Tonight I met Cindy Sheehan

(Welcome to my first diary on DailyKos..... so far, including my contributions, I have 38 comments and 17 recs.)
I live in CA-8, Nancy Pelosi’s district. In fact, I live right in the middle of downtown San Francisco. I see, literally every day, some of the ills of gentrification, as well as the high-rise development in downtown and the dire situation of drug use and homelessness that plagues our nation. I have lived in and traveled all over Europe, and I’ve never seen the devastation of the San Francisco Tenderloin.

I have been following this presidential race obsessively, first cheering for Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then Obama again, then Clinton again, then Edwards again, and finally Obama. Now, without any reservations, I am strongly behind Obama. I currently live in CA-8, but will soon be moving to central NJ.
Tonight, however, I faced one of the most interesting tests in the development of my political thought. I grew up in suburban Phoenix, believing in Bill Clinton due to my parents, reading Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky and listening to Rage Against the Machine and hardcore. I was the stereotypical simplistic radical teenager. I voted for Ralph Nader (and not only do I stand by my vote, I challenge anyone to convince me that Nader is to blame, rather than the US Supreme Court, the Florida Supreme Court, the Republican Party, George W. Bush, the Democratic Party, Al Gore, the media, etc. etc). Yet, I heard Democrats claiming that by supporting a Green, I had betrayed the Democratic Party. I had to remind them that the Democratic Party was only the answer insofar as it represented my views..... and Gore had not.
Finally though, I went to Berkeley and watched my (theoretical) wing of the Democratic Party grow and come into conflict with the moderates on one side and those prone to radical ignorance on the other. I strongly pushed for social programs, for civil liberties and for tolerance. Those were my biggest concerns and issues. I finally became a Democrat.
Then, the war came. I was told, by two Japanese friends of my girlfriend, almost with glee, "your country just bombed Iraq". I cried at the University Health Center, watching pictures of "shock and awe". I had opposed both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. I was disappointed in us, the people of the US. I loved my East Bay representative Barbara Lee for her contributions to our country. Yet nobody listened. And people died.
Suddenly, Cindy Sheehan came forward and spoke on behalf of her son. He was killed for an embarrassing, horrifying and destructive war. I saw her as a person in more than legitimate pain for the loss of a family member. Then, I saw her lampooned by the media. She was called crazy, delusional, an anti-Semite, etc. I began to ignore her.....
But it was entirely unfair. Tonight, she held a fundraiser in San Francisco for her campaign to take on Nancy Pelosi for the CA-8 seat in 2008. I watched her discuss her points. I didn’t think she represented her angle well. She sounded like a naïve groupie who was preaching to the choir. BUT then she started discussing Iraq. The obscenities started to fly. She was no longer the friendly, understanding person who had begun the discussion. Her passion overwhelmed me. I FELT her point. Here was a woman who had been completely devastated by the disastrous policies of my government and she was lashing out, screaming, "LISTEN TO ME!!!!!!"
Despite the errors of the activists that represent the left, we need to hear the voice of people like Cindy Sheehan. As much as we try to theorize about the political aspects of our current or future administrations, we are not allowed to fail to understand that people’s lives are at stake. Not just Cindy Sheehan’s son. Also: the children of countless others whose kids/parents/boyfriends/girlfriends/brothers/sisters are dying in Iraq; the Iraqis who’ve died by the hundreds of thousands; the victims of Hurricane Katrina who died, suffered and continue to suffer while our government just sits; low-income families who have to live with little income and no health insurance, and countless, COUNTLESS, other victims that I’m too angry to be able to name.
In the end, I don’t support Cindy Sheehan’s candidacy, because I don’t think she has the knowledge to lead our country. However, I have to say, and I want to repeat, ad infinitum, that her grievances are real, that the grievances of all our citizens are real...... and that this election is the fight of our lives.... THE FIGHT... OF OUR LIVES. This could be the twilight of our nation, and it is up to us to pull it back from despair, if only to preserve it for another generation of two. I’m sure you know whom I will be voting for. I hope you do the same. If you need a little guidance, think of those like Cindy Sheehan.

This editorial is perfect

From the NYTimes

The Low Road to Victory

Published: April 23, 2008

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.

If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.

On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11. A Clinton television ad — torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook — evoked the 1929 stock market crash, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis, the cold war and the 9/11 attacks, complete with video of Osama bin Laden. “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” the narrator intoned.

If that was supposed to bolster Mrs. Clinton’s argument that she is the better prepared to be president in a dangerous world, she sent the opposite message on Tuesday morning by declaring in an interview on ABC News that if Iran attacked Israel while she were president: “We would be able to totally obliterate them.”

By staying on the attack and not engaging Mr. Obama on the substance of issues like terrorism, the economy and how to organize an orderly exit from Iraq, Mrs. Clinton does more than just turn off voters who don’t like negative campaigning. She undercuts the rationale for her candidacy that led this page and others to support her: that she is more qualified, right now, to be president than Mr. Obama.

Mr. Obama is not blameless when it comes to the negative and vapid nature of this campaign. He is increasingly rising to Mrs. Clinton’s bait, undercutting his own claims that he is offering a higher more inclusive form of politics. When she criticized his comments about “bitter” voters, Mr. Obama mocked her as an Annie Oakley wannabe. All that does is remind Americans who are on the fence about his relative youth and inexperience.

No matter what the high-priced political operatives (from both camps) may think, it is not a disadvantage that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton share many of the same essential values and sensible policy prescriptions. It is their strength, and they are doing their best to make voters forget it. And if they think that only Democrats are paying attention to this spectacle, they’re wrong.

After seven years of George W. Bush’s failed with-us-or-against-us presidency, all American voters deserve to hear a nuanced debate — right now and through the general campaign — about how each candidate will combat terrorism, protect civil liberties, address the housing crisis and end the war in Iraq.

It is getting to be time for the superdelegates to do what the Democrats had in mind when they created superdelegates: settle a bloody race that cannot be won at the ballot box. Mrs. Clinton once had a big lead among the party elders, but has been steadily losing it, in large part because of her negative campaign. If she is ever to have a hope of persuading these most loyal of Democrats to come back to her side, let alone win over the larger body of voters, she has to call off the dogs.

A loss of 8.6% is painful because the monster can spin it.

Will everyone please stop representing this race as if the two sides are equal? Hillary's attacks are disgusting. Obama's main left-field attack on Hillary was that she did, in fact, lie about Bosnia.

Her attacks on him?
1) He's a Muslim (Farrakhan, Hamas newsletter, picture in African garb, her answer of "I have no evidence of that" rather than "no" when asked if he's a Muslim)

2) He is soft of terrorism/he is a terrorist (9/11, Weather Underground, 9/11, Muslim, anti-American preacher, OH, and 9/11)

3) He's an arrogant elitist who hates guns and religion.

So, to my understanding, he's an elite terrorist Muslim, who hates religion and has a crazy Christian pastor.

What do I think the Democrats should do? I think they should elect Obama, the Democrat in the race, before our neo-con/neo-lib (yes both) friend Clinton destroys our party, allows McCain to use her attacks on Obama, the clear nominee, and causes more war, more tax-cuts for the rich, abortion bans, homophobia, basically the end of our constitution and thus any meaningful USA.......

Let's face it. It's Obama, or the destruction of our country. Here's a hint: Hillary is not Obama.

Hillary performed marvelously tonight on ABC's "Dancing with the Stars"

With tonight's disgusting debate, ABC joins the FOX ranks. CNN is headed in that direction. What is happening to our media? This is truly frightening.......

From the Huffington Post:, a little sum up of the questions from the first half of the debate:

Both: "Any chance at a "Dream Ticket?"
Obama: "Bitter, much?"
Both: "Do you think your opponent stands a chance against McCain?"
Obama: "What about Reverend Wright?"
Obama: "Wait. I have an even stupider question about Reverend Wright."
Hillary: "Seriously. Who were you fooling with that Bosnia shizz?"
Obama: "Hey, Hussein! Why no American flag lapel pin?"
Obama: "Hey, Sean Hannity wanted me to ask you something, Barack! I got a question on the Weather Underground! Maybe later we'll talk about the Symbionese Liberation Army!"

You'll notice that of these 8 questions, 7 were directed at Obama and 3 at Hillary. Obama got 5 attacking "gotcha" questions and Hillary got 1.

When did Hillary Clinton become part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" (she means fascism/corporatism)?

Then she attempted to link Obama to Hamas, referring to a pretty sanguine article written by a major Hamas figure, featured on a page of the bulletin from Obama's church....... My god. And Farrakhan again?!?! Hillary really wants us to think he's Muslim.

I'm starting to truly think that if Hillary manages to destroy Obama with attacks and somehow magically pulls this off (incredibly) unlikely, I will not vote at all. Will she be any better than McCain?

I truly think Hillary does not care at all about this country, peace, women's rights, etc. She's trying to hand the Supreme Court to the fascists on a platter. Goodbye abortion rights! What a f!$§ing deplorable person. I think I'll move to a liberal country, like Poland (ha).

Like Billie Joe said......

Phoenix Mayor Wants Feds to Investigate Sheriff's Racial Profiling

by Blue Intrigue

Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:15:37 PM PDT

Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon has had enough of Sheriff Joe:

In the wake of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office crackdowns on illegal immigrants throughout the Valley, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon is calling on the FBI to investigate whether Sheriff Joe Arpaio has violated any civil-rights laws.

Link

• Blue Intrigue's diary :: ::
• 
  

In an April 4 letter to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Gordon asked the Justice Department's civil-rights division and the FBI to probe what Gordon calls a "pattern and practice of conduct that includes discriminatory harassment, improper stops, searches and arrests."

Justice Department officials promised to review Gordon's letter but declined further comment.

Hopefully, the feds will take Gordon's request seriously, coming as it does from the mayor of a large Southwestern city. Naturally, Arpaio is condescending and dismissive in his response:

"I think the mayor is disconnected from the people he represents and he doesn't get the point. Now he's going to Washington to confuse the issue and try to get the public against me," Arpaio said Saturday. "It's not going to work. I've done nothing wrong." ... Arpaio insists Gordon is taking the opportunity to play political games and said the series of letters, whether they come from ministers or politicians, don't bother him.

"I don't think any of them carry any weight cause I have nothing to hide," he said. "(Gordon) did this on his own because he's taking the heat. Now he's degrading my office and my deputies by insinuating that they're violating all these civil laws. We don't profile."

Phil Gordon, a lawyer, is not likely to waste the FBI's time on false claims.

Gordon's four-page letter details Arpaio's recent sweeps through predominantly Latino neighborhoods in Phoenix and Guadalupe.

"Over the past few weeks, Sheriff Arpaio's actions have infringed on the civil rights of our residents," Gordon wrote. "They have put our residents' well-being, and the well-being of law enforcement officers, at risk."

In his letter, Gordon says he was moved to write after Arpaio pledged to bring his sweeps to other Valley cities on an ongoing basis. Gordon, who is an attorney, asks that Arpaio be investigated for possible violations of four laws, including the Civil Rights Act and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act.

Additionally, Gordon has the backing of the ACLU, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League.

The sweeps, which Gordon has called "made-for-TV stunts", heve brought out the worst elements of society:

In his office, Gordon has a pair of posters held by protesters at the recent sweep that took place near Cave Creek and Bell roads. Given to him by a Phoenix police officer who was on the scene, one refers to Latinos with an expletive and a slur. Another says "Hooray for the slaughtering of the illegals!" and is adorned with a swastika.

The bottom line in this is that Sheriff Joe has poured resources into catching a few illegals (always in front of cameras) while violent crimes go uninvestigated and unsolved. And he has violated the rights of many citizens in the process. One of the more common citations issued during the sweeps has been for honking the car horn in support of the protestors who greet Arpaio wherever he sets up shop with his two hundred deputies. What kind of law enforcement is this? Oh, and how many non-Latinos have been stopped for this?

It's time to stop this thug.

Help elect Dan Saban.

From Today's Chronicle

Thanks, Mr. Mayor

Editor - Congratulations to Mayor Gavin Newsom on turning liberal San Francisco into an extension of the repressive Chinese government. The relay should have just been canceled.

JOHN NAVAS

San Ramon

Shameful, San Francisco

Editor - I have just watched one of the most embarrassing public spectacles imaginable with the San Francisco Olympic torch relay being beamed worldwide. It was like watching a car wreck, a failed surprise party or a canceled wedding. The sight of torch bearers waving at nobody along a nondescript stretch of Van Ness Avenue, following a flatbed truck, was pathetic. Flanked by double rows of dark uniformed police officers on foot and on motorcycles, the procession resembled a military drill more than a celebration.

As the world was watching, the powers that be in San Francisco blinked at the challenge of controlling both celebrants and dissidents. Whoever made the decision to cause this travesty should apologize to the thousands who waited hours to take part in something that should have made San Francisco proud.

WAYNE KATSUMATA

Berkeley