Let's look at some the events of the last few days, to see what they have in common:

1) Dennis Kucinich introduced a single new article of impeachment against the president, for his and his administration's lying us into a disastrous and illegal war;

2) Karl Rove not only failed to appear before the HJC on Thursday after being subpoenaed, but he skipped the country without notifying Congress(!);

3) Nancy Pelosi, in her signature style (vague, ambiguous, and vague again), made a statement which seemed to leave the door open for impeachment hearings (back on the table?);

4) I, Adam Sullivan, filed well in excess of the number of required petition signatures to gain ballot access for the Democratic primary here in NYC, where I am challenging Jerrold Nadler for his seat representing New York's Eighth Congressional District in the House.

From my perspective, this is a strong list of reasons for Mr. Nadler--who chairs the Subcommittee of the Judiciary on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties--to change his position on seeking to initiate impeachment hearings.

People, come on.

This is not helpful, necessary, constructive, or positive. There's a reason Obama has a strong vetting team for the VP slot - to find stuff that we don't know about possible candidates. I have no interest in second-guessing a process that I'm not a part of.

There are valid reasons for Clinton to be VP, and valid reasons for her not to be. I personally think Wes Clark is the best for the slot, but it's not my call. Nor is it something I should be getting invested in. Find a race or contest to get invested in where you can actually make a difference - there are lots of local candidates who could use some help.

Let Obama's team do its job, and lets stop fighting the primary wars. There are too many constructive subjects to write on that don't get enough attention - Congressional races and current policy issues, such as the Medicare vote that Ted Kennedy returned for.

Update [2008-7-10 12:43:59 by Falsehood]: - Added Clinton's name, and commendations for those in the comments who have been thoughtful. If you want another idea of an area for Obama to talk about, we can discuss the Party Platform that needs to be written. I've yet to see a diary on that. Thanks for the rec's - rest assured I know I don't deserve them, but that this diary expresses a common sentiment.

Hello All,

It looks like today has seen a bit of "buyer's remorse" for Barack Obama.

We've seen the meme loud and clear. From FISA to the faith-based funding to (apparently?) abortion, everyone seems convinced that Obama has moved massively to the center, dragging the support of Liberals along.

Let me be clear: I am a moderate. My individual positions vary, but I don't agree with many of you on some areas of policy. I don't think that invalidates my opinion, however.

My name is Adam Sullivan. Until recently, I was just another citizen of New York's 8th Congressional District. Now I am running for Congress as a challenger to Jerrold Nadler for nomination in CD8 by the Democratic Party. And I need your help.

You may legitimately ask why I would challenge Congressman Nadler, a representative with a long liberal voting record. While this is true, Nadler has failed us all where it matters most.

The issue--Impeachment

Some months ago, I joined a pro-impeachment group with the intent of encouraging my congressman to co-sponsor the Articles of Impeachment introduced in the House by Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.

       The NY Times has a most illuminating piece this morning about how many of Senator Clinton's African American supporters are facing primary challenges from angry supporters of Senator Barack Obama. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/us/pol itics/01dems.html?_r=1&ref=politics& amp;oref=slogin)
        This is of great interest to me, for in spite of the unity that Obama and Clinton ask from their supporters, many of Senator Obama's following are insisting on funding primary challenges based solely on the incumbent's support for a specific presidential candidate. This includes several members of New York's congressional delegation who backed Clinton and whose African American constituents refuse to get over that fact and actually base their support on their congressman's competence. Even some congressmen who did support Obama, like Steve Cohen of Tenn. and Rep Barrow of Ga., are facing African American primary challenges, either because of the incumbent's race (Cohen) or because of "not supporting Obama quiickly enough."
     This hateful "purge" of the congressional black caucus is one the most distressing events I have hadto witness this campaign season, second only to Kos of Daily Kos saying that Democrats who do not agree with the netroots should be primaried (essentially saying that there is no room for dissent). Clinton supporters could easily by the same token justify campaigns against Obama supporters in New Mexico, South Dakota, Kentucky, West Virginia, etc. However, they (me included) are not the ones choosing to vent their anger on their independent minded congressional representative. It is up to Obama to denounce these challenges and show a true grasp of the unity he so espouses.

thats right, he can't.... do you know why????

... think about it...

... keep thinking...

figure it out yet?

Its because he wouldn't want to. He supports Bush on crap like this, along with most other crap. He is Bush's third term. This can not be stressed enough.

Lets look at some other things McCain "can't" do

The primary battle during this cycle was a long, hard-fought campaign. There are still, and probably always will be, bruised egos and bitter feelings on all sides of the Democratic party. Some of the hurt will fade away or scar over given enough time, but time is not a luxury we can afford at this critical time in our country's history.

I've wondered for some time if there is any way we can all come together before the November election. Thinking about that question led me to take a hard look at our side of the political spectrum. The last word of the preceding sentence, spectrum, is what I want to talk about in this diary.

Much of the infighting on our side seems to be caused by a mistaken belief that anyone who doesn't believe the same way we do about all of the issues is a troll or a closet republican. We've fallen into the 'my way or the highway' thinking of our opponents. If this thinking is allowed to grow we will end up tearing our party apart.

read more...

I apologize in advance, there will not be a lot of original thought in this diary.  But I just read an incredible article in New York magazine about HRC and the primary and had to share.  It is a very interesting, intimate and in my opinion poignant look at the candidate.  Oh and the pictures are awesome!

Below are some of my favourite bits:

What strikes me as inarguable is that Hillary is today a more resonant, consequential, and potent figure than she has ever been before. No longer merely a political persona, she has been elevated to a rarefied plane in our cultural consciousness. With her back against the wall, she both found her groove and let loose her raging id, turning herself into a character at once awful and wonderful, confounding and inspiring--thus enlarging herself to the point where she became iconic. She is bigger now than any woman in the country. Certainly, she is bigger than her husband. And although in the end she may wind up being dwarfed by Obama, for the moment she is something he is not: fully, poignantly human.

It was Clinton's lack of faith in her political chops that caused her to be so deeply reliant on her chief strategist, Mark Penn. Penn, after all, had helped her win her Senate seat in 2000 when many said that it was impossible, just as he'd aided her husband in securing reelection in 1996 in less-than-promising circumstances. Penn was convinced that Hillary had to run as the candidate of strength; that she should focus relentlessly on her ruggedness and résumé, on her ready-from-day-one-ness. He argued strenuously that the most significant hurdle she would have to surmount was the doubt that a woman was capable of being commander-in-chief. Clinton came to agree, and spent more than a year talking of little else.

Hillary's weaknesses on the stump would have been problematic on their own. But they were exacerbated by the strategy that Penn had concocted for her. It was conventional, safe, inherently conservative, and not obviously wrong. It played to what he and many others, including Bill Clinton, perceived as Hillary's advantages. As the architects of her campaign, they believed they were designing a well-appointed estate in which the candidate would be comfortable--but instead it turned out to be a prison, where the iron bars were the leaden rhetoric of "35 years of experience, "ready to lead," yadda yadda yadda. And although it took Hillary some time to realize that she'd allowed herself to be thus incarcerated, realize it she eventually did. The jailbreak she staged came too late to save her from defeat. But not too late to keep her from emerging as a hell of a politician.

By now, as you'd imagine, Hillary's staff has grown accustomed to outbursts from WJC exquisitely timed to wreak maximum havoc with HRC's plans. But when I wander backstage, I find her people in a blue funk. "It's the last day of his wife's campaign, and he couldn't keep a lid on his emotions for her sake," says one aide. "How much more narcissistic can you get?" I ask how Hillary will handle it. "She used to get upset, but at this point, it's been so bad for so long, I think her attitude is, like, Whatever."

Would that be enough for Hillary? It's possible--but not likely. It's now 36 years since Clinton, while she was working in Texas on George McGovern's campaign, was told by her husband's future chief of staff, Betsey Wright, that she might have what it took to be the country's first female president. Dreams held that long are dreams that die hard, especially if they're held as fiercely and tenaciously as Hillary has always held the ambitions that propel her forward. The endless, brutal, wrenching campaign of 2008 would have wrecked a lesser woman. Hillary tells me she feels just fine: "Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Spoken like a true Clinton.

Maybe I don't get out much - but I found this piece to be incredibly revealing.  Thoughts?