Who’s Your President? I need your help
[ev type=”google” data=”-4165477466947288680″][/ev]
I woke up late on Wednesday June the 6th. The closing of the legislative session had been a roller coaster, and for the previous 5 days, I think I’d only managed about 4 hours of sleep a night. Rising from bed close to noon, I managed to avoid tripping over the dog and made my way to the kitchen to brew up some coffee. Still wiping my eyes, I fired up the laptop and unplugged my charging cellphone to start my daily routine.
“The session is over… really over,” was the serene thought that passed through my mind as I listened to the coffee maker start to brew. However, my mental post-lawmaking vacation quickly came to an end as I retrieved voicemails and glanced my email inbox.
“Oh yeah, the caucus.” Phone and email messages from supporters, surrogates and even the candidates themselves were already stacking up and reminded me that the next part of my new job as a politician had already begun. Nevada’s Democratic Presidential Caucus was in full swing and it was time for me to hop aboard. Candidates are campaigning hard, and they’re asking for my support.
Having met six of the eight Democratic candidates for President, read books written or suggested by many of them, and followed news of the campaign, I would have thought my choices for President would be clear by now. But here’s the thing…
I have no idea who I’ll ultimately support for President.
That’s where you come in. I need your help.
Here I am, meeting and greeting candidate after candidate as they swing through the Silver State. As an elected official, I have the opportunity to ask questions, discuss issues, and get a front row seat to the 2008 Presidential race. It’s an honor and a responsibility I don’t take lightly.
The slogan for the Nevada Democratic Caucus is “Winning the West.” Our unique state, with demographic, economic and environmental dynamics radically different from those of Iowa, New Hampshire and other early states in the nominating process, has a special opportunity to make sure the issues important to us as Nevadans are front and center in picking the next President. Jobs, health care, improving education, protecting the natural areas of our state, developing renewable energy- these are all issues important to Nevada and we need to know where the next President stands.
I intend to do what I can to make sure that happens. And you can be a part of it.
Over the coming months, I’ll be posting about my experiences meeting the candidates and talking about the issues, and discussing what I’m looking for in a President. I hope you will too.
What questions do you want asked? Are there specific candidate positions on the issues you like? Which of the eight do you think would be the most personable at a barbecue? Which Democrat do you think should be in the White House?
I look forward to hearing from you. Please post in the comments on this weblog, talk to me next time I see you out and about in Reno, or otherwise contact me. Have more to say? Consider writing a guest post on this blog or even creating a video I could post about your opinions.
I want to know… who’s your President?
View my other blog posts on the Nevada Democratic Presidential Caucus.
July 3rd, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Vote for Hillary!
She is the best candidate when it comes to gay rights. She has been influential in the civil rights movement and is applying those values to glbt and women’s rights. She supports civil unions, wants to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” program that was passed during her husbands presidency, and has a history of supporting glbt causes. Only Hillary accepted an invitation to the Human Rights Campaign’s Equality Convention out of all of the presidential candidates. I feel she will be representative of all people, regardless of sexual orientation.
July 3rd, 2007 at 5:47 pm
As your constituent, I would like you to endorse Hillary Clinton. I like her ideas on pay as you go fiscal policies. She has solid plans for a fiscally responsible government, unlike the current administration.
Out of all of the candidates, she is by far the most experienced and will be able to hit the ground running. We can’t afford a candidate a few months to learn the ropes.
I urge you to look beyond the talking points and I am sure you will see that HRC is the best choice.
July 3rd, 2007 at 6:05 pm
As a young person in Nevada, I think that Hillary Clinton is the best candidate. I am impressed with her knowledge of the issues that affect our state, as well as the United States.
Her immigration policy is tough and fair. Her treatment of individuals who make an effort to obtain a job and be a responsible citizen is reasonable, and it makes much more sense to work with possible illegal immigrants instead of deporting them all.
Hillary is the best choice!
July 5th, 2007 at 9:21 am
I am supporting Hillary Clinton for President.
The current administration has made such a mess of everything. Our next president is going to have to deal with the war, the national debt, the trade deficit, global warming, health care, China, Iran, etc. etc. This is going to b a horrendous job.
Senator Clinton has addressed the issues during the presidential debates and during her visit to Reno.
Based on her experience in Washington, I believe she knows what lies ahead. I feel she has the intelligence, the strength and the determination to accomplish better things for our country.
JB
July 10th, 2007 at 8:35 am
I support Obama. His years of experience in successful
coalition building (research his state and US Senate
record) has moved the agenda forward on several fronts.
(In the US Senate, that includes authoring legislation
that receives bipartisan support on energy issues, breaking
two decades of deadlock on that matter alone.)
Obama has been a key partner with Dick Lugar in arresting
the spread of loose nukes from Russian and in addressing
weapons of mass destruction worldwide. (See the Obama/Lugar bill expanding on the previous Nunn/Lugar bill.)
It will take a little time for Obama’s history and record
to become more well known, but that process has already started.
Obama appears to be a vehicle for creating a new political majority which Clinton likely can’t do, due to polarizing perceptions of her and even lack of support–21%–from
Democrats who, according to Gallup, will not even vote for her in the general election.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:47 am
The problems that we face in solving education, health care, etc. aren’t technical problems. That is, we know what we need to do, we just need to muster the political resolve to do it. Since the differences between the Obama, Clinton, and Edwards plan on how to solve these issues is minimal, what we truly need is someone who can build coalitions and get their proposals approved. Because of this, I strongly encourage you to support Barack Obama.
Obama has a proven record of working across the aisle and generating consensus. This is true not only in the area or politics, but outside it as well. Prior to announcing his presidential bid, Obama gave a speech at a mega-church in Orange County where some of the pastors had spoken out against him, saying that someone so liberal shouldn’t be allowed to speak at their church. Despite the hostile audience, by the time Obama finished he received a standing ovation, with many in the crowd saying they thought his proposals were very reasonable.
Obama also doesn’t generate the ill-will that Clinton does. For instance, the immigration bill generated such animosity that even senators who supported the measure were forced to vote against it. One can only imagine that the same will happen to much of the legislation Clinton proposes.
Also, Obama’s experience trumps that of the other candidates. While other candidates have spent much of their time in Washington, Obama has worked on the local level (as a community organizer), the state level (as a state senator), and on the national level (as a US senator). This experience gives him a unique vantage point to truly understand how policies created in Washington DC impact the country. For those who think Washington experience matters the most, I would encourage you to look at the presidents that a majority of historians consider our top 5. Then look at the ones they consider the bottom five. What you will notice is that the top 5 have very little “Washington” experience but that the bottom five have quite a bit. The lesson to be drawn from this? Perhaps that the more you are in Washington the more isolated and insulated you become, and thus you become less effective as a president, continually making political calculations rather than looking at what is in the best interest of the country.
Finally, if you cannot support Obama, please support anybody but Hillary Clinton. With conservatives lacking enthusiasm for any of the candidates in their party, we do not need to nominate someone who truly galvanizes the conservative base. To nominate Hillary Clinton risks losing not only the presidency but also numerous other state and local elections due to increased Republican turnout. Some people will say that this would be balanced by a galvanized Democratic turnout. I’m not convinced. The disdain felt for Hillary by many on the left (after not only her support for the Iraq War but also her introduction of legislation that would make flag burning a crime punishable by time in prison) could dampen turnout on our side. When even Jane Fonda is comparing Hillary to “a ventriloquist for the patriarchy with a skirt and a vagina,” we’re in trouble.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:23 am
David, I think it’s wonderful that you’ve asked for input on whom to endorse–not many elected officials do! But I have to say that the comment just posted about Jane Fonda, etc, really puts me off on all of this. I am supporting Hillary Clinton and I hope you will too, but I think what’s more important is that everyone get involved and choose a candidate. This sort of “anyone but Clinton” negativity is really disappointing. I’m supporting Clinton, but that doesn’t mean I have to say “don’t support Obama”.
I’m especially surprised to see a comment like this from an Obama supporter, because he has said that he will avoid negative campaigning, but I guess some things never change in politics!
Regardless of what this person said, as a woman, I think it’s time for a woman to be president. I also happen to think that Hillary is by far the most qualified candidate, as she has demonstrated in the debates. Our country is in such a dire state, we need our next president to have all the experience necessary to run the country right from his/her first day in office and I think that person is Hillary Clinton.
I know you’ll make the right choice, David. Best of luck! Can’t wait to vote for you AGAIN in 08!
July 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
I’m supporting JOHN EDWARDS for president not only because he has precise plans to restore our leadership in this world, end this brutal war in Iraq, create universal health care for all Americans, and end poverty (as Bobby Kennedy would’ve loved to see), but because Edwards is the MOST ELECTABLE of the Democratic candidates.
I don’t want to risk losing the White House to another Republican! Obama and Clinton unfortunately have no chance in the South and in many rural areas.
The Rasmussen Reports show time after time that Edwards leads Republican contenders in match-up polls by impressive margins, while Obama and Clinton don’t lead nearly as strongly in these polls. On top of that, Edwards is also leading solidly in many of the key Southern states.
Edwards is the one to caucus and vote for if people truly want a strong Democrat as their president.
Please endorse John Edwards, David! You can’t go wrong with Edwards, and we desperately need a Democrat to lead us.
July 17th, 2007 at 8:59 am
I’m pretty sure the poster took that Jane Fonda line
from an excerpt of an article that I had posted at my
blog. For myself, some of the reasons that had upset
many of Hillary’s former women supporters (described in
that article) are actually potential positives in Hillary’s
favor. Once Clinton got into the Senate, she became more of a flexible and compromising figure, some say too much so
(i.e. the “triangulation” factor of injecting political considerations into efforts to create legislation and also the execution of them).
I think the poster’s remarks are very important to consider.
This is a very legitimate part of the caucusing process.
You can NOT be thin skinned in that. This is how it has played out in Iowa (like forever). People are very direct about what they perceive to be a candidate’s negatives.
And, the points the poster made re: Hillary are very valid and important to consider. Caucusing is NOT suppose to be a love fest but a brutally honest consideration of who is the best person to put forth as our nominee.
And, I agree with the John Edwards supporter: electability is going to be very high up on the list of factors we look at.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:33 am
To not consider Hillary’s electability is insanity and dooms us to losing another presidential election. Essentially, Hillary is to the presidential election what Dina Titus was to Nevada’s gubernatorial–a candidate that I can agree on with (most) issues, but is completely unelectable.
I also worry that John Edwards has -unfairly- become a caricature. Late night talk shows and political pundits have hammered away at the $400 hair-dos, the $$$ taken for speeches on poverty, and the sprawling mansion. The not so subtle message is that he’s a hypocrite, which will be a tough image to shake. I actually like John Edwards quite a bit but I just don’t think he can win.
So my choice is Barack Obama, the candidate who is not only an inspiration to millions of us but very electable as well. Thanks for giving us input!
July 17th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
In recent weeks, there have been polls showing Obama
as the ONLY candidate beating ALL the Republican candidates. These polls are varying all the time, though.
Fact is, Obama’s drawing lots of independents and Republicans (Clinton and Edwards not as much)
July 17th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
To talk about electability (I don’t think Hillary is electable) isn’t being negative, just realistic. Nor is it negative to say that her vote on the Iraq War (and emphatic support of it until it became unpopular) and INTRODUCTION of legislation making flag burning a crime punishable by time in prison, is extremely problematic. And, as Anna Quindlen wrote, Hillary does have a “woman problem” (look at the article in The Nation, for more information on why Hillary isn’t doing so well with liberal women, married women, etc.).
Finally, I would say that all of her time in Washington actually makes her LESS qualified than Obama or Edwards because it has made her more likely to play politics with decisions that impact the lives of every day Americans. (does anyone really believe that her introduction of the flag burning legislation was anything other than an attempt to appear centrist at the expense of the First Amendment?).
I know it’s the desire of every front runner and their supporters to get a pass on issues like these, but in the hopes of electing someone who can actually win, they need to be brought up.
July 17th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
I’m personally supporting John Edwards. He continues to release specific and comprehensive policies. He was the first one to release a complete universal health care plan. His plan is the only one that guarantees universal health care for everyone and even leaves room to become a single-payer health care plan. In terms of the debate on the War in Iraq, he has been the leader on pushing us to get out of Iraq. He has done this by proposing a detailed exit stragety and has been willing to be out in front. Most recently in a MoveOn poll, he won by an overwhelming percentage because people see that Edwards offers a real solution to the global warming problem.
These are just a few of the policies that John is a leader on and this is why I support him and I think you should as well.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
I remember the last time Democrats were talking about “electability” and we got John Kerry. He was the most “electable” and now you can barely get anyone to say a good thing about him.
I think it’s more important to choose someone experienced who has a proven track record of fighting the extreme right wing and winning…rather than personal notions about who is “electable” and who is not.
John Edwards was on the national ticket once and lost. I can see the TV ads about $1200 hair cuts, his mansion, and the off shore hedge fund now. In Obama’s only federal election he was running against a joke of a candidate, who everyone agrees is not mentally well. Obama is fantastic, but he’s never experienced a real grilling. Imagine what the Republicans will do with his lack of experience, his middle name, his drug use.
The point is, none of these guys are without weakness.
What can be said about Clinton that hasn’t been said already? Hillary Clinton has been elected to the Senate twice, the second time by a huge majority. She has survived everything they’ve thrown at her and is more popular then ever.
Something to consider.
July 18th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Now, this is what I call “caucusing”!
July 18th, 2007 at 11:54 am
“Lack of experience.” This is something that people commonly say about Obama. Is it true?
First, let’s point out that Obama has eleven years of experience in government. In the eight years in the
Illinois state senate, Obama has been a key player in spurring progress in matters related to health care, education and ethics reform (the last item a very tough nut to crack in Illinois, btw). He did this by being
able to build coalitions with Republicans (some of whom state nowadays that they can sleep very comfortably with Obama in the White House).
Again, I encourage everyone to examine Obama’s record of actions in the U.S. Senate. Look at the bills he’s written, who signed on as co-sponsors, and furthermore observe what areas the agenda has moved forward due to his efforts (like energy). Also, look at his manner of operating in the Senate.
Obama’s level of experience far exceeds Jack Kennedy’s, Abe Lincoln’s and others who went on to serve in the White House. (JFK largely focused on investigative efforts when in the Senate. Lincoln served one term in the House of Representatives and a limited amount of time in the state Senate.)
When Barack Obama was traveling with Dick Lugar on one of their trips, investigating the spread of weapons of mass destruction, Lugar was asked by Russian journalists if he ever would consider trying to run for President again.
Lugar said “no”, that he was going to “pass that torch
to Barack”.
I think his candidacy represents a rare opportunity to upset the current stalemated game board of politics and government. And, an opportunity to finally move into those New Frontiers that we have yet to traverse.
Pundits yesterday were scratching their head as to why Obama hasn’t gotten into a fierce attack mode, like Elizabeth Edwards in recent days. Maybe because he’s a statesman? There is certainly something different in how he responds to things! That’s not to say he won’t use
what he calls his “sharp elbows” when necessary. But, so far there does seem to be something unusually different about this guy. He WILL fight the Republicans when appropriate.(Remember Memorial Day and his response to Romney and Giuliani when they trashed him and Clinton for their recent votes on the war? Completely Presidential.)
But, he doesn’t seem to play around with all the petty stuff or desperately attempt to strike out from a “poor me” position.
July 18th, 2007 at 11:58 am
When you’re talking about Hillary “fighting the extreme right wing and winning” you must not be talking about healthcare. Or welfare. Or a host of other lost battles that Hillary has been a part of.
When you talk about her being more popular than ever, to what poll are you referring? Because she was certainly more popular with the public before she announced her bid for the presidency and the public had a chance to become reacquainted with her - look at Gallup polls for proof.
She was certainly more popular with the liberal base when she was first lady and was trying to fight for causes rather than just get elected. Perhaps this idea of being “more popular than ever” is what you call a “personal notion” rather than something based on facts.
And John Kerry wasn’t the most electable of the candidates in 2004, he was just more electable than Howard Dean. The most electable candidate in 2004? Wesley Clark.
I would also advise you not to play fast and loose with your logic. You say Obama ran against a “joke of a candidate” but then go on to say that Hillary won her Senate seat “the second time by a huge majority.” What you fail to point out is that she also ran against a joke of a candidate who received almost zero financing from the Republican party.
Plus, candidate Obama took a courageous stand early on against the war when the country supported the war by large majorities. Despite this, he was still able to convince 70%+ of people in Illinois to vote for him for Senate. It’s hard to think of a vote Hillary has made during her Senate term that is courageous. As Washington Post liberal columnist David Broder wrote: “Hillary is for all that is popular and against all that is not.”
July 18th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
When I said Hillary is not electable, I mean that I know a TON of people from the South and even from here who (sadly) don’t want to vote for her because she’s a woman. This country is not ready for that kind of a change. Maybe it’s hard for you all to believe, but it’s true, I’m not making this up.
That’s why it scares me to think she might be the nominee, and then when the election comes around, she’ll get beat by a Republican because the backwards people of America just won’t vote for her no matter what party they’re from!
Also, Hillary has that odd “either ya love her, or ya hate her” factor which could really tarnish her shine if she were to win the nomination.
John Edwards has the experience already, he’s been working tirelessly to form detailed, working plans for every issue I can think of and has been going to those places in America that all the other candidates seem to have forgotten about. Everyone may talk about New Orleans, but I’ve only seen John Edwards go there and really help out (and not just once)!
So my family, friends, and I are strong supporters of John Edwards and will be till he’s in the White House!
July 19th, 2007 at 8:27 am
Hillary Clinton won’t lose the election because she’s
a woman. She will lose the election because, if she’s the
nominee, ole Ralph Nader will definitely jump in and draw
(pundits claim) 8% or more of the vote. Nader has been very, very clear he will run if that alleged “corporate”
candidate (i.e. Hillary Clinton) is nominated. It doesn’t look like he will if “Renegade” (secret service code name for Obama) is the nominee.
July 19th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Here are some US Senate elections that Hillary could negatively impact by helping increase Republican turn out. (comments on the races themselves are from Larry Sabato, a well respected political science professor at the University of Virginia):
Colorado: Democrat Mark Udall’s likely opponent will be Bob Schaffer, a former U.S. representative and unsuccessful 2004 Senate candidate. Republicans have coalesced behind Schaffer, across the state and nationwide, but Colorado has been trending Democratic. Udall may have a tiny initial edge.
Louisiana: the stage is set for a showdown between incumbency and demography. Post-Katrina Louisiana looks a lot Redder than the pre-Katrina state, but (we are) well aware of the folly of betting against incumbents, so the slight early lead belongs to Senator Mary Landrieu.
Maine: Senator Susan Collins also has the incumbency advantage and broad personal popularity. However, Maine and national Democrats hit a recruiting home run on May 8, when Rep. Tom Allen announced he would challenge Collins. This race should be watched carefully for signs of a 2006-like trend that produces Blue victories even against well-liked Red incumbents.
Minnesota: (This state) should vote Democratic in a presidential year–we’ll leave aside for now the VP possibility of GOP Governor Tim Pawlenty–so Coleman will have his work cut out for him. (But) Coleman is aggressive, tenacious, and may be tougher to beat that Democrats now think.
Oregon: Senator Gordon Smith remains in the same category as Collins and Coleman as another Republican representing a Blue state in a presidential year. In a tribute to the power of presidential coattails, Smith is endangered even though the DSCC has come up empty so far in its search for a heavy-hitting, high name-ID candidate.
South Dakota: something of a wild card, with Senator Tim Johnson not expected back on the Hill until September. There has been no announcement about whether Johnson will run again. On the Democratic side, the state’s at-large Representative, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, appears to have the primary field to herself if Johnson retires. For Republicans, things are much more uncertain, with the current Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and state senate Majority Leader all considering running, but waiting for more information about Johnson’s condition and whether he will seek reelection.
Given how close all these elections are looking at the moment, can we really afford to select a nominee who will galvanize the Republican base and put these (potential) seats in jeapordy?
July 21st, 2007 at 11:07 pm
I support Barack Obama for a number of reasons.
I attend the University of Nevada and have been in your office once to talk about funding for higher education on behalf of students a few months ago.
As you would probably have guessed, college affordability is a big deal not only to me, but a vast majority of students at the University.
Bill Richardson seems to have shrugged off this issue with the standard answer of promising to expand available student loans and grants.
John Edwards’ plan calls upon all students to work through school in order to be eligible for scholarships.
Hillary Clinton’s website fails to even mention any sort of plan, which makes me seriously doubt any committment to students.
I feel like Barack Obama really understands what is wrong with higher education in this country. Yes, he has introduced legislation in the Senate to make college more affordable and yes, he has addressed this issue in particular in speeches, on his website, and in other ways, but personally I was touched to learn of this man who obtained an Ivy League degree and turned around to use it to obtain a very low-income community organizing job. Obama “gets” what is wrong with education at the core. Honestly, it takes getting your hands dirty to really understand a lot of problems Americans go through and I feel like this man truly represents the people.
After all of the problems and wrongdoing that has come out of the Bush Administration, the last thing the United States needs is a democratic candidate who is merely power-hungry and bent on the oval office. What we as Americans need is someone who really understands us as Americans, not someone who will do or say just about anything to win.
So please, I ask of you to support Barack Obama.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
I gotta say I’ve got Tamara’s back here. On just about everything. Including Wes Clark. But more importantly, on the issue of the electability of Hillary. The fact that the Dems couldn’t defeat George Bush in 2004 should be a tsunami of a wake up call that we need to be smarter about how we do business. My cat Frank should have been able to beat Bush on ‘04. Nominating Hillary is like voting for Ralph Nader in either of the last elections. It would pretty much guarantee a Giuliani or a Romney in the White House.
Look, I’m as idealistic as the next person, actually a lot more so. But I urge you conscientious and educated voters to find that middle road between wisdom and idealism. (Continuing the metaphor) When you know that voting for Nader is essentially a vote for Bush, how can you cover your eyes and pretend you are being an idealist instead of a fool?
I, too, long for a real-life Bulworth. But waiting for the next JFK in 2008 appears to be a bit like waiting for Godot. Actually, it’s exactly like that. What we need are new ideas, a fresh approach, and people who will speak the truth and then act it. And while I would take Hillary 50 times over what we’ve had the last two terms, she still represents the entrenched political dynasty. And bottom line: she’s not going to get elected. If you think a nation that just voted Bush in twice is ready to elect Hillary, you might need to sober up.
I’m not saying Obama is the panacea for all our woes — or even the person we’ve been waiting and hoping for — just that he’s far better than anyone I’ve heard that’s got a shot at getting elected. And Ron Paul’s in the wrong party and because he makes sense (and believes in evolution), he’s probably not likely to get the nod from the folks in red.
I’m not saying this is my final word on this – except the Hillary part – because the eternal idealist in me is still searching the horizon for the next incarnation of Asoka.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Oh yeah, I almost forgot: David Bobzien rocks.
But I don’t think we can get him in the Oval Office just yet.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:25 am
[…] Just back from two weeks of vacation and it’s great to see all the varied responses I’ve gotten to my call for input on choosing a Presidential candidate in the Nevada Democratic Caucus. Thank you all! If you haven’t already joined in the discussion, check out the comments, and then please add your own! […]
August 4th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Barack Obama is my Choice for President of the United States
Hello, I have lived in Nevada since March of 2002, with the exception of 10 months in 2006 when I lived in Chicago. My interests include international travel, having been fortunate enough to travel to more than 20 countries, and I enjoy learning about other people and their cultures.
In terms of my prior political involvement, I shudder to think back to my early voting years when I simply voted the way people close to me voted without really knowing the candidates or the issues. In the last 8+ years, I have been so disappointed with the track the country was progressing on, so I took the initiative to become more educated and active on the issues we face as a nation, thereby becoming a much better voter.
In the 2004 presidential election, I went to rallies and attended house parties for the Democratic candidate, but I was not involved in volunteering for the campaign. For the 2008 presidential election, I am far more passionate about the election than any other time in my life, primarily because I am so excited about Barack Obama as a candidate.
I had not heard of Barack until the fall of 2006. The first time I recall seeing Barack was on TV on December 28, 2006 when the Oprah Winfrey show replayed the episode titled Barack Obama on the Tough Questions that had originally aired on October 18. I was very impressed when Barack shared his vision for the future and his message of hope to disillusioned Americans. Wow! What rock had I been living under not to have heard of this sincere, compassionate, intelligent, honest, and well-spoken senator?
On February 22, 2007, Oprah appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres show. Speaking on Ellen DeGeneres’ chat show, Winfrey admits, “I’m feeling Barack.” She continues, “I don’t just love him. I respect him. I think he’s a fresh new voice in politics. I think what he can do for this country would be amazing.”
(Note: I am not one of those Oprah viewers who believe that she is “perfect” or who follows her every move. In this instance, I am simply grateful that both Oprah’s and Ellen’s shows introduced me to Barack so I could go on to educate myself about his background and experience.)
In March 2007, I became involved at MyBarackObama.com (MYBO), and I signed up for my first event to attend a Barack Obama information party to watch Barack speak at the Iowa town hall meeting. I was impressed with his stance on the wide range of issues that are impacting our country these days. Hearing Barack at the town hall meeting on March 31 affirmed my belief that he is THE candidate who I can whole-heartedly endorse and support to be the next leader for our country.
On April 9th, I was amazed with Barack once again when he appeared on the Late Show with David Letterman. Dave tried to get Barack to mud sling at other Democratic candidates, and I was impressed with how Barack stayed above the fray by answering the questions in a positive way indicating that he would not engage in a negative smear campaign that is the norm in US politics these days.
On April 16th and June 24th, I participated in the national Women for Obama conference calls with Michelle Obama, and I was equally impressed by Michelle’s understanding of women’s issues in the US. I also had the pleasure of meeting Michelle in person when she visited Nevada. Like Barack, she is educated and sincere, and she displays much integrity and compassion.
I have also seen Barack in Nevada twice thus far. Each time I hear him speak, I become more committed to ensuring that Barack Obama is the next president of the United States. If you haven’t had the opportunity to see Barack or Michelle in person, I highly recommend taking advantage of future opportunities to join conference calls or attend local events when they visit your area.
The list of issues that cause me to support Barack is very long, so I will highlight some of the key issues here.
HEALTH CARE AND LOBBYIST PAYMENTS TO LEGISLATORS:
In July, after seeing the new Michael Moore movie SiCKO, I saw a post on BarackObama.com about whether or not Barack accepts funding from the health care lobby. Questions were back and forth, but no one took time to research the web for the answers. Wanting the answers myself, I searched the web and found several informative sites that answered the questions in great detail. In the spirit of sharing information, I posted on several sites with links to the information. You can view one here:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog&pop=1&ping=1&indicate=1
FOREIGN AFFAIRS: RENEWING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP:
I was drawn to this article, written by Barack Obama, by a blog post on MYBO. This article really delves into my concerns about where America stands as a global leader, and Barack’s vision for our future touches me very deeply and is one of the key reasons why I support Barack Obama to be President of the United States.
If you have limited time to read, please take 10 minutes to read the whole article by clicking the link below.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070701faessay86401/barack-obama/renewing-american-leadership.html
Summary: After Iraq, we may be tempted to turn inward. That would be a mistake. The American moment is not over, but it must be seized anew. We must bring the war to a responsible end and then renew our leadership — military, diplomatic, moral — to confront new threats and capitalize on new opportunities. America cannot meet this century’s challenges alone; the world cannot meet them without America.
Barack Obama wrote: “We can be this America again. This is our moment to renew the trust and faith of our people — and all people — in an America that battles immediate evils, promotes an ultimate good, and leads the world once more.”
In my opinion, Barack really gets it and understands how critical repairing our place in the world will be for the next administration.
STRENGTHENING FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES:
Having traveled to so many countries, I realize that the US is not always “the best of the best” as the media implies. As a single woman, I would be blessed to have a child, but in our country, laws do not support true “family values” in terms of caring for children and aging parents.
With the goal of sharing information, the following reports from The Project on Global Working Families help explain how drastically far behind our country is when compared to other countries around the globe when it comes to families, dependent care, and working conditions.
“The Project on Global Working Families is a research unit founded by Professor Jody Heymann at Harvard and McGill Universities and co-directed by Dr. Alison Earle.
The Project on Global Working Families is the first program devoted to understanding and improving the relationship between working conditions and family health and well-being throughout the world.
** A Work, Family, and Equity Index has been developed to measure how governments throughout the world meet the needs of working families. The progress of nations is gauged by examining their performance in implementing a set of essential public policies.
** The first truly global investigation of the experience of working families is underway, combining country-level household surveys with in-depth interviews of working caregivers, employers, and professionals in the fields of healthcare and education.
** A rigorous examination of the impact of working conditions on adult employment, children’s development, elder care and family health in the United States has turned up striking findings that also address issues of poverty, inequality, and disparities across gender and class lines.
** Our advisory work with policy makers and organization leaders in the United States and globally encompasses a range of issues that affect individuals, families, and societies.”
You can read these very enlightening reports at:
http://www.globalworkingfamilies.org/
I believe that Barack understands the issues that women face, and his position on the following issues will help address the areas where the US lags behind according to the Work, Family, and Equity Index reports published by The Project on Global Working Families.
http://women.barackobama.com/page/content/wfoissues
http://my.barackobama.com/page/-/MyBO%20Resource%20Center/women.pdf
I could go on and on, but these 3 areas are the primary reasons why I choose to support Barack Obama as the next President of the United States.
There are so many ways to get involved to ensure that Barack is the next President, with the ultimate goal of high turn out at the January 19 caucus in each and every Nevada precinct in favor of Barack.
If you agree, please link as new friends on both MYBO and My Space. My display name on MYBO is Lisa Beyer and the address for My Space page is http://www.myspace.com/megaptera1969
I am excited and passionate about being involved in this election to Barack The Vote and sweep the Nevada caucus in favor of Barack on January 19, 2008!
September 18th, 2007 at 6:35 am
[…] After much consideration, I’ve chosen my candidate in this year’s Nevada Democratic Presidential Caucus: John Edwards. […]
September 18th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
[…] As an Assemblyman, I very much felt an obligation to select a candidate who was not only best for the country but was also speaking to the issues facing my constituents specifically. It was a tough decision given the extraordinary field of candidates. I heard a lot of different opinions on the candidates both on my website when I asked for input [Link] and the one-on-one conversations I had with constituents. I also thought it was important to meet with as many of the candidates as possible and hear, first-hand, what they had to say. It was a long process, but a necessary one, and I’m happy with the end result. […]
December 27th, 2009 at 9:58 am
У меня совсем скоро в закладках место закончится, но я буду рад добавлять с вашего блога и далее ссылки на интересные темы!
July 28th, 2010 at 7:06 am
Great blog post, thanks. I am going to be back again to checked out more.