JK new E-mail: (Which I am still not getting.)

[TayTay]

Dear XXXXX

Dick Cheney will be there. So will Rick Santorum...Phyllis Schlafly...Newt Gingrich...Ann Coulter...Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman...and Grover Norquist, a figure at the center of the Jack Abramoff Republican lobbying scandal.

Tomorrow, at 9:30 a.m., the gavel will drop on CPAC 2006 - the Conservative Political Action Conference. Soon a parade of Bush administration and Republican Party leaders will trek over to kiss the rings of the right-wing political operatives who work so hard to push the reckless Bush agenda through Congress - and of the right-wing agitators that stop at nothing to keep Bush-backing candidates in power.

They've got a lot to talk about. Because from excusing the incompetence of the Katrina response...to denying the illegality of warrantless domestic spying...to condoning the corruption of the DeLay/Abramoff wing of the GOP...to disguising Bush policy failures on everything from Iraq to Social Security to the botched prescription drug program...

...Republican and right-wing activists have been getting a lot of practice trying to hide their incompetence, corruption and failures from the American people.

While they plot strategy, here's what we're going to do: raise the money we need to break their grip on power and drive them from office.

Contribute Today to Break Their Grip on Power

Our Break Their Grip on Power campaign will mobilize our grassroots network and deliver a forceful message in neighborhoods across America.

We will use newspaper ads, radio ads and grassroots "spread the message" initiatives to define the issues of 2006 and defend Democrats who tell the truth about the real needs of the American people.

We'll break their grip on power by changing the course of close campaigns at a moment's notice acting -- three million people strong -- to deliver unprecedented levels of grassroots help to support our candidates.

We'll break their grip on power by pulling our candidates through to victory with our Fight Back Fund springing into action whenever one of our candidates comes under attack.

And, as Election Day approaches, we'll break their grip on power by getting out the vote for change by using the full power of the Internet to drive Democratic and independent voters to the polls - bringing to our side even many lifelong Republicans who feel betrayed by a Republican Party that long ago lost its moorings.

Contribute Today to Break Their Grip on Power

When I joined courageous Democrats in the filibuster against the Alito nomination, I told you it was important to stand up for what we believe in, win or lose. Today, I want to remind you that, when it comes to the 2006 elections, we can't afford to lose. If we want to break their grip on power, winning is the only option.

Let's get it done, starting today and never turning back until the last vote is counted 270 days from now.

Sincerely,

John Kerry


Dear David Wade: I love you. These e-mails are getting better and better. Sigh! Just tell it like it is and with panache.

[TayTay]

1. Nice one from Barbara Boxer as well

Dear TayTay,

Tell President Bush to come clean about Jack Abramoff -- email your Senators now!

During last week's State of the Union address, President Bush spoke for 51 minutes on a wide range of subjects -- from his misguided war in Iraq to his failed energy policy.

Yet in that entire 5,369 word speech, the President saw fit to dedicate only 60 words to a subject that has infected his entire Administration as well as the GOP Congressional leadership: the Republican culture of corruption permeating Washington, DC.

Here's all that President Bush said about his Party's ethical lapses last week:

A hopeful society expects elected officials to uphold the public trust. Honorable people in both parties are working on reforms to strengthen the ethical standards of Washington -- I support your efforts. Each of us has made a pledge to be worthy of public responsibility -- and that is a pledge we must never forget, never dismiss, and never betray.

No apologies for Scooter Libby's obstruction of justice and perjury indictments related to the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. No acknowledgment of Tom DeLay's ongoing criminal prosecution for money laundering. No mention of the procurement head of Bush's own budget office who was marched out in handcuffs. No discussion of GOP Congressman Duke Cunningham's resignation after pleading guilty to bribery charges.

And certainly no reference to Jack Abramoff, the corrupt Republican lobbyist and major GOP donor who has already pled guilty to five criminal felony counts, with more likely on the way.

Tell President Bush to come clean about Jack Abramoff -- urge your Senators to support my amendment today!

In fact, now President Bush says that he doesn't even remember Jack Abramoff -- despite Abramoff raising more than $100,000 for Bush's 2004 re-election and serving as a member of the Bush Administration Transition Team in 2001 -- not to mention the more than 200 contacts that Abramoff's lobbying team had with Bush Administration officials in the first 10 months of 2001.

That simply doesn't pass the smell test. The American people deserve to know the truth about the extent of Jack Abramoff's relationship with the Bush Administration, and how that may have corrupted policy decisions.

That's why I have co-sponsored a "sense of the Senate" amendment, along with my colleagues John Kerry and Frank Lautenberg, urging the White House to provide the American people with a thorough account of the meetings the President, his staff, and senior executive branch officials had with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

It's time for President Bush to answer our questions about Jack Abramoff. Urge your Senators to support my amendment today!

Despite the President's rhetoric in his State of the Union address, the White House's refusal to fully disclose information about their dealings with Jack Abramoff simply exacerbates the problem.

After all, it's not George Bush's White House -- it's the people's White House -- and it is long past time they got an unobstructed look into their own government. If the President has nothing to hide, there shouldn't be a problem.

Tell President Bush to come clean about Jack Abramoff now!

Thanks so much for your continued support.


In Friendship,


Barbara Boxer

[beachmom]

2. I had to giggle at the end of your post

When you typed Dear David Wade: I love you, I first thought that that was part of JK's e-mail!

Anyway, good e-mail. I REALLY think we can do well in the '06 election. We need to fight back and raise the rhetoric ante!

[TayTay]

3. I'll set it off further with bolding or something.

But I am in deep like with David Wade. Him writes real good.

[Vektor]

14. I can't wait to meet him.

From what I hear, he's a male me.

Which HAS to be hot. :-)

Seriously. He seems awesome.

[beachmom]

15. He was the cute co-star in that Pelosi "Political Tourist" movie

right? They joked that he looked like a Republican. Anyway, agreed he's done some great statements and I just love the loyalty thing, with him still being with the Senator even after the loss.

[Vektor]

16. I've heard great things about him from so many...

And yes, he definitely seems to be a good, loyal guy.

[TayTay]

19. I did find a pic

I am getting so old. He looks to be about 22, right out of school.



Sen. John F. Kerry, left, and spokesman David Wade on his campaign plane with reporters,
with whom the candidate has grown more cautious.

[_dynamicdems]

4. I didn't get this e-mail either. I was getting them all prior to

this one, however. Strange.

[whometense]

5. I didn't get it yet,

but they never come together. I just got Boxer's; I'm sure JK's will arrive sometime this afternoon.

Ooops - just got it.

[_dynamicdems]

6. I got Boxer's too. I'll e-mail my senators for Sen. Boxer, but I'm going

to save my donation for JK when his e-mail arrives.

[ProSense]

7. Great. Thanks. I got the one from Sen. Boxer and

and from Sen. Kennedy:

Dear xxxx

Last week, Samuel Alito became a Supreme Court Justice, adding a strong believer in overreaching executive power to the Nation's highest court. Instead of using the opportunity to unite Americans behind a Justice who would reflect the mainstream values of Americans, President Bush caved in to the extreme right-wing of his party and gave them the kind of nominee they wanted -- after they'd flexed their right-wing muscle by forcing Harriet Miers to withdraw her nomination.

But we have another outrage to deal with. Under the cloak of national security, President Bush has ordered a secret surveillance program that spies on American citizens without any judicial oversight. That's against a specific law that Congress passed. I know, because I was one of its principal authors in 1978. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act established a special court to consider requests for such surveillance in national security cases.

The President should have worked with Congress to amend the law, not ignore it. I believe that his decision to go around the law actually weakens our national security instead of strengthening it. By creating such legal uncertainty, it opens the door for lawsuits against front line workers in our government who are trying to protect us. It even opens up lawsuits against phone companies that allow wiretaps.

These sensitive national security issues should not be thrashed out in open court. We know from our history that our nation is strongest when we come together for the sake of our national security. Thirty years ago, we had a Republican President and a Republican Attorney General who understood this. They worked with Congress to develop laws to respond to the grave threat of nuclear attack from the Soviet Union. They understood to successfully protect our security the rule of law must be clear.

President Bush's own words in 2004 show that he understood the purpose of the law. As he said, "any time that you hear the United States talking about a wiretap, it requires a court order ... Nothing has changed -- when we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so."

Yet the Administration did just the opposite in ordering secret surveillance. He ignored the law, ordered the surveillance, and now is trying to justify it by claiming he had "inherent" power as commander-in-chief to do it.

Sandra Day O'Connor disagreed. She said "a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens." No wonder the right wing wanted to replace her with a Justice like Samuel Alito.

As this latest fight goes on in Congress, we will have to do our best to uphold the basic principle that no President can put himself above the law and when he tries to do so he puts the nation at risk. And in the weeks and months ahead, we must remain committed to fighting any and all abuses of Presidential power that threaten our liberties and our security.

Thank you again for your continuing support.

Sincerely,



But nothing from JK.

[TayTay]

8. Perhaps it's a megaphone problem.

Ours just isn't big enough. (Ahm, I promised myself I wasn't going to say that. Damn.) I feel unloved. I can't get e-mail. I think I'm going to have a hissy fit.

[ProSense]

9. I know, and what's worse

is that I sent a note via the contact page at the PAC site, and still nothing. :-(

[TayTay]

10. Send your e-mail to Vek

She might be able to help. She is collecting this info per someone over there and helping with the 'quality checks' that every site needs to do, every so often.

[ProSense]

11. Thanks Tay. n/t

[globalvillage]

26. Check your PM

[ProSense]

17. Um...

The Democrats' Tiny Megaphone
By Robert Parry
February 9, 2006

Sen. John Kerry says a key reason that the Democratic political message seems so muddled to many Americans is that Democrats have a smaller “megaphone” than the one wielded by the Republicans and their conservative allies.

Snip...

While Kerry’s observation is undeniably correct – when one considers Fox News, right-wing talk radio, well-paid columnists and magazine racks weighted down by conservative publications – the overarching question remains why Democrats and progressives haven’t invested more in getting a competitive megaphone.

Wealthy progressives and liberal foundations can match up almost dollar for dollar with conservative funders. But the American Left has adopted largely a laissez-faire attitude toward media infrastructure, while the Right has applied almost socialistic values to sustain even unprofitable media ventures.

Snip...

So, while Kerry has a point in noting that a key weakness of the Democrats is the size of their megaphone, the more pertinent question is: What is America’s liberal community going to do about it?

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/020806.html

[sandnsea]

12. I don't have it yet either

Also not sure the PAC emails come from David. A couple of women run the PAC, I think, names escape me at the moment.

[Mass]

13. Just got it - Subject line is "You're not invited"

These emails are better and better, I agree.

[globalvillage]

18. I guess so.

I got pretty excited for a min, when I saw an e-mail in my inbox, but dispair set in when I realized the subject line was "you're invited" (to meet with my Rep and Common Cause which I can't do because it's a telcom meeting), and not the "you're not invited" e-mail from Sen Kerry.
So, if you don't mind, Tay, I will join you as one of the lonely and forgotten former recipients of the Senator's e-mail.
*Sigh*, guess I'll reply to the other...

[WildEyedLiberal]

20. Could it be your spam filter?

:shrug:

[globalvillage]

21. No, I checked.

And I'm getting Boxer, Kennedy...
I guess he just likes you guys better.

[WildEyedLiberal]

22. No, don't be sad!

PM me your email, and let me enter it in... I don't know, maybe it hates your computer.

[globalvillage]

23. Thank you, WEL.

Vek said she would check it out.
But thank you. I appreciate the offer.
:pals:

[WildEyedLiberal]

24. You know JK loves you

:pals: How could he not?

[globalvillage]

25. I know he does.

But thanks for saying that.

I choose to believe he's either saving all mine for Valentine's day or it's the work of a jealous staffer.

I'll narrow down my suspicions on the 15th.

:rofl:

[Island Blue]

27. I didn't get this one either.

I got one the other day (about Alito), but alas, I've been forgotten today. At least I know I'm in good company.

[karynnj]

28. I got it - it's from friends of John Kerry

[TayTay]

29. I'm off the list.

No alito or this one or anything. Sigh! I am forgotten and unloved. (Giant dramatic soliloquy deleted cuz I'm getting tired.)

Oh woe is me, so deprived. And the writing has been so snappy lately.

[globalvillage]

30. Jilted. Damn.

*sigh*
No sense waiting by the e-mail box.


I like not only to be loved, but to be told I am loved.
George Eliot

[TayTay]

31. Yeah, what she said.

Unloved, unable to spell and a wallflower. I need ice cream now. Sniff.

[globalvillage]

32. A deadly banishment

*plunges dagger through broken heart*

[karynnj]

33. This is not good that at least 2 of you didn't get it

It sounds like they're having problems managing so many emails.

[wisteria]

34. Add my husband and me to that list of former receivers who now

are not receiving his e-mails. I was notified by Vector though and gave her our e-mails. Hopefully that will take care of it. I wanted to be counted again as one of his online supporters.