I voted no on mandating physical presence because it both favors urbanites and uses fuel and thus causes global warming. Thinking at home also helps reduce herd mentality and snap decisions common to meetings.
I can see using some time membership requirement because DFA needs to be able to usefully claim members over time in order to grant voting rights, but I voted "not sure" because such requirements could very easily become excessive. A 2 week membership requirement should be plenty for now. I hope there is a decent, online way to prevent multiple votes by one individual with multiple online accounts, as that would help a great deal.

PS I know all about herd mentality because I raise cattle, It's like having a whole party convention or legislature in my pasture. Cows are so much more like people than cats or dogs.

Votes also get counted more carefully by computers than by voice vote especially, and abstaining is counted more properly by computers than at meetings too. Calling for objections, recieving none for about one second, and assuming broad support for a proposal is especially misleading.

Online voting allows bloggers like me to invite folks to join DFA and have a say so.  It means having newbies voting right along with folks who might be more experienced, but it means bringing more people into the process.

 I'd love to post at ScruHoo that folks can jump in and have a say.  Many will come over and sign up.  Many of those will stick around and stay active.

Web Roots (thank you Daily KOS for that name) can be extremely powerful.  It could be that some people can't make the DFA meetings and this would give them the chance to participate.

For example, I live in the south part of the country just north of the Henderson County line.  It is inconvenient to travel to North Asheville for a 1 or 2 hour meeting in the evening.  I'm willing to travel if candidates will show up, but from my past experience they don't seem to be too interested in DFA.

I believe we should use computer and wireless technology as much as possible to have an influence on the outcome of elections.  For old timers (and I'm one of them at 67) who want to sit and home and wait for the phone to ring for someone to tell them how to vote is a thing of the past.

Blogs can be extremely important for open dialogue and for spreading the word about issues and candidates.  In fact, I trust blogs over the news media.  NYT and WPO finally report something after it's been in the blogosophere for 2 weeks.  At least they're willing to follow our lead.

The Buncombe County Democratic Party decided to remove the blog from their web site so it is important that DFA make a local blog that is easy to find -- and that is limited to North Carolina issues.  The failing of most blogs (i.e. AC-T) is that bloggers are busy attacking each other and not offering any new content.  It's important that DFA not let this happen.

Thanks again Phil. (And Gordon and Alan.) As far as setting up a blog, I think that's really going to have to wait until we have a proprietary DFA-Asheville website. Our last polling thread, for example, got hijacked by folks from Blog for America who wanted to weigh in on DFA's national endorsment process.

But I agree about the importance of blogs in general, and I think that even Gordon would agree that it would be useful to have more local blogs. I hope we can offer something soon, but until then there's always ScruHoo.

Gordon, are you saying no membership restrictions in endorsement votes? Or are you just saying, "hey, I like this poll thing. You should do more of them."

I have some arguments against online voting. 

One advantage of requiring people to show up at the meeting where the vote is taken is that it ensures that all who are voting have heard the stump speech of each candidate that they are voting on. Direct democracy only works if the voters are informed. I want to know that DFA voters are making informedvotes.

OR

Maybe we don't have to close the voting the evening of the candidate forum. We could vBlog it and give DFAers a week to vote.

About limiting voting membership, I am in favor of having some loose requirements. Some time at DFA activities or campaigning for a DFA endorsed candidate in the past or public service on a progressive agenda, etc. would keep DFA from being taken over by trolls. 

Dean is first.

It would help if the purpose of this thread were explained.  What were the results of the endorsement vote?

Or is that the wrong question to ask.

Linda, re: contributions to Dodd from hedge funds and financial services institutions.  Since he's the chair of the Banking Committee, that sector is naturally interested.  If I were involved in that sector, I would appreciate regulation that levels the playing field and makes it difficult for scammers to do their thing. 

Frankly, I hadn't paid any attention to Dodd before he announced his candidacy.  So, I don't know his record.  What I do know is that he's attentive to input that he perceives to be credible because I've seen some of my input show up in his speeches and decisions.  What i suspect on the basis of his being Catholic, is that he's not averse to making mistakes (sins), admitting them, doing penance, and moving on. (That's probably the main contribution of Catholicism--it frees people from guilt, which is an inhibiting emotion).  What I also suspect is that he's committed to the principles of Catholicism, but not the hierarchical order.  I deduce that from the fact that he's married a Mormon.

There are a lot of us Catholics who subscribe fully to the moral principles of Christ but have a problem with the hierarchy trying to determine the minutiae of people's lives. 

Have you all seen this?  Wow, compare the "three front runners"...

like to Senator Dodd...then the Repubs....Kucincih  et al.  Pretty funny.(NOT)

Some looked like they copied each others papers and seemed so canned.

Some actually gave RESPONSES and thought instead of "I'll increase funding  or I'll DOUBLE the money"

but not tell you what they'd do with all that money they're giving. 

ONE members sent tens of thousands of petitions asking all of the presidential candidates to go on the record with their plans to combat extreme poverty and global disease.

Watch their video replies below and then choose up to three to compare.

and/or

Compare candidates

choose up to 3 at a time to compare the candidates

http://onevote08.org/candidatesvideos/

REPOST...cutoff.

1:40PM

Have you all seen this? Wow, compare the "three front runners"...

like to Senator Dodd...then the Repubs....Kucincih et al. Pretty funny.(NOT)

Some looked like they copied each others papers and seemed so canned.



Some actually gave RESPONSES and thought instead of "I'll increase funding or I'll DOUBLE the money"

but not tell you what they'd do with all that money they're giving.





ONE members sent tens of thousands of petitions asking all of the presidential candidates to go on the record with their plans to combat extreme poverty and global disease.

Watch their video replies below and then choose up to three to compare.

and/or

Compare candidates



choose up to 3 at a time to compare the candidates

http://onevote08.org/candidatesvideos/



ugh.....what to want for CHRISTMAS.

Huron John
Thu, 12/20/07

Reply to this

I have a question for some Obamanites: what has he done to prove that he's a legit anti-war progressive? What bills has he pushed through the senate to prove that he's dedicated to ending this war?

In all fairness, what has anybody "pushed through" to end the occupation? 

Kucinich does not have a shot, no doubt, but John Edwards has spoken more about the issues that effect poor blacks far more vividly than either Obama or Clinton.

Edwards speaks a lot, that's for sure. But what did he "push through" to back up his rhetoric when he had the chance?

Anyone who supports Edwards or not is invited to answer that question.

re: contributions to Dodd from hedge funds and financial services institutions.  Since he's the chair of the Banking Committee, that sector is naturally interested.  If I were involved in that sector, I would appreciate regulation that levels the playing field and makes it difficult for scammers to do their thing.

I don't see how someone who is as healthily cynical as you are with regard to politcians can reconcile this statement with that. Corporations don't bribe politicians to level the playing field -- they do it to TILT it in their favor.

Frankly, I hadn't paid any attention to Dodd before he announced his candidacy.  So, I don't know his record.

I really truly don't like pointing this out, but I distinctly remember a post of yours where you said, "Records matter." 

I agree with that one. 

are you saying no membership restrictions in endorsement votes?

With regard to DFA, what does it take to be a "member" but to sign up and log in? I like that because it is inclusionary rather than exclusionary. The more the merrier -- and the broader the perpective. And we sure need new blood on this blog too. Please stick around.

December 20, 2007
Tancredo to abandon White House bid

South Dakota: Where Irony Goes to Die

One of today's big national stories is about the Lakota Indians pulling out of treaties with the United States that were signed up to 150 years ago.

Here's the big story on argusleader.com, South Dakota's largest newspaper.

One of South Dakota’s most well-known philanthropists has agreed to inject millions of dollars into one of the state’s most recognizable tourist attractions, the Crazy Horse Memorial.

No mention of the Lakota story.  Not a peep.

9. Monica, actually, I wasn't trying to point out Dodd's contributions, alone per se', from Hedge Funds. You brought up prices for Oil due to speculation and Hedge Funds, and I posted how much those Hedge Funds were playing in this game. And, the other front runners, I believe received double, but it is something we all have to think about as special interests have sucha key role in our government.

And then that leads to the next question. What is Dodd's, for example, record, in comparison to his contributors. We, for example do know the others. One of them has a habit of voting for his contributors where he gives special phrases to the action and meaning. ie "compromise" "trim your sails". etc.

One of today's big national stories is about the Lakota Indians pulling out of treaties with the United States that were signed up to 150 years ago.

<>With Bush pulling the US out of everything form the Kyoto Agreement to the Geneva Convention, it seems fitting that they are finally pulingl out of gunpoint treaties that robbed them of not just their land, but their very identity as a people. 

One of South Dakota’s most well-known philanthropists has agreed to inject millions of dollars into one of the state’s most recognizable tourist attractions, the Crazy Horse Memorial.

I'll take my daughter to see that before I do the monstrosity on Rushmore. 

Tancredo to abandon White House bid

I imagine Kieth Olbermann is the only person sorry to hear it since Tancredo was such a good source of ridicule. 

20. LOL ... I forgot he was still running. When I saw that, I had to pause...?Hunter...Tancredo...Thompson?....wait...didnt' Hunter already drop out? LOL (I talk to myself a lot) :)

OOPS, my bad. Monica, Nope, it wasn't double, it was the same.

The Securities and Investments were double what Dodd received.

14.  Yes, Sitka, records matter.  I'm just admitting that I haven't checked the totality of Dodd's career in the Senate.  In part, that's because the presidency is a crap shoot.  I don't actually think a legislative position is a good predicate for an executive one, but neither Richardson, Huckabee or Giuliani recommend themselves. And I was really wrong about Bush Two!  Not that I voted for him, but I did think he couldn't be all that bad.  LOL

Linda wrote "[T]hat leads to the next question. What is Dodd's, for example, record, in comparison to his contributors. We, for example do know the others. One of them has a habit of voting for his contributors where he gives special phrases to the action and meaning. ie 'compromise' 'trim your sails'. etc. "

If this question is truly of interest, here's an excerpt from Dodd's Meet the Press appearance in October 2007:

MR. RUSSERT:  Let me ask you about another issue that’s been front and center and discussed, but a very different reaction from you, and that’s hedge funds.

SEN. DODD:  Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT:  And here it is from your home state paper, Stanford Advocate. “Among Democrats running for president, Connecticut’s” Chris “Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman who has stated his reluctance to hike taxes on hedge fund profits, leads in political contributions from the booming investment sector.

“The tax code allows hedge fund executives to pay capital gains taxes at 15 percent on a portion of the profits they earn known as ‘carried interest’ instead of paying the personal income tax rate, which can go as high as 35 percent.

“Dodd received $726,950 in donations from hedge fund executives for the first six months of the year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.”

And then this from The Hill, a luncheon that you canceled when it became public.  “Senate Banking Committee Chair Chris Dodd invited top executives in the equity and fixed-income trading divisions of the nation’s largest banks to have lunch with him in Manhattan in the hope of recruiting bundlers for his presidential campaign.”

You raise money from these guys, and then the legislation which would raise the tax rate to 30 percent, 35 percent, which normal people pay, gets killed.

SEN. DODD:  Well, no.  As always...

MR. RUSSERT:  Old time politics.

SEN. DODD:  Hasn’t been killed at all.  In fact, I haven’t come out even in favor or opposed.  The only thing I said...

MR. RUSSERT:  Harry Reid said—the leader of the Senate Democrats said it’s dead.

SEN. DODD:  It’s not dead.  I don’t think it’s dead at all.  And the point being is this.  Look, there’re unintended consequences to these actions.  As, as chairman of the banking—I’ve been on that committee for 26 years here. The next president of the United States is responsible for a $14 trillion economy.  Having some idea of capital formation of the country, having a pro-growth Democrat that cares about these issues:  What happens to endowments?  What happens to retirement accounts?  What happens to pensions? There are issues here that need to be addressed beyond the tax question.  And as chairman of that committee, the responsible answer, I think, is, let’s examine this.  Dick Shelby, the Republican former chair of that committee, and I’ve sent letters to the Treasury Department, the SEC saying, “Tell us what the implications of all of this are.  Are there some downsides to this we ought to consider?” I consider that sort of responsible reaction here.  I knew the politics of this thing.  Coming out against hedge funds doesn’t require any great leap of understanding.  Doing what’s right and responsible on the issue is critical.  I’ve been on this committee for a quarter of a century.  I know these issues very, very well.  No one has fought harder against the credit card industry, no one’s fought harder against the predatory lending and the housing issues, no one’s fought harder against the defrauds that went on in the student loan business.  There’s a long history.  I’ve also stood up where I thought the financial services sector was doing the right thing. Having someone running for the presidency as a Democrat who understands these issues is not a liability, it’s an asset, I think, when you consider the important fiscal questions...(unintelligible).

MR. RUSSERT:  But these are the managers, the managers of the funds.  The funds would not be affected, Senator, you know that.  These are a handful of people who are making hundreds of millions of dollars, and if the tax rate was increased, the testimony before the Senate was, they’d still be in the business, they’d just pay the taxes.

SEN. DODD:  There’s no question about that.  But the question is what do you do with that all of a sudden?  Where does that shift resource capacity, Tim? It is not—it isn’t a slam dunk answer.  There are people who legitimately think there’re problems with changing the tax code on this point.  They may ultimately, the point you’re making, be correct.  I’m not disagreeing with that.

MR. RUSSERT:  So you might support it?

SEN. DODD:  Absolutely.  My question was a responsible member of the committee, what ought to be the case here is saying what are the implications of this.  I recall back years ago with the S and L crisis, people made a similar suggestion, and as a result of what they did, we had a huge problem on our hands.  So here I’m merely trying to suggest that we act responsibly.

I'm just admitting that I haven't checked the totality of Dodd's career in the Senate.

That's commendable. The totality of such a long record would be difficult, if not impossible, to know. 

And I was really wrong about Bush Two!  Not that I voted for him, but I did think he couldn't be all that bad.

I pretty much expected what we've got. I remember NeoCon talking heads saying he would "finish the job in Iraq" even before the election. SNL did a skit with Will ferrel as Bush in the Oval Office as DC burned in the backround. Now THAT was prescient! 

OK, so Dodd claims he voted against that noxious bankruptcy revision which stuck it to ordinary folk.  Whether he did or not, it passed and somebody else is going to have to do another revision.

But, I was following a forum with Rep. Miller on KOS in which he made the point that home mortgages as the ONLY debt that cannot be adjusted by a bankruptcy judge.  A judge can make adjustments for debts owed on washers and dryers, but not on people's homes.  And then there are all of those other provisions like huge penalties for paying off a mortgage early, whether you're refinancing at a lower rate or just inherited money from grandma.  And, if the mortgage holder forcloses and sells the property at less than the mortgage, the person who's lost his house, still owes the difference and, if it's written off, then the IRS considers that income and wants to collect tax.

What's really irksome is that in the early eigthties when I was active in trying to get people mortgages from the local banks, the historic default rate on all home loans was less than one percent (much lower than any other class of borrowers) and yet people whose families had owned a property for generations couldn't get a mortgage to make necessary improvements because they were poor risks.  They were screwing with the people then and they're screwing with them now and being rich is supposed to be a sign of virtue. 

Well, these revelations about Dodd's record are going to dimish my honorary (and temporary) support for him as reward for filibustering the telecom immunity amendment. I hope he moves up and crowds the top polling candidates.

opps...... Well, these revelations about Dodd's record aren't going to dimish my honorary (and temporary) support for him...

Did HQ's understand they were promoting a private conversation in North Carolina when they front paged this thread?

This was one DFA group having give and take in a space they thought was theirs.

Oh well. since we are never on topic on anything but tomorrows news I hope they were finished with that one.

25.  Well, see, that's what comes from not watching TV and going to bed early.  I miss out on a lot of wisdom.

Though, I'm thinkin' that what "finish the job" actually meant was a well-kept secret.  That it was the New World's turn to dominate the globe was a bit of a logical stretch.  It's still hard to take the PNAC people seriously. 

Dodd is in as prime a spot to deal with sub-prime from his Chairmanship of Banking as he would be as President.

What the Hedge Fund tax rate proved beyond a doubt is that money moves to escape taxes.

that is why I proposed to tax the movement of money to get something from people just shifting it around, so everybody pays something

Sitka
Thu, 12/20/07

___________________________________________________________________________

You may recall Bush' Inauguration Day...............cold, grey, damp with rain............a miserable scene.............set the stage for the next 8 years...................

You may recall Bush' Inauguration Day...............cold, grey, damp with rain............a miserable scene.............set the stage for the next 8 years...................

Didn't watch a minute of it (and to this day I haven't watched Bush for any longer than it takes to change the channel or turn off the TV) but I do remember hearing about Larry King hugging him on behalf of CNN (I've never watched him anyway) which their reporter Jonathan King was said to have complained loudly about.

Dodd answers honestly. He didn't have to back peddle and he never claimed something that doesn't jive with what he did.

Bush 2 is not as bad in some areas as I expected(only because WE worked hard to stop some of it-ie Social Security and Health Care accoutns) and is even much worse than even I expected in other areas.

My new pressure cooker arrived...I'm a happy camper...I guess I'll have to try it out for tonight and make falafels!


All be well.

I see that former Senator Kerrey of Nebraska has apologized for attacking Obama's background. Obama has accepted the apology.

The Clinton campaign really has an interesting M.O. here; attack on drugs, let it run a few news cycles, then apolgize to keep the story running. Attack on experience, let it run a few news cycles and apologize and keep it running; and now attacks from Kerrey on his background, let it run a few news cycles, then apologize, and keep the story running.

I hope the voters realize this hit and run tactic for what it is. A well orchestrated smear campaign. Makes me ill to think she may be the nominee.

back for a second. I also think it fair to post, not only, with the transcripts provided by Tom ( thank you) of questioning Senator Dodd and receiving money from the financial insitutions,

Senator Dodd not only didn't vote on the Bankruptcy Bill, but he also DID vote on the Amendment to limit how much the financial institutions could charge the debtors.

S.Amdt. 31 to S. 256

Statement of Purpose: To limit the amount of interest that can be charged on any extension of credit to 30 percent.

YEAs ---24
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)

Not Voting - 2
Feingold (D-WI) Inouye (D-HI)

______________________________


So here, you have perfect proof that even with his biggest donors and he still didn't drop his drawers-so to speak :)

Kudos.

Personally, I tend to think that a 35% tax rate is a bit excessive.  It's actually the rate our property tax in NH comes to as a percentage of our pension and SS income.  If we didn't have some other income from investments, we wouldn't be able to stay on our property in NH in a house we built with our own hands.

The question Dodd was, in essence, asking was whether the actual taxes paid would be higher at 35% than at the !5% rate.  That's because the tax is on capital gains which are only realized when assets are sold or exchanged.  Now, while I considered it criminal to encourage people to sell their homes to buy up and use their capital gains to buy stuff they really didn't need, if people are just playing with money, like gamblers, then the more often they turn it over, the better.  Their playing with money doesn't really affect the economy as such.  True, their talents are wasted on playing with money, but that they have talents for something more substantial is doubtful. /snark/

I like to think of money as being comparable to words.  Money facilitates the transfer of things as words facilitate the transfer of ideas and thoughts.  Money and words are similar in that no matter how many times they are used, their value isn't diminished and it doesn't make any difference how many people use them.  On the other hand, when money and words are artificially limited, mankind suffers.  You can never have too much money, but when there's not enough things go bad.

So, the problem we have is that some people don't have enough money or don't get enough for their work to keep themselves and their progeny thriving.  But, taking it away from those who we think have too much doesn't necessarily get it to those who don't have enough.  There has to be some other way to insure that people are paid fair wages.   Which is why I don't think the minimum wage increase was nearly enough and if recent migrants arene't being paid a fair wage, then that's something to address with the employers, not the migrants.

Builders are hiring migrants to build McMansions on the coast of Georgia.  The reason they have to cut costs on labor (materials have been surprisingly constant) is because the land speculators have jacked up the price of lots way beyond reason.  Never mind that the stuff being built is largely uninhabited.  People are investing in new houses that they only live in part of the year.  Which is why I think this real estate bubble is going to be a real disaster.  While we have an increasing number of homeless people, we also have an increasing number of peopleless homes.  Which actually supports the finding that only one in ten subprime mortgages were for first-time buyers.  The rest were for the purchase of more housing than people actually need.

My guess is that the hedge fund people are going to be hit hard.  And so they should be. Vulture capitalism has to be discouraged.  Perhaps after they feel the pain, they'll be more willing to have the really bad actors regulated out. 

36.

I see that former Senator Kerrey of Nebraska has apologized for attacking Obama's background. Obama has accepted the apology.

The problems is that Kerrey's remarks were played over and over on CNN but, so far, I haven't seen anything about his apology to Obama.

Unfortunately, for people who don't pay much attention, only the first remarks stick in their mind and they never hear the latter.

In the recent poll, if you can believe any of them, 17% of "voters' (who really knows if they are) believe that BO is a muslim.

70% aren't sure what he is which is no problem since it shouldn't matter anyway.

He is actually a long-time member and activist of the Church of Christ if anyone is curious.

36.  right.  What I find annoying is the continued reference to Obama's Muslim heritage like it was something transmitted in the blood.  If he didn't live in a Muslim community and wasn't educated in the religion, then there's no heritage.  Religion is not something one inherits.  Moreover, regardless of the amount of exposure or immersion in a culture, there's no guarantee that it's going to stick.

It's really very Republican of the Clinton camp to assume that early childhood exposure is determinative of adult sympathies.

You may be what you eat, but you aren't what you see and hear. 

I am really glad to see asheville on this blog. those people have worked REAL HARD to turn that part of north carolina BLUE.

they even got training for god's sake.

but here? nada/

Since Obama is half white and half black, why is he always referred to as "black"?

It reminds me of an old movie "Pinkie" in which Jeanne Crain discovers in her 20's that, even though she looks white, she is half black. Suddently she decides to live as a black. It was perhaps the thing that was expected of her in those days of absolute discrimination. If she lived as a white, she would have felt she was living a lie. Sad. Of course, it was only a movie:))

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fraVollL3jQ

I have objected to the use of the word "oponent."  It's going to take a while to get out of the contest mode into the competition mode--people striving for the same goal, rather than trying to knock each other out.

42.  Because black blood is more potent than white.  LOL

Those numbers are virtually unchanged from November, when Clinton held an identical 22-point lead over Obama (47-25 percent), with Edwards in third (at 11 percent).

"Do you hear that sound Mr. Anderson, it is the sound of inevitability."

I see that former Senator Kerrey of Nebraska has apologized for attacking Obama's background. Obama has accepted the apology.

Not quite......

DES MOINES, Iowa - Former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey has apologized to Barack Obama for any unintentional insult he committed by raising the Democratic presidential candidate's Muslim heritage while endorsing rival candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The first Democratic-led Congress in a dozen years limped out of Washington last night with a lengthy list of accomplishments, from the first increase in fuel-efficiency standards in a generation......

Nobody seems to have questioned why it was passed so easily by a corrupt corporate Congress and signed so eagerly by Bush. 

Because it's actually not only slows the adoption of higher pollution standards which are already technologically possible, but moves us backward in the effort to reduce CO2 emissions by undercutting requirements for higher standards by states. 

Three cheers for the DCDems! They've done it (to us) again!

Do us a favor will ya? "Accomplish" less. 

Those numbers are virtually unchanged from November

That's bad news for Hillary. She's needs to grow her lead rather than remain stagnant. If she loses the early contests she'll surely drop like a rock nationwide among those who as of yet have no compelling reason to pay attention.

I tend to think that a 35% tax rate is a bit excessive.  It's actually the rate our property tax in NH comes to as a percentage of our pension and SS income.  If we didn't have some other income from investments, we wouldn't be able to stay on our property in NH in a house we built with our own hands.

You aren't a corporation, hedge fund, or whatever. The less taxes they have to pay, the more average people do.

new thread