Register to vote, and send Voltage to play at the Democratic National Convention.  We have songs that are perfect for the event already written, and I am already the number one democrat at the DNC.

Must watch!  http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/327.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GzPXer7946E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eRJbbtCbF8

Ban paperless voting.  http://pol.moveon.org/paperlessvoting/

I am happy that I am working in Obama's campaign!  The following snippet is from today's NY TIMES (we need to make sure we donate a few bucks to the campaign!):

Obama’s War Chest Drives a 50-State Strategy

Obama is drawing up plans for extensive advertising and voter-turnout drives across the nation, hoping to capitalize on his expected fund-raising advantage over Senator John McCain to force Republicans to compete in states they have not had to defend in decades.

With his decision to give up public financing and the spending limits that go with it, Mr. Obama has added several seasoned hands to his advertising team, a harbinger of a multifaceted television campaign that people inside and outside Obama headquarters said would grow well beyond its already large presence in 18 states.

Future commercials could run on big national showcases like the Olympics in August and smaller cable networks like MTV and Black Entertainment Television that appeal to specific demographic and interest groups.

Mr. Obama is also dispatching paid staff members to all 50 states, an unusual move by the standards of modern presidential campaigns so often fought in just a contained group of contested territories.

His aides and advisers said they did not believe Obama necessarily has a serious chance of winning in many of the traditionally Republican states, but rather that he can at least draw Mr. McCain into spending time and money there while also swelling the rolls of Democratic voters and supporting other Democrats on the ballot.

His strategists are busily studying data from focus groups, magazine subscription lists and census studies. It is the beginning of an intensive door-to-door drive, using volunteers overseen by a growing staff of organizers, to reach voters using persuasive messages tailored to their individual interests through the mail, e-mail and word of mouth.

Now, free from the constraints of public financing, campaign and party officials have said that Mr. Obama’s budget for the rest of the year could be well above $300 million. But Mr. Obama’s fund-raising slowed abruptly in May, when the campaign raised $22 million, $10 million less than it had in April and an even sharper drop relative to his monthly performances earlier in the year. The decline was evidence that Mr. Obama might have to work hard to keep donations coming in at the record pace he has been setting.

READ the rest at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/us/politics/22obama.html?em&ex=1214193600&en=c0dfa3b5e6e55855&ei=5087%0A 

Here's some good stuff about John McCain from Lonee Hamilton of: http://www.barackoblogger.com/ 

McCain Flip Flops

The Flipflop Express is great site that chronicles all of John McCain's flipflops. Check it out.

The reason why we invaded Iraq has become clear. As Rachel Maddow states in the MSNBC clip at the link HERE, the United States (special interests of the US, anyway) needs to set up an oil colony.

We've been hoodwinked. (But we already knew that, right?)

READ ON:

Cindy McCain better stop attacking Michelle Obama.

Check this out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/19/watch-mccain-didnt-love-a_n_108191.html

Data from 32 nationwide polls conducted from May 15 to June 15, 2008

For full results: http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has a profound appreciation of the media's great possibilities. That's at least part of what earned him the presumptive Democratic nomination for president.

The great battle to get the nomination -- a bruising 13-month struggle against valiant New York Sen. Hillary Clinton -- has ended. The war, against Republican nominee and Arizona Sen. John McCain, has only begun.

And if Obama's "Yes We Can" mantra leads to "Yes We Did" in a November election victory, he will be setting the tone for communications policy from the bulliest of all media pulpits. And he likely would have a solidly Democratic Congress behind him.

With that in mind, we asked the senator to weigh in on media's great challenges, issues and limits and go on the record with B&C about his communications agenda.

In e-mailed responses last week to questions submitted to his Capitol Hill office, Obama told us he is committed to working toward a digital-TV transition that is without significant disruption (the switchover would come less than four weeks after his inauguration); said the Federal Communications Commission needs to take merger reviews more seriously; asserted that FCC chairman Kevin Martin, like his predecessor, has tried to "dismantle" rules that protect the public; and gave his thoughts on whether cable content should be regulated or its channels unbundled.

Obama believes the consequence of consolidation has been less diversity, less local news and the parroting of stories across multiple outlets. That, he said, needs to change.

In other words, the media is on notice: The potential new sheriff is in town, and he believes there's plenty of cleaning up to do.

Q: You signaled that you would put the teeth back into antitrust enforcement. What would that mean for media companies that want to merge?

A: There is a clear need in this country for the reinvigoration of antitrust enforcement. Our competition agencies, the Department of Justice and the FTC [Federal Trade Commission], need to step up review of merger activity and take effective action to stop or restructure those mergers that are likely to harm consumer welfare, while quickly clearing those that do not. Specifically, for media mergers, the Department of Justice and the FTC should closely scrutinize all mergers for their implications for competition and consumer choice. The FCC should more seriously evaluate the impact of proposed mergers on the ability of divergent communities to participate in the national media environment.

Q: Where do you stand on the merger of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio, the only two satellite-radio companies?

A: I am waiting for final resolution by the regulatory agencies and would want to ensure that the merger does not give the new firm excessive market power or unduly limit the choices consumers have for satellite-radio content.

Q: You have said network neutrality would be a priority in your administration. Why and how would you go about ensuring a neutral Internet while still allowing networks to manage traffic?

A: The Internet is a powerful, democratizing tool. There are very low entry barriers for the delivery of services over the Internet, and public debate is unfettered by either the network owner or any single dominant voice. The neutral nature of the Internet makes that possible, and it is something we should defend. Up to now, legislation has focused on protecting against the discrimination against or in favor of any single voice or legal service. All have made allowances for objective, nondiscriminatory network-management practices.

Q: What prompted you to weigh in on media ownership and diversity at an FCC field hearing in Chicago (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6480419.html) last year?

A: I strongly favor diversity of ownership of outlets and protection against the excessive concentration of power in the hands of any one corporation, interest or small group. I strongly believe that all citizens should be able to receive information from the broadest range of sources. I feel that media consolidation during the Bush administration has had the effect of eliminating a lot of the diversity of information sources available to persons who have to rely on more traditional information sources, such as radio and television broadcasts and newspapers.

Q: What ill effects has the country suffered from media consolidation, if any?

A: This country's media ownership rules that both chairman [Michael] Powell and chairman Martin have wanted to dismantle protect us from excessive media concentration. However, even under current rules, the media market is dominated by a handful of firms. The ill effects of consolidation today and continued consolidation are well-documented -- less diversity of opinion, less local news coverage, replication of the same stories across multiple outlets, and others. We can do better.

Q: You co-sponsored the Dorgan bill to block the FCC's media-ownership change, which Martin has argued was a moderate compromise that took into account the input of opponents to consolidation. Why block it?

A: Chairmen Martin and Powell both argued that their previous effort to deregulate the media market was moderate, as well. Both the courts and a majority of the Senate disagreed the first time. And a few weeks back, the Senate disagreed with chairman Martin again. While he argues that the rule is no longer in the public interest, the public response has heavily weighed in against him. And common sense tells us that the consolidation of outlets in local markets will lead to fewer opportunities for diverse expression of opinions.

Q: What concerns, if any, do you have over violent or sexual content on TV? Should cable be regulated for content?

A: We have established a precedent that government should act to protect kids in a nonintrusive way on broadcast radio and TV. That does not mean that we need the same rules for other media, but it does require us to respect and remain true to the principle that our kids cannot protect themselves -- parents are their first line of defense, and regulation can make it easier for parents to exercise that responsibility. I am focused on ensuring that parents have the tools to protect their kids from offensive material. I prefer technological solutions to this challenge rather than extending content regulation to cable and satellite. Given modern technology and increasingly sophisticated cable and satellite boxes and services, the market should be able to rise to meet the market demand to protect kids from indecent content. If the market fails to meet that demand, legislative and regulatory action may be necessary -- but it must be crafted carefully and focus not on content censorship, but rather on tools for parents.

Q: Do you support requiring cable operators to sell their channels a la carte? Why or why not?

A: I think the jury is still out on a la carte. Several years ago, chairman Powell had the FCC study the effect on consumers of an a la carte system. That study concluded that on average, rates would go up for consumers because each channel would cost much more even if the consumer took fewer channels than they currently receive. Then during his term, chairman Martin had the FCC conduct a review of that study and reversed the findings. FCC staff said the previous report was wrong to conclude that the average cable household -- which watches about 17 channels -- would likely face a monthly rate increase of up to 30% under a la carte. That 2004 report reasoned that a la carte would drive up cable companies' costs for equipment, customer service and marketing, and that would almost certainly be passed on to subscribers. But the new report says consumers could receive as many as 20 channels without seeing an increase in bills and blamed the earlier finding on faulty data it obtained from the cable industry. I do not want to discourage diversity of programming on cable systems and fear that a la carte regulation may do that. But given the conflicting FCC reports, I remain open to review and discussion of the concept.

Hillary Clinton announced her support for our campaign today.

Senator Clinton made history over the past 16 months -- not just because she has broken barriers, but because she has inspired millions of Americans with her strength, her courage, and her commitment to causes like universal health care that make a difference in the lives of hardworking Americans.

Our party and our country are stronger because of the work she has done throughout her life, and I'm a better candidate for having had the privilege of competing with her.

Senator Clinton will be invaluable to our efforts to win in November, and I look forward to campaigning alongside her to bring this country the change it so desperately needs.

Hillary and her supporters are joining us at an urgent moment.

It's going to require a new level of commitment from every single one of us to build a national campaign in the general election.

And we're going win this election the right way -- by growing our grassroots network of ordinary people giving only what they can afford.

It's time for all of us to come together to take on John McCain in the general election. John McCain offers another four years of George Bush's policies, which our country simply cannot afford.

To win, we must continue building an unprecedented organization in all 50 states. And that will only happen if we all work together, side-by-side.

Thank you for joining this movement and supporting a new kind of politics. Together we can do more than just win an election.

Together we can change this country, and we can change the world.

And we are honored to have Hillary Clinton at our side as we do it.

Barack

After appearing here, Obama traveled to a rally in northern Virginia's D.C. suburbs, then headed back to his hometown of Chicago to take the weekend off. He's looking forward to "a date" tonight with his wife, Michelle, a round of golf on Saturday ("the best I can do is the low 80s," Obama said) and a bike ride with his children on Sunday.

Not that he is expecting it to be entirely relaxing. On Saturday night, Obama will face a challenge familiar to many American parents: Eight 7-year-olds are due at his house for a birthday sleepover in honor of his daughter, Sasha.

"These kids are planning to make pizza so who knows what our kitchen will look like," Obama said. "They shouldn't call these sleepovers. They should call them wake-overs."

If you are upset about the nomination of Barack Obama as the Democratic Candidate for President of the United States, PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO GO TO THIS Candidate Match Game II.  It will help you decide whether to vote for McCain or not. 

USA TODAY researched candidate positions on a range of top issues and then devised issue statements that help differentiate the candidates and their stances.

As you answer the questions, you can roll over each "issue" button to find background on their positions. Your answers are matched with the positions of the presidential hopefuls to reveal who is closest to your views. The sliders allow you to assign relative weights to match the importance that you place on each issue.

Please check it out. 

Real Clear Politics Electoral Map http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

 Barack Obama 228 John McCain 190 Toss Up 120 Toss Up states at present: (2004 Result) Nevada (Bush) New Mexico (Bush) Colorado (Bush) Missouri (Bush) Wisconsin (Kerry) Michigan (Kerry) Indiana (Bush) Ohio (Bush) Maine (Kerry) West Virginia (Bush) Virginia (Bush) New Hampshire (Kerry) North Carolina (Bush) If the states voted according to the present forcast Obama would need to win four states won by John Kerry in 2004 to win the presidency: Wisconsin, Maine, Michigan and New Hampshire. The current polls have Obama ahead of McCain in several key states such as Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Iowa, California, New York. If Obama can maintain current lead in Ohio and Wisconsin and swing 12 electoral votes, he wins. Of course, there are those among us who will say that this is not possible. Time will tell.