  you just become known as a career politician who is insensitive and doesn't really care what is going on in your communities.  If you want to really win votes, cut some abandoned lots or go and board up some houses that are abandoned and only God knows what is going on in them.

The DPG and the voter file ..

There has been a lot of discussion about the DPG's new policy to not offer its voter file to candidates challenging incumbents but I really don't see what the big deal is. I agree that it may protect incumbents but I'm not sure if that is a bad thing. Let's say Markel Hutchins decided to challenge John Barrow or Jim Marshall. I feel its better to protect these incumbents and give them a slight advantage to prevent knuckle-heads from getting in a race and siphoning resources that should be used to protect their seat in November. Does the DCCC, DNC, DSCC, or DLCC let candidates challenging Democratic incumbents come into the office for fundraising calls? I don't think so. They are about protecting incumbents.

You are also accepting the premise that if a candidate can't get the voter file from the DPG that they can't get good voter data to run a campaign. How many incumbents actually buy their data from the DPG versus someone who sells it on a consultant basis?

Yes it's true that the party is cutting into potential revenue but is it really that significant. I think we have new leadership in the party and we should give them the benefit of the doubt and see how everything turns out.

Experience AND Inspiration

Roseanne Barr has in interesting piece on the huffington post today entitled Experience Vs Inspiration. Its quite obvious Roseanne is a supporter of Hillary Clinton and I have no problem with that.

Let me say first, that I respect Roseanne and admire her work as an entertainer. I'm probably one of the biggest Roseanne fans out and I'm still waiting to get the rest of her seasons on DVD. However there is a huge fallacy in her argument that Senator Clinton is more experienced than Obama.

Senator Obama has been an elected official for over 10 years compared to Clinton's 8. Before that, he was a community organizer on the Southside of Chicago fighting for working families. Senator Clinton sat on the board of walmart.

Senator Obama does have the ability to inspire others. He is bringing thousands of new voters into the fold (which may make the difference in downballot elections). So how can we turn that away?

The question isn't, who is the most experienced, the question is which experience is best for working families and which experience will help beat John Mccain.

I think it's time for Tavis Smiley to go kick rocks...

Senator Obama has taken heat recently by Commentator Tavis Smiley for not attending his yearly day long promo for his books The State of the Black Union.

Although I enjoy watching the State of The Black Union on C-SPAN, I find it quite pointless. It's a group of liberal academics who sit around and talk about issues concerning the African American community. Sen. Obama is in for the fight of his life in Texas and Ohio and needs to spend all of his time there campaigning. If Mr. Smiley REALLY cares about issues concenring the black community, he would care about our candidates working towards winning the presidency and extending our majority in Congress instead of pimping candidates to line his own pockets.

Below is an excerpt from a Washington Post blog that has quotes from both parties:

"Obama followed up with a letter to Smiley, dated Feb. 13. In it, Obama explained why he declined the invitation, saying that he needed to campaign in states that Clinton must win to in order to topple her candidacy. "I will be on the campaign trail every day in states like Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin talking directly to voters about the causes that are at the heart of my campaign and the State of the Black Union forum such as affordable housing, economic opportunity, civil rights and foreign policy," Obama said in his letter. He had offered to have his wife, Michelle, speak in his stead at the State of the Black Union, but Smiley had declined. "I ask that you reconsider," Obama wrote. "Michelle is a powerful voice for the type of reach change America is hungry for."
Smiley responded in a commentary on the Tom Joyner Morning Show, condemning Obama's decision with his usual strong, passionate, rapid-fire delivery. He recounted the gist of his statement in the interview. "I think it is a miscalculation on his part not to appear and a missed opportunity.""I love Barack Obama and I love black people," Smiley said. "I celebrate his past accomplishments and I celebrate his future aspirations. I never wanted to stand in the path of his growth."However, he said, "My job is to ask the critical question, to raise these issues and keep these guys focused. There are some people who are disappointed that I'm not jumping up and down saying, 'Vote for Barack Obama.' That's not my role as a journalist. That's not what I do."


Smiley has acknowledged that he has received criticism as well as death threats. While I don't agree with death threats, I think he should receive criticism. Someone needs to tell him to go kick rocks.

The Case for Obama

I have been a supporter of John Edwards since the day after the 2004 election. I supported him because I felt like we needed a change in Washington. We needed someone who wasn't too entrenched with Washington Lobbyists to turn the place upside down. Senator Edwards is one of those few public servants who I feel "get it." From predatory lending to health care, Edwards was the first to jump on these issues and shape the debate of the party.

When Senator Edwards dropped out of the race, I was taken aback! Who should I support now? I actually went back and looked at the candidates on the issues before I made a decision and I started leaning towards one candidate. I watched the debate and started leaning towards another.

Then I started thinking about past elections. Although I was just in elementary school, I clearly remember the 1992 presidential election. That's the first presidential election I actually remember and I recall a young man that accepted our nomination from a place called Hope and I remember the excitement that I felt for this candidate at 7 years old. That man, Bill Clinton, went on to become President and change this country. I want kids all around this country to get the feeling that I did. I moved to the near present and started reflecting about sitting in the Fleet Center in Boston in 2004 and the night before John Kerry accepted the nomination, I remember a country boy from South Carolina assuring us that Hope is on the way. That speech touched me dearly and Senator Edwards has had my support since.

As the old folks used to say back home in Birmingham, Alabama, "I need someone to Hope me!" I need a president that knows the policy end of the Oval Office and will be ready to make the tough decisions but I also need someone that can assure American's fears in this tumultuous time.

From the Iraq War to Education, Barack Obama is the best and most progressive candidate left to beat the Republicans on every issue.

Although I have already voted for John Edwards, my support goes to Senator Barack Obama in hopes that he becomes the next President of The United States of America.

A Unified Party

The past week has been interesting. First we had the departure of Senator John Edwards from the presidential race. Of course this saddened me as well as many others. Senator Edwards has fought for all Americans and has continuously shaped the debate of the primary.

Last night's CNN debate was great! we saw our two potential nominees have an open discussion of the issues that didn't leave anyone bitter and didn't give the Republicans ammunition for the general election.

Although we don't have a nominee yet, I feel like we are at the right place to go forward to beat any Republican in November.

After watching the debate last night, I wonder if someone pulled the coattails of the 3 candidates and told them that they need to get their act together and work toward the common cause.

Grady CEO Resigned

The AJC is reporting that Grady CEO Otis Story has resigned. Mr. Story is the 4th CEO since 2005. Rep. Pam Stephenson who also serves as chair of the Grady Board will be the interim CEO. This is a troubling time for Grady and I hope the new leadership (Board and CEO) will work to making sure critical services such as the dialysis unit and the pharmacy are not cut.

On another note about Grady, it is time for the legislature to stop playing politics and cough up the money. The board approved its restructuring plan and at this point has done its part. It's now time for Fulton County, Dekalb County, and the state to do what they need to to ensure this hospital stays afloat.

Hopefully the last time I will talk about Obama and Race.

Obviously race has become a major issue in this campaign and I'm quite sick of it so I have a few things to say.

I find it INSULTING that people want to degrade African Americans who are not supporting Sen. Obama.

The basis of the criticism is pure hypocrisy. How does ANYONE have the testicular fortitude to say anything about a person whose decision to support a candidate is not based on race. Let's look at this scenario....

Average Joe is a white male and decides to support Senator Obama. A Clinton or Edwards supporter criticized Joe for not supporting a white candidate and called him a "nigger lover." The media outlets, bloggers, and activists would go crazy and DEMAND apologies from the campaign as well as the supporter.

I also have issue with the ignorance of supporting Sen Obama just because he is black. I REFUSE to choose a candidate just because of race. There are more important things to look at including elect ability, character, and if the candidate is speaking about issues that are important to me. Too many times have I seen elected officials and activists, including many African Americans who have SOLD US OUT on too many issues that affect us such as payday lending, affordable housing, public housing, gentrification, police brutality, education, and access to affordable health care, to blindly give them my support. For example, I also wouldn't expect myself or any other African American to support George Bush's nominee to the supreme court just because he is black. (Not to call anyone out but it's something to think about)

I would love to see a Black president in the near future, but its more important to me to win and bring about the change that I think will most benefit everyone and Senator Obama is respectfully not my choice.

As a good friend said recently, "What is HOPE? Hope essentially is the by-product of the absence of a definitive PLAN. (i.e. "Lets HOPE we make it to church on time this week...I HOPE the Lakers win tomorrow...I HOPE Obama isn't the democratic nominee") Something Obama's campaign clearly lacks - a plan"

You know, I never marched with King and my parents were in diapers around that time so they didn't either but I do think I remember hearing him say something about judging someone by "the content of their character and not the color of their skin" but what do I know, I'm just a young buck who is wet behind his ears and has a slavery mentality..

I do challenge everyone before they go to the voting booth to look at a few things...
1. What are the platforms of each candidate? Which one most represents you
2. Who is most likely to beat a republican and help down ballot races as well (US Senate and House, governors, and State Legislature races)

If you can honestly answer that your candidate does this, then I can respect you and your choice, but if you can't respect mine, go kick rocks.

Delegate breakdown

Here is a current breakdown of the delegate count for both parties

Democrats (2025 needed)
Clinton - 183
Obama- 78
Edwards - 52
Kucinich - 1

Republicans (1191 needed)

Romney 30
Huckabee- 21
Mccain- 10
Thompson- 6
Paul-2
Guliani- 1

The only thing that this tells us is that the primaries are far from over. There is no candidate that is anywhere near the votes needed to win the nomination. I think the next month will be interesting as the candidates criss cross the country seeking delegates.

With Richardson out, the Nevada race just got more interesting. I am wondering if the Clinton Campaign is trying to usurp the nominating process and will name Governor Richardson as her running mate soon in an attempt to trump all other campaigns. If that is the case, this is how I see the next few weeks playing out...

Clinton names Richardson as VP.
Clinton Skips South Carolina and focuses on Nevada
After the South Carolina, Edwards joins Obama as a ticket,
The campaigns come into Georgia California and other Feb 5 states campaigning stronger than ever and the central theme will still be "change vs. experience"

My question is, if this happens, which ticket benefits? Do we go all the way through the primary not knowing who our nominee is? Will that cause a knockdown dragout fight on the convention floor then Al Gore is nominated from the floor? (I come up with these scenarios at 4am when i'm battling insomnia)

Why I think John Edwards can still win the nomination

John Edwards has been polling in 3rd place for months and was often seen as a second tier candidate. Senator Edwards was outspent by Senator Clinton and still managed to beat her in the Iowa Caucuses. A former first lady who had the "establishment" supporting her as well as the former POTUS as well as Secretary of State campaigning for her to be beat by a former Senator who many pundits wrote off is AMAZING!!!

I believe that Senator Clinton will spend a lot of her money attacking Senator Obama in the next few days before the New Hampshire Primary. If Edwards continues a positive message, he may be able to siphon votes from both candidate and make a surprising show in New Hampshire and particularly South Carolina.

Alot of people are supporting Obama because he is black. This is more than about race. This is about electing the person that most represents your values. I must say this as I have been saying for a while as well, HOPE doesn't put food on the table, HOPE doesn't give you a fair mortage, HOPE doesn't give you universal healthcare.

Many people talk about Obama and the black vote, I'm still supporting a candidate who talks about issues that affect African Americans.