Political Cartoons of the Week

We are starting a new segment called Political Cartoons of the week, where we post the most relevant cartoons to the issues we are focusing on right now. The biggest issues, which are health care and the economy will, more then likely, dominate the media for awhile. It's always important to have a little humor about it all. Enjoy!

The time is now

As a progressive Democrat, I am often disappointed by my party's lack of urgency and action on issues that are otherwise 'political suicide' to advocate for. So when President Obama was inaugurated, I thought, even if he isn't (publicly) in support of same sex marriage, he isn't going to advocate for the bans to be in place. Wrong.

A few weeks ago, the Obama Department of Justice heavily supported and backed the Defense of Marriage Act in court,(the full brief summary points can be read here . And while a hold over from the Bush administration, Scott Simpson, wrote the brief, it doesn't make the blow to the LGBT community any less painful.

So while, I support the Democrats efforts on real change on health care, climate change, securing women's rights, and a myriad of other issues which we (hopefully) can see in the next 4-8 years, I do not support this party's and administration lack of willingness to stand up for its Americans who are GLBT. I have to ask the President and his party, what do you not get?

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting the Democratic Party to change over night in favor of gay rights, it was President Clinton who signed the Defense of Marriage Act and instituted Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But it has become abundantly clear that these laws are archaic now as they were then. With over 200 people dishonorably discharged in the military under Obama because of their sexuality, and more people calling for equality under the law, its time to step up your game and leave the rhetoric at home President Obama.

I understand that rights aren't given like apple pie from your grandma's on a hot Sunday, so I don't look to Pres. Obama to be the leader of the gay community, that's hardly the truth. I call upon gay rights groups to keep Obama honest and push him. I call for LGBT Americans, young and old, to take action into through own hands, and straight allies to understand that injustices affect them too (and act as well).

Marriage and representation in the military aren't the only issues I care about. The Employment Discrimination Act, which would prohibit unlawful firing for many groups, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, needs to be passed. The Hate Crimes bill (Matthew Shepard Act) is long overdue, and needs to see its passage once and for all. When we become too politically safe, we sacrifice the tears of a community who has waited too long for justice, equality, and fairness. Its time for the transgender community to be recognized as people, and not as caricatures.

Now is the time. YOU have to be the change YOU wish to see.

The March on Washington is Oct 11th, 2009, which coincides with National Coming Out Day. Its time to demand the equality that we ALL deserve. I am going, are you? For more info, ask me.

Samantha Korb
sckorb@uncg.edu
PR Coordinator UNCG College Democrats

Political cartoons to keep you smiling...smiley :)

Live Debate Thread

Go for it

I was in the same room with Hillary Rodham Clinton, my hero and my role model. She gave one of the best speeches of her life and one of the toughest speeches of her life. The energy in the room was amazing, even if I was all the way at the top, the point being...I was in there!It has been amazing convention thus far, and it looks like it is just only getting better.

I will be posting pictures and videos when I get back home. I did not get in last night, and by pure luck, I got in today, and I will try my might to get into tomorrow night, but one thing that is sure, we are going to Invaseco Field to see Barack Obama accept the nomination. We are going to be on the 5th tier, and I will get pictures that night. I could not get pictures tonight because my camera died (yes, I know, bad planning), but I got a lot of signs from the event.

More updates to come whenever I can get wifi in this wonderful city of Denver, and everything else I will update when I get back to Greensboro, NC on Friday night.

O, and apparently I was on C-SPAN, I am going to scope out the interwebs for that video.

Convention Update #1

Hello readers!

It has been a crazy time so far and I can only imagine it is going to get that much more crazy in the wonderful city of Denver, Colorado.

I arrived here Friday, Denver time at 11am (1pm Eastern time) and did not get any sleep the night before. When we got to the airport there were numerous welcome signs for the DNC, for various Obama and even some Clinton delegates. The city is definitely prepared for our arrival, and I really have enjoyed the hospitality Denver has shown us thus far. People talk a lot about the hospitality of the South, well....Denver has shown them up.

One non-funny political story that was not so funny at the time was that I left my phone (a new expensive one at that) on the light rail, which is the public train that runs a lot. A local college student and her friend found the phone for me, and meet me back at the Convention Center (which was about a 20-30 minute travel time for them and non for me).

Ok, so..the question of this whole week has been...what can you get into as someone who is NOT an elected DNC delegate? Well, the answer is very few things. But one thing we know is we are definitely going to see Barack Obama accept the nomination of our party. As much I want to be able to get into the Pepsi Center events this week...there is so much going on here that even if I don't see my girl Hillary on Tuesday night, than it will be worth it.

Bradley Hardy, former VP of the North Carolina Federation of College Democrats and elected DNC delegate is going to be on the floor events this week. I am going to ask him if he can take a bunch of pictures...but if he can't, then I do not know what to do.

That is all i have for now...i gotta go!

Political Macro for the Day!

O so true!

When FOX News Attacks

Here is a video showing the insane and misleading lies that FOX News (Faux News) has been perpetuating so far this general election cycle. When it comes to actual news, don't trust FOX News (but you already knew that, he is more proof why)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJox3lZGNgg

McCain's Green Eyed Monster

A column from Maureen Dowd that not only shows how low McCain has gotten this campaign season, but also the lengths he is willing to stretch to win this November.

McCain's Green Eyed Monster

-Maureen Dowd

Not since Iago and Othello obsessed on the comely Cassio, not since Richard of Gloucester killed his two nephews, not since Nixon and Johnson glowered at the glittering J.F.K., has there been such an unseemly outpouring of boy envy.

Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson and John Edwards have all been crazed with envy over the ascendance of the new “It” guy, Barack Obama.

Unlike his wife, Bill Clinton — the master of fake sincerity — still continues to openly begrudge his party’s betrothed.

Asked by Kate Snow of ABC News in Africa whether Obama was ready to be president, Clinton gave a classic Clintonian answer: “You could argue that no one’s ever ready to be president.”

As always, the Big Dog was more concerned with himself — asserting that he’s not a racist — than his party. Bill Clinton is not a racist. We can posit that. But he did play subtle racial politics in the primary. It’s way past time for him to accept the fact that there’s a new wunderkind in town.

Just as Bill Clinton looks at Obama and sees his own oblivion, so does Jesse Jackson. As Shelby Steele wrote in The Wall Street Journal, Jackson and his generation of civil rights leaders “made keeping whites ‘on the hook’ the most sacred article of the post-’60s black identity,” equality pursued by manipulating white guilt.

Now John McCain is pea-green with envy. That’s the only explanation for why a man who prides himself on honor, a man who vowed not to take the low road in the campaign, having been mugged by W. and Rove in South Carolina in 2000, is engaging in a festival of juvenilia.

The Arizona senator who built his reputation on being a brave proponent of big solutions is running a schoolyard campaign about tire gauges and Paris Hilton, childishly accusing his opponent of being too serious, too popular and not patriotic enough.

Even his own mother, the magical 96-year-old Roberta McCain, let slip that she thought the Paris Hilton-Britney Spears ad was “kinda stupid.”

McCain’s 2000 strategist, John Weaver, was equally blunt with Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter: “It’s hard to imagine America responding to ‘small ball’ when we have all these problems.”

Some of McCain’s old pals in the Senate are cringing at what they see as his soulless transformation into what he once scorned.

“John’s eaten up with envy,” said one. “His image of himself was always the handsome, celebrity flyboy.

“Now somebody else is the celebrity,” the colleague continued, while John looks in the mirror and sees his face marred by skin cancer and looks at the TV and sees his dashing self-image replaced by visions of William Frawley, with Letterman jokes about his membership in the ham radio club and adventures with wagon trains.

For McCain, being cool meant being a rogue, not a policy wonk; but Obama manages to be a cool College Bowl type, which must irk McCain, who liked to play up his bad-boy cool. Now the guy in the back of the class is shooting spitballs at the class pet and is coming off as more juvenile than daring.

Around the McCain campaign, they grouse that Obama “hasn’t bled.” He hasn’t bled literally, in military service, just like W., the last holder of an E-ZPass who sped past McCain. And he hasn’t paid his dues in the Senate, since he basically just stopped by for directions to the Oval Office.

As a new senator, Obama was not only precocious enough to pounce on turf that McCain had invested years in, such as campaign finance lobbying, ethics reform and earmarks. When Obama did reach across the aisle for a mentor, it was to the staid Richard Lugar of Indiana, not to the salty Republican of choice for Democrats, McCain.

When the Illinois freshman took back a private promise to join McCain’s campaign finance reform effort, McCain told his aide Mark Salter to “brush him back.” Salter sent an over-the-top vituperative letter to Obama. “I guess I beaned him instead,” Salter told Newsweek’s Howard Fineman.

McCain could dismiss W. as a lightweight, but he knows Obama’s smart. Obama wrote his own books, while McCain’s were written by Salter. McCain knows he’s the affirmative action scion of admirals who might not have gotten through Annapolis without being a legacy. Obama didn’t even tell Harvard Law School that he was black on his application.

McCain upbraids Obama for being a poppet, while he’s becoming a puppet. His mouth is moving but the words coming out belong to his new hard-boiled strategist, Steve Schmidt, a Rove protégé, nicknamed “The Bullet” for his bald pate.

Schmidt has turned Mr. Straight Talk into Mr. Desperate Straits. It’s not a good trade.

Some Political humor for your Tuesday

Some GWB Humor for ya

The GEORGE W. BUSH PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY is now in the planning stages, the Library will include:

The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has yet been able to find.

Hurricane Katrina Room, which is still under construction.

The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to remember anything.

The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't even have to show up.

The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let you in.

The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out.

The National Debt Room, which is huge and has no ceiling.

The Tax Cut Room, with entry restricted only to the wealthy.

The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of your favorite Republican Senators.

The Economy Room, which is in the toilet.The Iraq War Room, after you complete your first tour, they make you to go backfor a second, third, fourth, and sometimes fifth tour.

The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed location, complete with shotgun gallery.

The Environmental Conservation Room, still empty, but very warm.

The Supreme Court Gift Shop, where you can buy an election.

The Decider Room, complete with dart board, magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice,coins, and straws. Additionally, the museum will have an electron microscope to help you locate the President's accomplishments.

Admission: Republicans - free; Democrats - $1000 or 3 Euro

Obama Office Volunteering in Greensboro, NC

So, for the first time, I am officially volunteering at the Obama Office in Greensboro.

I've done some data entry and I am womaning (LOL) the front desk.

I shall be here for a bit, it shall be fun, it has been so far.

Political Cartoon Roundup

Enjoy!

Bush fails on women's rights and reproductive choice

Once again Bush and his administration have proven to fail women in their rights and their reproductive choices, yesterday was another sign of the damage Bush has done to women these past 8 years and what he is continuing to do.

A political friend of mine, Lauren Guy McAlpin, wrote this facebook note about what Bush has done and I feel it gets to the point of why Bush has been so dangerous to women here (and also abroad) with his absurd policies.

New proposal repackages discrimination as "personal conviction"

The Bush Administration has launched a new offensive on women's rights. This week, the Department of Health and Human Services moved to make new strides in limiting reproductive options. The proposal includes three major strikes:

- Strike 1: Some methods of birth control (such as oral contraception and EC) can be defined as abortion, because they can prevent implantation after conception. Since some people believe life begins at conception, these methods can be defined as abortificants.

- Strike 2: Doctors, pharmacists, and other medical professionals are allowed to refuse to prescribe, fill, or provide legitimate information about birth control if they're "morally opposed" to it. Any clinic receiving federal funding cannot refuse to hire or take disciplinary action against these individuals.

- Strike 3: Deceptive "Crisis Pregnancy Centers" -- centers that pose as medical clinics but really just dole out false information to prevent women from making educated decisions -- get even more social service money.

Why stop there? Why not pretend sperm are sentient beings and redefine condoms as abortificants as well? Then doctors and clinicians wouldn’t have to deal with handing out all those pesky free condoms if they didn’t want to. Why not let doctors be “morally opposed” to women having more children than she appears to be able to support. Let them sterilize women at will! Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? But the truth is, these new “rules” could open the flood gates for all sorts of new, outlandish redefinitions of reproductive options, from limiting access to birth control to creating a new culture of eugenics.

The thing is, this idea of "choice" gets all mangled up in this conversation. And no I'm not talking about the choice of the patient; I'm talking about those who swore an oath to do their jobs but think they can “choose” when to put their medical duties on the backburner. They say prescribing or even talking about birth control is against their personal convictions. Well guess what? You're a doctor, and your job is to assess situations from a medical standpoint, not a moral one. If a doctor is obligated to let living patients die because they requested a DNR order, they should also be obligated to provide a measly little birth control prescription with legitimate medical information if requested to do so.

The same goes for pharmacists. Let's say I was a pharmacist and, for some bizarre reason, was opposed to the elderly treating their high blood pressure, and therefore refused to fill Beta blocker prescriptions for clients over 65 years of age. You, the patient, have made the decision to take these Beta blockers, but I have made the decision not to give them to you. Discrimination? No. “Personal conviction.”

“Fine,” you might say. “That's your decision; I'll go to another pharmacist.” Whoops! I'm the only pharmacist in town, and the pharmacists in the next town over are all against the use of Beta blockers by the senior citizens as well. You, my friend, are shit outta luck.

Why does it sound so crazy when discussing something as trivial as blood pressure medication but not when considering reproductive medicine? It’s outright misogyny, another facet of a culture of control over human lives that the Bush Administration has asserted time and time again, and it has not slowed in its last few months of existence. Discrimination is being repackaged as “personal conviction,” and with this new proposal, there are zero consequences.

When did 'liberal' become the 8th word you can't say on TV?

Great article by "Gene in Mass" on Newsvine.com...here is the article below and the link at the bottom...

Like many Americans, I spent Independence Day enjoying good food, time with my friends (my family is too far away to spend the day with), and fireworks. From my home in Worcester, Massachusetts, I can observe the Fourth of July display at the College of the Holy Cross without even leaving the comfort of my back porch so it's become something of an annual tradition. While observing the stunning pyrotechnics, I began to ponder the political history of our nation, particularly in the context of the current presidential election.

One can hardly read a political discussion forum without encountering comments of vitriol and blind anger towards those who dare to wear the badge of "liberal". So dirty has the word become that even liberals have stopped using it, favoring the more positive spin associated with the moniker "progressive." Naturally, changing the name we call ourselves has done nothing to stop the attacks hurled at us, and we could hardly expect otherwise. A rose by any other name, after all, still smells as sweet. But the question ought not to be "Why didn't changing our name help us," but rather, "Why are we afraid to embrace our beliefs and to wear them proudly?"

Detractors will often cry that liberalism will ruin the country; that we are pacifists bent on seeing our nation destroyed; that we would rather throw our lot in with terrorists and thugs than see America succeed. Yet, we all should comfort ourselves in the knowledge that this sort of diatribe is purely the concoction of the far right and has no basis in historical fact. Everyone who graduated high school could, if they so desired, list some of the greatest achievements liberalism has offered us, but out of habit, they choose not to do so. We liberals must not allow them to forget that our country would not be the beacon of hope for the world that it is today without the liberals of our past

Pro-war conservatives like to tell us that spreading democracy to the Middle East is our solemn duty, and that the citizens there will thank us for it one day. But could we expect our democracy to spread beyond our borders if slavery had not been abolished? Would the world take our "one voice, one vote" concept seriously if women and African Americans had not been granted the right to vote? Could we truly claim to have the answer to the racial strife that still plagues Iraq if we had not integrated our schools, ended racial discrimination in our laws, and abolished the bizarre "separate, but equal" doctrine? These advances in our social laws were all vehemently opposed by conservatives, yet they are the very advances that have made this country great, not just for those granted "greatness" by accident of birth, but for all those others who, left up to conservatives, would never have a chance to touch upon it.

Religious conservatives, oddly the most venom-filled of the group, often make the claim that liberals want to limit their freedom to worship how they choose, yet this argument displays woeful ignorance of our nation's history. In fact, if the more religious among the citizens of the American colonies had their way, there's every possibility we would not have fought the Revolution that guaranteed the very freedom they now take for granted. Some 15-20% of American colonists remained loyal to the British crown, and the largest percentage of that group were members of the Anglican Church, who were so beset by fear of Catholicism, they hailed King George and feared that a religiously free state would allow Catholic dominance to spread.(source) Further, many Quakers refused to join the revolutionary cause, choosing to remain neutral (Gottlieb, 2005.) While it's true that there were also many religious leaders and followers who felt Revolution was a path ordained by God, it is from the religious that some of the greatest dissent could be found. (Ferling, John, "A Leap in the Dark: The Struggle to Create the American Republic (2003)). Indeed, without the progressive mindset, without the belief that the status quo is not something to be maintained purely for tradition's sake, the liberties we have come to enjoy in our great society might never have come to fruition.

Social conservatives, themselves commonly identified as religious conservatives, are simultaneously the simplest and most difficult people to understand. They are fiercely patriotic, and their religion is the backbone of their lives. They are men and women of strong faith and often possess an unyielding work ethic. And certainly, their positions against issues such as abortion and gay marriage come from deeply-held beliefs that define the core of their being. But the justification for these beliefs cannot be found in law. In fact, it is these very conservatives who have, at various points throughout American history, turned their backs on the document that first outlined the liberties we, as citizens of the United States, must demand from our government: "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all mean are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable human rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Yes, for all their complaining that liberals are unpatriotic, it is the conservative movement that has consistently stood in opposition to the idea that all citizens should enjoy the same liberties, the same opportunity to find happiness. From segregation to interracial marriage, from women's rights to gay rights, from voting rights to property rights, conservatives have always stood as roadblocks, demanding that we deny freedom to all those with whom they disagree. These are the people who believe freedom of religion only applies to those who share their religious views, as demonstrated by their unrelenting efforts to codify their beliefs into our national law. It is the liberals, in blocking efforts to allow one religion's doctrine to be imposed upon all our citizens, that have truly guarded our freedoms.

Fiscal conservatives have long held the belief that sound economic policy derives entirely from a supply-side system in which the wealthiest corporations and individuals are granted the greatest tax relief, in the hope that this relief will translate into higher productivity and greater profits, which will then "trickle down" to the masses. The masses, in turn, will spend this money, thereby enhancing the financial position of all players of the game. They fail to realize that supply-side economics has largely failed to deliver on its promise (Karl Case & Ray Fair, Principals of Economics (2007)). Not only did Reagan promise us that the tax cuts he pushed through would actually pay for themselves (which turned out to be untrue), but the most recent incarnation of supply-side economics, offered by President Bush, has yielded higher unemployment and reduced productivity, the very opposite of the intended affect. On the other hand, the liberal economic policies at the heart of Roosevelt's New Deal hauled our nation out of a depression caused by the great concentration of wealth that occurred in the 1920's. More recently, Bill Clinton's economic policies gave us a GNP fully one-fourth of the entire world's output, 4% unemployment (lowest in 40 years) and 15 million new jobs. (source)

Despite all this, I would never argue that conservatives have done nothing to enhance our country. After all, Ross Perot is conservative, and he brought us Bill Clinton.

http://gbixler.newsvine.com/_news/2008/07/05/1640343-why-did-liberal-become-a-curse-word

The Democratic Five: Why I am a Democrat

I've been asked this question countless times...Why are you a Democrat? When I first got into the political process, I joined the Democratic Party, at age 18, because it wasn't the party of Bush. But when I learned more about the political process, I knew that the Democratic Party was the party for me. Why? Because it is the party that was able to enact the most change I wanted to see when it came to the current American political system and I feel the best way to enact that change is to get involved within the party and make these things happen. Is it always easy? No. But is the work necessary? Yes.

The 2nd question I get is...Do you always vote Democratic? And the answer to this is no. I tend to vote mostly Democratic, however, there have been times I have voted 3rd party, or even Republican. It was because those Democrats either didn't reflect my views or didn't convince me of their vote.

The 3rd question I get is...So if the Democratic Party sometimes doesn't reflect your views, then what kind of Democrat are you? I'm a progressive Democrat. To me, what that means is that you support Democratic candidates and policies that are progressive, meaning that they might be 'seen' as 'liberal' by some, but simply enough, I want society, our government, and our country to move forward. I know that moving forward means different things to different people, but for me, it means equal opporunity and equality for all, protecting our civil liberties and rights, protecting and saving our planet from the path its on right now, war only as a last resort, affordable and accessible healthcare for all, education for all and making higher education more affordable, and having a fair playing ground for all people when it comes to economc growth and opportunity. These are the general things I want to see America accomplish.


The 4th question is Why not the Republican Party or a 3rd party? Actually, this isn't an easy question to answer. The Republican party hasn't always been hijacked by the Reagan, the Bushes, and the religious right. The Barry Goldwaters of the world didn't care who I slept with, or about gays in the military, but the current Republican party has used the gay community as a wedge issue (see "Gay Marriage" and "Conservative Base" in the 2004 election), has denied the rights of women when it came to their bodies and reproductive rights, and has continued support of abstinence only sex education. The Republican Party has lost its mind when it comes to economics. The idea that the rich will 'trickle-down' their money to help the poor and disenfranchised is a lie that is still being perpuated by the current leadership of the Republican Party. John McCain, the Republican nominee for President has included in part of his economic plan to give tax breaks to corporations and not families who desperately need them, talk about a loss of reality on who really needs help in America. Sure, let's give more money to oil companies, because we see how they've helped us so far. Are you happy with your $4-$5 gas/galloon? I sure the hell am not. This is not to suggest that some Democrats are not in the pockets of big oil companies and corporations, because this is Washington, the circus isn't going to change because of the election of Barack Obama, but we can work toward a political climate that values people over PACs, but this is the necessary work that needs to happen.

So why not 3rd parties? My support for the Democratic Party isn't because I do not respect or see commonalities between the major parties and 3rd parties. I do recognize that 3rd parties have historically been an influential part of the American political system, and I hope that they continue to be an integral part of our political system. I think the 2 major parties can take a lesson from 3rd parties, and help them become the parties they need to be to represent the American people. However, as I stated before, I want our country to be changed and the system changed as well. Working within the system with progressive views and policies from progressive 3rd parties is something the Democratic Party needs. The Democratic Party is making a turn to become more progressive, but we need, not only the election of Barack Obama to occur, but we need a progressive 60 seat majority in the US Senate. Is this work easy? No. Is it necessary? Yes.

Lastly, will you always be a Democrat? That answer depends on if the Democratic Party will continue to generally reflect the economic and social views and values that I hold. The Republican and Democratic Parties have changed over time and I suspect they will change again. So the answer remains to be seen, but as for now, I am a Democrat, and a proud one at that.

Welcome Democrats!

Hello and welcome to the official blog of the UNCG College Democrats. This is a community web log where any member of our organization can post a rant about the latest political issues, their thoughts on candidates and policies, or whatever wacky hijinks the dems are up to. To request access simply email us at uncgcollegedems@gmail.com and don't forget to check out our new and improved website at www.uncgcollegedems.com!