Incumbent Scared of The "Signs"

Dear Supporter,

YOU are making a difference. The incumbent has issued a letter to his supporters telling them about how effective our efforts have been:

"...we face an announced Democrat opponent in 2008. His campaign signs are already starting to pop up around the district. Maybe you have seen one? And his small band of activists have been very aggressive bloggers. This is the first time I've had a Democrat opponent since 1998."
We exist. We are pushing for what is righteous and just, and this strong message has put the incumbent on the defensive and we are not even in 2008 yet.

Let us show how strong we are before 2008 and please send in your donations on December 15th by clicking here: http://www.actblue.com/contrib... or by mailing in donations with a check dated December 15th to:
Sam Rasoul For Congress P.O. Box 126 Blue Ridge, VA 24064

Thank you for your support and Happy Holidays!

Sam on Guns, Fines, and Promises...

Sam,

I am Nathan {last name removed}, a voter in your district and noticed your ad on facebook.I read some of your issues page and agree with you on many things. I would liketo point out though that the environment and schools may be important issues butin my opinion it would be good to let people know your stance on other issueslike the possible policy changes on gun rights after the Virginia Tech shootingand the issue of the increased fines for tickets in Virginia. Personally I thinkthat you should fight to overturn these fines. I am sure there are better waysto pay for the budget deficit such as reducing the lawn care for highwaymedians. I don't think that pretty bushes and flowers and well groomed grass onthe highways are as important to voters as the pains these new fines areinflicting on low income families. I attend college at Virginia Tech but I haveworked for minimum wage and I understand how hard it would be to pay $2,500 fora ticket. I hope you consider my input and I wish you luck in your campaign.

~Nate

(Response in 1st comment)

No PAC Money Please

With the help of concerned Virginians, I am able to campaign for Congress, as a Democrat, to represent the 6th Congressional District of Virginia (www.SAM2008.com). Fourteen members of Congress have said they do not take any money from PACs. And I have decided to join them.

First, let me explain what PAC means:A PAC is defined as a group that raises and spends limited "hard" money contributions for the specific purpose of electing or defeating candidates. Organizations that raise soft money for issue advocacy may also set up a PAC. A PAC can contribute $5,000 to a candidate per election, and up to $15,000 a year to a national political party. PACs may receive up to $5,000 each from individuals, other PACs and party committees per year.

Let me say that giving money to political campaigns may be good. If you make that choice for yourself, rather than a PAC, I very much hope you will decide to contribute to my campaign. So what is the problem?

Well, the problem is that money from PACs has become a pervasive, disruptive, and even corrosive force in Washington. Excess is the problem. There are many things in the life of individuals, organizations, and communities that are harmless, perhaps even wholesome, in and of themselves. But there is nothing that can not be carried to excess and/or misused. And that is where we are with PAC contributions today because they are the method used by groups with unwholesome intentions.

Every PAC contribution comes with assurances it is intended for better government. And some of our finest legislators, from both parties, are among the happy recipients. But we now have a long experience of decisions taken in Washington that prove to be absurd and/or probably the result of corruption. Thus, I believe that it will be best if I am free to represent you in Congress after consultation primarily with you, my 6th District voters. Of course, there will be input from other sources, but not from those who routinely pay and then want to play.

Over $9,000,000,000,000

Our national debt has just recently surpassed $9 trillion and nearly $4 trillion of that came during the Bush administration.

In the first 225 years of our nation's existence we accumulated about $5 trillion in debt and in the past 6.5 years we have ADDED about $4 trillion!

Our debt has grown by 75% while Bush has been in office and our children will pay for this, quite literally. Talk about taking advantage of those who can't fight for themselves!

Letter To Me About Caring

Dear Sam,
As an 26 year old immigrant in this beautifull country, I can tell you that, as a Christian, it is one of the things that bother me the most here...the lack of respect for the children and the elderly.
When my mother died of ovarian cancer at the age of 50, I was only 20 and in college.
I stayed home to help my father raised my 5 younger sibblings until they were all out of the house.
My father passed away at my house many years later.
To this day, I do not have any regrets about the sacrifices my family had to make to accomodate his needs.
That is the strong fabric of any decent society and we are losing that battle very fast to the Chineese and many other nations.
Go for it and make enough noise about it to be heard...
LOUD and CLEAR.

Gerard Halloy Ph.D

Potential President with a Peace Prize?

Christopher Hitchens, the world-renowned and delightfully fluent -- albeit insufferably gruff -- journalist, contemplates an interesting possibility in the current issue of Slate: "If [Al] Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize, will he run for President?" USA Today even wrote that Gore "hasn't ruled out another White House run."

We seem to have forgotten that the candidate list is not closed. We invest so much effort into researching and debating about the announced candidates that we completely ignore the potential candidates. I think that Al Gore, having won the popular vote before, stands a very good chance at winning the Democratic nomination even when entering the race so late. My reason for putting my own trust in Gore delves deep into political and environmental ideology, but I believe the average American will not vote for him (or anybody else, for that matter) based on his policies. The average American will vote on his image and their memories of his public life. This is actually a positive thing for Gore. Where many see Hillary as too animated, Obama as too young, and Edwards as too pretty to be the next President, they will most certainly go for Gore who is neither animated, nor young, nor pretty.

The more people see of our current Vice President, the more, I think, they yearn for our former, more reasonable and level-headed Vice President. Gore, despite his association with the Clinton administration and the stigma attached to that, is being remembered fondly by the American public as his stance on issues such as Iraq and global warming are being more widely-accepted, revealing Gore's amazing foresight. Also, Gore didn't shoot anyone in the face.

While I know what candidate out of the current Democratic frontrunners I currently like, I know that I will have to seriously rethink my vote if Al Gore enters the race.

- Reed Braden (These opinions are solely mine.)

♪ Why Can't We Be Friends? ♫

Leslie Wayne recently wrote in the New York Times' blog, The Caucus, about one of many hissy fits in the Democratic road to the White House.

September 18, 2007, 1:18 pm
Edwards and Clinton Tussle Over Lunch
By Leslie Wayne

Joe Trippi, the Edwards campaign Internet guru, is using a Senator Hillary Clinton security-themed fund-raiser taking place in Washington today to ratchet up the campaign’s increasingly negative attacks on her – and to solicit money from Edwards supporters, as well.

“Guess who’s really coming to lunch with Hillary?” the e-mail to Edwards supporters asks and then goes on to say that Mrs. Clinton’s $1,000-a-plate luncheon is a “poster child” for “what is wrong in Washington.”

The noontime fund-raiser, at the offices of Jones Day, a Washington law firm, features Mrs. Clinton and members of Congress holding one-hour sessions on a number of security-related issues – and people who pay the entry fee can attend. The event, Mr. Trippi said, shows how “too many in office have fallen under the spell of campaign money at any cost.”

Mr. Edwards has made attacks on lobbyists and the influence of special interest money one of his signature campaign issues, and has long criticized Mrs. Clinton for what Mr. Edwards claims are overly-cozy ties with Washington insiders. By contrast, he has positioned himself as a Washington outsider, not beholden to lobbyists or political action committees.

Still, the Edwards campaign is not above using the Clinton fund-raiser as a chance to do some money-raising of its own. As the email closes, Mr. Trippi tells supporters that: “You may not have $1,000,” but he asks Edwards supporters to donate, even in amounts as low as $25 and $100, and said this money will be “combined with the contributions of thousands of others who are replying to this email right now.”

Fund-raising aside, in the war of words, the Clinton campaign is not taking Mr. Trippi’s attacks lightly. In response, Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer told Politico.com: “Increasingly negative attacks against other Democrats aren’t going to end the war, deliver universal health care or turn John Edwards’ flagging campaign around.”

I like The Onion's version of this better:

Clinton Blasts Obama For Slamming Edwards Jab
September 12, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC—Dissent continued to plague the 2008 presidential campaign this week, as Sen. Hillary Clinton had harsh words for Sen. Barack Obama's recent criticism of blunt remarks made by former Sen. John Edwards over what he called "petty Democratic-party infighting."

"I am dismayed and outraged by my opponent's baseless accusations in response to my other opponent's crude mudslinging tactics, which were inappropriate and which the American people will not stand for," Clinton said, echoing the criticism of criticism that has become a key element of this race. "The sheer effrontery. Destructive. Barb. Vitriol."

Campaign observers speculate that Clinton's comments could provoke a strongly worded response.

I personally don't care how Clinton, Edwards, et al. earn their money as long as they keep it legal and as long as it gets us a responsible Democratic President in 2009. Rather than agreeing with Edwards' campaign in that Hillary's lunch is the poster child of what is wrong with America, I seem to think that Edwards' campaign's reaction is the poster child of what is wrong with politics. We're all Democrats here, and we're supposedly all sensible people. Can't we just get along?

When the day comes that one of our three Democratic frontmen (or woman) get the party's nomination and they choose a Vice President to run with them, I would love for them to choose one of the remaining two of our Hillary-Obama-Edwards trifecta. I like each of these candidates a lot, and I dislike a small, but equal amount of things that they have each said and done, but I would love to have any two of them in the White House at the same time. I fear with all of the negativity between candidates right now, this can never be possible. At the rate we are going now with our incessant arguing and mudslinging, the leaders of our party are burning so many bridges between themselves that they are fatally weakening our chances for a successful election.

I take dirty campaigning very seriously, and the Edwards-Clinton rivalry is very much weakening my likelihood of voting for either of them. If only we Democrats can stop behaving like... well... stubborn donkeys, we might be able to accomplish something for once.

- Reed Braden (These opinions are solely mine.)

Updating the Layout

Our blog will be undergoing some layout and design updates today. I apologise in advance for any unintended inconvenience.

Corruption: Congressional Pensions

(From Kathy, a concerned citizen)
As just one of the topics, we need to discuss the ability of congresspersons who have been convicted of a crime and are still allowed to receive the congressional pension. The subject of congressional pensions is a sore spot with me because congress was meant to be of the people, not a career in and of itself. Since they could not pass a bill to prevent their pals from receiving pensions after conviction, maybe we need as states to do it one at a time and get the message across to these people. Public service is great, but I really feel that they should not be getting greater benefits, and in most cases, MUCH greater benefits, than the people they represent. It immediately puts congressmen “out of touch” with the average person.

HIGHEST INCREASE OF UNINSURED ARE THE "RICH"--NO ONE IS SAFE!!

I am here to break the news to you that the "rich" are now feeling the pains of our healthcare crisis!

The U.S. Census Bureau has just released new data that the total number of uninsured Americans has increased from 44.8 million in 2005, to 47 million in 2006. Not only is this increase unacceptable and a disgrace for the greatest country in the world, but now the "richest" of Americans are really feeling the pinch. The greatest increase in uninsured Americans came in the income bracket of "$75,000 or more," with the addition of nearly 1.4 million uninsured in this bracket alone. (Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in The United States: 2006)

No one is safe in this healthcare crisis, but there is an answer. HR 676 provides a national health care system that is PRIVATELY delivered (different from "socialized" healthcare, but is single-payer). With HR 676, healthcare in America will run business-as-usual, and the average American will pay only a fraction of the costs they are currently paying due to the fact that we will have system that is created to serve THE PEOPLE and not PROFIT.

FROM "NOT LARRY SABATO"

POSTING:
Via RK, I saw the new Democracy Corps Memo, that shows the most vulnerable races in 2008 around the U.S. Listed as "Tier 1" vulnerable was Tom Davis' seat which makes a lot of sense since it will likely be open. Listed as "Tier 2" vulnerable was Thelma Drake's seat which again makes sense since she won in a very close election against a lackluster campaign in 2006.But what is really strange, almost unexplainable is Bob Goodlatte being listed as "Tier 2" vulnerable. To who? That seat is the second most reliable Republican seat in Virginia, only behind the 7th District held by Eric Cantor. I can not think of a single person who could even pull within 10 points of Goodlatte here. Even if he retired, I'm not sure Democrats could stay within 10 points in an open seat race against Chris Saxman, Mark Obenshain, Ben Cline, Morgan Griffith or whoever the GOP decided to run.
Anybody have any idea what I am missing here?

COMMENT:
Better watch Sam Rasoul in action as a campaigner before saying that Goodlatte has no real opposition.Sam is energetic beyond most candidate's dreams, has excellent ideas about how to run a campaign, and has started early. He knows the odds and is willing to work for a victory. Plus...since Goodlatte is my congressman...I can vouch for the fact that lots of people in the district wish he had kept his promise not to run after 5 terms. We're tired of this particular Bushit lover.
Posted by: roanoke dem August 05, 2007 at 09:36 PM

LIE by LIE of the IRAQ WAR

Visit this link to see a time line of each lie of the Iraq War: http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/

WHERE IS THE FIRE?!

Where is the fire in your belly? It is time for progressive minds to band together and demand answers and change! Just look at what the Bush adminstration has done to our great nation with false propoganda to stimulate fear! This complex has plauged our nation and now it is time for the people to take back our government!

My style is different from Eddie’s, but being truly educated on the realities can really incite anger. I believe in an educated exchange of ideas, but we must do so with a certain degree of fortitude and ferventness. It is time to act.

If you want to talk about delivery of our message then help each other do so, but we are all fighting the same fight. Let’s do so together as Americans

44.96%

In 2005, Virginia only had 44.96% of registered voters turnout...but this was 1.98 million people. Virginia currently has a population of 7.6 million. 75.4% of those are over 18, or about 5.73 million (but not all can vote e.g. aliens, felons..)
If 5 million citizens in Virginia can actually vote, that means that over 3 million did not vote. Why did they not vote? I know politics-as-usual tells us that they will not vote no matter what we do, but I believe that is because non-voters feel disenfranchised with the good ole boys network.

You have to speak about issues that affect all Americans, not just voter profiles. Even if you get 10% of non-voters to come out, that is 300,000 votes. Most non-voters would vote Democrat, no doubt.

Let's channel that energy.

YDs, It's Time To Mobilize

Young democrats of the Sixth District of Virginia, if you care about your future then now is the time to act. Don't know how or even if you can make a difference? Just as the fundamental part of mass is the atom, the essential building block of change is SELF.

Dont look for, but BE the change agent.

The Fight For Our Future

D-Day

On this day in 1944, 6603 Ameican lives were lost where the land meets the sea in eastern France, promoting freedom and a vision greater than any one man . No matter our opinions of the current conflict in Iraq, let us take a moment to cherish those brave soles.

Congressman Goodlatte Chasing His Tail

Fiscal responsibility is a plagued virtue of government, fallen ill by pork barrel spending-benefiting friends of our Washington legislators. Now this chronic Congressional fiscal indiscipline, combined with a reckless foreign policy, has resulted in a chronic Federal budget crisis. And even critical programs such as the Farm Bill of 2007 are being considered for cuts.

Congressman Goodlatte, wrote in the Roanoke Times, in an article, Trying to do more with less., that “Here in Virginia, the health of the Chesapeake Bay is of great concern to many of us.” He continues “The Farm Bill affords us the opportunity to create policies that would positively impact the health of the bay without burdening farmers with superfluous regulations.” Congressman Goodlatte continued to distract constituents with worthy praise for environmental considerations in his article: “The benefits of conservation programs are not solely realized by farmers. All of us benefit from improved air, water, and land quality.”

One week later, we read “Bay Bill Too Costly, Congressman Says” in the Daily-News Record. And “Unfortunately, [CHESSEA] is extra expensive …”, about the conservation plan known as Chesapeake's Healthy and Environmentally Sound Stewardship of Energy and Agriculture Act of 2007. And Congressman Goodlatte executes this abrupt about-face as Senator John Warner and State Delegate Matt Lohr, both Republicans, continue to express support for CHESSEA.

Now, the Farm Bill involves a wide range of considerations, from farming, through commodities, domestic food assistance, energy development, trade and conservation. It is prudent for any public office holder to periodically take a fresh look at complex and costly proposals. We do not know what went into this reappraisal and reversal. But we do know that Congressman Goodlatte owes us an explanation.

Unless he turns over a new page, Congressman Goodlatte will be reluctant to offer that explanation because he seems to feel a lack of responsibility to his Virginia constituents. Why? Well, unexplained rhetorical position reversal maneuvers, from an eight-term incumbent Congressman, who signed the Republican Contract with America, limiting Congressmen to three-terms, are not unprecedented.

Iraq

Mistakes were made and there is a case for out-right deception of the American public. The truth is that these references are made to the past and we must look to the future. The Iraqi government cannot support it's own country, but our presence is inciting more violence.

A phased withdrawal over the next 12-18 months, with concrete benchmarks for the Malarki government is a new policy we should employ in Iraq. Iraq is our war, but the war is long over and the Iraqis should be forced to focus on reconstruction of their country with the help of the world community. If the country must be split, then so be it. Soldiers continue to die, children maimed by shrapnel, no clean water, and multiple tours for our National Guardsmen...sounds like too much pride on all sides, and not enough progress.

Our Children's Wellness

A measure of things to come? Most would agree, our future lies with our youth. UNISEF released a study last week called “An Overview of Child Well-Being in Rich Countries,” where the United States ranked 20th out of 21 “rich countries.” I am no expert on UNICEF or international research, but this sparked concern for me living in the greatest country on earth.

The research studied six dimensions of child well-being and the United States finished 20th in the two categories Family Relationships and Behaviors & Risks. A correlation could be drawn between these results and the fact that workers in our country registered the most worker hours per year of developed countries, meaning mommy and daddy are not home.

At least a conclusion can be drawn from these results, but why are we dead-last in the dimension Health & Safety? As the most prosperous country on earth, our children are in a marginal standing in Health & Safety, two necessities of life based on any social theory. As a society, we must improve affordability and accessibility to all Americans, especially our youth, our future.

Want To Know How Conservative Bob Is?

Do you want to know how conservative Bob is? Read this post:

political Theocracy.

Why Do We Have To Settle For Less?

This is in response to “Trying to do more with less” by Bob Goodlatte, published in the Horizon section of the Roanoke Times on May 13th, 2007.

To many of the citizens of our great country, evidence continues to mount that our legislative policies are being dictated by “big business and special interest groups.” I would like to make the case for our small and mid-size farmers in Western Virginia that are often underrepresented in an equation that favors large farmers.

There are two basic ways to help the average farmer in Virginia: (1) through subsidies and similar programs and (2) by decreasing input costs, namely the costs of energy and feed. Our incumbent congressman has said that “unfortunately, the budget for the farm bill is significantly smaller than it was in 2002,” essentially stating that funding for subsidies will not increase and will likely decrease. In my view funding for subsidies and loan programs is “significantly smaller” largely for two reasons: (1) the funding and resources being allocated to the Iraq war, estimated at $8 billion a month and (2) the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, where over two-thirds of the benefits went to the top 20% income earners in America.

In partisan politics, we often focus on what we do not agree upon, attempting to demonize the opposition. As a result, little is accomplished. I propose that we focus instead on situations in which we can build a consensus across party lines and socio-economic differences. Most can agree that energy prices in our region have increased significantly over the past 10 years, yet large oil firms have little problem posting record oil profits. Exxon-Mobile posted a $39.6 billion record profit last year. This amount was not just the largest profit ever recorded for the oil giant, but the largest annual profit for any company in U.S. history.

These rising energy prices are our real concern, as they play the major role in the question of rising input costs for our farmers, more specifically the cost of feed. The major components of feed are corn and other crops that have been used as sources of alternatives to gasoline or bio-fuels. The increased demand for these crops has led to a subsequent increase in feed costs. So farmers feel the energy pinch in two ways with increases in fuel costs and feed costs.

I am not a farmer, but as a small business owner, I can sympathize with the small and mid-size farmers of our region that must operate in an erratic industry. When Washington D.C. has no real answers for working America, citizens are often fed some alternative propaganda on positive changes to legislation like our “farm bill.” Why aren't more legislators inquiring about record oil profits while the rest of the country is subsidizing the pockets of a few rich elite? Every company has the right to make a profit, but we should be realistic about deciphering between prices in a “free market” and pricing in an industry that has become an oligopoly with power in the hands of a few.

How can our legislators look farmers of our district in the eye and claim to be working to help them, when we are hard pressed to find representatives that are not influenced by big business to fight for working middle America?