Barack Obama at UCCS

The video......

The Reich Wing says the Supremes are just "five lawyers"

Chickenshits to the end.

One Amendment George Bush supports

I guess we should appreciate what little we have left of The Constitution:

On his final U.S. Independence Day as president, Bush told an audience Friday at the home of the Declaration of Independence's author that he was honored to be present for the naturalization. Shouts from protesters were heard during Bush's remarks, and the president responded by saying he agrees that "we believe in free speech in the United States of America."

'Course he couldn't help the a*hole-ish response....

Happy Fourth to our Gutless and Powerless Congress

Joe Galloway, has the perfect July 4 column, condemning what he calls "a gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution" that is "yet another stain on the gutless and seemingly powerless Democratic majority in both houses of Congress." He
adds:

"That a majority on both sides of the aisle -- not least of them the presumptive nominees for president of both political parties -- intend to vote for such a violation of Americans' right to privacy and of the sanctity of their personal communications is a stunning surrender to those who want us to live in fear forever."

If criticizing one's country out of honor and pride is not patriotic enough for you, please go see this flag pin...

Two good questions from Galloway's column:

How can even one senator on either side of the aisle in good conscience vote in favor of this law that does nothing to enhance our security and everything to diminish our rights as a free people?

How can both men who seek to become our next president cast such a vote when both should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder declaring that they would govern by our consent and with our approval, not by wielding the coercive and corrosive and corrupt powers that King George III and his latter-day namesake from Texas thought are theirs by divine right?

(h/t Glenzilla)

More Republican support for the troops

Just one more lie from the Bush Administration:

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has extended the tour of 2,200 Marines in Afghanistan, after insisting for months the unit would come home on time. The 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which is doing combat operations in the volatile south, will stay an extra 30 days and come home in early November rather than October, Marine Col. David Lapan confirmed Thursday.

And let's look at the lies Dick Cheney told upon being nominated chosen by himself for the Vice Presidency:

For eight years, Clinton and Gore have extended our military commitments while depleting our military power. Rarely has so much been demanded of our armed forces, and so little given to them in return. George W. Bush and I are going to change that, too. I have seen our military at its finest, with the best equipment, the best training, and the best leadership. I'm proud of them. I have had the responsibility for their well-being. And I can promise them now, help is on the way.

Soon, our men and women in uniform will once again have a commander in chief they can respect, one who understands their mission and restores their morale.

Not quite mission accomplished, eh, Dick?

Your Republican/TABOR/George W Bush economy at a glance

Total private sector job gains in the Bush years may fall below 3 million by November. The annual average for the Clinton years was 2.6 million.

Think once again what a $3 Trillion investment in America would have done to the fanatical terrorists....

Here come the Swift Boats again.....

Kerry got slammed by these guys. They're going to come after Barack in exactly the same way under the same assumptions that the press will fail to do the fact-check -- is he ready for the onslaught?

Because what elevated the outlandish Swift Boat allegations that Sen. John Kerry had lied about his war injuries in Vietnam, and what gave the allegations legitimacy and legs, was the fact that the mainstream press not only showered the Swift Boat attacks with voluminous coverage (CNN aired nearly 300 segments on the topic), but that the press completely failed, in a timely fashion, to ferret out the lies the Swift Boat Vets were peddling as part of their elaborate campaign season hoax.

Bloggers, reporters, staffers, volunteers, and the candidate Himself.....all will have to defeat the lies right-wingers will use against our next president.

Ready or not....

Merrifield: "It's a new era, baby!"

"We have more registered Democrats in El Paso County now than there are in Boulder County," Merrifield said. "It's a new era, baby!"

Happy "Bring 'em On!" Day

There were 186 U.S. fatalities in Iraq when Bush said it. Today there are 4,113.

This day ranks somewhere up there with "Mission Accomplished" and "Last Throes".

Heckuva job, Republicans............

General Wes Clark is 100% Correct about John McCain!!!!!

No Republican seat is safe -- not even Dougie-boy Lamborn's

From Hal Bidlack:

"There are no safe Republican seats in this election." -Karen
Hanretty

You read that quote correctly. Karen Hanratty, the communications director for the NRCC, told the AP last week that there is not a single Republican Congressman who can count on winning his district. I know you heard from me just last week, and if you've already sent a contribution I want to thank you for your support.

But midnight tonight is the end of the quarter, and we need to build a solid reserve of funds in order to prepare for the inevitably bombardment of slander that will rain down from extremist groups. Your support of $50, $100, or $500, or more at this crucial point in the campaign can help us prove
how viable of a candidate I really am.

Can you donate at here by midnight tonight?

Doug has proven he's incompetent to be a congressman. But what's worse than an incompetent Republican? A competent one, like Jeff Crank would be, at continuing to decimate our government and failing to serve its citizens.

A True Patriot: Barack Obama

Only scoundrels would (and they will) question the Patriotism that rings from Barack Obama's speech today:

Those men of Lexington and Concord were among our first patriots. And at the beginning of a week when we celebrate the birth of our nation, I think it is fitting to pause for a moment and reflect on the meaning of patriotism – theirs, and ours. We do so in part because we are in the midst of war – more than one and a half million of our finest young men and women have now fought in Iraq and Afghanistan; over 60,000 have been wounded, and over 4,600 have been laid to rest. The costs of war have been great, and the debate surrounding our mission in Iraq has been fierce. It is natural, in light of such sacrifice by so many, to think more deeply about the commitments that bind us to our nation, and to each other.

We reflect on these questions as well because we are in the midst of a presidential election, perhaps the most consequential in generations; a contest that will determine the course of this nation for years, perhaps decades, to come. Not only is it a debate about big issues – health care, jobs, energy, education, and retirement security – but it is also a debate about values. How do we keep ourselves safe and secure while preserving our liberties? How do we restore trust in a government that seems increasingly removed from its people and dominated by special interests? How do we ensure that in an increasingly global economy, the winners maintain allegiance to the less fortunate? And how do we resolve our differences at a time of increasing diversity?

Finally, it is worth considering the meaning of patriotism because the question of who is – or is not – a patriot all too often poisons our political debates, in ways that divide us rather than bringing us together. I have come to know this from my own experience on the campaign trail. Throughout my life, I have always taken my deep and abiding love for this country as a given. It was how I was raised; it is what propelled me into public service; it is why I am running for President. And yet, at certain times over the last sixteen months, I have found, for the first time, my patriotism challenged – at times as a result of my own carelessness, more often as a result of the desire by some to score political points and raise fears about who I am and what I stand for.

So let me say at this at outset of my remarks:

I will never question the patriotism of others in this campaign. And I will not stand idly by when I hear others question mine.

My concerns here aren't simply personal, however. After all, throughout our history, men and women of far greater stature and significance than me have had their patriotism questioned in the midst of momentous debates. Thomas Jefferson was accused by the Federalists of selling out to the French. The anti-Federalists were just as convinced that John Adams was in cahoots with the British and intent on restoring monarchal rule. Likewise, even our wisest Presidents have sought to justify questionable policies on the basis of patriotism. Adams' Alien and Sedition Act, Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, Roosevelt's internment of Japanese Americans – all were defended as expressions of patriotism, and those who disagreed with their policies were sometimes labeled as unpatriotic.

In other words, the use of patriotism as a political sword or a political shield is as old as the Republic. Still, what is striking about today's patriotism debate is the degree to which it remains rooted in the culture wars of the 1960s – in arguments that go back forty years or more. In the early years of the civil rights movement and opposition to the Vietnam War, defenders of the status quo often accused anybody who questioned the wisdom of government policies of being unpatriotic. Meanwhile, some of those in the so-called counter-culture of the Sixties reacted not merely by criticizing particular government policies, but by attacking the symbols, and in extreme cases, the very idea, of America itself – by burning flags; by blaming America for all that was wrong with the world; and perhaps most tragically, by failing to honor those veterans coming home from Vietnam, something that remains a national shame to this day.

Most Americans never bought into these simplistic world-views – these caricatures of left and right. Most Americans understood that dissent does not make one unpatriotic, and that there is nothing smart or sophisticated about a cynical disregard for America's traditions and institutions. And yet the anger and turmoil of that period never entirely drained away. All too often our politics still seems trapped in these old, threadbare arguments – a fact most evident during our recent debates about the war in Iraq, when those who opposed administration policy were tagged by some as unpatriotic, and a general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal.

Just read the whole thing to see what a True Patriot feels in his heart for this country....and how to disarm the petty patriots who will will say Obama doesn't love his country enough, doesn't wear a flag pin, or was went to school somewhere out of the ordinary.

Don't mistake James Dobson for a Minister

Don't worry, I won't:

James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, is in the news as of late for ripping Sen. Barack Obama over a 2006 speech dealing with faith and public policy.

My issue isn't the speech or Dobson's criticism. I want to know why in the world we in the media keep holding Dobson up as an influential Christian leader or evangelical leader when the guy says with his own mouth that is nothing of the sort?

In a radio interview discussing the speech, Dobson was critical of Obama for saying: "And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would it be James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?"

Dobson took offense to that and made this interesting comment: "I am not a reverend. I'm not a minister. I'm not a theologian. I'm not an evangelist. I'm a psychologist. I have a Ph.D. in child development from the University of Southern California. And there is no equivalence to us."

Yeah. I had the same reaction you likely did. Here is a guy who is often declared a religious leader who now says: "Nope. Not me."

Now, if the guy who is held up as an evangelical leader says he's not, then why do we even care what he has to say about religion? Why even play up his reaction to an Obama speech -- or even his criticism of McCain -- in a religious discussion, when that's where it shouldn't be?

Exactly. Why do we care?

Dobson's just a psychologist with a doctorate in child development. So his views on religion are just his; he's not a faith leader of millions

The millions who've given him billions think he's some kind of Christian morals expert. Millions trust his every last word. I don't trust the first word out of his mouth.

Dobson's latest political failures examined in The Gazette

The Mighty Doctor James Dobson is not going to like this:

On Tuesday, James Dobson of Focus on the Family railed against Sen. Barack Obama for distorting the Bible and trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality."

But if he was trying to rally his base of Christian evangelists to vote against Obama, he might need a lot more than a censorious radio address.

He scolded Barack, no doubt, like his mother scolded him. Barack immediately responded, which is how bullies like Dobson need to be treated. The Gazette continues:

- Christian influence in politics has historically gone up and down since the early 1800s; this is another movement whose time may be up for now.

- The Bush administration hurt the evangelical cause - such as with the war in Iraq, its response to Hurricane Katrina and its alleged human rights violations at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center.

- Two of the movement's most important figures, D. James Kennedy and Jerry Falwell, are dead.

And the ethical failures of many other evagelical leaders still resonate.

The one ("life") or two-issue ("homosexuals") politics of those like Dobson and Haggard fails the religious philosphy they claim guides them - and it fails the followers they purport to lead. Now the followers are abandoning the the hyper-political preachers daily. And some evangelicals have seen the error of their ways.

A true leader is coming to town, one who's attempting to apply the positive aspects of religious belief to constructive solutions to our problems. His name is not James Dobson, it's Barack Obama. I believe it's Barack's turn to give a good lecture on morals to Dr. James "SpongeDob" Dobson.

Oh, and check out this excellent graphic from the Gazette by Becky Rother that makes the point of the article crystal clear: