Disinfo Rehab

Living in the Inner Sunset, and for some reason not on any mailing lists, I've missed out on most of the "fun" that is Political Dead Tree Mail this season. In particular, I'm missing out on the flurry of eastside mailers for the Democratic Central Committee, which include many current Supervisors as candidates.

The Bay Guardian's blog reports that apparently the so-called "Change" Slate of candidates is sending out a slate card mailer with the Bay Guardian's logo on it, implying an endorsement of Sen. Carole Migden (the SFBG in fact, endorsed Mark Leno.) There is a more detailed photo of the mailer in question over at the Wall discussion board as well.

I took a look at the pictures myself, and the "too-clever-by-half" design makes it rather easy for voters to be misled that it's a Guardian slate card. Yes, it does say "all change initiatives and DCCC candidates endorsed by" above a logo that looks almost exactly like the Bay Guardian's. At the same time, however, they use the logo as the return address as well.

Yes, there is a disclaimer, but to the casual eye scanning a pile of crappy junk mail, it seems to give the Guardian stamp of approval to all candidates. The fact that people are complaining about it to the Guardian indicates that whatever the alleged "intent," if the end result is the voter is feeling misled or confused, the piece fails. Not being a mind reader, I don't know if this was intentional or just plain dumb, but I wonder what progressives would say if the roles and candidates were reversed. I seriously doubt they'd be giving the Other Side the wink and a nod.

More interesting, though is how Supervisor Daly has taken a "do it my way or go F**K yourself" attitude, saving his best vitriol for people who've been on his side in the past. He has issued two heavy handed progressive fatwas on SF Labor Council director Tim Paulson - someone whom I've worked with in the past and always found to be an honorable, decent guy - and who, with the SFLC, did a lot to support Supervisor Daly in the past.

I've never seen a politician who can turn so angrily on longtime friends and allies just because on one issue they may disagree. It is also bizarre to see the "progressive" candidate also decree that he, and he alone is the only one qualified to lead the progressive movement, no one should question his wisdom, and that "discipline" (his words) are needed from "progressives" and "their paper, the Bay Guardian." (Funny, I thought Bruce Bruggman owned the paper and he and the editorial board were in charge of it!).

I thought the point of "progressives" in City politics was to encourage a more inclusive, community-based approach that allowed everyone to express themselves. I didn't realize that after 8 years of progressive domination of the Board of Supervisors, I'd get a fatwa issued on my ass because I didn't follow one Supervisor's decrees, chapter and verse.

There are some big issues on the ballot, which inspire a lot of heat on all sides. However, a scorched-earth policy by any side, especially in Sensitive San Francisco, leads to often permanent entrenchment of feuds. Heck, lefties are still sore at each other over the 2003 Ammiano vs. Gonzalez fight...it's been what, 5 years now?

The question then becomes - after a beat-down, drag-out, name calling fight where Daly and Co. have shown a willingness to save the biggest knives for their closest friends who deviate even in the slightest from the One True Way, will Daly, be effective as a Supervisor or on the (sigh) DCCC?

I don't know if "progressives" are aware that the big failures of last year (the progressive "Convention", the lack of a real Mayoral challenger and the resulting political damage) have set up a situation where the Other Side is energized and ready to attack.

And, let's be fair - Supervisor Daly did, in fact point out a year ago the problems of the budget-busting measures being supported by the Mayor that have led us to the deficits we have now. Unfortunately, his poor choice of words allowed the Other Side to rip him good, and eventually got him ejected from the Budget Committee. In the end, the Board rubber stamped the budget busters and blame is now shared by all. Being "correct" is not enough in City Hall.

Progressives need to realize that their days are numbered if they continue to run these bobble-headed campaigns. The electorate of 2008 is not that of 2000 - and The City is not in the shadow of a heavy handed mayor who appointed a Board Majority to do his corrupt bidding.

Times have changed and if "progressives" want to have a say in the future, they're going to have to "change" themselves too.

PS: Free Piece of Consulting Advice: All of this drama could have been avoided if the Big Kids had simply designed the flyer and put the Guardian-like logo next to the items the Guardian actually endorsed, and left a blank space next to Sen. Migden's name.

That way they could get their message across and no one could accuse them of being shady. With a little creativity, one can accomplish their goals in political communication, without resorting to shenanigans. Sometimes it's as easy as just taking a breather, walking around the block, and returning to the computer with a few new ideas.

UPDATE: Beyond Chron provides some disinfo rehab as well as some interesting information about who paid for Daly's latest mail piece, and how they feel about his tactics. Go read it!

Posted by Greg Dewar at 9:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In the last few days before the Big Election, anyone like me who was foolish enough to put their email address on their voter registration form is getting all sorts of nonsense in their email in-box. I'd mentioned before this is not such a brilliant idea.

Interestingly enough, however, Big Evil Lennar corporation, which is spending a pile of cash to get that silly Prop. G passed, uses a company that voluntarily complies with the CAN SPAM law even though it doesn't apply to political communications.

On the other side, I'm getting tons of spam from Cindy Sheehan (!), the No on G/Yes on F campaign, and the Chris Daly group trying to take over the DCCC, and it doesn't even try to be CAN SPAM compliant. (And God help you if you dare say something to these paragons of virtue - they're liable to rip your head off for daring to suggest they're anything less than angels.)

Funny, that.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 2:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

No on 98 = Linux World
.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 7:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

email survey
.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 12:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Found on StumbleUpon, images of Our President in ads all around the world.

This is what people think of us around the world. Sure we can take the macho think tank "screw 'em all" attitude, but in an era of a declining dollar, recession and the like, we may wannab worried about the rest of 'em saying "screw you" back.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 4:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the new features of the voter registration form is the fact you can voluntarily enter in your email address, along with the other info, which means inevitably someone goes to City Hall, buys the voter data, and campaigns start sending email out willy nilly. My friend Anna, who's a professional in the email marketing business, has an interesting analysis of the stuff she's received.

I am getting relentlessly spammed by Cindy Sheehan's "campaign," which seems to place its faith in poorly written hysterical emails that make it hard for me to treat her campaign seriously. However, I got one today from the campaign for Judge Thomas Mellon that was actually pretty good. The message was short and to the point - more importantly however, it was from the trial judge in the landmark gay-marriage case, which is rather timely.

Mellon's opponent is Supervisor Sandoval, who I wouldn't trust to run a two-car parade, much less be a judge in a courtroom. Mellon's campaign was smart, however, not to spam me with a negative messave, but instead with one that is timely from the judge in the gay marriage case.

Political campaigns need to resist the urge to blast out lots of crappy emails just because it's easy or free. Spamming people is a sure-fire way to piss off voters, and mealy mouthed justifications about how the CAN SPAM act doesn't apply to 'em just makes people even more pissed off.

Instead, it's better to use online social networks, such as Facebook, to recruit supporters and communicate with them, and allow them to opt in to online communications. Everyone's happy and no one gets spammed!

Posted by Greg Dewar at 2:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sen. Clinton continues to make the case that a) her campaign is over and b) she just doesn't have the temperament to be president when things don't go entirely her way. (Mind you, we have many qualified women who can be president who do possess the intellect and judgment to be president, they're just not running this year. Which is unfortunate).

Lately, she's been prone to comparing her (broke as Hell) campaign to things like the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s, Rwanda, Zimbabwe (you know where all those people died) and so on. Today, she hit a new low, the same week we learned of Sen. Ted Kennedy's brain tumor, when she cited the assassination of Robert Kennedy in California as a reason her campaign should go on.

No, really. In addition to all the other tacky statements she's made, in addtion to the virulent racism of her supporters like Geraldine Ferraro, in addition to race baiting, she said that.

This week.

The same week we heard about Ted Kennedy's tumor.

A few weeks from the 40th Anniversary of Bobby's assassination.

Hillary for President? Hell no. She's no longer some sort of bold leader of whatever. She is behaving like a psycho ex girlfriend, but this time she wants her finger on the nuclear button.

Thanks Hillary. You've just set back the cause of electing women to the presidency, you're trashing the Democratic party, and enabling a third term for George Bush. Flame on, Hillbill, flame on.

UPDATE: Typical of Hillary, she offers an "apology" that is anything but with this line :

"I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation and in particular the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that whatsoever," the former first lady said

What the HELL do you mean "if" it was offensive? Give me a break. Just admit you screwed up and be an adult about it. I'd have more respect for Hillary if she just said that, instead of this mealy-mouthed, non-apology.

UPDATE 2: Someone just sent me this link, which points out this isn't the first time she's done this. What amazes me is how Hillary and her supporters want to "blame" her failing campaign on the media, "sexism" or whatever, and don't seem to want to come to terms with a basic reality - she ran a really bad campaign at tremendous expense. "Winning" campaigns don't stiff vendors in small towns and borrow money from the candidate, and they don't sit around denying reality.

UPDATE 3: This isn't going away for Sen. Hillary, and it looks like while Hillary was waiting for Obama to "implode," she just did so herself.

And of course, Mr. Olbermann calls her out, as only he can:

Posted by Greg Dewar at 1:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I've never been a big fan of ballot measures. Once the last resort for a distressed citizen to get a social ill addressed by government, they've now become the first weapon for special interests with money to jam all sorts of bizarro spending and borrowing into government, often with paved Road-To-Hell like results.

Living in San Francisco affords one the benefit (!) of voting on even more of these things, which more often than not are simply "advisory" measures with absolutely no power - a sort of civic primal scream against whatever a few thousand signatures wanna scream against.

In a way, it makes voting that much easier since I pretty much vote "no" on all ballot measures, especially bonds, the leading cause of budget woes, and yet, the most popular of measures. Every year there are pleas to vote for "more money" for worthy causes and the like, and yet no one ever stops and wonders where this "free money" comes from. It ain't free - it's borrowed money at high interest rates. If you want to know part of the reason civic budgets are always out of whack - it's because they have tons of bond debt service to pay.

For June, I'm keeping it easy and simple. I'm voting "Yes" on A and B here in San Francisco, only because they're trying to fix something. "A" tries to address the problem of paying teachers in one of the most expensive parts of the country in as best a way as possible under current rules, and "B" is a housekeeping measure to fix some problem with pensions and the like. Fine, I'll vote for 'em.

As for the rest, I'm voting a nice big "NO" on all of 'em. Most of these things are either political grudges gone wild and a waste of the paper they're printed on, or they're things that just aren't that trustworthy. Since I was not part of the dream team that got paid by Lennar to pass Proposition "G" (and because I'm worried a company with so many financial problems would be given a piece of Our City), I'm voting NO.

I'm also voting NO on F, because while the intentions may be honorable, the stream of "Frak You's" I get from its supporters have convinced me they already have enough votes to win, and don't need mine. (Odd way to win an election, kids!).

As for the infamous Props. 98/99 - a big NO on both of them too. Classic special interest big bucks buying a way onto the ballot. Unless a state ballot measure really does what it says or revolutionizes our arcane budget process in ways we honestly need, I always vote NO on all state ballot measures.

I don't care if it's some Worthy Cause with ads that make you cry like you're watching a Hallmark ad or a Lifetime TV Movie, I say no! We pay a Legislature and a Governor a lot of money to pass laws - they should be doing that, instead of running around paying for lavish trips with special interest campaign dollars.

Remember, your ballot is taxpayer financed fun. If you find yourself bored with some of the more arcane races, feel free to write in names as you feel appropriate...or for more fun, bullet-vote for your favorite candidates for Democratic Central Committee! Enjoy!

Posted by Greg Dewar at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Well that certainly didn't work out, did it?

I think I must be on a direct mail blacklist, because I've never gone through an election and received a handful of mailers before....so aside from the few I'd planned to scan in this week, I have very few pieces to dissect.

However, the patriotic citizens of SF Usual Suspects, who pioneered this concept some time ago, have an extensive archive of direct mail online to read, dissect, and so on. Enjoy!

Posted by Greg Dewar at 9:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I never thought the day would come when I would not be getting an assortment of political junk mail, but, for some reason this year I've received maybe 4 pieces, total. I get more mail from the folks who run LinuxWorld or the good people at Netflix than from the many causes and candidates.

So, now I'm begging - if you're getting buried under piles of appeals for people running for DCCC, State Senate, or whatever, email me and let me know what you have, and I can either arrange to pick something up or you could just send me a JPEG of the many dead trees in your recycle bin.

What little I have will be scanned and placed in this year's Direct Mail Disinfo Rehab Archive, but the more the better! At this rate, all I'll have to debunk are a few flyers and the endless email spam a certain out-of-town candidate for Congress keeps bombarding me with.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 11:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Election Thing

Posted by Greg Dewar at 3:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Whilst reading the breaking news that John Edwards finally endorse Barack Obama (AFTER the North Carolina primary), I have to say I was more than a bit surprised to read this:

Democrat John Edwards is endorsing former rival Barack Obama, fresh signs of the party establishment embracing the likely nominee even as Hillary Rodham Clinton refuses to give up her long-shot candidacy.

Now, mind you, I was never one to simply assume Mrs. Clinton had this thing pwned from the beginning, but many other people did, and made their choices as appropriate. Now, Bill and Hillary are personally in debt, have $20 million in general election campaign money they can't spend, and have pulled out all the stops to block Barry, all to no avail. Up against a guy who most people hadn't even heard of just a few years ago.

Go figure. That's almost as baffling as the state Senate incumbent with a warchest full of cash and an array of Sacramento insiders running the show, now running third in a three way race. Strange how a year changes things.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 3:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It's Friday, and it's the big day for the weirdest remake I've heard of, Speed Racer. To celebrate the movie a few links...first from the always awesome io9.com sci fi blog we have this clip of the original, non-dubbed opening of Speed Racer...

and of course the SNL parody with George Clooney:

The LA Times has this really interesting set of pictures, with comments from the set designers, too that's worth checking out.

Coming up soon: Disinfo Rehab Mail for the Primary Election, Decoding the DCCC Elections, and more. Don't forget to check out my other site at Adama for President as well!

UPDATE Somehow, the good citizens at Hulu.com managed to discover this humble blog, and alerted me to the fact you can watch dubbed version of Old School Speed Racer online!

The fact that someone, anyone even reads this blog, much less made the effort to alert me to this, well it just made what was a crappy Friday much better. (oh and while I watched this as a kid I forgot the southern-style songsters who did the original theme song...)

And to continue the fun, here's the version of Sponge's tribute to the OG Speed Racer theme in English, mashed up with snippets from the new movie..

Posted by Greg Dewar at 12:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Today, I want to make a plea to politicians, politickers, and whatnots in the Big Media to please take a flamethrower to the dossiers and computers that suggested one use the term "agent of change" in any political related materials, now and forevermore.

It's a meaningless phrase, tossed around even more so as the One Guy who talked about Change suddenly got popular, and then suddenly EVERYONE wanted to Talk About Change, and How They're an Agent of it.

Folks, unless you are literally an Agent of C.H.A.N.G.E. (Cannibalistic Humanoid Aboveground Nuclear Germanic Enemas), CONTROL, SPECTRE, or some other spy-related organization with the cool logo and gun to prove it, please, find a new way to talk about your tireless work on the amendment to subsidize puppies and rainbows.

Please.

Think of the Children.

**Note: I meant to say "soundbits" not "soundbites," so grammar/spelling posse, put away the rope and the branding iron. Please?

Posted by Greg Dewar at 1:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Too Clever by Half
.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

While the drones in the Media focuses on things that make for good "stories," (but don't cover "issues) we've missed a pretty big milestone in the race for President by Barry Obama:

Former Senator David Boren (D-OK), former Senaor Sam Nunn (D-GA) and former Democratic Party Chairman Joe Andrew (D-IN ) all endorsed........Sen. Barack Obama.

No kidding.

Folks, this is real news. Sens. Boren and Nunn are not hippie lefty latte-sippers hanging with the trustafarians in the Mission. These guys are serious conservative Democrats and have decided to sign in with Sen. Obama. Joe Andrew is also definitely not some wild-eyed Communist, and his endorsement is fairly important as well, on the eve of the Indiana primary.

Even in the midst of all this nonsense about some pastor, or some bowling ball, or whatever, even when the media chooses to ignore Really Big Problems like the recession, decline of the dollar, and the war in Iraq, these guys chose to support Obama.

Wow.

Here is the text of Joe Andrews' letter in support of Obama. This is simply amazing (hat tip to the Daily Kos diarist who posted this:

May 1, 2008

Dear Friends:

I have been inspired.

Today I am announcing my support for Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States of America. I am changing my support from Senator Clinton to Senator Obama, and calling for my fellow Democrats across my home State of Indiana, and my fellow super delegates across the nation, to heal the rift in our Party and unite behind Barack Obama.

The hardest decisions in life are not between good and bad or right and wrong, but between two goods or two rights. That is the decision Democrats face today. We have an embarrassment of riches, but as much as we may love our candidates and revel in the political process that has brought Presidential politics to places that have not seen it in a generation, we cannot let our family affair hurt America by helping John McCain.

Here is my message, explained in this lengthy letter that I hope is perceived as a thoughtful analysis of how to save America from four more years of the misguided polices of the past: you can be for someone without being against someone else. You can unite behind a candidate and a vision for America without rejecting another candidate and their vision, because in real life, opposed to party politics, we Democrats are on the same side. The battle should not be amongst ourselves. Rather, we should focus our efforts on those who are truly on the opposite side: those who want to continue the failed policies of the last eight years, rather than bring real change to Washington. Let us come together right now behind an inspiring leader who not only has the audacity to challenge the old divisive politics, but the audacity to make us all hope for a better America.

Unite the Party Now

I believe that Bill Clinton will be remembered as one of our nation's great Presidents, and Senator Clinton as one of our nation's great public servants. But as much as I respect and admire them both, it is clear that a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue this process, and a vote to continue this process is a vote that assists John McCain.

I ask Hoosiers to come together and vote for Barack Obama to be our next President. In an accident of timing, Indiana has been given the opportunity to truly make a difference. Hoosiers should grab that power and do what in their heart they know is right. They should reject the old negative politics and vote for true change. Don't settle for the tried and true and the simplistic slogans, but listen to your heart and dare to be inspired. Only a cynic would be critical of Barack Obama inspiring millions. Only the uninformed could forget that the candidate that wins in November is always the candidate that inspires millions.

I ask the leaders of our Party to come together after this Tuesday's primary to heal wounds and unite us around a single nominee. While I was hopeful that a long, contested primary season would invigorate our Party, the polls show that the tone and temperature of the race is now hurting us. John McCain, without doing much of anything, is now competitive against both of our remaining candidates. We are doing his work for him and distracting Americans from the issues that really affect all of our lives.

We need to be talking about fixing the economy, not whose acquaintances once said what to whom. We need to be talking about stopping the attacks in Iraq, not stopping the attacks in Indiana. We need to be talking about policy, not politics.

Barack Obama is the Right Candidate for Right Now

While I am a longtime critic of our Party's rules that created so-called super delegates, we have the rules we have and we must live with them. I am humbled and honored to be a super delegate, and I understand the seriousness of the duty it entails. I recognize that this is a difficult decision for super delegates like me, who owe so much to President Bill Clinton. It is right to be loyal, to be grateful and to be consistent. But it is also right to acknowledge the inevitability of change, right to dare to dream for a better world, and right to know what in your heart is the right thing for the future even if your friends and family disagree. Good things, just like good people, can disagree. But as Democrats, we must disagree with dignity, debate with admiration of each other, and in the end, go forward with mutual respect.

President Clinton and Vice President Gore gave me the opportunity to serve as the Chair of the Democratic Party. I pledged my loyalty to them, and I will never forget Al Gore putting ego aside, gently demurring, and simply asking me to put our country ahead of politics. It is a lesson I will remember forever, and it is what guides me now in this decision. What is best for our Party and our country is not blind loyalty, but passionate support for the candidate who can best correct the misguided policies of the last eight years.

We need a candidate who will re-invigorate the economy and keep good jobs here in America. We need a candidate who will end the war in Iraq. We need a candidate who will provide health coverage for our 45 million uninsured neighbors. We need a candidate who will end our addiction to high-priced foreign oil by investing in renewable energy here at home.

That candidate is Barack Obama.

What was best for America sixteen years ago was electing Bill Clinton. What would have been best for America eight years ago was not only electing Al Gore, which we did, but allowing him to serve as President of the United States. Imagine how the world would be different if Al Gore and not George Bush, would have been President of the United States. Let's seize the opportunity and vote for someone who like Al Gore, was against the war from the beginning, and who brings a new energy, a new excitement, and a new politics to our country.

Let’s put things right.

Time to Act

Many will ask, why now? Why, with several primaries still remaining, with Senator Clinton just winning Pennsylvania, with my friend Evan Bayh working hard to make sure Senator Clinton wins Indiana, why switch now? Why call for super delegates to come together now to constructively pick a president?

The simple answer is that while the timing is hard for me personally, it is best for America. We simply cannot wait any longer, nor can we let this race fall any lower and still hope to win in November. June or July may be too late. The time to act is now.

I write this letter from my mom's dining room table in Indianapolis, Indiana. Four generations of my family have argued and laughed around this table. But what I humbly believe today is that we, as Democrats and as Americans, face what Dr. King characterized and what Senator Obama reminds us is the fierce urgency of now. As a nation, we are at a critical moment and we need leaders with the character and vision to see us through the challenges at hand and those to come. I can't guess what will happen tomorrow, so I can't tell you what kind of experience our next President will need to have to deal with those challenges. But I can tell you what kind of character and vision they will need to have -- and that is what inspires me about Barack Obama.

As Democrats, however, we risk letting this moment slip through our fingers. We risk ceding the field to the Republicans and allowing the morally bankrupt Bush Agenda to continue unabated if we do not unite behind a single candidate. Should this race continue after Indiana and North Carolina, it will inevitably become more negative. The polls already show the supporters for both candidates becoming more strident in their positions and more locked into their support. Continuing on this path would be a catastrophe, as we would inadvertently end up doing Republicans work for them. Already, instead of the audacity of hope, we suffer the audacity of one Democrat comparing John McCain favorably to another Democrat. When that happens, you know it is time for all of us to stop, take a deep breath and unite to change America.

We must act and we must act now.

The Problems of the Process: 2000 and 2008

When Al Gore got a half million more votes than George Bush in 2000, yet the Electoral College elected George Bush President, we saw the absurdity of any system that does not elect the person who gets the most votes. That is why the Democratic Party's nomination process is flawed. I will continue to fight for a 2012 process where there are only primaries, and which ever Democrat gets the most votes becomes our nominee. Delegates should decide the party platform -- voters should decide who our nominee is.

But we are struck with this absurd system for 2008, and, flawed though it may be, we must work within it without betraying the voice of the people. No amount of spin or sleight of hand can deny the fact that where there has been competition, Senator Obama has won more votes, more States and more delegates than any other candidate. Only the super delegates can award the nomination to Senator Clinton, but to do so risks doing to our Party in 2008 what Republicans did to our country in 2000. Let us be intellectually consistent and unite behind Barack Obama.

A New Era of Politics

My endorsement of Senator Obama will not be welcome news to my friends and family at the Clinton campaign. If the campaign's surrogates called Governor Bill Richardson, a respected former member of President Clinton's cabinet, a "Judas" for endorsing Senator Obama, we can all imagine how they will treat somebody like me. They are the best practitioners of the old politics, so they will no doubt call me a traitor, an opportunist and a hypocrite. I will be branded as disloyal, power-hungry, but most importantly, they will use the exact words that Republicans used to attack me when I was defending President Clinton.

When they use the same attacks made on me when I was defending them, they prove the callow hypocrisy of the old politics first perfected by Republicans. I am an expert on this because these were the exact tools that I mastered as a campaign volunteer, a campaign manager, a State Party Chair and the National Chair of our Party. I learned the lessons of the tough, right-wing Republicans all too well. I can speak with authority on how to spar with everyone from Lee Atwater to Karl Rove. I understand that, while wrong and pernicious, shallow victory can be achieved through division by semantics and obfuscation. Like many, I succumbed to the addiction of old politics because they are so easy.

Innuendo is easy. The truth is hard.

Sound bites are easy. Solutions are hard.

Spin is simple and easy. Struggling with facts is complicated and hard.

I have learned the hard way that you can love the candidate and hate the campaign. My stomach churns when I think how my old friends in the Clinton campaign will just pick up the old silly Republican play book and call in the same old artificial attacks and bombardments we have all heard before.

Yet, despite the simple and overwhelming pressure to do anything and everything to win, Barack Obama has risen above it all and demanded a new brand of politics. People flock to Senator Obama because they are rejecting the hyperbole of the old politics. The past eight years of George Bush have witnessed a retreat from substance, science, and reason in favor spin, cronyism and ideology. Barack Obama has dared not only to criticize it, as all Democrats do, but to actually reject playing the same old game. And in doing so, he has shown us a new path to victory.

Uniting for Victory

The simple fact is that Democrats need to be united in November to win, and Clinton supporters, in particular, will be vital to victory. We will not convince Clinton supporters to join the Obama campaign, however, by personally criticizing them. We must welcome everyone and avoid doing Republican work for them. It is therefore incumbent on all of us who once supported Senator Clinton to welcome the thousands who should now switch their support to Senator Obama. Similarly, a necessary part of the healing process for our Party is for those who supported Senator Obama early to have the grace and good sense to broaden the tent and welcome newcomers into the fold.

The old players of the old political game will claim that I am betraying my old friend Senator Evan Bayh by switching my support to Senator Obama. I believe that Evan Bayh would be a great President, and therefore a great Vice President. I will continue to argue that he would be a great choice to be on the ticket with Barack Obama. Evan Bayh is uniquely positioned as a successful governor with executive experience who is now a U.S. Senator with foreign policy experience and who is young enough to not undercut the message of vitality and hard work that Barack Obama represents. Part of healing the Party may be to have a Clinton supporter on the ticket, let alone someone who would help with Indiana, Ohio and the moderate Midwest in the general election.

Being for Evan Bayh, however, does not mean that you have to be for Hillary Clinton. The important message to Hoosiers, and to super delegates, is that being for someone does not mean that you agree 100 percent of the time. Regardless of whether Evan Bayh and I support different candidates, I will support Evan Bayh.

We must reject the notion that we have to beat the Republicans at their own game -- or even that the game has to be played at all. It is so easy for all of us involved -- candidates, campaigns and the media -- to focus on the process and the horse race that we forget why we got into it in the first place. Barack Obama has had the courage to talk about real issues, real problems and real people. Let's pause for a second in the midst of the cacophony of the campaign circus and listen.

In 1992, I was inspired by Bill Clinton because he promised, and delivered, a framework for addressing America's problems. President Clinton ended a long-running left-right debate in our Party, and inspired millions. He drew giant crowds and spoke passionately for a generation of Americans who often disenfranchised and rarely participated in governing. Today, Barack Obama does the same thing. Winners redefine the game. Winners connect with the American people and not only feel their pain, but inspire them to take action to heal the underlying cause. Barack Obama is that kind of candidate and that kind of leader, which is why he will win in November.

Welcoming Everyone into the Party

We face significant challenges as a nation and as a Party, but time and again, Americans have shown the resilience and determination necessary to overcome even the highest obstacle. We have a difficult road ahead, but I have complete confidence that Barack Obama is the candidate who can lead our Party to victory and the President who can guide us to even greater heights.

Many Democrats know me for one short speech I gave over and over again in the 2000 Presidential campaign. That speech was about welcoming people into our Party and welcoming undecided voters to our campaign to elect Al Gore. Today, we need to welcome Clinton supporters, undecided voters, and all Americans to join Barack Obama's cause to fight for a better America. My speech ended with these words, which are even more relevant today:

The difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party is that you are always welcome in the Democratic Party.

Because Democrats don’t care if you are black or white or brown or a nice shade of green, you are welcome in the Democratic Party.

We don’t care if you pray in a church or a synagogue or a temple or a mosque, or just before math tests, you are welcome in the Democratic Party.

We don’t care if you are young or old, or just don’t want to tell your age, you are welcome in the Democratic Party.

We don’t care what gender you are, or what gender you want to hold hands with; as long as you want to hold hands, you are welcome in the Democratic Party.

We don’t care about the size of your bank account, just the size of your heart; and we don’t care where you are today, just where you dream you want to be tomorrow.

That is your Democratic Party.

That is Barack Obama's Democratic Party.

That is the Party that will win in November.

Joe Andrew

Posted by Greg Dewar at 2:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)