As another diary pointed out, the Clinton campaign is going "nuclear" or at least negative on Barack Obama for taking money from a former member of the Weather Underground

The donation, all of $200 was from William Ayers.  An admitted former member of the Weather Underground

But who is William Ayers now?

I write this to defend the career of a great Democratic senator, Hillary Clinton.  

Does anyone get the feeling that Mark Penn sounds a lot like the Pied Piper right now?  Standing there this morning with thousand dollar bills hanging out of the pockets of his cheap suit and cheese danish smeared on his tie.

"NO NO it's GONNA WORK IT'S GONNA WORK.  Just gotta stick with it!!!"

NCD = NON CANDIDATE DIARY
The Anti-reproductive rights coalition, headed in large part by soon-to-be-ex-governor Matt Blunt, is working hard to make choices even harder to come by in the state of Missiouri.

As The Kansas City Star's report on MO House Bill 1625 indicates:

Legislation presented to a House panel last week would classify emergency contraception as an abortion-inducing medication, contrary to the definition used by the Food and Drug Administration.

Steve Clemons of Huffington Post Blog writes that an Al Gore endorsement of Barack Obama is rumored:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

A well-placed spouse of a Clinton campaign insider just told me that a rumor is spreading like wild fire that Al Gore is going to endorse Barack Obama.  My source emphasizes that this is rumor and may just be paranoia and hyperventilation of the campaign, but it's important to know that this rumor is out there. Another source of mine inside Obamaland has told me that they have been working very hard to secure Gore's public support and trying numerous avenues to "encourage" him.

But should Gore endorse at all?  I'm of two minds.  Follow me below the fold, please.

It is eloquently written in an earlier diary, to paraphrase, that it is time to stand up and question the factual basis for opinion in our culture.

I agree, we have a duty to each other to question how an opinion is formed.  To encourage each other (as Americans, not just party members) to formulate opinion based on research and understanding.

However, we’re about to embark on a long journey into a General Election.  And when we do, we should also be very careful of what we reject.  Because often we reject opinion because WE THINK it’s “just emotional baggage.”   And often we forget that one person’s emotional baggage is another person’s lifetime of experience.

I've heard and read people say that to argue against Hillary Clinton based on the dynasty argument is sexist.  Was it sexist when we rejected George W. Bush's presidential dynasty when we did it in 2000, or 2004?  

What makes it sexist now?

I normally can't stand Pat Buchanan.  But last night he made a point that my father made months ago.  I agreed with my dad (a hardcore democract) then and I have to agree with Buchanan now.

Perhaps the most important vote any senator can make, is whether or not to authorize an action that will get people killed.  Far worse than anything to do with funding or oversight -- the vote on a war resolution has the possible impact on human lives.

Hillary Clinton can't say her vote for the Iraq War Resolution was a mistake. Because if she does she's then saying that in the biggest vote in her senate career (not a very long one) she got it wrong.

I live just a couple of blocks South of a big Funeral Home and cemetery here in Kansas City, Missouri.  About an hour west, in Topeka Kansas is noted midwestern hate-monger, Fred Phelps.

I've become very disenchanted with the political process in our country.  Mostly I believe -- REGARDLESS OF PARTY -- campaigning has become about money - who has the most to run an election, compensate high-paid political consultants, pay for high-cost ads, etc.?  

While I can ultimately come to grips with this reality, more dire is that I've become extremely skeptical of the election process.  Every time I go to a poll I wonder if my vote will really be accurately counted.  But today I came upon what I think might be a helpful solution to my plight.

Now more than ever, political skeptics should volunteer as poll workers and election judges.

It occurs to me that the recent consolidation and concentration of media ownership further pushes America to in the direction of propaganda peddling.  Many call ours an information society.  But is it really information?

Based upon Goebbels' Principles of Propaganda by Leonard W. Doob, published in Public Opinion and Propaganda; A Book of Readings edited for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues.

Current examples are in bold:

1. Propagandist must have access to intellijence concerning events and public opinion.

See also; administration data mining, telco immunity, Giuliani's company.

I should preface this by saying I’m voting for Kucinich in the primary.  But, if HIllary Clinton gets the nomination, it will be the first time in my life I’ve not voted for a Democrat for President.  I won’t vote for a Republican, but I cannot, in good concious, vote for Hillary Clinton.  She has her campaign staff to think for it.  After eight years of ugly UGLY behavior from the administration, the LAST thing I will do is vote for someone who - based on their behavior towards their fellow democrats - looks to be no better.

Dear Senator McCaskill:

I voted for you in 2006.   I do not agree with the MoveOn.Org ad in the NY Times criticizing General Petraeus.  I think it was pointless.  Nonetheless, it was their right to run it.  I'm very disappointed, however, that you chose to vote for a resolution condemning it.  I thought that the person I voted for could be trusted to spend their time upholding the constitution.  

I just wanted you to know that since you can't seem to find better things to do with your time - and our tax dollars - than condemning someone's constitutionally-guaranteed speech, I won't be voting for your re-election.  

For the past few months we progressives have been taking the conservative and media bait.  We've been characterizing our desire for equal access to marriage as "gay marriage."  The reality we shouldn't be talking about a specific type of marriage we are talking about equal access to marriage for any American.  

If Bush were re-elected, I seriously think it will jeopardize the Republican party for the next 16-20 years.  The backlash of a second Bush term has been talked about in Conservative publications ("The American Conservative" among them) and I think it's legit.  

If Bush is elected as president for a second term, the Republican party will face serious problems in 08, and beyond with younger voters and diminished support for more socially liberal Repub. candidates.  If Bush wins, it will NOT be because of Iraq, or Terrorism, or fiscal policy.  If Bush wins it will be because of one thing:  the socially conservative, religious right turnout swung the election in his direction.  

Conservative Christians will have decided this election if Bush wins and the backlash will be felt for decades.