Blue Hearts

Blue Hearts!!

Happy New Year. Today is the first day of the year and I'm starting out right by writing to you. I'm sure you've been busy but still wondering when the next blog would come out. Well here it is. You have continued to send me good stuff that I'm passing along.

Before we get into it, I just want you to know how important you are to me. Blue Hearts is nothing but a thought without you and your actions. I believe we can make things happen and that we can affect change if we only make the effort. I know that in 2006 we can get to the next level and really take some meaningful action toward achieving our goals.

Are you with me?

As usual, we'll start with humor and end with local (KC) stuff. Happy Reading!

HUMOR
=====================================

BREAKING!! Top Ten New President Bush Strategies For Victory in Iraq...

10. Make an even larger 'Mission Accomplished' sign

9. Encourage Iraqis to settle their feud like Dave and Oprah

8. Put that go-getter Michael Brown in charge

7. Launch slogan, 'It's not Iraq, it's Weraq'

6. Just do whatever he did when he captured Osama

5. A little more vacation time at the ranch to clear his head

4. Pack on a quick 30 pounds and trade places with Jeb

3. Wait, you mean it ain't going well?

2. Boost morale by doing his hilarious 'Locked Door' gag

1. Place Saddam back in power and tell him, 'It's your problem now, dude'

---Late Show with David Letterman

---------------------------------------------------

from the AP wires:

CONGRESS OUTSOURCES THE PRESIDENCY

Congress today announced that the job of the President of the United States will be outsourced to overseas interests as of December 1st, 2005. The move is being made to save not only a significant portion of the President's $400,000 yearly salary, but also a record $521 billion in deficit expenditures and related overhead."We believe this is a wise move financially. The cost savings should be significant," stated Congressman Thomas Reynolds (R-Washington).Reynolds, with the aid of the Government Accountability Office, has studied outsourcing of American jobs extensively. "We cannot expect to remain competitive on the world stage with the current level of cash outlay,"Reynolds noted.Mr. Bush was informed by email this morning of his termination. Gurvinder Singh of Indus Teleservices, Mumbai, India will be assuming the office of President as of September 1st. Mr. Singh was born in the United States while his Indian parents were vacationing at Niagara Falls, thus making him eligible for the position. He will receive a salary of $320 (USD) a month but with no health coverage or other benefits.

It is believed that Mr. Singh will be able to handle his job responsibilities without support staff. Due to the time difference between the US and India, he will be working primarily at night, when few offices of the US Government are open.

"Working nights will allow me to keep my day job at the American Express credit card support call center," stated Mr. Singh in an exclusive interview. "I am excited about this position. I always hoped I would be a President some day."

A Congressional spokesperson noted that while Mr. Singh may not be fully aware of all the issues involved in the office of President, this should not be a problem. Mr. Singh will rely upon a "script tree" that will enable him to respond effectively to most topics of concern. Using this tree, he can address common concerns without having to understand the underlying issues at all. "We know these scripting tools work," stated the spokesperson. "Mr.Bush has used them successfully for years." Mr. Bush will receive health coverage, expenses, and salary until his final day of employment. He will then be eligible for $240 dollars a week unemployment for 13 weeks. Unfortunately, he will not be eligible for Medicaid as his unemployment benefits will exceed the allowed limit.

Mr. Bush has been provided the outplacement services of Manpower, Inc.to help him write a resume and prepare for his upcoming job transition. According to Manpower, Mr. Bush may have difficulties in securing a new position due to limited practical work experience. One possibility is re-enlistment in the Air National Guard. Should he choose this option, he would likely be stationed in Iraq, a country he has visited. "I've been there, I know all about Iraq," stated Mr. Bush, who gained invaluable knowledge of the country in a visit to the Baghdad Airport terminal and gift shop and a nearby tent for a turkey sandwich.

Sources in Baghdad and Falluja say Mr. Bush would receive a warm reception from local Iraqis. They have asked to be provided with details of his arrival so that they might arrange an appropriate welcome.

------------------------------------------

Avian Flu

Recent news about the avian flu virus has raised concerns from Main Street to the White House. There is the possibility, even likelihood, that the virus will mutate into a form that can more easily infect humans. As the president pointed out, a vaccine cannot be made until this evolution occurs. This raises the concern that it may be impossible to create enough vaccine fast enough to protect all our citizens.

But there is hope. Gallup polls tell us that as many as 45 percent of Americans don't believe in evolution. Since random mutation is the engine of evolution, these same people must believe that the virus cannot mutate. Therefore, there is no need to waste vaccine on folks who believe there is no possible threat to themselves - thus leaving a sufficient supply for the rest of us. Perhaps President Bush, given his doubts about evolution, may wish to demonstrate his leadership by foregoing vaccination.

This approach has added benefits. Polls also tell us that disbelief in evolution is most pronounced among the less educated, the poor and conservatives. If the anti-evolutionists among these groups were to opt out of vaccination, then, through immediate deaths and natural selection, we would raise educational attainment, reduce poverty, and become a more progressive society.

----------------------------------------

Andy Rooney will make you think http://www.badmash.org/videos videos_flv.phpv=cbs_60min_andy_rooney_iraq_war_051002a512K_Stream.flv&t=Andy%20Rooney

and

Andy Dick will make you laugh http://www.badmash.org/videos/harlan.php?v=george_bush_512K_Stream.flv&t=Harlan%20McCraney,%20Presidential%20Speechologist

-------------------------------------------------

Subject: GWB Explains His Position on Global Warming


Just when you think our president isn't keeping his eye on the ball!

http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1147

====================================
SERIOUS:
-------------------------------------------------

DID YOU KNOW????
Service records of elected officials and ilk:

DEMOCRATS:
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V,

Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam. Paraplegic from war injuries. Served in Congress.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars,and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57

* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.

REPUBLICANS -- and these are the guys sending people to war:
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for
U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non- combat role making movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.

* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Vietnam POW, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem," although continued in NFL for 8 years as quarterback.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.

PUNDITS AND THE LIKE:
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
* Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don't shoot back.)

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/11/29/foxman/print.html

------------------------------------------------

Check out this important chart! K


http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/gopscorecard.htm

----------------------------------------------

I'll be curious to know if anything comes of this. K

Yesterday, I issued the following release about President Bush's recent admission that he has personally authorized domestic surveillance without a court order. I sent the referenced letter to four presidential scholars, asking for their input: Cass Sunstein, University of Chicago Law School, Bruce Ackerman, Yale University, Susan Low Bloch, Georgetown University Law Center, Michael Gerhardt, College of William and Mary School of Law. I hope you'll take a moment to read my statement below, and then forward this email to everyone you know.

Barbara Boxer

Boxer Asks Presidential Scholars About Former White House Counsel's Statement that Bush Admitted to an 'Impeachable Offense'

December 19, 2005

Washington, D.C. -- U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today asked four presidential scholars for their opinion on former White House Counsel John Dean's statement that President Bush admitted to an "impeachable offense" when he said he authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge.

Boxer said, "I take very seriously Mr. Dean's comments, as I view him to be an expert on Presidential abuse of power. I am expecting a full airing of this matter by the Senate in the very near future."

Boxer's letter is as follows:

On December 16, along with the rest of America, I learned that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge. President Bush underscored his support for this action in his press conference today.

On Sunday, December 18, former White House Counsel John Dean and I participated in a public discussion that covered many issues, including this surveillance. Mr. Dean, who was President Nixon's counsel at the time of Watergate, said that President Bush is "the first President to admit to an impeachable offense." Today, Mr. Dean confirmed his statement.

This startling assertion by Mr. Dean is especially poignant because he experienced first hand the executive abuse of power and a presidential scandal arising from the surveillance of American citizens.

Given your constitutional expertise, particularly in the area of presidential impeachment, I am writing to ask for your comments and thoughts on Mr. Dean's statement.

Unchecked surveillance of American citizens is troubling to both me and many of my constituents. I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter as soon as possible.

Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

-------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Don't be fooled!
By Dorothy M. Neddermeyer, PhD

In the last few days you have seen a new President Bush. He has become this year's rendition of a "Chatty Cathy" doll. Suddenly, after being exposed as a usurper of the United States Constitution the President is now trying to fool America again.

President Bush is scared because he knows that he has committed impeachable crimes that are clearly exposed to the American people. This Administration has violated the Constitution and civil and criminal laws by prior acts far too many to describe here, but the wiretapping of United States civilians without proper warrants is a clear violation of the fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The President's claim that he has the authority to do these acts are based on his own fuzzy thinking. So what does he do? He attacks.

You pull the ring at the back of his head and he says "9/11". W's handlers have figured that keeping Americans in fear serves his purposes well. Remember, these are the same people that kept telling us that we are going to be attacked again; you can expect this attack next fall before the off year Congressional elections.

The question is; Are the American people that stupid? The President does not count on Americans to be "fast on their feet" or in their minds. Bush gives a head fake. He claims that the fact that Iraqis went to the polls means that they have a government. Look again Mr. President. The votes haven't even been counted and it takes a 2/3's vote to elect any of the high
officials of the new Iraqis government.

Don't be fooled. If you listen to this bogus leader you will see that he wants you to accept "facts that are not in evidence". The fact that Bush claims that he has the "authority" to violate the Consitution does not make it so. This President was never given dictatorial powers, even by a Republican held Congress. This President now wants to blame Democratic Senators for the failure of the Patriot Act to pass the Senate. This is not true, it his abuse of his powers that real Americans want to control. He wants to muzzle the press and suppress the reporting of his wrongdoing. If we want freedom to grow, then we must maintain our freedom in the United States of America.

We, as Americans, must stop this so-called leader from destroying our civil liberties in the name of war. It is a ploy, a bait and switch. No man is above the law, not even a leader with feet of clay. Don't let him fool you with his canned "9/11". Don't listen to this Christmas' pull the string doll of the neo-cons. Stand up and preserve the liberty, freedom and rule
of law for which our forefather's have fought and died.

------------------------------------------------

Although it's too late to sign the letter, I thought you should know the DNC is not sitting around taking it. They are responding to the incomprehensible actions taken by the other side. Reminds me of the good old days with The War Room. K


This morning I was getting ready to send an email thanking more than 7,000 of you for stepping up to take the fight into the backyard of Jean Schmidt and any other Republican leader who attacks one of our veterans for cheap political gain. We had begun working with Lamar, an ad company in the area, and signed a contract to place two billboards near Jean Schmidt's district office in Portsmouth, Ohio (one on US-52 and one at 1024 Offnere Street). Thanks to your overwhelming response we were also looking into putting up additional billboards in several other locations in the Cincinnati market.

Unfortunately, at about 10 AM, we got two phone calls -- the first came from Lamar's Cincinnati office informing us that because of the content of the ad, they are refusing to continue to work with us. The second call came a few minutes later from Lamar's Huntington, West Virginia office, informing us that despite our signed contract, they were also rejecting our ad. This reversal came more than 24 hours after the DNC had signed a contract with Lamar, and 48 hours after they had accepted the artwork for the billboards you helped pay to put up.

By rejecting these ads, Lamar has limited your right to be heard.

The DNC's General Counsel, Joe Sandler, has drafted a letter to Lamar's chairman demanding that Lamar honor its commitment to run the billboards. They think they can get away with this because they own nearly every billboard in the district, but you can put pressure on Lamar to support free speech by signing on to the letter:

http://www.democrats.org/lamar

The full text of the letter is at the end of this note, and we will deliver it by noon Friday with the signatures of everyone who wants to be included. The management at Lamar Advertising has seriously miscalculated if they think that thousands of Americans who want to stand up for our veterans will be silenced.

The attack on a decorated combat veteran's courage and patriotism that came out of Jean Schmidt's mouth on the House floor was unacceptable. But Lamar Advertising seems to think that thousands of people coming together and holding her accountable for it is what's really unacceptable.

Republican leaders need to learn they cannot get away with dishonoring the service of veterans to score political points. This is a pattern that needs to stop here and now, and that's why this billboard is so important.

Please forward this message around to let people know what's happening. I will be in touch as this story unfolds.

Thank you,

Tom McMahon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

P.S. -- Here is a copy of the letter to the Chairman of Lamar Advertising:

Mr. Kevin P. Reilly, Jr.
Chairman & CEO
Lamar Advertising Co.
5551 Corporate Blvd.
Baton Rouge, LA 70808

Dear Mr. Reilly:

We are writing on behalf of the Democratic National Committee to demand that Lamar honor a contract its Huntington, West Virginia office entered with the DNC for placement of two billboard advertisements in Portsmouth, Ohio. These advertisements accurately referred to a statement made by U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives attacking a respected Member of Congress and decorated war veteran. The advertisements were aimed at informing her constituents about this statement, and called on Rep. Schmidt to cease such attacks.

The DNC was told by your Huntington regional manager that Lamar is refusing to honor the contract because the advertisements are "too negative." In addition to refusing to honor the contract for the Portsmouth billboards, Lamar, through its Cincinnati office, refused to accept the same advertisement for placement on billboards in Cincinnati.

While Lamar's form contract reserves to the company the right to refuse to run a billboard advertisement, Lamar's conduct in this instance raises serious questions about whether the company is unlawfully or improperly using corporate resources to favor or benefit the Republican Party or Rep. Schmidt. Your regional manager was unable to cite any company policy providing any objective standards or criteria for rejecting political or advocacy advertising.

Rep. Schmidt's constituents are entitled to know what she is saying on the floor of the U.S. House and the DNC has a right to tell them. Lamar should either offer a credible reason for its efforts to censor the Democratic Party or else should live up to its contractual obligation and let the DNC put up its billboard and let the people of Rep. Schmidt's district hear the truth.

Please let us know immediately whether Lamar intends to honor its contract--and if not, why. Fairness and the public interest demand no less.

Sincerely,

Joseph Sandler, General Counsel, Democratic National Committee
Amanda LaForge, Chief Counsel Democratic National Committee

------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Hughes, Democracy for America"
Subject: Corrupt and Shameless?
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 11:03:04 -0500

Dear Kristin,

"Our people in uniform have been subjected to these cynical and pernicious falsehoods day in and day out ... and back home a few opportunists are suggesting they were sent into battle for a lie."

That's what the Vice President says about you.

Dick Cheney has made himself the name-caller in chief, referring to critics of the forged White House case for war -- people like you and me -- as not only "dishonest and reprehensible," but also "corrupt and shameless." He's the perfect man to say that. He knows "corrupt and shameless" personally. And on Monday he'll prove it again ... by keynoting a gala fundraiser for indicted congressman and GOP machine boss Tom DeLay.

That's the same Tom DeLay who said, "I am the federal government." Unfortunately, he wasn't far from the truth. Money talks in politics, and Tom DeLay has bankrolled 29 Republican campaigns in 2005 through his political action committee. Some of those Republicans are running Washington right now.

If we want a government that responds to us -- a government of the people -- we have to take it back. Tom DeLay and Dick Cheney need to hear that we're sick of their corrupt and shameless party in a language they understand: cold, hard cash. Let's put our money where our mouths are. Take on Cheney and DeLay, donate to DFA today:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/29-candidates

While they toast each other at their $1,000-a-plate surf-and-turf dinner on Monday, we have our own asset: thousands of us rolling up our sleeves, chipping in what we can, and putting a stop to them. That's why we've brought back the bat.

Over the last two years DFA has supported more than 850 progressive candidates with an average contribution of $1,200. With $34,800 we can match Tom DeLay's 29 Republican candidates with contributions to 29 new leaders of our own. But we need your help to do it.

Every dollar counts -- and every dollar brings us closer to breaking the reign of Cheney, DeLay and their corporate cronies in Washington.

We've got them on the run. Now, let's show DeLay and Cheney what the grassroots can do. Give now:

With thanks,

Tom Hughes
Democracy for America

-----------------------------------------

December 5, 2005
Op-Ed Columnist
A Black Hole

By BOB HERBERT
The news last week that 10 marines had been killed in Falluja in yet another improvised bomb attack sent a familiar feeling of dread surging through Paul Shroeder.

Every morning, when Mr. Shroeder awakens, he feels normal for the first 5 or 10 seconds. And then it dawns on him that his son, Augie - Lance Cpl. Edward August Shroeder II - is no longer around. Then an awful sadness descends, like a black curtain, over the rest of the day.

Corporal Shroeder, 23, was one of 14 marines killed last August in a roadside explosion in Haditha, in western Iraq. Just two days earlier, six marines from the same reserve unit - the Ohio-based Third Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment - had been killed in an ambush.

"When you have one or two guys get killed, it's back by the truss ads," said Mr. Shroeder. "It's not on the front page. But when you have 20 killed from the same unit in the space of 48 hours, that's big news."

The deaths of the 10 marines last week generated big headlines. But there was considerably less coverage the day before, when the Defense Department announced that four other servicemen had been killed in separate incidents in Iraq. The coverage fluctuates, but the suffering and dying of young American troops in this hellish meat grinder of a war goes on day by day, without end.

(Two more soldiers were reported killed yesterday in a roadside bomb attack in southeast Baghdad.)

Mr. Shroeder (pronounced SHRAE-der) and his wife, Rosemary Palmer, who live in Cleveland, and who are facing the Christmas season with eyes swollen and raw from crying, believe enough is enough. They have gone public with their view that the war has been wasteful and foolish and not worth the lives lost.

"We have to come up with a plan to get us out of there," said Mr. Shroeder. "What we're saying is that we need a serious debate about all options to end this. We cannot have the open-ended, ongoing, stay-the-course thing, because it's killing people."

Mr. Shroeder said he and his wife are not calling for an immediate withdrawal, "just willy-nilly," of American troops. But they believe it is essential that a workable plan for an orderly withdrawal be developed - and developed quickly - because the present policy, reaffirmed by President Bush in his speech at Annapolis last week, "is not working."

In Mr. Shroeder's view, President Bush's war policies have been both tragic and futile. "Staying the course," he said, is like continuing to pour water into a hole in the sand at the beach, "a process that gets you nowhere."

"My son told us two weeks before he died that he felt the war was not worth it," Mr. Shroeder said. "His complaint was about having to go back repeatedly into the same towns, to sweep the same insurgents, or other insurgents, out of these same towns without being able to hold them, secure them. It just was not working, and that's what he wanted to get across."

Mr. Shroeder dismissed the idea that criticism of the administration and the war was evidence of a lack of support for the men and women fighting in Iraq. "You can support the troops and be critical of the policy that put them there," he said.

He took issue with the public officials who insist that his son died for a "noble cause," however comforting that might be to believe. On the contrary, he feels that Augie's life "was wasted."

Recalling his last conversation with his son, Mr. Schroeder said, "I asked him, 'Do you feel like you're protecting your family and other Americans back here?' And he said, 'No. Not at all.' "

He said Augie felt that he was not accomplishing anything. "He thought it was a waste."

Mr. Shroeder, 56, is a partner in a trading company. His wife, 58, is a high school Spanish teacher. They've started a small nonprofit organization called Families of the Fallen for Change (fofchange.org) that they hope will help push Congress to take steps to bring the U.S. involvement in the war to an end.

I asked Mr. Shroeder how life has been for him and his wife since Augie's death. He paused for a long time, then said:

"Life is not the same. The holidays are not good. We both are church people and we sing in the choir, and this is the Christmas season. So normally it's a time of great music and wonderful singing. But I can't participate this year because - well, because he's just not here."

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

-------------------------------------------------
OK. This one is long. But it is an interesting perspective from "the right". K

December 8, 2005
Op-Ed Columnist
Running Out of Steam

By DAVID BROOKS
Conservatives are in power but out of sorts. Fifty years after the founding of the modern right, conservatives hold just about every important government job, yet the conservative agenda has stalled. Federal spending has surged. Social Security reform is dead. And when voters are asked which party they trust on key issues, they decisively reject conservative ideas.

On the economy, Democrats are trusted more, 56 to 34. On education, it's Democrats 55 to 32. On taxes, Democrats 48 to 38. On health care, Democrats 54 to 29.

For members of a movement that is supposed to be winning the battle of ideas, conservatives are in a mess.

So what's gone wrong? First, most of the issues that propelled conservatives to power have been addressed. Modern American conservatism was formed by people who wanted to defeat the Soviet Union, reduce crime, reform welfare, cut taxes, deregulate the economy and reintroduce traditional social values. All those problems are less salient today.

Second, conservatism has been semi-absorbed into the Republican Party. When conservatism was in its most creative phase, there was a sharp distinction between conservatives and Republicans. Conservatives chased ideas, while Republicans were the corporate hacks who sold out. Now that conservative Republicans are in power, that distinction is obliterated.

There are a number of consequences. A lot of the energy that used to go into ideas is now devoted to defending Republican politicians. Many former conservative activists have become Republican lobbyists. (When conservatism was a movement of ideas, it attracted oddballs; now that it's a movement with power, it attracts sleazeballs.)

Most important, there is greater social pressure to conform to the party's needs. Even writers and wonks are supposed to stay on message. In the 1970's, supply-siders mounted an insurgency against the Republican House leadership and against some sitting G.O.P. senators. If any group tried that today, it would be crushed by the party establishment.

Third, conservative media success means intellectual flabbiness. Conservatives used to live in a media world created by people who thought differently than they did. Reading certain publications and watching the evening news was like intellectual calisthenics. Now conservatives can be just as insular as liberals, retreating to their own media sources to be told how right they are.

Fourth, conservatives have lost their governing philosophy. In 1994, the Republicans thought their purpose was to reduce the size of government. But when the government shutdown failed, they never developed a new set of guiding principles to clarify which things government should do and which things it shouldn't. George Bush came up with a philosophy of compassionate conservatism, but it remains fuzzy and incomplete.

Fifth, conservative Republicans have lost touch with their base. To win, Republicans depend on white rural and suburban working-class voters making $30,000 to $50,000 a year. Conservative Republicans offer almost no policies that directly benefit these people. Americans at that income level tend to be financially risk-averse. But the out-of-touch Republicans offered a Social Security plan that increased risk.

Sixth, conservatives have not effectively addressed the second-generation issues. Technological change has really changed the economy, introducing new stratifications. Inequality is rising. Wage stagnation is a problem. Social mobility is lagging, and globalization hurts hard-working people. Global warming is real (conservatives secretly know this). The health care system is ridiculous. Welfare reform is unfinished. Conservatives have not addressed these second-generation issues as effectively as their forebears addressed the first-generation ones.

The good news is that we are about to enter a political season with no obvious conservative standard bearer, leaving plenty of room for innovation. Also, the current conservative crisis has produced some new thinking. A few weeks ago, two young writers, Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam (my former assistant), unveiled a fresh conservative agenda in a Weekly Standard essay called "The Party of Sam's Club." These writers, 26 and 25 years old, are closer to the future than the party leaders.

And the final bit of good news for the right is the left. No matter how serious the conservative crisis is, liberals remain surpassingly effective at making themselves unelectable.

President Bush's descent from the euphoria of an against-the-odds reelection victory one year ago this week to the current reality of a White House in crisis has been as rapid as it has been unexpected. Presidential advisers and outside analysts say the route back to genuine recovery is likely to be slow and difficult -- and without a clear blueprint for success.

Friday's indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby dealt another big blow to public confidence in the administration, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Bush's approval rating fell to 39 percent -- the lowest recorded by this poll in his presidency -- and a majority of Americans said the charges signal broader ethical problems in the administration. By a ratio of 3 to 1, those surveyed said the level of honesty in government has declined during Bush's tenure.

With its ability to command public attention and frame the national agenda, the presidency is a supremely resilient institution, and such recent occupants as Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton have bounced back from adversity. But Bush faces such a complex set of problems -- an unpopular war in Iraq, high energy prices, the costly challenge of rebuilding New Orleans, a fractured party, disaffected independent voters and little goodwill on Capitol Hill -- that his prospects are particularly daunting.

Beyond that is the question of whether Bush needs to make fundamental adjustments to a governing and political style that has given him electoral success but also left the country deeply polarized. With his Republican base showing signs of discontent and independent voters more disaffected than ever, Bush faces a potential tradeoff on every important decision ahead of him that could cause him to lose as much ground with one part of the public as he gains with another.

Whether he can devise a strategy that successfully navigates between the right and the center may determine just how much he can achieve for himself and his party through the rest of his presidency.

The president's advisers recognize the reality in which they find themselves. "What the public wants is back-to-basics governance and decision making," presidential counselor Dan Bartlett said yesterday. "This is not a situation in which it changes overnight or that there's a 'Hail Mary' pass that changes the dynamic. . . . There's not a magic bullet."

That assessment comes after one of the toughest weeks of Bush's presidency that included the perjury and obstruction charges against Libby, an embarrassing defeat over the nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, and the 2,000th U.S. death in the war in Iraq.

White House officials see recovery as a step-by-step process, beginning with the announcement of a new Supreme Court nominee who they hope will overcome the wreckage left by Miers's withdrawal last Thursday. Between now and the end of the year, they hope to push a budget through Congress that includes both funds for hurricane rebuilding and offsetting spending cuts, and also engage with the hot-button issues of immigration and border security.

Abroad, they look to the Dec. 15 elections for a new government in Iraq as a potentially significant benchmark in helping to convince the American people that Bush's policy is working. With presidential trips scheduled to Latin America, China, Japan and elsewhere in November, officials foresee opportunities for Bush to command international attention and regain some of his lost momentum.

Early next year, Bush will attempt to use his State of the Union address to chart a revised agenda for the rest of his term, which his advisers believe will help signal changes in direction and emphasis from the past year.

Outside analysts agreed that Bush has plenty of time left to extricate himself from his problems but expressed skepticism that things will work out as well as the president's advisers hope. "The Bush administration, up until recently, has been a study of success built on success," said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University. "What that gave him was momentum. Now the chain has been broken, and it's very difficult to assemble a sequence of likely successes."

A Republican strategist, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer a bark-off analysis of Bush's problems, was far gloomier, noting that the situation facing Bush is about as bad as it can get. "What's in front of him are very big structural problems," he said.

Ticking off a list that includes a looming winter energy crisis because of high heating oil and natural gas prices, an immigration fight that could further divide his party, negative perceptions of the economy despite strong growth numbers, and overall pessimism about the direction of the country, he added: "It's not like it's a one-shot deal where they hit bottom and then bounce back. I'm not sure they've reached bottom yet."

One immediate question is how Bush will respond to the indictment of Libby and the still-unresolved situation of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove. His statement on Friday after special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald outlined the perjury and obstruction charges against Libby was terse and narrowly focused on Libby's situation. Will he use the fact of an ongoing criminal proceeding to avoid offering the public a full accounting of what happened inside his own White House in the unveiling of CIA operative Valerie Plame?

Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said presidential actions will speak louder than words. "What American people want in response to challenges is not talk but government leaders that smartly adapt," he said, adding that Bush has done so during past challenges.

Other presidents in trouble have reached for new advisers to signal a fresh start in hopes of rebuilding confidence in their administrations. "An apparent willingness to clean house and to look for people who are not immediately compromised with some of the substantive issues here -- namely the war -- might help," said Walter Dean Burnham, a professor of government at the University of Texas.

That worked well for former president Ronald Reagan after the Iran-contra scandal pushed his approval ratings even lower than Bush's are today. Reagan recruited former senator Howard Baker as his new chief of staff and brought in several other officials without long ties to the administration. But one presidential adviser said a new team is not necessarily the answer Bush is looking for.

"He wants to achieve real things in his second term," a senior official said. "He will make sure he has an agenda and the people around him to fill it. But he is not the type, just because a critic or supporter says you've got to make this change or that [to do so]. . . . He has seen past presidents who made changes in the White House and it didn't accomplish what they hoped it would."

With more than three years left in his presidency, Bush has ample time to regain his footing, according to several presidential scholars. Bruce Buchanan, a professor of government at the University of Texas, said: "He has the resources as the incumbent president to change the subject, to change personnel, to change the message of the day, to get something out that says he's going in a fresh direction. But will he triumph like he did in his first term? Unlikely."

Bartlett agreed that turning around public opinion on both domestic issues and Iraq will take time. "When you have GDP [gross domestic product] numbers like we had yesterday [Friday] showing robust growth despite the challenges of Katrina, it's quite remarkable, but the overhang of energy prices is souring people's view of the economy. That's not easy to overcome overnight."

On Iraq, he noted that attitudes toward the war are by now deeply entrenched and said the president will continue to make the case that success there is directly linked to success in fighting terrorism, but as with the domestic economy, the White House team expects no easy breakthrough in public opinion. "We believe that's going to require a sustained effort," he said.

Bush also must consider the degree to which Cheney has now become a liability in his efforts to recover politically. Two Republicans privately said yesterday the taciturn Cheney has become a major burden to the president, and that his association with an unpopular war and proximity to the Libby embarrassment will eat at the administration's credibility. "This 'I'm a sphinx' gig just doesn't get it any more," one of the GOP strategists said.

Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin said Bush faces bad choices as he attempts to regain momentum. The Miers episode raised questions about his judgment and decisiveness, while the leak investigation has raised questions about the administration's ethics.

"He can try to retreat to his base and make them happy, but that will come at great expense," Garin said. "Or his other option is to try to be what he hasn't been up to now, which is a president of consensus who tries to govern from the center. But we saw the toll that he pays from the right for that. So at the moment, he seems to be much more a captive of events."

Events, however, can energize a president as well torment him. Early in Bush's presidency, for example, many saw Bush bleeding influence; the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks infused him with new purpose and public support.

James W. Ceaser, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said there are too many levers at the disposal of a president to leave him without prospects of recovery in times of crisis. The question is how Bush now deals with them. "Looking at things from a distance, you can't go eight years without some of these things," he said. "Now you have to go about doing something about them."

-----------------------------------------
Very interesting! K

Jews and the Christian right: Is the honeymoon over?

Worried by increasingly strident evangelical rhetoric, Jewish leaders have finally dared to criticize conservative Christians. Will an alliance held together only by a shared support for Israel survive?
By Michelle Goldberg

Nov. 29, 2005 | Throughout the last five years, as the Christian right has assumed ever greater power and prominence in America, the organized Jewish community has been remarkably quiescent. Traditionally, Jewish leaders have been among the most vigilant guardians of American secularism, seeing the separation of church and state as key to Jewish equality. But faced with an evangelical president who seemed inviolable and an alliance of convenience with the religious right over Israel, Jewish leaders didn't raise much of an outcry when billions of taxpayer dollars were diverted toward religious charities through Bush's faith-based initiative. They didn't make a fuss when the administration filled the bureaucracy with veterans of groups like the Family Research Council and the Christian Coalition. As leaders of the religious right and their allies in the Republican Party trumpeted plans to "take America back," observers detected growing anxiety among ordinary American Jews, but there was little response from organized Jewry.

This month, that started to change. Two major Jewish figures -- Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, and Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism -- have taken on the religious right and, by extension, the Republican Party. By doing so, they have enraged some evangelicals and opened a fissure in the larger Jewish community. Some leaders are worried about provoking a conservative backlash and ushering in a new era of anti-Semitism. Others rejoice that someone has finally articulated what so many ordinary American Jews have been thinking. Either way, the culture wars have suddenly taken on an overtly sectarian cast.

On Nov. 3, Abraham Foxman gave a speech to an ADL meeting, calling attacks on church-state separation the "key domestic challenge to the American Jewish community and to our democratic values." "[T]oday we face a better financed, more sophisticated, coordinated, unified, energized, and organized coalition of groups in opposition to our policy positions on church-state separation than ever before," he said. "Their goal is to implement their Christian worldview. To Christianize America. To save us!" Among the major players in this campaign, Foxman listed Focus on the Family, the Alliance Defense Fund, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council.

Foxman lamented the divisions in the Jewish community over the issue, noting that there is much less unity than there was 15 years ago. Nor could Jews count on their old allies in the civil rights struggles -- African-Americans and Latinos -- for help. Those bonds have withered; those groups no longer tend to see church-state separation as a vital condition for minority rights. With the America that Jews have prospered in threatening to disappear, Foxman called for a meeting of Jewish leadership to plan a coordinated strategy.

One person who plans to be there is Rabbi Eric Yoffie, whose group is the largest Jewish organization in the country, representing more than 900 congregations. Two weeks after Foxman's broadside, Yoffie blasted the religious right in a sermon delivered to around 5,000 people at the Union's biannual convention in Houston. Yoffie says he hadn't coordinated with Foxman, but the two share some of the same concerns -- though Yoffie approaches the issue from a religious rather than a political perspective.

"We are particularly offended by the suggestion that the opposite of the religious right is the voice of atheism," he told his audience. "We are appalled when 'people of faith' is used in such a way that it excludes us, as well as most Jews, Catholics and Muslims. What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God and that anyone who disagrees with you is not a person of faith?"

Much of Yoffie's sermon argued that for many Jews, liberalism is the result of religious values, not their antithesis. Being a liberal believer, he said, "means believing that religion involves concern for the poor and the needy, and giving a fair shake to all. When people talk about God and yet ignore justice, it just feels downright wrong to us. When they cloak themselves in religion and forget mercy, it strikes us as blasphemy. "

And then he launched into the most controversial part of his sermon -- an impassioned denunciation of right-wing homophobia that invoked the historical parallel of Nazism. "We understand those who believe that the Bible opposes gay marriage, even though we read that text in a very different way," he said. "But we cannot understand why any two people who make a lifelong commitment to each other should be denied legal guarantees that protect them and their children and benefit the broader society. We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations. And today, we cannot feel anything but rage when we hear about gay men and women, some on the front lines, being hounded out of our armed services. Yes, we can disagree about gay marriage. But there is no excuse for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry."

Yoffie's sermon was more than 8,000 words long, and ranged over all kinds of subjects. By all accounts, though, the crowd responded most enthusiastically to his salvos against the religious right. This was something that American Jews have been desperate to hear from their leadership, but much of that leadership has been unable or unwilling to say it. As the Jewish newspaper the Forward wrote in an editorial, "There are many reasons to applaud this month's back-to-back speeches by Abe Foxman and Eric Yoffie on the dangers of the religious right, but here's the most important: They have given voice to something their constituents have been thinking and feeling for a long time."

Why the silence until now? Part of it has to do with Israel. Christian Zionism, inspired by end-times beliefs that make the return of Jews to Israel a precondition for the second coming, has made American evangelicals the world's staunchest backers of Israeli hawks. (Their Jewish allies usually choose to ignore the fact that the Christian Zionist's apocalyptic scenario ends with unsaved Jews being slaughtered and condemned to hell.) But while evangelicals support Israel for their own eschatological reasons, there have been threats, implicit and explicit, that such support might weaken if Jews oppose their domestic agenda too aggressively. Indeed, in response to Foxman's speech, Tom Minnery, vice president of government and public policy at Focus on the Family, told the Forward, "If you keep bullying your friends, pretty soon you won't have any.'" (Neither he nor anyone else from Focus on the Family returned a call for comment from Salon.)

According to JJ Goldberg, the Forward's editor, such warnings issue from inside the administration as well. "The timing here is crucial," he says. "The Bush administration is imploding, so the fear of White House retaliation is much lower than it was. That was a very real fear. It wasn't just a theoretical fear about Israel. It was threats. Play nice or you won't be able to come in and talk to us about the things you need. The major Jewish organizations, either individually or working through AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee], they go in every week because there's all kinds of stuff they need -- a missile, a box of bullets, intelligence sharing. It's good for them to be able to play that role and it's good for Israel and the United States to have an intermediary. In Tom DeLay's Washington, if you didn't play nice, you didn't get to walk in the door. So there has been this silence, coupled with the fact that they didn't think they could win." (Of course, not all Jews support AIPAC or the Israeli right, but those who don't have little presence and less influence in Washington.)

Yoffie, for his part, says his group never had access to the White House, but agrees that the dynamic Goldberg describes has affected the broader Jewish community. "Does that operate in the Jewish community? Sure. Does it work for us? Absolutely not. We say what we think." Yet the reason his speech has received so much attention both inside the Jewish world and outside, he suggests, is because the Bush administration is under attack more broadly, and so there's more space for dissent.

There's still plenty of anxiety among parts of the Jewish community over what Foxman and Yoffie are doing. Rabbi Yechiel Z. Eckstein, founder and chairman of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews -- and a former staffer at the ADL -- predicts that Foxman's call for a united Jewish front is doomed to fail, since other Jewish leaders won't want to take on the religious right. Eckstein's entire career is devoted to being a liaison between evangelicals and Jews -- his organization raises money from Christians for Jews in Israel and in the diaspora, and he's an advisor to Ariel Sharon and a goodwill ambassador to the state of Israel. Conservative Christian support is crucial for Jews in both Israel and America, he says, and it's folly to attack them.

Eckstein says that it's the liberal Protestant churches that have turned on Israel by calling for divestment. Meanwhile, secular Europe treats Israel like a pariah. "And who are the only ones who are coming out and standing with Israel? The evangelical Christians," Eckstein says. Eckstein acknowledges Foxman's fear about the erosion of church-state separation, but thinks any danger posed by the American religious right pales beside the threats to Israel. "Jews need to always be on guard for their survival as Jews, and for their rights as Jews here in America, but I don't believe that those rights are threatened to the point that Jewish leaders like Abe Foxman should try to galvanize the Jewish community and start a battle with a constituency that includes the president of the United States, and that includes such a large part of the Republican Party and such a large part of America," he says. "I don't think it's reached that point that Jews should be alienating their greatest friends in the real battle of Jewish survival."

When I spoke to Eckstein, he had just gotten off the phone with someone from Focus on the Family. Christian leaders, he said, feel hurt and victimized by Foxman's speech. And he feared what might result: "Rhetoric can create an anti-Jewish feeling among good Bible-believing Christians," he says. "Certainly in the evangelical world they're very focused on their leadership. It's very different than the Jewish community -- most of the Jewish community doesn't care what Abe Foxman says. If their pastor says that black is white and white is black, well, the pastor said so. If leaders themselves start to say it's the Jews who are preventing us from having a moral society in America … that's what we saw in history."

Goldberg dismisses Eckstein's argument as contradictory. "You can't on the one hand make a claim that we don't need to defend ourselves because we are essentially in a good place, and at the same time argue that we shouldn't defend ourselves because we are so vulnerable that we could lose everything in a minute," he says.

In fact, neither is true. Jews in America aren't endangered, but the power of the religious right has clearly reached a point where a great many feel exceedingly nervous. The fear is not of pogroms or outright discrimination; rather, it's of the disappearance of the secular civic culture that allowed Jews to feel like full citizens of America rather than a tolerated minority.

Throughout the last decade, the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish groups had reached a kind of accommodation with the religious right that was based in part on Christian leaders toning down their more theocratic rhetoric. In 1995, Ralph Reed, then the executive director of the Christian Coalition, addressed the ADL and apologetically acknowledged that much of his movement's language alarmed Jews. "This is true not only of the blatant wrongs of a few -- those who claimed that 'God does not hear the prayers of Jews,' those who said that this is a 'Christian nation,' suggesting that others may not be welcome, and those who say that the only prayers uttered in public school should be Christian prayers. It is also true because of the thoughtless lapses of many -- the use of religious-military metaphors, a false and patronizing philo-Semitism, and the belief that being pro-Israel somehow answers for all other insensitivity to Jewish concerns."

Such sensitivity has virtually vanished from today's religious right, replaced with a triumphalist religious nationalism. Foxman was especially alarmed by the situation at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo., where, according to numerous reports, a climate of outright religious bigotry prevailed. Some faculty members introduced themselves to their classes as born-again Christians and encouraged their charges to convert. Upperclassmen exerted similar pressure on undergraduates; one Jewish cadet was slurred as a Christ killer. Several cadets have filed a lawsuit.

Even more disturbing to Foxman than the abuses themselves was the religious right's response when they came to light. Few were apologetic -- instead, they declared themselves the victims. When Democratic Rep. David Obey offered an amendment to a defense appropriations bill calling for an investigation into the situation at the academy, Republican John Hostettler stood up and said, "The long war on Christianity in America continues today on the floor of the House of Representatives."

When the Air Force adopted guidelines intended to remedy the situation, the religious right reacted furiously. The guidelines didn't prevent senior officers from proselytizing to those under their authority, though they did urge them to be "sensitive." They also called for public prayers to be non-sectarian. Christian conservative leaders interpreted this as an assault, and 70 congressmen joined movement representatives in signing a letter to President Bush decrying the guidelines and asking him to issue an executive order protecting "the constitutional right of military chaplains to pray according to their faith."

"There is an arrogance in their efforts to pull every institution toward Christianity," says Foxman. "It's a concerted effort to use government to achieve that which religion should achieve in the open marketplace." The more theocratic elements of the religious right -- elements Reed tried to marginalize, at least in public -- have now taken center stage. A decade ago, Foxman says, the drive to Christianize America "wasn't in the open, it wasn't as blatant, it wasn't as aggressive."

As Foxman said in his speech, "Make no mistake: We are facing an emerging Christian right leadership that intends to 'Christianize' all aspects of American life, from the halls of government to the libraries, to the movies, to recording studios, to the playing fields and local rooms of professional collegiate and amateur sport, from the military to SpongeBob SquarePants."

Given this onslaught, Jews can't simply cede their place in America in exchange for support for Israel. Speaking of those who caution him not to disturb the Jewish-evangelical alliance, Foxman says, "If we cannot disagree, what kind of a friendship is it?"

-- By Michelle Goldberg

Salon Media Group, Inc
101 Spear Street, Suite 203
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone 415 645-9200

-----------------------------------------
As many of you know, Blue Hearts believes strongly in the power behind our purchases and how to best wield this power. That said, it has proved very difficulty and murky to figure this out. Here is another tool that can help direct your spending. Please note that companies are judged differently than at BuyBlue.org. As I said, it's a challenge to keep it all straight and do what's best based on our values. Happy shopping.

Human Rights Campaign
BUYING FOR EQUALITY
http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/ct/_1q1yuS1vmfg/
***************************

The Human Rights Campaign's Buyer's Guide gives you the information you need to support companies that support equality.
The guide utilizes the groundbreaking research and advocacy of the Human Rights Campaign's Workplace Project to give you the tools to effect corporate change in your everyday life.

Shopping at Banana Republic or L.L. Bean? Filling up the tank at Shell or Exxon? Fighting the mid-afternoon snacking urge with a Balance Bar or a Power Bar? Our buyer's guide will let you know which products and companies to support and which to avoid. Click here to download your complimentary buyer's guide:
http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/ct/_1q1yuS1vmfg/

We are proud to say that corporate America is leading the way to fairness and equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in offices and boardrooms around the country. By offering domestic partner benefits and implementing inclusive anti-discrimination policies, workplaces are rapidly becoming a fairer place for all employees.

However, it is still legal in most states to fire a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employee for no other reason
than who they are. Many companies still have a long way to go toward equality for all employees. You can help turn the tide by making informed decisions about the products you purchase and the companies you choose to support, especially during this busy shopping season.

Together, we can help effect real change in workplaces across the country.

Warmly,

Joe Solmonese
Human Rights Campaign President

--------------------------------------------
It's encouraging to see the year in review! K

Dear kristin,

I hope you are enjoying a wonderful holiday season. As the year draws to a close, I'd like to share some of 2005's successes we should celebrate.

In January, my brother, Howard, announced his candidacy for chair of the Democratic National Committee saying, "The Democratic Party needs a vibrant, forward-thinking, long-term presence in every single state and we must be willing to contest every race at every level. We will only win when we show up and fight for the issues important to all of us."

By February, Howard was in! And the reforms began right away. This year the DNC is raising money faster than ever and putting it to good use hiring grassroots organizers in every state.

In the fight to protect Social Security from privatization, thousands of Democracy for America members told their personal Social Security stories in March. DFA organizers around the country compiled the most compelling stories and delivered them to members of Congress. After over 100 meetings in April, Congress heard your concerns and dropped the President's plan.

By May, the DFA Training Academy was in full swing, bringing some of the best organizing talent in the country to grassroots members in red and blue states across the country. With your help, we're on track to train 25,000 activists by the 2008 presidential election.

In June, you helped expose the Bush administration's rush to war by forcing the Downing Street Memos into the mainstream media. Public support for the war has been on the decline ever since.

When the grassroots discovered Paul Hackett in southern Ohio, he nearly won a congressional seat that hasn't been in Democratic hands in decades. DFA members poured over $100,000 into Maj. Hackett's campaign in July and the OH-2 congressional seat is now "in play' in 2006.

Over 100,000 members of Democracy for America, TrueMajority Action and MoveOn Political Action stood in vigil with Cindy Sheehan in August.

When Hurricane Katrina hit, Democracy for America hired one of the grassroots' key leaders in New Orleans to coordinate our response with the Louisiana NAACP at the Rights, Recovery and Renaissance conference.

Generation DFA spent much of October on the road with the Foo Fighters, registering young people to vote and bridging the gap between community service and political action.

In November, our work bore fruit with big electoral wins. We elected new Democratic governors in Virginia and New Jersey. We beat back Governor Schwarzenegger's power grab in California. And we put DFA-List candidates into office across the country.

Finally, when Dick Cheney traveled to Houston earlier this month to raise money for indicted Congressman Tom DeLay, DFA responded by saying, "enough!" DeLay's political action committee supported 29 Republican candidates in 2005. So, DFA raised over $35,000 for 29 candidates of our own.
I want to thank you for your work on all of these initiatives and more. You are what makes Democracy for America and all our work possible.

That's why I'm inviting you to take this last opportunity in 2005 to make a donation to Democracy for America.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/contribute

Your generosity is powering a grassroots revolution that is on pace to win back both chambers of Congress in 2006, pick up the majority of governorships and elect DFA-List candidates to local office across the nation.

That's a New Year's resolution I think we all share. Thank you for all you do.

Happy New Year!

Jim Dean
Chair

=====================================

LOCAL:


**************** Blue Hearts meeting ****************
**************** January 18th, 8:30 am ***************
***************2100 Stratford Rd, SMKS **************

Our speaker will be from the Midwest Bioethics Center addressing stem cell research. I'll send out a reminder email and ask for RSVP's next week but, please, get this into your calendar! K

----------------------------------------------------------

From: Phil LeVota, Chairman ,Jackson County Democratic Committee

I hope that this e-mail finds everyone in a good holiday spirit. For those of you who missed it, the 1st annual Democratic Holiday Party was held last week and over 200 Democrats gathered to celebrate the season. Fun was had by all and we were able to donate almost 200 pounds of food for the Harvesters Program and over 30 toys for underprivileged children for the Toys For Tots Program. For those of you that were there, thanks for coming and I know you had fun, For those of you that couldn't make it, don't miss it next year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is the monthly installment of the Democratic Newsletter from our Democratic leaders in Jefferson City. Don't listen when the Republican windbags say that Democrats don't have a plan. How about Job Creation, Stronger Consumer Protection, and Restoring Integrity and Accountability to Government? Here it is. Read all about it!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our prayers are with the families of Dutch Newman, Claire McCaskill, and Cathy Spainhower for their recent losses. Please keep them in your thoughts this holiday time.
-----------------------------------------
There's the news. Here's the rant!

I saw on Fox News how Unions are destroying our country and just received an e-mail about how Unions are bad. I first thought that everyone knows that the Labor movement is one of the best things that has happened to our country, but then I thought maybe I would pass on another e-mail to give you the talking points to talk back to that misinformed, misguided, Republican Union basher.

From a recent e-mail to me: (Thanks Bob Hemenway).
Writer unknown:
I don't belong to a union, but history is history....
Without unions, there would have been no child labor laws. Children worked 14 hours and 16 hours a day for less than a buck a day at the turn of the century. Unions changed this and child labor laws were enacted.

There were no health benefits, no vacations, no 40-hour work week, no sick leave. Working conditions were deplorable in most industries and unsafe. Workers were locked in factories, sweatshops. There was discrimination of every sort. It was the unions that changed this. Without the unions, everything people have gained will be lost. And those non-union workers, like myself, have a great debt to pay for the union activists.

Despite all the problems of unions, this country prospered under unions. It's unfortunate that today, after Reagan began all the union busting, that people are losing benefits and jobs and security.

Other countries have national health plans, minimum four week vacations. Not in this country anymore. The good ol' USA is proud to export jobs and hire illegals at little pay.

I am a capitalist, but I don't believe in oligarchy out of control or in profits before people. Profits and good wages and great benefits and good working conditions go a long way to making our country stronger. We are destroying all that we once fought for, and for what?????

So, no, unions aren't terrorist organizations; they may not be perfect, but they built our country and helped citizens get a fair deal which they would never have gotten if the unions weren't there. Unions need to be changed, perhaps, and they are undergoing change. But without unions, we could fall back to the dark ages.... So, I beg to differ, it isn't the unions that are terrorists, but those companies that try and succeed to exploit people around the world. Do you think Exxon and Shell and BP give a damn about all the disease they have caused in third world countries by polluting fresh water drinking supplies and company slums. It is disgusting!!!!! We are very lucky in the US. Let's keep it that way.

Look at India, China and lots of other developing nations where we are exporting our jobs to. See how many children really work making sneakers and in other horrendous factories. I've traveled. I've seen the horrors that occur at the hands of the greedy. And we as a nation that claims to love freedoms, look the other way when it comes to this.

A stable nation with happy workers is much more secure than nations that exploit anyone and everyone they can. It happened here before, so why can't it happen again?

Again, I am a capitalist, but there needs to be protection for our citizens.
Writer unknown

I am proud to have Unions as partners in the Democratic Party. They have always been there fighting for what we stand for. So why don't you hug the next labor man or woman you see and thank them for all they do? They will love it. Keep up the good work have a great Christmas, New Year, and any holiday you and yours celebrate!
Phil LeVota
Chairman
Jackson County Democratic Committee
Visit our website: www.jacksoncountydemocrats.org

----------------------------------------------

Campaign Kickoff ‘06

Join Missy Taylor
Candidate for Kansas House of Representatives
with special guest
Congressman Dennis Moore
at

The Blue Moose
4160 W. 71st St., Prairie Village
(Just west of Mission Road)

Thursday, January 5th
5:30 – 7:30

Wine and appetizers provided

$250 Benefactor
$100 Sponsor
$25 Individual
$10 Student

Please share this invitation with friends.

INVITATION ONLY
PLEASE SAVE THE DATE

----------------------------------------------

Please let me know if you are interested in attending this. I would like to have representation from Blue Hearts. Anyone??? We can send 1-2 people. Thanks,
K

The Midwest Center for American Values believes the progressive vision represents the core moral values and high aspirations held by the vast majority of Americans. In an effort to insure a fair, compassionate, and vibrant democracy, MCAV is working to ensure responsible state government. MCAV believes that the well-being of Missourians is being threatened by TABOR, a state constitutional amendment that will force reduction of public services, K-12 education, state universities, and health care. MCAV wants to protect Missouri from the devastating effects of TABOR that families in Colorado have suffered over the past decade.

DATE: JANUARY 26, 2006 - 6pm-9pm - UMKC Administration Building, 5115 Oak, 2nd Floor

Please RSVP no later than January 15.

These forums will be interactive, based on experiential learning (does that sound boring? Don't worry - it isn't). MCAV is developing games that will help people understand the particular issue with which we are dealing.

This month we will be focusing on TABOR - the 'so called' Tax payer bill of rights. This is a piece of legislation which was just recalled in Colorado because of the devastation it does to a state budget, education, social services and other programs

This is an 'INVITATION ONLY' Event. We are asking you to send 1-2 people from your organization to the forum. They will learn the game and take it back to teach it to others in your organization or area.

If there is an organization or person you feel should be invited and may not be on the list, please let us know. We have limited space and the game is set for about 50- people.

We will do several follow ups on more particulars as the weeks go by. Please save the date. If you cannot come, please let us know so we can fill your spot.

We are happy that Missouri Budget Project is helping to sponsor this event. More organizations will be added.

Thank you for what you do in your organizations. Together, MCAV believes we can make a huge difference in the priorities of our state and our country.

Vicki Walker
Midwest Center for American Values
www.midwestvalues.org
816.289.5932

-----------------------------------------

For our Kansans in the group!!!


True Blue Women Quarterly Meeting
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
7:00 pm
Asbury Methodist Church, 75th and Nall, Prairie Village

Mark your calendar to attend True Blue Women’s first meeting of the new year, and make your resolution to be really active
with True Blue Women in 2006!

Carol Sader, a founder of Mainstream Coalition and a former Kansas State Representative, will help us kick off this important year.

We’ll also divide into four Issue Committees and determine goals and strategies for the coming year.

Education Lisa Veglahn, lveglahn@sbcglobal.net
Judy Sherry, judysherry@kc.rr.com
Environment Jennifer Byer, byerdubois@hotmail.com
Jeanie Schiefelbusch, jeans@ku.edu
Health care Mary Sgroi, sgroim@mac.com
Liz Christian, lchristian@kc.rr.com
Social Justice Barbara Johnson, barbara@cosmopolitan.org
Maurine Kierl, mkierl@kc.rr.com

If you already know which Issue Committee you want to join, visit http://www.truebluewomen.org/upcoming_events.htm and contact the women listed above.

This will be an exciting year! True Blue Women promises lots of ways to get involved and make a difference in 2006.

Join us!
Bring a friend!

# posted by Blue Hearts @ 12:52 AM 0 comments