President J. W. Bush bypasses American laws

Again President J. W. Bush declared that he has the power to bypass four laws. How much power does a president have?

As the Boston Globe reported on January 30, 2008, President Bush declared this week that he has the power to bypass four laws, including a prohibition against using federal funds to establish permanent US military bases in Iraq, that Congress passed as part of a new defense bill.

Wow, after he had
bypassed laws before, when he invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003, a war which observers like counter-terrorism expert Rohan Gunaratna frequently referred to as a "fatal mistake".

Nonetheless, President Bush still moves ahead and tried to do what ever he wants but the unwillingly signed the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008. In spite of signing the law,
President J. W. Bush asserted in his signing statement that four sections of the bill unconstitutionally infringe on his powers, and so the executive branch is not bound to obey them.

Bush said,"Provisions of the act . . . purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the president's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as commander in chief. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President."
(quoted by the Boston Globe)

And then again, Phillip Cooper, a political science professor at Portland State University, pointed out that Bush's statement does not clearly spell out the basis for any of his challenges. Cooper, who has been a pioneer in studying signing statements, said the vague language itself is a problem. Cooper continued by saying,"It is very hard for Congress or the American people to figure out what is supposed to happen and what the implications of this are."

In other words, President Bush uses once again
only a vague language so that he is able to do what he has been doing all along.
The questions remains, do the
Democrats, who took over Congress in 2007, really follow up on their mandate to restrain power of this
President J. W. Bush?
Is there real oversight?


A dialogue about ideologies is needed.

As CNN reported on January 22nd, Omar Osama bin Laden, son of Osama bin Laden, announced that he is organizing a multi-month horse race across North Africa to promote peace. “ Bin Laden's son to father: Change your ways”
Shouldn't the world leader pick up this straw and support this effort? Sadly to say I did not hear much of any efforts to engage in a dialogue with a person who is closest to the man, whose ideology has given us so much pain.
The 26-year-old Omar Osama bin Laden told CNN in English, he had learned in recent months from his British wife,"I try and say to my father: 'Try to find another way to help or find your goal. This bomb, this weapons, it's not good to use it for anybody.' "
Omar Osama bin Laden might not be able to change his father's mind at once but it would be a great opportunity of a dialogue, something not seen from our governments. Should we at least find out what drives these people to give their lives for a cause?
Do we actually know what their cause is?

Mr. President what's new?


Sen. Edward M. Kennedy endorsed Sen. Barack Obama

Sen. Barack Obama was endorsed by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), one of the most powerful senators and a relative of John F. Kennedy.

In a speech at American University in Washington, Kennedy, who is already 75 and a 45-year veteran of the Senate , joined his niece, Caroline Kennedy, and his son, Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-R.I.), in publicly backing Obama for the party's nomination.

All three Kennedys, believe that Obama stands for "Change We Can Believe In." Moreover, Obama invokes the inspiration of former President John F. Kennedy who change history as Obama will change the course of history.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) was calling on Americans to "have the courage to choose change." In addition he declared: "It is time again for a new generation of leadership! It is time now for Barack Obama!"

American should turn inwards and imagine a future molded by the people for the people, with a president who listens and whose interests are the people of America and only the people.

Why not give Barack Obama a chance to prove to the world that American is once again the land of opportunities, the land where everything is possible, and a land which is able to grow past their historical controversy.

Watch Kennedy Endorsements of Barack Obama hier:

And read the transcript of the speech:

Remarks of Senator Edward M. Kennedy
On Endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for President
January 28, 2008
As Prepared for Delivery by

Thank you, Caroline. Thank you for that wonderful introduction and for your courage and bold vision, for your insight and understanding, and for the power and reach of your words. Like you, we too "want a president who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again." Thank you, Caroline. Your mother and father would be so proud today.

Thank you, Patrick, for your leadership in Congress and for being here to celebrate and support a leader who truly has the power to inspire and make America good again, "from sea to shining sea."

Thank you, American University.

I feel change in the air.

Every time I've been asked over the past year who I would support in the Democratic Primary, my answer has always been the same: I'll support the candidate who inspires me, who inspires all of us, who can lift our vision and summon our hopes and renew our belief that our country's best days are still to come.

I've found that candidate. And it looks to me like you have too.

But first, let me say how much I respect the strength, the work and dedication of two other Democrats still in the race, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. They are my friends; they have been my colleagues in the Senate. John Edwards has been a powerful advocate for economic and social justice. And Hillary Clinton has been in the forefront on issues ranging from health care to the rights of women around the world. Whoever is our nominee will have my enthusiastic support.

Let there be no doubt: We are all committed to seeing a Democratic President in 2008.

But I believe there is one candidate who has extraordinary gifts of leadership and character, matched to the extraordinary demands of this moment in history.

He understands what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called the "fierce urgency of now."

He will be a president who refuses to be trapped in the patterns of the past. He is a leader who sees the world clearly without being cynical. He is a fighter who cares passionately about the causes he believes in, without demonizing those who hold a different view.

He is tough-minded, but he also has an uncommon capacity to appeal to "the better angels of our nature."

I am proud to stand here today and offer my help, my voice, my energy and my commitment to make Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

Like most of the nation, I was moved four years ago as he told us a profound truth--that we are not, we must not be, just red states and blue states, but one United States. And since that time I have marveled at his grit and his grace as he traveled this country and inspired record turnouts of people of all ages, of all races, of all genders, of all parties and faiths to get "fired up" and "ready to go."

I've seen him connect with people from every walk of life and with Senators on both sides of the aisle. With every person he meets, every crowd he inspires, and everyone he touches, he generates new hope that our greatest days as a nation are still ahead, and this generation of Americans, like others before us, can unite to meet our own rendezvous with destiny.

We know the true record of Barack Obama. There is the courage he showed when so many others were silent or simply went along. From the beginning, he opposed the war in Iraq.

And let no one deny that truth.

There is the great intelligence of someone who could have had a glittering career in corporate law, but chose instead to serve his community and then enter public life.

There is the tireless skill of a Senator who was there in the early mornings to help us hammer out a needed compromise on immigration reform-- who always saw a way to protect both national security and the dignity of people who do not have a vote. For them, he was a voice for justice.

And there is the clear effectiveness of Barack Obama in fashioning legislation to put high quality teachers in our classrooms--and in pushing and prodding the Senate to pass the most far-reaching ethics reform in its history.

Now, with Barack Obama, there is a new national leader who has given America a different kind of campaign--a campaign not just about himself, but about all of us. A campaign about the country we will become, if we can rise above the old politics that parses us into separate groups and puts us at odds with one another.

I remember another such time, in the 1960s, when I came to the Senate at the age of 30. We had a new president who inspired the nation, especially the young, to seek a new frontier. Those inspired young people marched, sat in at lunch counters, protested the war in Vietnam and served honorably in that war even when they opposed it.

They realized that when they asked what they could do for their country, they could change the world.

It was the young who led the first Earth Day and issued a clarion call to protect the environment; the young who enlisted in the cause of civil rights and equality for women; the young who joined the Peace Corps and showed the world the hopeful face of America.

At the fifth anniversary celebration of the Peace Corps, I asked one of those young Americans why they had volunteered.

And I will never forget the answer: "It was the first time someone asked me to do something for my country."

This is another such time.

I sense the same kind of yearning today, the same kind of hunger to move on and move America forward. I see it not just in young people, but in all our people.

And in Barack Obama, I see not just the audacity, but the possibility of hope for the America that is yet to be.

What counts in our leadership is not the length of years in Washington, but the reach of our vision, the strength of our beliefs, and that rare quality of mind and spirit that can call forth the best in our country and our people.

With Barack Obama, we will turn the page on the old politics of misrepresentation and distortion.

With Barack Obama, we will close the book on the old politics of race against race, gender against gender, ethnic group against ethnic group, and straight against gay.

With Barack Obama, we will close the door on the old economics that has written off the poor and left the middle class poorer and less secure.

He offers a strategy for prosperity--so that America will once again lead the world in better standards of life.

With Barack Obama, we will break the old gridlock and finally make health care what it should be in America--a fundamental right for all, not just an expensive privilege for the few.

We will make the United States the great leader and not the great roadblock in the fateful fight against global warming.

And with Barack Obama, we will end a war in Iraq that he has always stood against, that has cost us the lives of thousands of our sons and daughters, and that America never should have fought.

I have seen him in the Senate. He will keep us strong and defend the nation against real threats of terrorism and proliferation.

So let us reject the counsels of doubt and calculation.

Let us remember that when Franklin Roosevelt envisioned Social Security, he didn't decide--no, it was too ambitious, too big a dream, too hard.

When John Kennedy thought of going to the moon, he didn't say no, it was too far, maybe we couldn't get there and shouldn't even try.

I am convinced we can reach our goals only if we are "not petty when our cause is so great"- only if we find a way past the stale ideas and stalemate of our times - only if we replace the politics of fear with the politics of hope - and only if we have the courage to choose change.

Barack Obama is the one person running for President who can bring us that change.

Barack Obama is the one person running for President who can be that change.

I love this country. I believe in the bright light of hope and possibility. I always have, even in the darkest hours. I know what America can achieve. I've seen it. I've lived it--and with Barack Obama, we can do it again.

I know that he's ready to be President on day one. And when he raises his hand on Inauguration Day, at that very moment, we will lift the spirits of our nation and begin to restore America's standing in the world.

There was another time, when another young candidate was running for President and challenging America to cross a New Frontier. He faced public criticism from the preceding Democratic President, who was widely respected in the party. Harry Truman said we needed "someone with greater experience"--and added: "May I urge you to be patient." And John Kennedy replied: "The world is changing. The old ways will not do...It is time for a new generation of leadership."

So it is with Barack Obama. He has lit a spark of hope amid the fierce urgency of now.

I believe that a wave of change is moving across America. If we do not turn aside, if we dare to set our course for the shores of hope, we together will go beyond the divisions of the past and find our place to build the America of the future.

My friends, I ask you to join in this historic journey -- to have the courage to choose change.

It is time again for a new generation of leadership.

It is time now for Barack Obama.


At least Egypt is helping in the Crisis.

At least Egypt is giving thousands people of Palestinians a chance to buy much needed supplies.

Thousand of Palestinians continued to cross into Egypt for a second day on Thursday to buy much needed supplies.

The Israeli government had blocked fuel and aid shipments into Gaza and sealed off all borders with Gaza making it one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world.

On Thursday, Jordan's King Abdullah II told the US president George Bush, that Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip threatened peace efforts in the Middle East.

Although Bush has called on Israel to refrain from unilateral actions, including the imposition of economic siege and escalation of military operations against the Palestinian people, nothing more has been done by the Bush administration. Ultimately his words were as usual great statements for the media with no results.

If the world continues to be an onlookers to the injustices around the world such as in conflict between Palestinian and Israel, terrorism will continue to inflict casualties and suffering on the people around the whole world.

We can't stop terrorism with weapon but with honest compassion. We need to do something about the suffering in this world.

Stop being so self-righteous and do something for the poorest people in the world.

Oprah Winfrey endorsement Barack Obama

Talk show host Oprah Winfrey has been getting slack from her viewers because of her endorsement of democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama!

Oprah's story is America's story: a young girl from Mississippi, who grew up without electricity or running water but realized her promise through education and achieved her dreams in liberty. Oprah, 52, reminds us that we who flourish in freedom have a moral responsibility to help others who have the desire to succeed but just need an opportunity. Oprah is helping create those opportunities. Out of her own pocket, she built new homes—and gave new hope—to 65 families who lost everything in Hurricane Katrina. Last year, Oprah launched a successful campaign to help victims of abuse find the justice they deserve, so they can move on with confidence.


The Clinton campaign continues to lash out at Obama and the news media

The Clinton campaign continues to lash out at Sen. Barack Obama and the news media.

A bitter fight between the two Democratic front-runners has taken on a new dimension because of the involvement of Bill Clinton. While his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, campaigns elsewhere, the former president has been making daily appearances in South Carolina.

Questions about the candidates' honesty and consistency have been paramount since Monday's testy presidential debate. Now the Democratic Party is fearing a backlashes from its members and voter.

Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, accused the Clintons of using the "politics of deception," and he compared the former president to the late Lee Atwater, a Republican operative from South Carolina who was known for his tough tactics.

In Washington, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who endorsed Sen. Barack Obama last week, castigated the former president Bill Clinton for what he called his "glib cheap shots" at Obama. He thought both sides should settle down but placing the blame mainly on Clinton.

A few prominent Democrats, including Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) and Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have spoken to the former president about the force of his Obama critiques. They also voiced their concern that a Clinton victory could come at a cost -- particularly a loss of black voters.

Sen. Barack Obama had begun his campaign free of any racial undertone but as Former Gov. Jim Hodges said Clinton's campaign seemed determined to win "at all costs." Obama responded with his own radio spot with, "Hillary Clinton will say anything to get elected."

(quotations from the Washington Post and the Time)


Obama most likely Democrat to unify America

I found this article in the The State News Paper of South Carolina quite interesting and decided to put it on my blog.

- The State editorial board's Democratic presidential primary endorsement

THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY in South Carolina this year offers voters an unusual choice. Earlier votes have winnowed out the most experienced candidates, leaving a field with fewer accomplishments and differences on policy, but including two candidates who come with the promise to make history just because of who they are.

Looking at the remaining field: Rep. Dennis Kucinich offers a bold plan on health care, but his platform is an odd fit for us and for many in South Carolina. John Edwards has morphed away from the optimist who won South Carolina in 2004. The candidate who stayed mostly above the fray four years ago is angry now, and pushing hard to turn working-class angst into political opportunity. He also has tried to one-up the other top Democrats with the least prudent plan for withdrawing from Iraq.

On positions from Iraq to health care, the policy differences between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama are minute. Much of the debate between them has involved making these molehills look mountainous or clashing over who-shifted-when.

The one most significant difference between them can be found in how they would approach the presidency - and how the nation might respond.

Hillary Clinton has been a policy wonk most of her life, a trait she has carried into the U.S. Senate. As her debate performances have shown, she has intelligence and a deep understanding of many issues. Her efforts in New York focused first on learning her adopted state’s issues in detail, and pursuing legislation that would not necessarily grab headlines.

But we also have a good idea what a Clinton presidency would look like. The restoration of the Clintons to the White House would trigger a new wave of all-out political warfare. That is not all Bill and Hillary’s fault - but it exists, whomever you blame, and cannot be ignored. Hillary Clinton doesn’t pretend that it won’t happen; she simply vows to persevere, in the hope that her side can win. Indeed, the Clintons’ joint career in public life seems oriented toward securing victory and personal vindication.

Sen. Obama’s campaign is an argument for a more unifying style of leadership. In a time of great partisanship, he is careful to talk about winning over independents and even Republicans. He is harsh on the failures of the current administration - and most of that critique well-deserved. But he doesn’t use his considerable rhetorical gifts to demonize Republicans. He’s not neglecting his core values; he defends his progressive vision with vigorous integrity. But for him, American unity - transcending party - is a core value in itself.

Can such unity be restored, in this poisonous political culture? Not unless that is a nominee’s goal from the outset. It will be a difficult challenge for any candidate; but we wait in the hope that someone really will try. There is no other hope for rescuing our republic from the mire.

Sen. Obama would also have the best chance to repair the damage to America’s global reputation. A leader with his biography - including his roots in Africa and his years spent growing up overseas - could transform the world’s view of America. He would seize that opportunity.

He would close the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, which has damaged America’s moral standing, and strive to rebuild many diplomatic relationships.

Despite America’s bitter partisan divide, all sides should agree on this: In such an environment, little gets done. Congress has been largely useless under both Republican and Democratic leadership. Setting aside the ideological conflict for conflict’s sake to get anything worthwhile done has fallen severely out of fashion.

And America certainly has things to get done.

From terrorism and climate change to runaway federal entitlement spending, there are big challenges to be faced. Sen. Obama is the only Democrat who plausibly can say that he wants to work with Americans across the political spectrum to address such subjects - and he has the integrity and the skills of persuasion that make him the best-qualified among the remaining Democratic hopefuls to address these challenges.

He would be a groundbreaking nominee. More to the point, he makes a solid case that he is ready to lead the whole country. We see Sen. Barack Obama as the best choice in Saturday’s Democratic primary.

External Link Video | The State's Editorial Board endorses Barack Obama


Why does SEN. BARACK OBAMA, D-ILL. run for office?

OBAMA: "What I do want to focus on, though, is how important it is, when you talked about taking on the Republicans, how important it is I think to redraw the political map in this country. And the reason I say that is that we have gone through the 2000 election, the 2004 election, both of which were disappointing elections. But the truth is that we as Democrats have not had a working majority in a very long time. And what I mean by that is a working majority that could push through the kinds of bold initiatives that all of us have proposed. And one of the reasons that I am running for president is because I believe that I can inspire new people to get involved in the process, that I can reach out to independents and, yes, some Republicans who have also lost trust in their government and want to see something new. When you look at Bush and Cheney and their record, the one good thing they've done for us is they have given their party a very bad name."


That gives us a unique opportunity in this election, and what we can't do, I think, is just to take the playing field as a given. We want to expand the scope of the electorate so that we can start getting a 60 percent majority, more folks in the House, more folks in the Senate, and I think that's something I can do.

OBAMA: And that's why we've seen record turnout in every election so far. I'm not taking all the credit for it. I think people are voting against George Bush. But I also think that we've inspired people who had not previously voted before, and that's what the Democratic Party has to do.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate in South Carolina

Sen. Barack Obama said , "While I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart."

Sen. Hillary Clinton said, “I’m just reacting to the fact, yes, they did have ideas, and they were bad ideas. . . . Bad for America, and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor [Tony] Rezko in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago."

Sen. Barack Obama said , "Part of what the people are looking for right now is somebody who is going to solve problems and not resort to the same typical politics that we've seen in Washington.”

Three quotes out of contact but the show how the debate went today. Who was throwing mud again?

For a Transcript of the Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate in South Carolina you may read here.

I found the debate quite interesting, except that it was too often interrupted by sometimes distracting questions. Why don’t these moderators let the discussion build their own theme? It would give the voters a better understanding of who these candidates are instead of making them look good.

Even prior to this debate I thought Sen. Barack Obama was a very intelligent man who really cares about the people. After the debate, I liked him even more. He is not only smart but also very polite and diplomatic person. He gives us a different idea of what a politician could be, honest and forthright.

Sen. Hillary Clinton on the other hand has lost my trust. I now believe that she is going to continue the Washington-special-interest-policies if she would become the president. Don’t we have had that now long enough?

Although John Edwards has shown his great compassion in this debate, and I would prefer him over Clinton, I still think he was not able to right the level of Barack Obama.

I believe Sen. Barack Obama that he wants change and empower us people again!


Does our vote actually matter?

Is the outcome already decided before the primaries?

Well, if you look at the system closely you will find out that theses caucuses are actually only a window dressing. The numbers of delegates are already determined before the elections. Just look the number of so called “Superdelegates ”.

Superdelegates are delegates to a presidential nominating convention in the United States who are not bound by the decisions of party primaries or caucuses. Superdelegates are elected officeholders and party officials.

However, a candidate needs a simple majority of the combined delegate and superdelegate votes to secure the nomination. Democratic delegates from state caucuses and primaries number 3,248. This means that the total number of votes is 4,040. The total number of delegate votes needed to win the nomination is 2,025. Superdelegates account for approximately one fifth or 19.6% of all votes at the convention. Delegates are chosen in the Democratic caucuses and primaries account for approximately four fifths 80.4% of the Democratic convention delegates.

Moreover, “superdelegates” are appointed by the party and not obligated to support the candidate chosen by the voters. And this part is the weakest point in this electoral process!

So, I am questioning, how much does our vote matters?
Then again
, it explains why so many people are turned off but such unfair, complicated and murky process.


Who is really getting the money?

A $145 billion stimulus package centered on tax breaks for consumers and businesses to rejuvenate the lagging U.S. economy?

Does this make sense? Have similar stimulus packages in the past ever really changed anything? NO!

All these give away are just bandages. The help maybe for a few months and the thing even get worse. What is it about the tax fear in the US? Except for big cooperation taxes have never been high. Just look at other industrialized countries like Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden. However, these countries have an excellent Health Care, School and Social System. In the US we only have uninsured and poor people, or extreme rich people. And the government gives these rich people the biggest tax brake but spends all the money collected on wars or substitutes for wealth cooperation.

President Bush and his government points out the $800 for the consumers but does not name the millions he will give to rejuvenate businesses. Don’t let the $800 blind you! He did this before, gave everyone $300 and cooperation $300 millions in tax-cuts. I know $800 is a lot for some folk. But is it far? Why does everyone have to pay to make big investors happy?

What’s wrong with the congress? Don’t the democrats have the majority? Do the really believe this works? At least Bush and the congress receive criticism form the Democratic presidential candidates. Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) said it would "leave out tens of millions of working Americans," and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) said Bush's proposal "makes no sense." Even former Senator John Edwards (N.C.) commented by saying Bush is "making matters worse." (quoted by Washington Post)


Barack Obama: Yes We Can

Read the full text of the speech while you are listening...

I want to congratulate Senator Clinton on a hard-fought victory here
in New Hampshire.

A few weeks ago, no one imagined that we'd have accomplished what we
did here tonight. For most of this campaign, we were far behind, and
we always knew our climb would be steep.

But in record numbers, you came out and spoke up for change. And with
your voices and your votes, you made it clear that at this moment - in
this election - there is something happening in America.

There is something happening when men and women in Des Moines and
Davenport; in Lebanon and Concord come out in the snows of January to
wait in lines that stretch block after block because they believe in
what this country can be.

There is something happening when Americans who are young in age and
in spirit - who have never before participated in politics - turn out
in numbers we've never seen because they know in their hearts that
this time must be different.

There is something happening when people vote not just for the party
they belong to but the hopes they hold in common - that whether we are
rich or poor; black or white; Latino or Asian; whether we hail from
Iowa or New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, we are ready to take
this country in a fundamentally new direction. That is what's
happening in America right now. Change is what's happening in

You can be the new majority who can lead this nation out of a long
political darkness - Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are
tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington; who
know that we can disagree without being disagreeable; who understand
that if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence
that's stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something
better, there's no problem we can't solve - no destiny we cannot

Our new American majority can end the outrage of unaffordable,
unavailable health care in our time. We can bring doctors and
patients; workers and businesses, Democrats and Republicans together;
and we can tell the drug and insurance industry that while they'll get
a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. Not this
time. Not now.

Our new majority can end the tax breaks for corporations that ship our
jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the
working Americans who deserve it.

We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame
and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking
about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their
greatness. We can do this with our new majority.

We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and
entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our
planet from a point of no return.

And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our
troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan;
we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in
the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes,
because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that
should unite America and the world against the common threats of the
twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change
and poverty; genocide and disease.

All of the candidates in this race share these goals. All have good
ideas. And all are patriots who serve this country honorably.

But the reason our campaign has always been different is because it's
not just about what I will do as President, it's also about what you,
the people who love this country, can do to change it.

That's why tonight belongs to you. It belongs to the organizers and
the volunteers and the staff who believed in our improbable journey
and rallied so many others to join.

We know the battle ahead will be long, but always remember that no
matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can withstand the
power of millions of voices calling for change.

We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics who will
only grow louder and more dissonant in the weeks to come. We've been
asked to pause for a reality check. We've been warned against
offering the people of this nation false hope.

But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been
anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible
odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't
try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a
simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people.

Yes we can.

It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the
destiny of a nation.

Yes we can.

It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail
toward freedom through the darkest of nights.

Yes we can.

It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and
pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.

Yes we can.

It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the
ballot; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.

Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and
prosperity. Yes we can heal this nation. Yes we can repair this
world. Yes we can.

And so tomorrow, as we take this campaign South and West; as we learn
that the struggles of the textile worker in Spartanburg are not so
different than the plight of the dishwasher in Las Vegas; that the
hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are
the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA; we
will remember that there is something happening in America; that we
are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people;
we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter
in America's story with three words that will ring from coast to
coast; from sea to shining sea - Yes. We. Can.

Just Watch Obama


$20 Billion Deal

President George W. Bush will sell $120 million in precision-guided bombs as part of an overall arms package worth roughly $20 billion to Saudi Arabia.

Well, this is again another money scam to make the American weapon industry happier. And what does American get from this deal? Wouldn't such deal irritate other countries in the Middle East even more? What about all the talk about peace?

Peace can't happen with weapons!

President George W. Bush sees this deal as a way to pressure Iran more. However, Saudi officials have sounded a skeptical note recently about Bush's drive for more diplomatic and financial pressure on Iran, which the president has emphasized almost daily on his swing through the Middle East. In addition, Prince Saud al-Faisal, said at a recent news conference. "We are neighbors to Iran in the Gulf region, and as such we are careful that peace and tranquility reign between the region's countries. We have relations with Iran, and we talk to them, and if we felt any danger we would not hesitate to discuss it with them."

So if even the personal friends of President George W. Bush disagree with his approach, why is he still going ahead with his ideas? Can’t he hear the warning, friendly advises? Or is he too arrogant to hear the truth?

This behavior is very scary!


President George Bush

President George Bush launched a new verbal attack on nearby Iran, on his Middle East tour on Sunday during a stop in the United Arab Emirates. He was calling Iran "the world's leading state sponsor of terror" and accusing Tehran of sending hundreds of millions of dollars to extremists around the world.

Does President George Bush believe he will make the world saver with such accusation? Doesn’t he read News Paper? I know he always says he does not care about what the press says! Well, this action is arrogant! Dubai-based Gulf News newspaper for example condemned on the human rights record of President George Bush and pointing to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. In adding the Dubai-based Gulf News points out that President George Bush has no moral right to lecture others on freedom and democracy.

If President George Bush continues to irritate the people in the Middle East and other parts in the world, Americans should not be surprised if they continue to be on the top of the list for radical groups to move against the western world, especially the United States, with force.

Solving the terrorist problem, is in my opinion not possible with threats or force, rather than with communication and understanding. Let’s try to understand the differences in culture, religion and philosophies of the Middle East first, instead of name calling, as President George Bush does. He has never even met the president of Iran in person. How can you judge some one without knowing this person? Why does Iran feel as agitated as it supposedly does? Is it maybe because of the strong support of the United States for Israel?

Why does the United States support Israel? Is it again the big problem of the day: MONEY?


President Bush is in the Middle East

Well, what has is saying sound partially good.

However, year and years before similar demands were made but there was no muscle to back the demand up. So the only way to achieve a lasting peace is if the Israelis clears all illegal settlements. As long as Israel is continuing to act like they are right and able to do what ever they want, as long as they continued to invade Palestine, nothing will change, as we have seen over many decades.

If President Bush really wants peace and not just look good, he has to give both parties an ultimatum and back it by withdrawing any aid to Israel if they don’t dismantle all settlements today.

Don’t wait another day!


What role do the media play?

Isn’t it interesting how some media such as the New York Times on Line is focusing primarily on one candidate? Why do you thing this is the case? Is it because they really want to report news or are they trying to secretly endorse the candidate they think would be more friendly to their cooperate cause (money). Senator Hillary Clinton is the longtime candidate (30+ years) with all the Washington inside (and connection to the lobbyists whose concerted effort is designed to effect influence, typically over government authorities and elected officials).

  • Hillary Clinton’s New Hampshire Primary Speech (January 8, 2008)
  • On Eve of Primary, Clinton Campaign Shows Stress (January 8, 2008)

Why did CNN and other media play Senator Hillary Clinton’s teary moment over and over again? Why did they show Bill Clinton’s “Fairy Tail Speech” over and over again? Is the media afraid that Senator Barack Obama may really have a chance to become President?

New Hampshire Primaries

New Hampshire Primaries 2008

N.H. Democratic Primary Results





Hillary Rodham Clinton




Barack Obama




John Edwards




Bill Richardson




Dennis J. Kucinich








Joseph R. Biden Jr.




Mike Gravel




Christopher J. Dodd




100% reporting

N.H. Republicans Primary Results





John McCain




Mitt Romney




Mike Huckabee




Rudolph W. Giuliani




Ron Paul








Fred D. Thompson




Duncan Hunter




Tom Tancredo




100% reporting