Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Asian Tribune: "Why is Obama the favorite of the rich and powerful Democrats?"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:50 PM
Original message
Asian Tribune: "Why is Obama the favorite of the rich and powerful Democrats?"
Some international perspective, showing wariness of Obama's relative inexperience and listing some of the practical reasons why a Hillary Clinton presidency would be welcome overseas:



US Election: Why is Barack Obama the favourite of rich and powerful Democrats?

Mon, 2008-02-11 04:01
By Raj Gonsalkorale


...Barack Obama, if elected the President, will obviously not make the mistakes that George W Bush has made, but his campaign rhetoric so far has produced little evidence that he is aware of the value of alliances. It is ironic that he is campaigning against the influence of power blocks locally while some of his biggest supporters as per recent US polls are the well to do people in many of the States where primaries have been held, who would very likely want him to serve their interests if he wins the Presidency. It is a well known fact that the rich and the powerful operate through very influential lobbyists, and although Barack Obama has gone hoarse telling his faithful that he will not be a captive of such Washington lobbyists, he will find it impossible to ignore those rich and the powerful lobbyists when they call on him to repay the support and funding they have given him to get to the White House. It is more than likely that these influential people think that they could deal more easily with an inexperienced person rather than a tough, experienced campaigner like Hillary Clinton, as they know that rhetoric is good to win elections but is short-lived and disappears after the first rush of euphoria after an election. It is said that Nelson Mandela had promised washing machines to every household just prior to his first election and that people had lined up in shops to get their washing machines soon after the election, and naturally had to go away quite disappointed! Although the US electorate has moved very far from washing machines, Barack Obama’s rhetoric and motherhood statements about change could be equally short-lived.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand has a large support base amongst the not so rich and the disadvantaged and her campaign financing has suffered on account of this support considering their inability to plough in large injections of funding for her campaign. She is also on record as saying she will listen to those poor and disadvantaged people who support her and at the same time she will be pragmatic about the environment she and all other Presidential aspirants live in when introducing change. This support must surely be quite irksome to the upper classes that would rankle at the thought of a real people’s President who would introduce measures to help the poor and the disadvantaged.

There is something facetious about Barack Obama and if he does go to win the Democratic nomination and the Presidency, American people should expect a different man in Barack Obama once he is President, not the messiah he is painting himself to be, the one who is promising to bring in “change” in bucket loads, the one who would bring all US troops from Iraq within an year, and who would single handedly change the mindset of Americans about how they perceive the rest of the world.

For the rest of the world, they need an American President who understands and values alliances, partnerships, who understands other power blocks like China, India, the EU, Russia and the emerging powers of some South American countries, and the need to work in harmony with them. They need a President who will talk tough with Israel and take a strong lead in bringing a settlement to the Palestinian conflict. Whatever issues that may impact on the US electorate, efficient and effective management of international issues will have a major impact on the American people as well as the people in the rest of the world. George W Bush has spent more than 3 trillion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan and left the US in severe debt, resulting in major economic crises in his country, and as a result of that, creating negative economic waves throughout the world. Barack Obama may win the Presidency, but it is unlikely that he will be able to be the President that the world would prefer to have compared to Hillary Clinton. The world is certain to be better served by her sound pragmatism and her experience, and by those experienced people who surround her, including her husband. The American people too will reap the benefits of sound international policy and practice by such a Commander in Chief....

More: http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/9575
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. Only one word is needed:
Offshoring.

It'll happen either way, but true globalization is about expansion. Not migration.

At least, in theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. commentary from the Asian Tribune??? wow strong argument
that is some hard hitting shit you got there
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. The opinions of others who are affected by our policies doesn't matter?
I don't know the reputation of the Asian Tribune, but if their credentials are solid, then their opinion counts, too, as would, for example, an Italian or Greek or Austrian or German or Brazilian, et cetera, newspaper editorial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. it is a far out stretch to find something that lends credence to your opinion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. But you do or do not know the reputation of Asian Tribune for veracity?
That is all I am asking. There are some excellent journalistic sources such as Asian Times, so I don't discount editorials simply because they ostensibly come from overseas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
39. It would be a bit more honest if it reflected the fact that Obama has overwhelming support
from Democrats abroad as well as the international community, largely on the strength of his anti-war position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elspeth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. Actually, I take foreign papers a little more seriously because our press is so compromised
Everything must be read with a grain of salt, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Darn - I knew I must be rich and powerful. Where's the cash? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. This article is pretty much crap
Suggest that Obama is controlled by the rich and powerful because they vote for him and Hillary for the working class yet ignores where he is getting his campaign contributions. Hillary has gotten more $$$ from lobbyists than anyone running now, Obama is getting it from normal people across the country. BIG difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. crap? this is hard hitting news from the biggest paper in the world
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. Obama isn't accepting money from federal lobbyists.
If you want to give him one of the small donations which are powering his campaign, I suggest doing it though MoveOn.org so that the campaign will know your donation is from a liberal:
www.moveon.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
33. Really? Last time I looked, Obama was taking millions from lobbyists.
Obama is taking contributions from the same groups that Hillary is taking contributions from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Name one federal lobbyist which Obama took money from in his presidential campaign,
Edited on Sun Feb-10-08 10:18 PM by Eric J in MN
...or show me one legitimate article saying he's taking money from federal lobbyists for his presidential campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. He's taking millions from corporate lobbyists - who cares if they are federal or not?
I agree with the stands that Obama is taking against lobbying money, but he's still taking their money. In this climate, he has to. It's impossible to mount a viable candidacy without taking lobbyists money.

Ok, he's not taking *federal* lobbyists' money. So what.

Please stop with the "Obama is pure as the driven snow while Hillary is an evil Republican Lite." They're both right-leaning centrists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. The difference is that federal lobbyists try to change federal policy,
...which a president is involved in, while state lobbyists try to change state policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. He's taking millions from corporate lobbyists - who cares if they are federal or not?
I agree with the stands that Obama is taking against lobbying money, but he's still taking their money. In this climate, he has to. It's impossible to mount a viable candidacy without taking lobbyists money.

Ok, he's not taking *federal* lobbyists' money. So what.

Please stop with the "Obama is pure as the driven snow while Hillary is an evil Republican Lite." They're both right-leaning centrists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
10. What are you going to do if a posting limit is put in place?
Good heavens. As to this post, it's exceptionally absurd piffle. Raj Gonsalkorale is not likely to sway many voters here with his "logic." He's just another partisan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rene Donating Member (758 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. Au contraire. I'm not voting for anyone I never heard of 12 months ago.
This article truly makes sense.
Obama's got nothing of a voting record per se, because he's voted PRESENT 120 times --- no decisions/no committment to a yes or no vote.
He's got major absentee problems from the committees on.
He's a tool for the nuclear industry.
Not my choice for President of the United States of America.
He's certainly no JFK or RJK. He absolutely is another Jim Jones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
11. Have NONE of you ever heard of JACKSON STEPHENS? GHWBUSH? They MADE Clintons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #11
29. Full run, or two-week low-load test?
IIRC, after the test run, she opposed it.

Interesting source material -- all Naderite. Al Gore's the heavy. Blast form the past!

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #29
40. Al Gore's NOT the heavy - WTI was used to spin against Gore, but it was Clinton's doing
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 09:21 AM by blm
in order to protect Jackson Stephens. Gore got the backlash - undeservedly. Clinton's protection of WTI likely lost Gore Ohio in 2000 and definitely caused the Greens to turn on Gore.

The SAME Jackson Stephens who staked WalMart.

The same Jackson Stephens who brought BCCI into this country.

The same Jackson Stephens who was tight with GHWBush for decades.

The same Jackson Stephens who bankrolled Bill Clinton's political career in Arkansas AND his primary campaign.

The same Jackson Stephens who escaped further scrutiny when Bill Clinton deep-sixed all of BCCI's outstanding matters throughout the 90s.

Let me guess - just coincidence to the Fascist Wannabe wing of the Democratic Party?

Ever think of siding with the Anti-corruption, open government wing of the Democratic party? We could use some help in the trenches from citizens who want open government that respects them for a change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dcindian Donating Member (881 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
12. Asia?
Isn't that where the Clintons sent all of our jobs? No wonder they like her so much
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. You may have put your finger on it.
They're protecting somebody's cash cow, that's obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
13. Probably because they have access to better information
Edited on Sun Feb-10-08 06:02 PM by dailykoff
than shitty propaganda like this. The more you make the better information you can afford.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. p.s. I'm pretty sure this is why Hilly is hanging onto her Latino vote.
Commercial Latino media outlets have been flogging her pretty relentlessly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
16. Let me check..
.... how much to I care what Asia wants?

Ummmmm.....


Freaking not at all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. channelling donald rumsfeld
...is not attractive.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Asia...
... and particularly China, love the Clintons because Bill gave them free and total access to our markets for NOTHING.

Fuck them, and fuck the Clintons.

And channeling drooling morons isn't too swift either jerkwad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. it's one thing to have concerns about US industries
It's another to write garbage like that. I apologize for saying you're channelling Rumsfeld. You're not. You're channelling Pat Buchanan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. Favored Nation status
despite China's abysmal human rights record.

China will own us in 10 years.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. And after 10 years..
... these stupid FUCKS here still don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
20. How ironic
That a newspaper that caters to the Asian elites complains that Obama attracts elites. The Asian Tribune has zero credibility in commenting on Democratic politics; they should go back to glorifying George Bush like they did in the old days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
21. I don't know a thing about this paper, but they sure have their facts screwed up.
As I understand it, it's Clinton who has had the big donors, and Obama has matched and exceeded her fundraising--going wild in January--with mostly small donations.

Clinton, the champion of the working class? Come on. She's neither a "woman of the people" nor particularly compassionate toward the poor. And if her trade policies are anything like Bill's, they are not only sans labor and environmental protections, they favor outsourcing zillions of American jobs to cheap labor markets in faraway foreign lands.

Obama, a tool of the rich? Well, aside from the fact that there is hardly an American politician who isn't a tool of the rich (I'm finding it hard to think of 3), I don't see anything that stands out about Obama to make him more of a tool of the rich than anybody else, and certainly than H. Clinton.

Odd piece. I'm wondering who their "readership" is. Asian fatcats getting rich off the slave labor of young women? Yeah, they'd go for a Clinton. NAFTA, drool, drool. But why would they try to sell Clinton to Asian businessmen as the "working class" candidate? Dunno.

-----------------------

Here's a much better Asian news/commentary source. Asia Times. They tend to get their facts right. They write in depth. They have good writers--many of them. They often cover the U.S.--with excellent articles. And they also really and truly give you the other side of the world perspective. Big world out there--which doesn't look at us as the center of it.

Here's a sampling on U.S.topics

CAMPAIGN OUTSIDER
Super Sunday spills to Super Tuesday 2/6/08
By Muhammad Cohen
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JB06Aa01.html

THE BEAR'S LAIR
The trillion dollar deficit 2/6/08
By Martin Hutchinson
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JB06Dj01.html

THE ROAD TO HYPERINFLATION, Part 2 1/30/08
A failure of central banking
By Henry C K Liu
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JA30Dj02.html

Prejudice, blame and the US way 2/6/09
By Julian Delasantellis
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JB06Dj03.html

This last one, by Delasantellis, looks especially interesting. I just scanned it. Asia Times at its best--about the U.S. economy, political debate, economists, rich vs. poor--well written, literate. I've got to quote this from it:

Delasantellis

"Since it undoubtedly pays better to be perceived as a friend of finance capital than its foe, more numerous are those on the other side of the trenches, the rightists, the conservatives, those tasked with defending the increasingly tenuous ideological redoubt that, thanks to the tax cuts of Ronald Reagan and George W Bush, everything is essentially all right with the US economy.

"These include the aforementioned Arthur Laffer, a man who, now three decades after becoming known as the Godfather of supply side economics, gives every indication by his appearance on TV that Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Grey was an eerie premonition about him. Others are Larry Kudlow of CNBC and the National Review, Amity Shales of the Council on Foreign Relations, Jerry Bowyer - the man I previously described as the person on Fox News who equated universal healthcare coverage with terrorism (The terror of state health care Asia Times Online, July 24, 2007) - various sundry and readily interchangeable editorial page writers from the Wall Street Journal, and now, after a lifetime of 60-second or less B-movie roles, low-rated and thus subsequently cancelled cable game shows and television commercials, Ben Stein.

"If you happen to miss the debates that flare regularly on US afternoon cable TV (like, if you have a job or something), I will now summarize what they sounds like.

"RIGHTIST: 'The economy is great.' LEFTIST: 'No, it stinks.'" (MORE)

----------

I'm salivating to read the rest!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. Here's a quote from one of Asia Times' articles I cited above...
THE BEAR'S LAIR
The trillion dollar deficit 2/6/08
By Martin Hutchinson

"It was revealed last Thursday that the George W Bush administration intends to present a budget showing deficits of US$400 billion for each of the fiscal years to October 2008 and October 2009, at a time when we are close to an economic peak. Given a normal recession, that means the next "trough" deficit will probably be over $1 trillion. The final report card can now be written on the fiscal management of the Bush administration, the primarily Republican Congresses since 2001 and the Federal Reserve chairmen of the period. One's only regret in writing it is that no grade lower than F has been discovered." (MORE)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JB06Dj01.html

-------------------

The Delasantellis article cited above is a bit thick in parts, but also has come hilarious mockery of Bushitic economics. Well worth wading through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #21
37. I saw the same thing here
Obama gave a speech to about 5,000 people for $25 per person. Clinton had a $500 a plate dinner.

That last article was kinda interesting, and reminds me again of how the rightwing always claimed the economy was great under Clinton, and how I always resented that since I was working as a temp. But isn't it kinda silly to claim that there will even be a "left" side on cable TV?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raffi Ella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
23. yet another great article from you,thanks.
Not even Jesus Christ himself could live up to the Hype Obama has created around himself.Should he somehow win the nomination over Hillary Clinton his followers will be in for a surprse when the Great One does nothing Great at All.

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sloppyjoe25s Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. Hillary strength with dems...
...who make less than $50K is quite real.

But it's probably more a matter of name recognition and comfort with Clinton "Brand" - and the fact that her campaign secured alot of local party bosses early -- rather than some deep belief on their part that she will "help them more"

They were not particularly helped by the Clinton years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
27. He said...
he would let Bush's tax "cuts" expire. He's playing softball right there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
32. I searched around a bit on the Asia Tribune web site, and could find out nothing
about them. Their "About Us" statement has no facts, and sounds vaguely like some Rev. Moon and "world government" stuff I've read. Other 'news' article are very poorly written, or poorly translated. The writers don't seem to have any concept of what "news" is, nor much academic or journalistic skill in separating out facts from the writers' opinions. (I guessed they'd make good AP reporters.) The first sentence of their "About Us": "Asian Tribune is the conscience of humanity."

About Us: Asia Tribune
http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/14

On the home page, at the top it says, "A Newspaper Published by World Institute for Asian Studies," with a link, so I went there, searching for...funders, names, address, country, anything. Their "About Us" is equally uninformative--and many of their pages (conferences, conference reports) are blank.

About Us: World Institute for Asian Studies
http://www.worldinstituteforasianstudies.org/about.html

I'm beginning to think they are CIA front or something--except that the CIA generally does better work than this.

I wouldn't cite this nebulous "internet publication" as a serious source of news or opinion for my candidate, nor as in any way typical of Asian opinion. I think it's a very suspect source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iktomiwicasa Donating Member (942 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
41. I live in the poorest
county in the U.S. Support here amongst my people is overwhelmingly in favor of Barack Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC