Caught between the two systems is the Midwest (click for 12 hour loop)

September 19, 2007
2030z
UNISYS Water Vapor Satellite of USA (click here for 12 hour loop)

There is a vortex over Hudson Bay driving the central continent system.

September 17, 2007

2031z

UNISYS Enhanced Infrared Satellite (click above, thank you)

The Northwest and Canada is in for some nasty stuff, too.

September 19, 2007
2030z
UNISYS Enhanced Infrared GOES West (click here for 12 hour loop)

September 19, 2007

2030z

UNISYS Enhanced Infrared Satellite (click here 2 hour loop)

Louisiana eyes storm now hitting Florida

September 17, 2007
2030z
UNISYS Water Vapor Hemispheric Satellite of the North and West hemisphere (click for 12 hour loop)

If one cares to follow the 'line' between the Pacific storm and the current storm in the Gulf there is a straight line between that extends to the Arctic Circle. It is along that line there will be the greatest force affecting these storms and there 'predictable' vorticity.


September 19, 2007
1930z
UNISYS Infrared Satellite GOES West (click here)

It's been my experience whenever there is a 'counter' turbulence in the Pacific, the Atlantic manifests a significant storm in greater dynamics than the Pacific storm; nearly in exact alignment with each other. One can nearly draw a straight edge between them.




September 19, 2007


1930z


UNISYS Infrared Satellite GOES East (12 hour loop click here)










September 19, 2007
1817 gmt
Tropical Atlantic Satellite.

There is still plenty of heat spilling off Africa and it is also connected to the "Ingrid" system. Being a weather forecaster and attempting to protect the public is getting to be an impossible job. Take a deep breath and do all you can, maintain a 'stress-free' environment to prevent errors. You are all in my thoughts. Good Luck !


September 19, 2007
2006 gmt
Carribean Sea Satellite

"Ingrid" may turn out to have some activity yet. This system is well supported all the way to the equator, crossing the Central American area of the continent. The system supporting this new vortex and Ingrid is extremely large and unpredictable. The manifestation of the vortex over Florida alone proves the high turbulence at work today.

These babies happen fast. Look out ! Consider evacuations ! In my opinion, there is high probablity of tornadoes.

System may cross Florida into the Gulf (click here)
by NOLA.com
Wednesday September 19, 2007, 1:29 PM

According to the National Hurricane Center, a large area of disturbed weather over the western Atlantic northern Bahamas and the east coast of Florida is associated with a tropical wave interacting with an upper-level low.
NOAA/NHC graphicThis National Hurricane Center map shows a system of low pressure that is expected to move across Florida and into the Gulf of Mexico. Meterologists say that the system has the potential to become a tropical storm.
There are no signs of organization at this time. However, surface pressures are gradually falling and environmental conditions appear favorable for a subtropical or a tropical cyclone to form over the next day or two as the disturbance moves westward over Florida and intothe Gulf of Mexico.
Regardless of development, this system will likely bring showers, squalls and locally heavy rains over portions of Florida during the next day or two....

Bush's Poor Job Approval Rating has rubbed off on the performance of Congress

Bush's Rating between September 14 - 16, 2007 according to CBS is:

Approval :: 29%

Disapproval :: 64%

Undecided :: 7%

Bush 'relost' his base he had gained only a week ago. I guess the report from Iraq is the motivating force away from the Republican agenda.


Congress rating between September 14 - 16, 2007 according to CBS is:

Approval :: 27%

Disapproval :: 65%

Undecided :: 8%

That is a 2% improvement for Congress during the very same period for Bush's loss.


Iraqi PM: Shooting Was "In Cold Blood" (click here)
Al-Maliki Disputes Blackwater USA's Version Of Shooting That Left 11 Dead
(CBS/AP) Iraq's prime minister on Wednesday disputed Blackwater USA's version of a weekend shooting that left at least 11 people dead and declared he would not tolerate "the killing of our citizens in cold blood."
Land travel by U.S. diplomats and other civilian officials outside the fortified Green Zone remained suspended for a second day after Iraqi authorities ordered Blackwater to stop working as an investigation continues into the Sunday incident.
The Moyock, North Carolina-based firm is the main provider of bodyguards and armed escorts for American government civilian employees in Iraq.
U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Mirembe Nantongo said the contractors involved in the shooting are still in Iraq, but she refused to comment on the specifics of the case pending an investigation. Americans and Iraqis have offered widely differing accounts of the Sunday incident, with Blackwater insisting that its guards returned fire against armed insurgents who were threatening American diplomats.
The New York Times reported late Tuesday that a preliminary review by Iraq's Ministry of Interior found that Blackwater security guards fired at a car when it did not heed a policeman's call to stop, killing a couple and their infant....

This is the old OJ below. Not much has changed I would say. (click on)

For hire … a private US security guard in Iraq.Photo: AP
Does the Bush/Cheney Administration know how to run a war or what? I wonder what's to come of the Iraq Embassy when all the USA troops leave? Should be interesting to see. I take it this is an issue INSIDE 'The Green Zone.' Immunity? Private contractors have immunity? How many people have been killed by these mercenaries? The Iraqi government should demand their removal of all private contractors and put their own people to work !

Embassy grounds US diplomats after shoot-out (click here)
The decision to ban US government officials' movement outside Baghdad's fortified green zone came as the Iraqi Government vowed to challenge the immunity of private security contractors from prosecution under Iraqi law and review the operations of all such companies in Iraq.
...The decision effectively halted Blackwater's operations because a main task of the company is to escort diplomats, including the US ambassador, Ryan Crocker....

Watch the media fiasco over this on all the cable networks. It will be just like old times distracting the nation away from the elections, the issues, the Iraq war and causing issues over racism. O.J. Simpson's arrests and trials aren't about racism, it's about narcissism and self-righteousness that leads him to believe no matter what he does he's above the law.

This is the last time this issue will appear on this blog due to a protect against the media coverage and shame on everyone else. I don't see any other minority getting the attention he does over alleged crimes committed. I can see it now, the OJ Trial only interrupted when necessary for commericals promoting the Republican candidate for president. I just can't wait, can you? Everyone pay attention now to the politics of the day, there will be a quiz in November of 2008 !

Click here for 24 hour loop. Missing is 3 PM and 6 PM.

I'm going to revisit this tomorrow. Have a good day.

Antarctica
September 19, 2007
12:00 PM

Highest Temperature today is
Base Jubany
Temperature :: 40 °F / 4 °C
Humidity :: 65%
Pressure :: 29.78 in / 1008 hPa
Conditions :: Light Rain
Winds :: NW at 32 mph / 52 km/h /
Time :: 3:00 PM GMT

Lowest temperature today still ain't all that low:

Vostok
Temperature :: -60 °F / -51 °C
Humidity :: 37%
Pressure :: in / hPa
Conditions :: Blowing Snow
Winds :: SSE at 14 mph / 22 km/h /
Time :: 6:00 PM VOST

Amundsen-Scott
Temperature :: -63 °F / -53 °C
Pressure :: in / hPa
Conditions :: Snow
Winds :: NNE at 14 mph / 22 km/h /
Time :: 12:00 AM NZST

Clean Air
Temperature :: -63 °F / -53 °C
Humidity :: N/A%
Pressure :: 28.89 in / 978 hPa
Conditions :: Ice Crystals
Winds :: NNE at 14 mph / 22 km/h / 6.2 m/s
Time :: 11:50 PM NZST

Nico
Temperature :: -67 °F / -55 °C
Pressure :: in / hPa
Winds :: West at 7 mph / 11 km/h /
Time :: 2:00 PM GMT

There is some very nasty weather developing offshore the southeast USA. (click here)

An emergency shelter at a school on the outskirts of Shanghai today. (NY Times article below)


September 19, 2007
1507 gmt
West Pacific Global Satellite



September 19, 2007
1530z
UNISYS Enhanced Infrared Satellite of north and west hemisphere (click here12 hour loop)


There are massive heat transfers today. Even with a damaging typhoon hitting China there is little relief for the troposphere. The satellite picture above of the West Pacific shows extremely hot conditions in the one place there is still water vapor over tropical forests. The heat is still concentrated more north than south of the equator, however, Antarctica is taking a hit with temperatures on the Peninsula reaching 40F today. Asia hasn't seen the last of it's typhoons either.


Typhoon Spares Worried Shanghai (click here)

By HOWARD W. FRENCH
Published: September 20, 2007
SHANGHAI, Sept. 19 — A powerful typhoon lashed at China’s east coast today, forcing gigantic evacuations in Shanghai and other coastal cities and causing widespread damage to the south of the city.

As recently as late Tuesday, the storm, bearing the Thai-derived name Wipha, had been forecast to make a rare direct hit on Shanghai, China’s largest city, prompting the evacuation of 300,000 residents of low-lying neighborhoods and vulnerable areas, along with a battery of other emergency measures....



September 18, 2007
Key West, Florida
Photographer states :: Feeling the effects of the approach of 93L with this little squall in Key West. Wish I would have used the film camera, as the digital didn't catch the detail of the lower clouds. Three distinct layers of clouds,all moving at different speeds. Plenty of wind and some light sprinkles, then all was calm again within an hour.

September 19, 2007

1430z

UNISYS Water Vapor Satellite north and west hemisphere

Heads up, everyone. Consider this a shot across the bow. This is the stuff the scientists are warning everyone about. THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF A VERY DANGEROUS TROPOSPHERE. These storms are 'pre-loaded' in a super hot troposphere with instant development with little warning. This is it. This is the dangerous stuff. The dark clouds above are intense humidified air mass and as time goes by there will be more and more intensity and longevity to these events.

Firefighters still battling Big Bear & Julian blazes | Video

September 15, 2007

Big Bear Lake, California

Photographer states :: Photo taken in the town of Fawnskin shows thick smoke from a forest fire burning near Big Bear Lake in the mountains 70 miles East of Los Angeles. The fire is being fought by numerous fire agencys and has destroyed over 15,000 acres so far. Firefighters, aided by aircraft are fighting to keep the flames away from Fawnskin, a town on the other side of Big Bear lake.

Polar Bears "Dropping Like Flies" From Heat Exhaustion

Date not known
Cold Bay, Alaska

Hunter Jeremiah Johnson comforts a polar bear that had collapsed from heat exhaustion before he could shoot it.

Hunters are shooting Polar Bears out of compassion?
Since when?

The weather at Glacier Bay National Park (Crystal Wind Chime) is:

Elevation :: 33 feet

Temperature :: 43 F / 6 C

Conditions :: Mostly Cloudy

Humiidty :: 87%

Dew Point :: 39 F / 4 C

Wind :: Calm

Pressure :: 30.24 inches / 1024 hPa (Falling)

Visibility :: 10 miles / 16.1. kilometers

UV :: 0 out of 16

Clouds :: Scattered Clouds 1200 feet / 365 m
Mostly Cloudy 2600 feet / 792 m
(Above Ground Level)

The First Lady President. "I am your girl."

The Hillary for President campaign is one of the most duplicated campaigns I have ever seen. Will the Official website please stand up (click here). The lady is inclusive and that has translated into a multitude of support in any form it takes. I sincerely believe there is more momentum for Hillary Clinton than is estimated when one considers all the generic websites enthusiastically engaged in this campaign.

If Barak Obama wants to state he has more than enough experience to be President then all one needs to do is realize Hilllary Rodham Clinton was born to this job and this is literally 'her moment.' No one can take that away from her.

The lady is a force to contend with and to set herself apart from any other candidate following the You-Tube debates she took a very bold and commanding stand demanding a contingency plan from the current White House regarding Iraq. It was necessary and it demonstrated a woman capable of leading the USA and defending it without regard to public opinion and an oppressive DC establishment. You have to hand it to her, she knows who she is and she ain't afraid of using her powers. That is a leader assured and ready.

Hillary comes ready made. She isn't so much a reactionary as one of reflection. She takes a stand on issues and while appearing to be inflexible to the public's outrage at times, has her times to reflect on what the American people are saying and why there needs to be a change in policy or public statement. Hillary is a well honed politician and she has been through it.

In Arkansas, Hillary was a very public figure always taking on the Southern Good 'Ole Boys to defend her spouse's leadership. When journalists covered the Clinton administration in Arkansas it wasn't unusual to have those that lean Republican say, "...and where is Hillary today..." in hopes of avoiding any conflict.

Hillary Clinton longs for a simpler campaign whereby candidates for nomination seek to admit defeat before the votes are cast thus limiting the field to just a few worthy individuals to focus differences and define a clear leader. That luxury would not be the case in 2008 and regardless she has risen to the challenge, set herself apart from her competition and commands a more than respectable lead with an ever increasing gap between her and those behind her.

HILLARY CLINTON IS NOW THE ONE TO BEAT (click here)

Sat Sep 15, 7:56 PM ET
These things happen quietly, subtly, without pronouncements, sometimes without anyone ever noticing they are occurring. But often -- not always, mind you -- one candidate surges to such an advantageous position in the fight for a presidential nomination that the contender suddenly becomes the front-runner. It just happened.
It's not quite clear what celestial or temporal event prompted it. No one took a straw vote (the Republicans did that, and they still have no front-runner), and no one caucused. It's not a mainstream media conspiracy, either. It's just a discernible adjustment in the political climate. But find me someone who thinks, deep in his or her heart, that Hillary Rodham Clinton isn't in the strongest position right now in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008.
This isn't a matter of survey data, or a question of money raised, or crowds roused, or debate questions parried, or bumper stickers distributed, or editorials drafted or e-mails forwarded. It's more a question of sitting here in September and thinking of the role of Mr. October or, to put it more plainly, to see who is playing the role of Reggie Jackson, who once was quoted in Sport magazine as saying he was the straw that stirred the drink of the New York Yankees.
When it comes to the 2008 race, Sen. Clinton, who seldom gives a speech that can be described as stirring, is doing a lot of stirring nonetheless. To change the sports metaphor: "She has played above the rim without a mistake," says a top New Hampshire Republican....

Senator Clinton has been working the crowds. Not just the Democratic nomination crowds but both sides of the aisle in DC. She has been relentless in her pursuit to work with Republicans when all the American people wanted was to rid themselves of corruption and incompetent leadership. She took the White House long before her declaration of candidacy, by seeking bipartisanship and shoring up whatever competency she could muster in a Senate seat rarely cold for lack of a New York Senator interested more in a campaign for President than the best interests of the American people. Senator Clinton is running for President because she believes she can lead this country to prominence in the face of grossly incompetent Republican leadership.

Her record is well known. She has the scars of being a Senator in the legislature while the White House was occupied by a Bush and Cheney. She will be the first to admit there were mistakes made but that was in a hostile political environment for anyone other than Republicans intent on abusing the good nature of the American people in fear of another September 11th. She has done well to survive the day in DC post Bush and is proving to be agile, determined and commanding in the face of a Senate record that does not compliment an anti-war climate in the USA. It is my estimation the Senate has been a busy place for this New York transplant and no one can accuse her of languishing in the limelight of her spouse. Senator Clinton is self made and doesn't lean on Bill for anything more than support. Admittedly, the 'pillow talk' is more than classified.

Clinton to Propose Universal Health Care (click here)
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: September 16, 2007

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday will lay out a plan to secure health insurance for all Americans while severely limiting the ability of insurers to deny coverage or charge higher premiums to people with chronic illnesses and other medical problems, her aides and advisers say.

Mrs. Clinton’s purpose, they said, is not only to cover the 47 million people who are uninsured but to improve the quality of health care and make insurance more affordable for those who already have it.
The goal of Mrs. Clinton’s plan, to be outlined in a speech in Des Moines, is similar to that of the ill-fated plan that she and President Bill Clinton pushed in 1993 and 1994.
But advisers to Mrs. Clinton, a Democrat from New York, said Saturday that she would try to avoid the perception that she was advocating a bureaucratic, big-government solution. That perception, promoted by conservative Republicans and the insurance industry, sank the Clinton plan in 1994....

Some would say, here we go again. I don't think so. The Republicans have had their chance in large measure under this administration and have proven to ignore the needs of the American people in regard to health care resulting in a draconian industry which has looked the other way to deaths of citizens while reaping profits to stockholders. To a very certain degree, this is a legacy issue for Senator Clinton. She mastered a plan many years ago and attempted to set the USA on a path to wellness and health only to be publically abused by media campaigns designed to destroy the hopes of an American health care insurance that would bring equity to all this country's citizens. In recent days, the Bush White House has come out in attempts to limit states rights in providing coverage to children. That is unconscionable and only reflects the degree of ruthlessness the Republicans still harbor regarding the wellness of America.

Hillary will be strong on every issue between now and the nomination. Once nominated, as it would seem it is her's to lose, she will prove to run circles around any Republican candidate for President of this country. She is unafraid of her capacity to lead and that is reassuring to a nation still reeling from September 11, 2001 that has chronically been emblazened in their memories with nearly daily reminders to that trauma. She comes from the very state suffering the largest death toll from that day and to that end there can be no mistake to her resolve both in domestic policy and military determination to build an undaughting national defense strategy.

She is no softy on Human Induced Global Warming. She realizes the extent it is a serious issue while taking control of it's brevity at the You Tube debates with a willingness to 'set the moderator' straight. We only wish the issue was treated that day with brevity as Ms. Clinton demanded, instead a comedy act and snow man that took the stage. I appreciate her for commanding the issue be seen in it's seriousness.

She isn't alone on this issue. The former First Lady had a ready made leadership in Al Gore whom has been leading the fight to responsible American policy which has spawned bills in both the Senate and House. As a President, Clinton would sign the necessary legislation to bring the USA out of the dark ages and into a future for it's children. With her spouse's global initiative already working to change the face of energy and it's infrastructure all the USA has to do is adopt reasonable sustainability goals and the job is done.

Where Mrs. Clinton will fall into disfavor is with the Republican Values Voters, however, there are cracks in that contingency of Americans. Cracks that will open other doors for a Democratic woman candidate that may very well bring those values voters to some degree to the Clinton Camp. The good shepards of the Republican Right Wing have their issues with the lack of stewardship in regard to the future of their planet. One delivered to them by a God that expected more than oil revenues as a priority to economic strength and allowable wars.

A Crisis of Political Faith for Evangelicals (click here)
By Shawn Zeller

9:40 AM; Sep. 17,
GOP hopefuls will get no free passes this time from a religious base angered by tepid progress on its agenda
In almost every presidential election of the past three decades, social conservative and evangelical voters didn’t need anything like their own debates or special summit meetings with the candidates. That’s because their choices were so obvious early on: In 1980 there was Ronald Reagan, who coyly told the members of the evangelical Religious Roundtable that, while he understood its membership was barred from endorsing him, he felt free to endorse them. In the past two elections there was George W. Bush, who describes himself as a born-again Christian and won his second term with the support of four out of five evangelicals.
So far in the 2008 campaign, though, evangelical conservatives have been facing a very different prospect: No obviously viable candidate to rally behind and an increasingly restive mood in their ranks.
So political leaders of the religious right are stepping up efforts to find a consensus choice, starting this week by staging the first-ever Values Voter Presidential Debate for the Republican candidates. The debate, in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., will be moderated by Joseph Farah, who edits the conservative online news site WorldNetDaily, and the questioners will include such old lions of the movement as Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum....

That only scratches the surface of the depth of leadership Senator Clinton is capable. The character of the USA will come full circle in providing a quality of life for it's citizens while again leading the world to priorities in defeating terrorist networks and sharing economic strategies. I do believe the last time Senator Clinton visited Pakistan was when a lady lead that country as Prime Minister. It is all too odd that both these women are again returning to prominent leadership roles at the same time. Very odd indeed.

I congratulate the Democratic Party for being the party of change. This is the first time two minority candidates are leading the nomination to the Presidency. It is very exciting and very youthful. Did I mention the Clinton White House now has a daughter that finds politics as attractive as a Saturday Night date?

It's all getting very interesting and to that end I wish everyone the best of luck. It's the country that is the winner. I am looking forward to a vibrant America with a future insured and not promised.

The Audacious Candidate, one of more than hope.

This is Barak at the 2004 Democratic Convention. Even then he was eyeing the very real possiblity of bring the Democratic Party back to prominence as the leadership to restore America's promise. I am a little tired of hearing the word 'promise' and I do believe he is as well.

Barak on opposition to the war in Iraq that dates back to well before it even started on March 19, 2003:

War Critics Question Obama's Fervor (click here)
Some Say Actions Don't Match Talk
By Perry Bacon Jr.Washington Post Staff WriterSaturday, September 15, 2007; Page A01

..."I don't oppose all wars," Obama, then a state senator, said on Oct. 2, 2002. ". . . What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."...

For any serious anti-war voter, that statement realizing it was in 2002, has to give one pause to realize Barak wasn't meerly opposed to the invasion into Iraq but had already assessed the Bush White House as incompetent regarding government policy and the use of the USA military.

For any voter seeking a candidate which has consistently brought an anti-war agenda forward to a campaign for President of the USA one has to consider seriously this man with many years in government but always painted into the background of any Democratic Party agenda.

That tends may be true of the minorities of the party and it is their obligation to speak about it. They are there, they are represented, they are fostered in the capacity they are found, but, are they vilified somewhat to prevent any dynamic participation? If one is serious about equity, about finding 'the candidate' to restore the USA to global leadership bringing all countries to our side as allies again, while nurturing domestic power to revitalize America's infrastructure it is the obligation of those with a conscience regarding the future to search their soul for that answer.

Is there a minimalist oppression that lends advantage to any other candidate which disaffects Senator Obama's campaign? I can't help believe a recent statement by his spouse resounds in that latent reality. I think the statement went something like this, "My wife said this is the only time I'll be running as a candidate for President of the USA." It is a galvanizing statement and I couldn't help believe there was a barrier she was reacting to as if 'hope' for a Black Candidate doesn't yet exist in the face of social preferences still resounding within the electorate. It's a 'framework' of reality to study and any responsible voter has to ask themselves that one last time before casting the vote to reclaim the nation from the impoverishment of the Bush years.

Barak Obama has international reach and recognition, he has been surrounded by prestige within the Democratic Party and celebrities have come forward to help the voice of this candidate be heard. He is serious, insightful but has a character trait that is both intriguing and worrisome at the same time. In his campaign there is a profound effort to understand the voter of 2008 and bring them to the reality that their government can reach into the heart of an their issues.

He rarely presents his public image in perfection, but, is able to survive the day simply because of his sincerity and personal openness which causes him some embarassment in appearing to stumble over issues rather than address them. Barak seeks not to be 'the correct candidate' so much as a powerful candidate agile enough to cross any boundary that hampers issues yet to be addressed in openness. He doesn't allow people their skepticism of their government. He is in a quagmire in this race for President and the quagmire is caused by a man already in the White House. The people of the USA are injured, they are weakened in their resolve to solve their problems in a way that lends truth and willingness to policy and it would seem Barak Obama has his finger on that pulse and is more than willing to address it no matter how awkward and contentious the moment.

I indeed appreciated his active participation in the AIDS campaign in Africa. He was very visible and very open about the personal concern and personal responsiblity for a pandemic sweeping Africa. No other candidate even came close to making that statement on a continent where AIDS is epidemic causing instability in governments and casting vast number of children into orphanages. It was bold, it was completely blind to American opinion. He reached into the heart of the issue in Africa and challenged Africans to be tested and receive treatment. It was a desperate act to bring on board the people of Africa to reclaim their own future no different than he challenges those in the USA to recapture this country's future. He's a blastedly good candidate for President.

He is a treasured leader which the American people cannot afford to lose. I like him. I like him a lot and if there was ever a candidate that would consider 'the will of the people' over and above any policy he would sign; it is this one. He believes in people, reaches out to them and seeks their support in making their will known. He includes 'the objection' of those that surround him into the reality of America and brings cause to 'deal with it.' It is an excellant approach to policy and needs to be considered as a model to Democratic forums at all levels of government. Deal with the objections and don't shy away from it while placing it either within policy or bringing the reality of 'wrongness' to it. It is not dissimilar than the venue of the Supreme Court which has a majority and minority opinion when administering the powers of that court. Barak Obama is not just a candidate, he is inclusive of any and all objections to his position and will his opinions aren't 'spit polished' at the onset, they are certainly developed in the reality of a nation divided.

I have yet realized a lie to this man's campaign, an untruth or any trend in that direction. If there is a hint of dishonesty regarding Barak, his policies and campaign it should be brought forward now and not sometime when a Presidential Candidate could be marked for elimination due to covert tactics. If that covert nature by the opposition either Democrat, Independant or Republican exists, 'The October Surprise' if you will, then it needs to be dismissed as strategic, latent and dishonest in estimation in finding an honest and forthright President much needed in White House.

Basically, now is the time to aire any candidate's dirty laundry so there are respectable choices in November 2008 and not sabotaged candidates that demoralize the electorate at the last minute. In predicting the outcome of November 2008, it is my estimation the Democratic nominee will have too much momentum to ever be undermined enough to be defeated, however, there is current polling that would find any Democratic candidate challenged enough to have perhaps only a margin rather than a significant lead to insure that victory. With Barak, there is little chance there are skeletons in his closet and to that end he needs to be seriously assessed and esteemed.

The voice heard round the world and a very different one from his earliest statements regarding Iran.

Obama Warns Bush Against New War (click here)
CLINTON, Iowa, Sept 14--Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama warned the Bush administration against expanding the war in Iraq to neighboring Iran which he said is a force to be reckoned with in the Middle East.Obama speaking at an Iowa audience said that he hears "eerie echoes" of the rhetoric that led up to the invasion of Iraq.He said: "George Bush and Dick Cheney must hear loud and clear from the American people and the Congress: You do not have our support, and you do not have our authorization, to launch another war."Obama's comments came during a speech on the future of the 4-year-old war in Iraq, which he said has only bolstered Iranian influence....

Already working to shore up America's economy in local economies. It has been the local economies that will be the backbone to reclaiming the labor force's chances of regrowth. It would seem Barak isn't waiting to be president to establish his intentions for America's Middle Class.

Obama, Durbin want to meet with B of A on LaSalle deal (click here)

(Crain’s) — Sens. Richard J. Durbin and Barack Obama are seeking a meeting with Bank of America Corp. CEO Kenneth Lewis to discuss the impact of B of A’s pending acquisition of LaSalle Bank Corp. — a move that signals a shift in what until now has been a largely mute response from Chicago’s political leaders to the prospect of thousands of lost jobs here.
In a letter sent Friday, the Democratic senators asked to meet with Mr. Lewis and other senior executives “at your earliest opportunity.”
The senators want to talk about the likelihood of retaining local jobs, the impact on local banking competition and the possible reduction of civic participation and community lending, the letter says....

Barak Obama is a reactionary. But. That is his style and not his habit. It is not his habit because he is also a 'closer' without loose ends to trip over.

Obama’s in the Eye of the Beholder (click here)
Can the junior senator from Illinois be both a stalwart progressive and a post-ideological unifier?
By David Moberg (Tama, Iowa)

Every August for 46 years, until she retired two years ago, Duffy Lyon carved the butter cow sculpture that has occupied a place of honor at the Iowa State Fair. But newly inspired, this summer she crafted 17 pounds of butter into the campaign logo of Democratic presidential aspirant Barack Obama, proudly displaying her creation at an Obama forum on rural issues here.
“He’s the kind of person who will represent us the best, better than Hillary,” she says. “He’s for people who haven’t got things.” Prominent dairy farmer Joe Lyon, like his wife an active 78-year-old independent who Bush turned into an ardent Democrat, adds, “We’ve got to have a change in Washington. I think it’s been a calamity—war, giveaways to the well-connected. I don’t think we’ve seen anything like it in history. And we’ve just seen the tip of the iceberg. I don’t know how long it will take to straighten out....

The American Credibility Gap, both domestic and international

The obvious credibility of the USA military under an incompetent leadership is obvious and nothing short of sustained trustworthiness will return confidence by the people of the USA in it's military deployments. There will be more skepticism regarding any war engaged by the USA and the nuclear ambitions of the American military has to be scaled back to fall in line once again with the United Nations Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Peacekeeper missions that are actually accomplished would be putting the right foot forward after conducting a tragic and failed war in The Middle East.

Internationally, the USA has to get it's act together to be effective in diplomatic efforts to avoid war. Here again the Bush administration is proving that downsizing a government only leads to greater threats to national security of the USA and our allies.

Lack of ID Data Impedes U.N. Sanctions Against Iran
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: September 17, 2007
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16 — In the six months since the United Nations Security Council acted to freeze the assets and curb the overseas travel of Iranian officials, including members of the Revolutionary Guards, an embarrassing snag has occurred: the United States lacks passport numbers and other data to go after most of the people listed.
Even as the Bush administration is pushing for new sanctions against Iran, officials acknowledge that the United States has not carried out existing Security Council penalties on several companies linked to Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Officials say they lack identifying information that would ensure that the right companies are punished.
“No one believes in these sanctions more than we do,” a senior administration official said, speaking anonymously because of the delicacy of the issue. “We want to see them applied, not just announced. But there is the technical problem of getting the right identifier information that can pass muster in a court of law.”...

What was that quote again, "No one believes in these sanctions more than we do, blah, blah, blah..." Really? Why don't I believe that?

As Americans used and abused by a Republican infrastruture we not only have a right to disbelieve any and all spoken words, but, are obligated to our self-dignity and self-respect to not only disbelieve but ridicule any agency of government unable to sustain a vigorous effort of diplomatic resolve.

Now.

With that in mind, whom in this country is going to become President and close the credibility gap?

What then happens next in Afghanistan? Does the USA roll up it's military and go home?

This is an article from The New York Times in the year 2002. The American forces sent to Afghanistan was a paltry number compared to what should have been sent. The venue of war was never to be Afghanistan, there is no oil there. There are a lot of mountains and primarily peaceful tribes impoverished and Muslim.

March 29, 2002
Left Behind (click here)
An interview with RAWA’s Sahar Saba.
By Kristie Reilly

The American media and the Pentagon have trumpeted the collapse of the Taliban and the “liberation” of Afghanistan, but for the Afghan people, conditions have not changed. Indeed, they may be getting worse.

The Afghan refugee and humanitarian crisis continues: Billions have been promised in foreign aid, but little of it has reached Afghanistan. An official from the U.N. Population Fund says the relief effort, to succeed, must be conducted on an unprecedented scale. “It is larger than Kosovo,” he says. “In Kosovo, there were 1.5 million people, and in Afghanistan there are 20 million.” In a country that has one doctor for every 50,000 people, the overall mortality rate has doubled since August.

International peacekeeping troops, stationed in Kabul, have been able to maintain a measure of security in the city’s streets. But outside Kabul, there are no peacekeeping forces, and regional warlords still rule. Infighting between rival warlords and vicious attacks on civilians have continued throughout the U.S. bombing campaign. In short, Afghanistan is on the verge of civil war....

This venue of investigation is not unusual for The New York Times. The journalists working for that newsprint frequently seek interviews with people 'in the know' in areas of the world very removed from media influence/presence. So, when this article was written there was already musings about continued and increased conflict in the days to come. It speaks profoundly of the abandonment of the USA into Iraq leaving Afghanistan to the efforts of the Brits and NATO. Should they go it alone or should the USA reenter the conflict in Afghanistan and further stabilize the region from Afghanistan as is best rather than from a distant cousin nation called Iraq?

It seems obvious to me where any American efforts belong and that is where Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network resides enjoying their view from a top a Pakistan tribal area.

In all honesty, if the 'regular' forces in Iraq were redeployed into Afghanistan and the Reserve units and National Guard units were sent home forever, it would be a relief for Afghanistan to finally have a military presence to end the suffering while delivering humanitarian aid, reconstructing the country where the people are ready for it and desire it, ridding the countryside one halmet at a time of warlords and poppies and replacing it with Afghanistan culture and perhaps a rebuilt Mosque or two for the people to find a home rather than estrangement of their cultural values.

I strongly believe a redeployment of American forces into Afghanistan will bring the Taliban infiltration to an end while rebuilding will return the 'hearts and minds' to the government of Hamid Karzai. With Afghanistan stabilized there is little doubt much of the regions turbulence would end. I do mean end and not just a transitory peace. The Afghans have priorities. They are sophisticated in ways the Iraqis are yet to grow into, they are literally ready for roads, cities, schools and a cultural economy.

It is the right way to stop terrorist aggression. With Osama bin Laden in prison or dead, the terrorist networks could no longer admire the tenacity of the network that brought The West to 'it's knees;' so much as a network finally ended when corruption was removed from the USA government and the priorities of a Western nation was returned.

There has to come a day when The West has defeated terrorist networks and not just protect from them. Defeating al Qaeda where they make their plans and hide their leaders will be a huge victory for The West. Afghanistan as a stabile nation with hope and quality of life for it's people as a reality, whereby, the stability of Iraq is yet to be written. Literally. We need to leave Iraq to Iraqis and we need to give back Afghanistan to the people there.

We need to fight terrorism with economies that people are willing to sustain and not with perpetual gun battles and bombings. It has to come to pass The West has defeated al Qaeda otherwise the impetus for terrorist network proliferation will never end. I sincerely want Afghanistan to be free and autonomous and a good partner in the region. I believe they are capable of all that with an America clearly on a path to victory. I doubt sincerely any return to Afghanistan will be a bloody war or a long lived war. It wasn't when we first entered Afghanistan and the only way that will be different is if coupe elements from Pakistan bring a greater war due to it's political instability, but, here again: The USA returns with vigorous diplomatic efforts along side it's military.

The humanitarian crisis in Iraq overshadows any and all military initiative in that country. There is no debate.

This is not from a source I would consider propagandized. It's from the BBC.

Cash pledged for Iraqi refugees (click here)

The Iraqi government has promised to give $25m (£12.5m) to help neighbouring Syria and Jordan cope with about two million Iraqi refugees.
The United States has agreed to accept 20,000 of the most vulnerable Iraqi refugees for resettlement.
The offers came at a UN conference in Geneva, which ended on Wednesday.
In all there are an estimated four million displaced Iraqis, nearly two million of whom remain in Iraq, forced to move by the violence in the country....

In the map above it is noted there is an influx into Syria of over one million refugees from Iraq. General Patraeus' only mention of Syria was some form in interference in Iraq's police and military. In other words, the General spoke of Syria as an enemy of the USA. How could any country absorbing that volume of refugees from a war the USA instigated be an enemy to the USA or Iraq. I'd like someone to explain that. Additionally, there is nothing like invading still another sovereign country on the basis of pre-emption when it has absorbed the refugees from Iraq. That is not only increasing the danger of genocide of the Iraqis now fleeing for their lives, but, also places them in double jeopardy as there is no Iraq to go home to when the war migrates into Syria.

Iran is no different in their commitment to Iraq. It currently allows and encourages any and all Iranians whom care to, to bring humanitarian relief to the people of Iraq, as a result there are camel caravans and vehicle caravans that bring food and medical supplies to those in need in Iraq. There is no mention by Iran of refugees, but, I believe Iran opts to prevent any refugee crisis by sending supplies into Iraq.

The answer to General Petraeus' misguided depiction of Syrian and Iranian involvement in weapons supply to Iraqi extremists is, what did you expect? These countries are inundated by people fleeing in fear of their lives; without diplomatic efforts by the USA and USA assistance in handling refugee issues these countries are left in the realization of sheer horror of the crisis and only seek to facilitate the end to suffering no matter form that takes including sending arms to Iraq along with the humanitarian supplies and then there is the issue of 'getting' the supplies to the people. I sincerely doubt General Petraeus sends USA military to escort Iranian and Syrian convoys into Iraq. So, therefore, I am sure the humanitarian caravans are armed and very dangerous, just as Iraq currently is.

General Petraeus needs to be grateful for any and all humanitarian relief the neighboring countries currently are sending as if eight million dead Iraqis result he has a lot of answering to do and it won't just be to the USA Senate either. He along with his bosses.

Then there is this article in the Lebanon Daily Star:

Al-Qaeda in Iraq slowly finds itself with no future (click here)

By Safa A. Hussein Commentary by Monday, September 17, 2007

In 2005, a violent conflict started between Albu Mahal and Al-Karabla, two major Sunni Arab tribes populating the remote area around Qaim in Anbar Province. One of these tribes supported Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Both tribes were hostile to the Americans and to the Iraqi government. The Americans and the Iraqi government assessed this to be a normal tribal conflict. Later developments revealed that neither Al-Qaeda in Iraq nor the Iraqi government nor the Americans recognized that it reflected a drastic change in the political dynamics that would shape the new phase of the Iraqi conflict.
Only a few months later, Al-Qaeda in Iraq assassinated tribal leaders in Anbar and Kirkuk provinces because they called on their followers to join the Iraqi security forces. In a letter from a local Al-Qaeda in Iraq leader to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, he described those assassinations as having the anticipated intimidating effect. Al-Qaeda in Iraq went further by carrying out a suicide attack against a police recruiting station, killing dozens of recruits. It was at this point that the Americans made up their minds to support the tribes against Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Iraqi government followed up on this effort. However, even then Arab countries did not anticipate the potentially significant political outcome of the conflict between the Anbar tribes and Al-Qaeda in Iraq....

Now if those reading the article can put aside the propaganda of the last week and realize the dynamics to these outcomes always existed and the final outcome would be the same anyway, it's easy to realize the USA is not needed in Iraq.

It would seem the USA caused a 'hell on Earth' for the Iraqis. With the USA invasion the Iraqi people of all ethnicities were turned loose to find a way to protect themselves because the USA could not. That in turn manufactured an economy for struggle of domination of land and resources and invited the emergence of a terrorist network within Iraq that would seek to capture a government infrastructure, namely al Qaed in Iraq. The invasion created the circumstances in An Albar so let's not now state we are experiencing success in An Albar. The fact of the matter is An Albar is finally working out it's kinks to whom exactly is going to dominate the infrastructure there, and the terrorist network lost the fight. It would have happened eventually anyway. The fight between the Sheiks and al Qaeda was always there, the Americans and Bush's Iraqi government just put a different face on it.

Al Qaeda in Iraq was an opportunist network trying to secure a place within a sovereign nation to attempt a coup of sorts. To that end it was financially supported by Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda, but, it had nothing to do with bin Laden's network. It doesn't have anything to do with bin Laden's network now. It's an autonomous entity that was never going to be tolerated anyway. So while Bush's military ran around Iraq removing weapons caches' and attempting to protect themselves from the tribal disputes they were never needed. The American participation in Iraq was more an annoyance to the tribes already conducting wars due to anarchy.

The American presence in Iraq was and is nothing more than an attempt to protect the nation building within the Green Zone. It has absolutely nothing to do with the tribal issues except for any political agenda that would bring raids to Iraqi towns. In the meantime, Baghdad was being ethnically cleansed by the Shia, including those elements 'embedded' in the Iraqi police. The 'image' put before the American people was one of orderly maneuvers to 'take down' any and all networks of insurgents in Iraq. What was transpiring were daily searches of homes and towns without any direction except to 'get the job down' on the own without any real intelligence to their daily deployments. The purpose to these American missions were to make it safe for Americans.

The larger attacks that destroyed Mosques and cause greater tribal tensions was instigated by Al Qaeda in Iraq in hopes it would cause a war within a war and allow them more control rather than less. Al Qaeda in Iraq was as much a rebel group as any insurgent group except they had big bombs and more funding, so much for the theory of Syrian and Iranian involvement. Al Qaeda no matter where they are, cannot match a sovereign country's ability to deploy weapons. I am quite confident that if the Iranians and Syrians wanted to send in weapons to destroy American presence it would already be done. Hello? If there are weapons dealers in Iraq selling weapons to the tribes crossing the borders from Syria and Iran then they learned the 'idea' of exploiting war for profit from their American counter parts.

None of the weapons in Iraq that came from outside the country of Iraq were ever sanctioned by any other neighboring country. Quite the contrary, the neighbors to Iraq wanted to avoid any conflict that would bring the American war over their borders. The weapons in Iraq from foreign sources come from dealers that Petraeus can't stop and neither can the neighboring countries of Iraq.

The only purpose the USA military serves in Iraq is to enforce the directives of Bush to maintain a nation building friendly to American oil contracts. That is the only reason why the USA is in Iraq and the exact reason we need to leave. The USA is creating the possiblity of greater war due to their own priorities and adding to the issues the tribes have to deal with when faced with multipling insurgent groups when people feel their tribal leaders don't have control. The reason things have settled down in An Albar is because the USA is backing the tribal Sheiks and allowing them their clout in restoring order to their hamlets. That is all this is. There is no revolutionary Petraeus victory here. Not at all. It's simply the USA allowing the status quo to take hold, without American interference or priorities. Petraeus ain't all that folks.

..economy...unemployment...inflation...energy...transportation... usa debt...taxes...

Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman, dishes on his personal dealings with presidents in his new book "The Age of Turbulence."

Could it be all those issues are tied together? I believe they are. The question is how will the next President of the USA bring all those issues into line?


The Bush economy was nonexistant. There was never significant job growth and now the rate of job growth has stalled and will begin to fall in the negative direction as companies facing economic crisis will instill cut backs to satify stockholders.

The tax structure of the USA has to be reinstated to a point whereby there is significant payment of the debt of the country. That will not service any government stimulated job growth either. Paying debt or paying for budgets only maintains the status quo.

The fact of the matter is the majority Republican House and Senate spent the nation into debt to avoid still 'another' Bush economic decline. They used the USA Treasury to 'buy' an economy when they couldn't find a way to have tax cuts along with escalating debt. So quite literally, the economy of George Walker Bush was actually far worse in dimension than that of his father's which never included the Middle Class in any of it's efforts, in that the USA Treasury was simply recycled into the private sector and used as collateral to secure higher and higher debt ceilings facilitating greater debt that was then rerouted back into the economy which was then taxed and the tax infrastructure was then used to secure higher debt ceilings and on and on and on it went.

There was never an economy. It was all smoke and mirrors. The Democrats are in majority now and they aren't playing the 'borrow and spend' game of Bush's artificial economy anymore. The degree they are 'trapped' into it is due to the Iraq War and the chronic demands of the country to 'support the troops' in the face of a failed and illegal war. Supporting the troops should be in the measure of bringing them home and not funding a defeat.

The future economy must be dynamic and multi-dimentional. The reality is the Democrats are the only ones that can bring the USA back from economic demise and literally make Alan Greenspan eat his words regarding double digit interest rates. How? Easy. The USA has to return to manufacturing. That is not possible you say, because all the manufacturing jobs have been outsourced. The jobs that will be created under the next Democratic President will be manufacturing jobs due to cutting edge needs of the nation. Cutting edge as if we didn't know what was to come. Not hardly.

The USA needs a new transportation infrastruture. Democratic leadership will bring about legislation that will facilitate new methods of transportation including greater public transport resulting in manufacture of everything from rail components, to train compartments, to electric cars, and enegy infrastructure of solar panel arrays, wind farms and battery arrays. In the immediate future of the USA there will be demands for ethanol vehicles and fuel. That so the people of the USA come to realize there are alternatives to the ancient fossil fuels and their damaging emissions. These are all new technologies and industries to the USA and will provide plenty of opportunity for the USA to retool itself adding to the work force, hence widening the tax base and accelerating the reduction of debt. As the debt comes down the federal government can expand projects to secure the best interests of Americans in returning high quality education and healthcare. In doing so, new jobs will result and the USA recovery will become exponential.

Why Democrats?

Because the Republicans rather keep Americans impoverished and fighting wars. Any and all 'investment' by the USA is to other countries that benefit stockholders regardless of where they live. The prime example of that is the new E85 Cartel formed by George Walker Bush which his brother Jeb was chairing at the onset. The E85 Cartel will facilitate the manufacturing of ethanol outside the USA which will increase the cost with transportation costs and virtually eliminate the benefits of ethanol to Earth in use by the USA because the tankers that will contain this commodity use fossil fuels to transport it to the USA ports no different than oil from the Middle East.

The Republicans are NOT capable of running a government that will increase the domestic economy of the USA. Their only philosophy is to rid the USA federal government of any capacity other than it's military capacity and stop any and all income tax placing 'use tax' on any kind of economy as the only federal income. The Republicans are not about to pay USA labor what it is worth even though it is the best labor force on Earth. The Republicans answer to rebuilding a manufacturing infrastructure for the USA is to allow and permit immigration to 'handle' the cost of employment.

Wake up America !! This is easy. Stop living in denial that the Republicans are economic whiz kids. It just ain't so.

So, did I cover all those subjects. Let's see, I touched briefly on the debt, tax rates, energy, transportation, so what is left is the word economy and inflation. Well, with new infrastructure on the rise there will be a vibrant USA economy so long as the House, Senate and Executive Branch act to protect Ameican workers and limit the extent outside investment and imports plague that new infrastruture. So that takes care of the economy and if it has the dimension it needs to accomplish the reversal of Human Induced Global Warming with the application of American will and know how, then I really do believe Alan Greenspan will be eating his words.

There.

We covered all those topics in a multi-dimensional approach to responsible governement and included the reversal of a deadly environmental threat along with it.

That should do nicely.

Oh, one other thing. When the soldiers come home, especially the returning National Guard there will be new job skills for them to learn and new jobs for them to return to. So much for sustained military rotation, their labor will be needed right here on USA soil to restore the capacity of the USA economy.

The most accessible candidate out there. John Edwards has the best interest of America firmly within his campaign.

The outsider this time. In his previous bid as a Vice Presidential candidate, the former Senator was a DC insider. Not this time. He has the 'Cat Bird's Seat.' He is looking at the trouble the nation has aquired since he has left his North Carolina seat and can safely state, the nation needs leadership he can only offer. He has a unique perspective in that he has distanced himself from his past and removed the adverse 'logos' of Kerry's Swift Boaters.

Edwards: Bush, Congress Fail to End War (click here)
By NEDRA PICKLERThe Associated PressFriday, September 14, 2007; 2:11 PM
WASHINGTON -- White House candidate John Edwards criticized President Bush in a televised response Thursday for failing to pull out of Iraq, but also spread some of the blame to the Democratic-led Congress.
Edwards' dual criticisms came in a unique two-minute ad that he paid for on MSNBC and that aired after Bush addressed the nation. Bush said he has agreed to reduce the number of U.S. troops from their highest level of the war, but rejected calls to leave Iraq....

John Edwards has a more than interesting career. He has always focused on 'managing' the unmanageable including taking on lawsuits for clients challenged in their lives due to healthcare malpratice. If the former Senator were nominated you can be sure the Republicans would be attempting to gut any and all of his attempts for election because he would be rolling back constraints on class action lawsuits and demanding better representation in the courts of clients disaffected by the errors of others including the much coveted Bush Pharmaceutical giants.

U.K. Offers Insight Into the Edwards Healthcare Plan (clickhere)
September 05, 2007 12:59 PM ET
The dream of universal healthcare, as outlined so far in the Democratic presidential race, looks like this to me: Every American (says John Edwards) gets health insurance or at least most people (says Barack Obama). Will it mean higher government spending? Probably. But it can be paid for via higher taxes on wealthy Americans (Edwards). But who knows, maybe through greater use of technology, cost savings will be enough to avoid a tax increase (Hillary Clinton).
But as the various plans get looked over, explained, and debated, it seems very likely that all sorts of unanticipated aspects to them will pop up, such as this recent piece of insight from Edwards regarding his plan, via an AP story:
"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK."...

So, what other issues has brought insight to Edwards candidacy. He is a former member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee. As a Judiciary Committee member he heard testimony regarding issues of safety in children's toys. His demands of the Bush White House was to shore up regulations in the face of vast deregulation of consumer safety within the current White House. Needless to say, John's insight and demands fell flat within the majority Republican legislation he walked away from to run for President, but, I am confident he confronted the problems Americans are now concerned about regarding the contaminated imported toys. It wasn't as though John didn't try, he simply was outnumbered as every other Democrat in the years from 2002 to 2006.

An Edward's Presidency would bring a youthfulness to the White House. It would also be a return of a First Lady with delicate health. Elizabeth has been a force to contend with during John's campaign and with her status of First Lady she would be among some of the most interesting women the USA had to grace the halls of the White House. Mary Todd Lincoln's delicate health are among the many stories of President's that attended state functions alone while their wives were attended to due to their adverse health. There is every reason to believe the White House would be vigorous as Elizabeth could add touches of perfection to the issues before her.

In some circles John is considered 'The White Man' candidate of the Democrats. I find that insulting as he has already stated same. In a recent statement the former Senator said, "If you are voting for me because of my gender or skin color, I don't want your vote." The Democratic Party has gotten over social barriers long, long ago and John Edwards is among the proudest of it's members unwilling to pander to voters whom are unable to rise to party standards.

John Edwards ponies up the subprime cash (click here)

August

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards vowed he would use his own money to help out Katrina victims who had been foreclosed upon by mortgage lenders in whom his own money had been invested. On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported Edwards was living up to his promise. In addition to ordering one-time employer/Edwards money manager Fortress Investments to ensure that none of Edwards' $16 million kitty was invested in subprime lenders, he set up a charity to aid families who had been directly affected by the two lenders owned by Fortress....

John is not without compassion and certainly has an understanding of what makes an economy run and how to bring people out of Lower Middle Class to elevate their standard of living in the USA....and unions like what they are hearing from the Edwards Campaign.

Union Leader Stern Says Edwards Has Edge for 2008 Endorsement (click here)
By Kim Chipman and Heidi Przybyla

Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) -- John Edwards has more support from Service Employees International Union members than any other presidential candidate, though not enough yet for an endorsement, said Andy Stern, president of one of the largest U.S. labor groups.
About 2,000 of the union's leaders will meet Sept. 17 in Washington to listen to pitches from the major Democratic candidates and take a straw poll that will help guide the group's endorsement, Stern, 56, said in an interview.
``Edwards has done an awful lot with leaders and members in our union,'' said Stern, who expects a decision on whether and who to endorse by the end of October. He said Senators Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York have strong support within the union, too, and together may be able to fend off any endorsement of Edwards, a former North Carolina senator....

While charismatic, John Edwards has been walking the USA since he first threw his hat in the ring in 2002 for the 2004 Presidential nomination. With his first attempt at the White House his funding was limited and placed him about where he is now, which might be telling him a thing or two about his personal best; but; he went through many pairs of shoes for his lack of funding by literally being the first candidate raising votes in New Hampshire door to door.

John's ambitions stem from a long standing commitment in a desire to serve as President as demonstrated by his 'never controversial' political action committee "One America" (click here).
The PAC was formed in 2001, always operated within the law and has always been transparent. That less a statement about 'soft money' and more a statement about John Edwards, a man with very respectable roots.