Dems looking in wrong place for lost voters
Mood:  silly
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

It's sadly pathetic that the democrat's have to go as far back as FDR and JFK, just to be able to say they stand for anything. Yet they're what many of the older democrats look back on.

Democrats are looking in the wrong place for their lost voters

The Democratic National Committee is in San Antonio this weekend trying to develop a strategy to bring more Hispanics under the tent after a steady decline of support from the nation's largest minority in recent elections.

And while San Antonio is clearly a cut above my hometown as a convention city, the Democratic honchos might have learned more about the party's plight at my 20th high school reunion in El Paso last week.

Certainly, they wouldn't have gotten any of the inside jokes about how my border brothers and I gave each other nicknames like "El Fin," "Beak" and "Gator." But the DNC would have gotten a lesson on why an increasing number of my former classmates have abandoned the Democratic hustings of their parents and are now voting Republican.

To understand how solidly Democrat El Paso still is as a city, consider this: While President Bush carried red-state Texas with 61 percent of the vote last year, 56 percent of El Pasoans voted for Sen. John Kerry.

But virtually none of the 10 or so guys I hung around with in high school still call El Paso home, a sad commentary on the brain drain that besets the border city. The group includes a physician, a microbiologist, a financial analyst, a schoolteacher, a pharmaceutical rep, a cop and a couple of salesmen.

The majority are Hispanics whose parents are either first- or second-generation Mexican immigrants. Of those parents, I'd be willing to bet that about 70 percent of them are products of the civil rights era and are die-hard Democrats.

Going into the reunion, I was ready for numerous discussions to steer toward politics.

When people hear you cover politics for a living, they tend to treat you like an electoral confessional, regaling you with the reasons why they voted for Ross Perot for president or Chuy De la O for El Paso mayor. (The late De la O was a colorful political dreamer who had one good eye and was known to don Uncle Sam outfits during campaigns.)

Yet I was mildly surprised by what my old buddies had to say about the last presidential election. About half, I'm guessing, voted for Bush. And the other half were sticking with the Democratic Party, but by a thread.

The physician in the group, a Houston pediatrician who is African American, described the shift best.

"Being black, you can probably guess what my political leanings are," he said. "But I find myself increasingly in the middle anymore. The Democrats don't want to hold anybody accountable for anything, and the Republicans still have some conservative views on social and health programs that make me uncomfortable."

The Bush backers were vocal about their support, saying they appreciated the president's strong faith in God and his firm stand against terrorists. The Democrats were markedly more guarded, and none of them offered a spirited defense of the party.

That's when it struck me: In their silence, what the latter group seemed to be saying is that they don't know what the party of FDR and JFK stands for anymore.

This weekend, I expect DNC Chairman Howard Dean to talk a lot about investing in the political infrastructure to reach out to Hispanics, blacks and women.

But that investment will only lead them to voters. They still must find a message that resonates with these groups that are no longer exclusively on the liberal fringe.

Related story...
San Antonio Express News ~ Rebeca Rodriguez ** Democrats are seeking to woo back Hispanics

San Antonio Express News ~ Jaime Castillo ** Democrats are looking in the wrong place for their lost voters

Activists indicted for allegedly transporting illegal immigrants
Mood:  d'oh
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

Headline should read, "Two criminals arrested last month with three illegal aliens", or maybe just "Five criminals arrested"

Activists indicted for allegedly transporting immigrants

TUCSON - Two border activists arrested last month with three undocumented immigrants in their vehicle have been indicted by a federal grand jury.

Daniel Strauss and Shanti Sellz and the three men were stopped by U.S. Border Patrol agents 25 miles from the Mexican border on July 9.

Strauss and Sellz, volunteers with the No More Deaths group, were arrested under a federal statute making it a crime to transport illegal entrants.

The two activists told the agents they were taking the men to Tucson's Southside Presbyterian Church because they were vomiting and suffering from bloody diarrhea.

Border Patrol officials have said the men were not ill and refused medical aid once in custody.

Federal prosecutors said Strauss and Sellz were indicted Wednesday on one count each of conspiracy to transport an undocumented immigrant and transporting an undocumented immigrant.

They are scheduled to be arraigned Aug. 11.

Prosecutors said the conspiracy charge carries a 10-year maximum sentence and the transporting charge carries a five-year maximum sentence.

Information from: Arizona Daily Star

The Arizona Republic ~ AZ Central - Associated Press ** Activists indicted for allegedly transporting immigrants

Hollywood bucks down the drain as ACT falls apart
Mood:  chatty
Topic: Columns

George Soros and a motley crew of Hollywood entertainers, technology leftists and all the traditional Dem special interests used the umbrella group Amercia Coming Together to spend $ 200 million to elect John Kerry. They organized and ranted and blew money like it was water. They did manage to elect a Democrat to secretary of state in Missouri. Money well spent. Here is the kicker, ACT is broke but Kerry hung on to some of the money that he raised. Ask yourself why.

America Coming Together Comes Apart
The Democrats’ great hope goes away.

A few days after the 2004 election, America Coming Together, the giant pro-Democratic voter turnout group that had raised about $200 million from George Soros, Peter Lewis, and a variety of Hollywood moguls, released a list of its accomplishments. Obviously, ACT, as big as it was, had not put John Kerry over the top, but the group had "held conversations at 4.6 million doorsteps about the truth about the Iraq war, about the state of our healthcare system, about the economy." It had registered half-a-million new voters. In the last days of the campaign it had made 23 million phone calls, sent out 16 million pieces of mail, and delivered 11 million fliers. And on top of it all, it had "launched the largest get-out-the-vote effort the Democratic Party has ever seen," turning out "unprecedented levels of voters in the battleground states."

It all sounded very, very impressive. And then ACT listed its accomplishments at the polls, and the results seemed far less impressive. ACT had "helped ensure George W. Bush’s defeat in several of the key states and made the race close in others." It had "enabled Democrats to take back the Oregon state legislature for the first time in 10 years." It had helped Missouri Democrat Robin Carnahan win election as Missouri secretary of state. And finally, "In New Hampshire, we saw wins for the presidential race and the governor’s race, as well as a gain of four state senate seats."

And that was it. Soros and all his colleagues had spent $200 million to elect a Democratic secretary of state in Missouri.

The question that hung in the air at the time was whether, after such a defeat, the big donors would continue to support ACT — to get ready for the next big campaign — and help it grow into an even larger turnout machine. And now we have the answer: No.

On Tuesday ACT, which had already downsized dramatically in the months since the election, pink-slipped most of its remaining staff and shut down all its state offices. The money had dried up, the donors were on to other things, and the "largest get-out-the-vote effort the Democratic Party has ever seen" was over.

Throughout its life — it started when Ellen Malcolm of EMILY's List, Steve Rosenthal of the AFL-CIO, former Clinton operative Harold Ickes, and others held a downcast post-election dinner in November 2002 at a restaurant in Washington's Dupont Circle neighborhood — America Coming Together operated on the assumption that big, big money would bring victory to the Democratic party. The McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law had just taken effect after the 2002 elections, and it revealed in stark terms that Democrats, despite their image as the party of the little guy, had for years been far more dependent on seven-figure contributions than Republicans were. With unlimited contributions to the parties banned by McCain-Feingold, Malcolm, Rosenthal, Ickes, and their colleagues — the group included representatives of the Service Employees International Union, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Sierra Club, and several other groups on the left — had to find a way to keep the big Democratic donors engaged. America Coming Together — a so-called "527" group that could still legally accept big contributions — was the answer.

In July 2003, they traveled to Southampton, to the estate of George Soros, where Soros's political consultants made a pitch for spending large amounts of money on Democratic-voter turnout. Soros, his friend and giving partner Peter Lewis, and several others present agreed that it was a good idea, and the money began to flow. "We came out of that with a big commitment from George and Peter Lewis and some of the other participants," Ellen Malcolm told me when I interviewed her for my book, The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. "So all of a sudden this little idea..." Malcolm paused for a moment before saying, "We could do more."

A lot more. Soros, who would eventually give ACT $20 million of his own money, virtually dictated the size and scope of the new organization; he was personally responsible for its massive effort in all the swing states. "He’s very good at pushing out the limit," Malcolm told me before the election. "At one point, we thought we could only do seven or nine states. And George would come in and say, 'No, you can do this.' He helped us put together some other ways to raise money and pushed us into doing all the states. And he was right."

When rich Democrats across the country saw that Soros and Lewis had joined up with America Coming Together, they decided to hop on board, too. There was Hollywood producer Stephen Bing, who gave $12 million. There was Hyatt hotel heiress Linda Pritzker, whose family gave $5 million. And the Service Employees International Union, which gave $3 million. And Massachusetts technology entrepreneur Terry Ragon, who gave $3 million. And Texas technology executives Jonathan McHale and Christine Mattson, who together gave $3 million And the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, which gave $2.1 million. And New York philanthropist Lewis Cullman, who gave $2 million. And Rockefeller heir Alida Messinger, who gave $1.5 million. And Agnes Varis, head of AgVar Chemicals, who gave $1.5 million. And Illinois broadcasting magnate Fred Eychaner, who gave $1.5 million. And Seattle tech entrepreneur Robert Glaser, who gave $1.2 million. And the Teamsters Union, which gave $1 million. And Colorado entrepreneur Tim Gill, who gave $1 million. And television producer Marcy Carsey, who gave $1 million. And Pennsylvania financier Theodore Aronson, who gave $1 million. And Oregon publisher Win McCormack, who gave $1 million. And heiress Anne Getty Earhart, who gave $1 million. And Texas technology entrepreneur James H. Clark, who gave $1 million. And the American Federation of Teachers, which gave $1 million. And Florida millionaire Dan Lewis, who gave $1 million. And Ohio philanthropist Richard Rosenthal, who gave $1 million. And clothing entrepreneur Susie Tompkins Buell, who gave $1 million.

And those were just the ones who contributed $1 million or more. In all, America Coming Together, along with its sister organization, the Media Fund, raised and spent about $200 million. And as Election Day approached, the organization gave off an air of confidence born of the belief that it was simply too big to fail.

In a way, it didn't fail. In 2004, America Coming Together helped create a record Democratic turnout — a performance that would have been a fabulous success had not the other guys turned out even more. In the end, though, the problem for ACT was not that it failed to turn out voters. The problem was, despite its claims to be reaching more people than ever before, it really did not reach a lot of new people. America Coming Together was not, in fact, America coming together; it might more accurately have been named Traditional Democratic Party Constituencies Coordinating Like Never Before. You could go to any office of ACT and find lots of people from NARAL, or the Service Employees union, or Planned Parenthood. They were the same old groups doing the same old thing, only more so.

Despite all the hype and all the press releases, the effort really wasn’t about converting new voters to the Democratic party. Rather, it was about squeezing just a little more juice out of a lemon that had been nearly squeezed dry in the past. Steve Rosenthal’s well-regarded successes in previous elections had not involved attracting large numbers of new people to the cause. They involved getting union voters to turn out in ever-greater percentages, even as the percentage of union households in the electorate shrank. The problem was, you could do that for only so long. At some point, every union member or union household member of voting age could turn out and it still wouldn’t be enough to elect a Democratic candidate. For that, you had to expand your appeal, and that was something ACT failed to do. Malcolm, Rosenthal, and Ickes discovered that you could call it America Coming Together, but saying so didn't make it true.

— Byron York, NR's White House correspondent, is the author of the book The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy: The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President — and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time. This piece is adapted from the book.

National Review ~ Byron York ** America Coming Together Comes Apart

Origional story at...
This Blog **** Libtard grassroots organization, Americans Coming Together... falls apart

Another Fitzgerald indictment - still not Rove, Dem fundraiser accused of taking kickbacks from teachers' pension fund
Mood:  chatty
Now Playing: Another Fitzgerald indictment - still not Rove, Democrat fundraiser that is accused
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

Chicago and Democrat contributors...why am I underwhelmed with surprise?

Millionaire charged with taking kickbacks from teachers' pension fund
By Andy Shaw

A politically connected businessman has been indicted for a second time on federal fraud charges. Stuart Levine (left) is linked to a scam involving the Illinois Teachers Pension Fund along with one of the Democratic party's biggest fund raisers, Joseph Cari.

The message from the feds Wednesday is crystal clear: Chicago City Hall is only one of the fronts in the war on government corruption. It also appears to be rampant at the boards and commissions that oversee billions of dollars in state of Illinois programs. One of the alleged scammers is multi-millionaire businessman Stuart Levine. Another is Joe Cari, one of the Democratic parties biggest national fundraisers.

Joseph Cari, a 52-year-old Chicago lawyer and major Democratic party fundraiser for Bill Clinton, Al Gore and others, allegedly conspired with Highland Park businessman Stuart Levine, a former member of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System. The two were attempting to extort $850,000 in kickbacks from a Virginia investment firm that was seeking an $850 million contract to invest the money of 325,000 retired teachers.

"Cari called the firm and told the firm they had to sign the contract by the end of the day or their application for the money would be pulled off the table. He made clear this is the way things are done in Illinois," said Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. attorney.

Levine, who has already been indicted for allegedly shaking down hospitals and medical schools as a member of the state's hospital construction board, is facing 14 additional counts in the new indictment. He allegedly extorted several hundred thousand dollars from investment firms that wanted a piece of the teachers' $30 million pension fund.

"He used fraud and extortion to put those funds to use for the benefit of his friends, not for the teachers," said Fitzgerald.

Levine was appointed to the boards by former Governor George Ryan and reappointed by Governor Blagojevich. He is a longtime friend and major contributor to the state's former attorney general, Jim Ryan.

At Wednesday's announcement the feds talked about where the investigation is going.

"We're obviously very concerned about how the state boards are operated. This is a broad investigation, and if there's anyone out there who has information about any corrupt conduct, regardless of individual involvement in the state board, we want them to come forward," Fitzgerald said.

Stuart Levine is fighting the charges in the hospital shakedown scheme, but the government has at least one major cooperating witness. We don't have a reaction to the new indictment from Levine or his attorney, but Joe Cari is pleading guilty along with another lawyer, Steven Loren of Highland Park, who allegedly drafted the phony legal documents in the scam. Both lawyers are cooperating with the government.

ABC 7 Chicago ~ Andy Shaw ** Millionaire charged with taking kickbacks from teachers' pension fund

Firm ordered abortion, ex-employee says
Mood:  irritated
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Firm ordered abortion, ex-employee says

Because of various health issues, April Thompson said she had reason to believe she might never have a child.

When she got pregnant, the joy she wanted to share with her employer quickly turned sour when, she said, her boss demanded that she get an abortion or risk losing her job.

Thompson's attorney, Ed Buckley, said the woman eventually was fired by Piedmont Management Associates, a homeowners association management firm, for refusing to get the abortion.

Thompson recently filed a lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court against the company and its president, Celia Ebert, on grounds of discrimination and emotional duress. "We believe that the conduct of forcing a women to get an abortion falls into intentional infliction of emotional distress," Buckley said.

Ebert's attorney, Benjamin I. Fink, said his client would not comment on the lawsuit.

"Ms. Ebert and Piedmont Management categorically deny Ms. Thompson's allegations," Fink said in a statement. "Piedmont Management is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate in its employment practices."

Thompson could not be reached for comment. Buckley said she is on doctor-ordered bed rest and is due to deliver in the fall.

According to the suit, Thompson began working at Piedmont Management Associates in April 2002 and was promoted to closing director and director of administrative services in fall 2003. Buckley said things were going so well for Thompson that in May 2004, Ebert gave her a loan with the promise that a raise was forthcoming. In June, she got the raise and began paying back the loan, Buckley said.

But on a personal level, Thompson was suffering from endometriosis, and a doctor recommended a hysterectomy to handle the condition, which can lead to severe pain and infertility.

Thompson, 30, sought a second opinion from a fertility doctor and decided on laparoscopy surgery. According to the lawsuit, when Ebert found out Thompson was seeing a fertility doctor, she told her she was "worried that she was trying to get pregnant."

"If you get pregnant, you will have to move because I am not putting up with any babies around here and you also won't have a job," the lawsuit says Ebert told Thompson. "The guys and I do not even hire single mothers because of the problems. I know you have some great delusion that you will be a great mother, but you won't — you can't even take care of your dog."

In December 2004, Thompson's doctor told her laparoscopy surgery did not address her medical condition and recommended the hysterectomy. Thompson said Ebert agreed to give her medical and vacation time for the procedure. On Jan. 24, Thompson went in to schedule her hysterectomy and was told she was pregnant. According to the lawsuit, when Ebert found out, she demanded that Thompson get an abortion.

Fink, Ebert's attorney, said Ebert "and Piedmont Management intend to vigorously defend Ms. Thompson's claims and are confident that through the legal process Ms. Thompson's allegations will be shown to be completely false."

Atlanta Journal-Constitution ~ Ernie Suggs ** Firm ordered abortion, ex-employee says

Dem Jon Corzine gave much as $615,600 (gift tax included) to a former flame who runs one of the biggest state-employee unions
Mood:  smelly
Now Playing: NJ GOV RACE - MCGREEVEY REVISITED
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

Jon Corzine (left), Carla Katz (center), and Bill Michaelcheck (right) at the Pierre Hotel, Annual Paradise Ball 2002 >>>>>

JON CORZINGED

WASHINGTON - The New Jersey governor's race exploded into a firestorm yesterday, with the revelation that super-rich Sen. Jon Corzine gave $470,000 to a former flame who runs one of the biggest state-employee unions.

The value of the donation ballooned to as much as $615,600, because Corzine also paid the gift tax.

The Democrat stonewalled questions about whether he gave any other money to sultry Carla Katz, who represents 9,000 New Jersey state employees as head of Local 1034 of the Communications Workers of America.

Republican rival Doug Forrester — backed by some watchdog groups — charged the gift represents a conflict of interest because Katz and other unions have vowed to seek billions in taxpayer funds for pay hikes from the next governor.

"I believe that if someone is responsible for representing the public interest in a negotiating process of any form, the nature of the financial relationship that existed — or continues to exist — should be known," Forrester said.

"There needs to be no question on the part of the public that the actions that are being taken are being taken solely with the public interest in mind," Forrester told The Post in a telephone interview.

Corzine refused to say if he made any other gifts to Katz and her family, declaring, "I'm a public official but I also have a private life."

The senator denied there's any conflict of interest, saying that if he's elected governor, he wouldn't be the one directly negotiating with his ex-girlfriend.

Spokesman Tom Shea refused to say if Corzine still provides financial support to Katz , saying: "He's just chosen not to discuss a private relationship."

But Larry Noble of the Center for Responsive Politics said, "As a political matter . . . I think he has to answer whether there is an ongoing financial relationship. The voters are going to want to know."

New Jersey Republican Chairman Tom Wilson called it "d?j? vu all over again" and evoked memories of the sleaze that led former Gov. Jim McGreevey to resign after putting a man with whom he'd had an affair into a sensitive job.

"She's not somebody who owns a widget company in Secaucus. She's the president of the largest bargaining unit for state employees," Wilson said of Katz.

Corzine is the richest U.S. senator in his own right, worth at least the $261 million he made as Goldman Sachs CEO. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is a billionaire through his wife.

On Dec. 18, 2002, Corzine granted a $470,000 loan to Katz through a company he controls so she could buy her Bloomsbury, N.J., home from her ex-husband, according to documents uncovered by The Star-Ledger and New York Times.

Katz met Corzine in 1999 during his campaign for Senate. Their relationship went public in 2002, a year before his divorce became final.

The relationship ended in July 2004 and Corzine turned the loan into a gift on Dec. 9 — one week after he launched his campaign for governor.

But the two remain close. She kissed him on the cheek when her union backed his bid for governor on June 27.

Corzine says he paid the gift tax. His campaign wouldn't reveal the amount, but the nonpartisan Tax Foundation pointed to an Internal Revenue Service chart indicating the federal tax on a $470,000 gift is $145,600.

Katz ducked reporters yesterday at the Local 1034 headquarters in West Trenton, with aides saying she was in meetings.

Additional reporting by Angelina Cappiello
The New York Post ~ Deborah Orin and Ian Bishop ** JON CORZINGED

Hillary would lose to Rudy and McCain
Mood:  chatty
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

All that hand ringing has been for nothing. Gallup has Hillary getting soundly beat by Rudy or McCain. The truth is that Hillary will probably lose to someone else because the GOP is so strong going into the mid-terms that they will probably be able to nominate someone much more conservative than Rudy or McCain and still beat Hillary.

Poll: Clinton trails Republicans

WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., would do better than Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., against potential 2008 Republican presidential rivals John McCain and Rudy Giuliani -- but would still lose, a Gallup Poll showed Wednesday.

Both McCain, a senator from Arizona who challenged then-Texas Gov. George Bush for the Republican nomination in 2000, and Giuliani, mayor of New York City during the Sept. 11 attacks, would beat Clinton in the trial matchup, 50 percent to 45 percent, the poll showed.

Either of the two Republicans would beat Kerry 54 percent to 41 percent. In the presidential election last Nov. 2, Bush beat Kerry 51 percent to 48 percent.

None of the prospective candidates tested by Gallup has announced plans to seek the presidency in 2008.

Gallup's latest nationwide survey of 922 registered voters was conducted by telephone over a four-day period ending July 28. The survey had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Gallup's Jeffrey M. Jones said the results showed "the Republican candidates have an edge at this point with at least a slight lead" in the hypothetical races.

Clinton, a first-term senator from New York seeking re-election in 2006, appears to be the "stronger of the two Democratic candidates" 28 months before the parties begin the presidential primary process that chooses the parties' respective nominees, Jones said.

The Gallup Poll showed both McCain and Giuliani enjoying strong appeal among the independent swing voters, who often decide the outcome of the nation's presidential elections.

McCain and Giuliani each drew support from at least 50 percent of the independent voters surveyed by Gallup, while Clinton attracted no more than 41 percent and Kerry got no more than 38 percent.

McCain and Giuliani also did a better job stealing Democratic support from Clinton and Kerry than the Democrats did luring Republican support from the Republicans. Clinton drew no more than 12 percent of Republican voters in the trial heats against McCain and Giuliani.

McCain and Giuliani drew at least 18 percent of the Democratic voters in the trial heats against Clinton and at least 22 percent in trial heats against Kerry.

Indianapolis Star ~ Stewart M. Powell ** Poll: Clinton trails Republicans

Evan Bayh: Dems lack credibility on security
Mood:  cheeky
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

Indiana Senator Bayh, who is planning on running for president in 2008, says that the Dems cannot shift the debate to issues they think will benefit them until they close the security credibility gap with Republicans.

Bayh: Democrats Face Security Threshold

Des Moines, Iowa - Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, said Thursday that his party lacks credibility on national security and needs to convince Americans that Democrats are willing to use force when necessary.

Until the party can persuade voters, it will be unable to move the debate to issues that work for Democrats, Bayh said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Unless the American people know that we will be good stewards of the nation's security, they're unlikely to trust us with anything else," said the two-term Indiana senator. "That's a very important threshold we have to get over."

Bayh said there are legitimate grounds to criticize President Bush's approach to fighting terrorism, but until Democrats establish more credibility on the issue, many voters won't listen.

"Many Americans wonder if we're willing to use force to defend the country even under the most compelling of circumstances," Bayh said. "The majority of Democrats would answer that question that, yes, there is a right place and a right time. We don't get to have that discussion because many people don't think we have the backbone."

Bayh has spent three days in Iowa, the first presidential caucus state, attending party fundraisers and meeting privately with activists who play a crucial role in Democratic politics.

Bayh said he would make a decision on a presidential bid after next year's midterm elections, basing it, in part, on whether he has a realistic chance of winning the nomination.

"Is this a sensible thing to do?" he said. "I've never been a big person for fool's errands. I think you have to conclude you have some prospect of being successful."

Bayh said his electoral success in heavily Republican Indiana and moderate views are a model for Democrats to end their recent electoral failures. Summing up those failures are polls that show voters overwhelmingly trusting Republicans on national security, he said.

"We've got a few voices out there who would be a little bit more on the fringe," Bayh said. "Unfortunately, too often they define the entire party."

San Francisco Chronicle ~ Associated Press - MIKE GLOVER ** Bayh: Democrats Face Security Threshold

Movenot.org: Americans didn't flock to Canada after Bush win
Mood:  chatty
Now Playing: LIBTARD LIAR ALERT
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

The main stream media made a big deal out of a surge in visits to Canadian immigration web sites following the Bush victory last November. Unfortunatly, the mass migration did not happen. We can always hope for good luck after the mid-terms.

Americans didn't flock to Canada after Bush win

OTTAWA - Canadians can put away those extra welcome mats -- it seems Americans unhappy about the result of last November's presidential election have decided to stay at home after all.

In the days after President Bush won a second term, the number of U.S. citizens visiting Canada's main immigration Web site shot up sixfold, prompting speculation that unhappy Democrats would flock north.

But official statistics show the number of Americans actually applying to live permanently in Canada fell in the six months after the election.

On the face of it this is not good news -- Canada is one of the few major nations seeking to attract immigrants -- but Immigration Minister Joe Volpe was philosophical.

"We'll take talent from wherever it is resident in the world. I was absolutely elated to see the number of hits and then my staff said 'You know what? A hit on the Internet is after all just a hit'," he told Reuters on Thursday.

"I guess I'm happy Republicans and Democrats have found a way to live together in peace and in harmony," he said.

Canada generally tilts more to the social and political left than the United States.

Data from the main Canadian processing center in Buffalo, NY shows that in the six months up to the U.S. election there were 16,266 applications from people seeking to live in Canada, a figure that fell to 14,666 for the half year after the vote.

A spokeswoman for Canada's federal immigration ministry declined to speculate on the reasons for the drop.

Toby Condliffe, who heads the Canadian chapter of Democrats Abroad, did have an explanation of sorts.

"I can only assume the Americans who checked out the Web site subsequently checked out our winter temperatures and further took note that the National Hockey League was being locked out and had second thoughts," he told Reuters.

Last year, Canada, which has a population of about 32 million, accepted 235,808 immigrants from all over the world.

Yahoo News ~ David Ljunggren - Reuters ** Americans didn't flock to Canada after Bush win

Democratic Pollster: We Don't Stand for Anything
Mood:  chatty
Topic: Lib Loser Stories

Dem pollster sees problems for Dems ahead.

Democratic Pollster: We Don't Stand for Anything

Democratic Party pollster Stan Greenberg said Wednesday that "one of the biggest doubts about Democrats is that they don't stand for anything."

During a conference call with reporters, Greenberg said Democrats deal with "the same doubts they had about John Kerry" - the party's 2004 presidential nominee. The issue arose as Greenberg discussed what Democrats need to do to stop Republican gains among Hispanic voters.

Bush got about 40 percent of the Hispanic vote, according to various estimates, a slight improvement from the 35 percent he got in 2000. Greenberg, a former pollster for President Clinton, said Hispanic voters' stand on the issues indicate Democrats can solidify their Hispanic support if they "rediscover their values and beliefs."

Democrats' lack of clarity was a contributing factor for the gains made by Republicans among Hispanics in 2004, Greenberg said, adding "that stands out even more for voters generally and for white Catholics."

Greenberg's comment come as Democratic leaders, including party Chairman Howard Dean, say they are trying to do a better job of telling voters who they are.

"Not that we need to change what we believe in, but need to do a better job of communicating what we believe in," said Karen Finney, a Democratic Party spokeswoman.

News Max.com ~ Associated Press ** Democratic Pollster: We Don't Stand for Anything