Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago

From Ben Smith at Politico.

Obama moves DNC operations to Chicago

In a major shakeup at the Democratic National Committee -- and a departure from tradition -- large parts of the committee's operations are relocating to Chicago to be fully integrated with the Obama campaign.

The DNC's political department, housed in Washington, D.C., will be dramatically rebuilt, with staffers offered a choice of moving to Chicago, joining state operations, or staying in Washington, DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney said.

But the power will clearly be shifting to a centralized Chicago hub.

The DNC's key role in coordinating political operations with state parties is expected to largely be taken over and overseen by Obama's senior staff in Chicago, state party officials said.

"This is part of the implementation of the plans Paul [Tewes] discussed last week with the state party chairs," Finney said. "As part of the efforts to fully integrate DNC operations with the Obama campaign here in Washington, in Chicago and in the states, political, field and constituency operations are moving to Chicago to work in the Obama headquarters. The goal is to consolidate these efforts into one operation and effectively drive one national strategy."

People familiar with the plan said that state party staffers paid for under Howard Dean's 50 State Program would be shifted to working for the presidential campaign, at least in targeted battleground states.

The move reflects Obama's desire to maintain an unusually streamlined campaign, as well as his swift and complete takeover of a Democratic Party that isn't always known for its unity. The move may also save the campaign money, as the Obama campaign can use DNC salaries and staff to pay for elements of its organizing campaign and avoid some of the duplication that has often dogged presidential efforts.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 608/Obama_moves_DNC_operations_to_Chicag o.html

Makes perfect sense to me since those Chicago people know how to run a political op better and more honestly than anyone.  I know all the loyalists here will rave about this great move but I ask you one thing.

Are you scared yet?



Display:


Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 12)

Scared of what?  retaking the White House in November?


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 01:57:41 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.60 / 15)

How about, scared of funneling millions of dollars of contributions through a notoriously corrupt political machine? Chicago politics are as dirty as they come.

This combined with shutting down donations to any progressive organizations that don't go through the Obama campaign...well, it's worrying, to say the least.

How can you not see that?


by OtherLisa on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 01:59:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

What are you talking about?

I can donate to any progressive organization I want to.

And no one donates to progressive organizations through the DNC.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:00:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 3)

Obama is not part of the Daley machine.


by NewOaklandDem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:01:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.50 / 8)

Really?  lol


by Tolstoy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:03:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 8)

Daley certainly backs him now (everyone loves a winner!), but not in 2004, when he first ran for Senate.  The machine supported Hynes.

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=5 954


by NewOaklandDem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

(with hands over ears) NANANANANANANA!!!!  I can't hear you!


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:07:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.71 / 7)

Some of these deadenders get more pathetic by the day.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:22:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Yep.  I've gone from punching pillows, to all out giggle-fests.


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:25:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.75 / 4)

I don't take them very seriously. Great for laughs though! Hampster has a McCain/Clinton petition drive that has 32 signatures (see downthread)! LOL! In the Obama Baby Mama Fox tape Michelle Malkin ( !!!!) all but says Larry Johnson is a lunatic. This is their leader. You can't make this stuff up.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:36:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

I know, I posted the link.  ;)


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:38:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where are the heavy duty trolls (2.00 / 4)

when you need a good dustup?

This latest batch came out of the oven half baked.

Larry C. Johnson? Quit polishing that Ka-Bar, Larry and get your rapidly widening ass in gear.

Ambassador Joe?? Calling your Excellency!

Susan Hu????  We know you're lurking.

Can't even get Alegre to come back with a list of demands for a groveling apology for the innumerable sins committed by all and sundry.

:^(


by ReillyDiefenbach on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:48:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

when you say deadenders I picture you are rummie and shooter.

Could we please stop?


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:43:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

Tolstoy,

Serious question:  What are you still doing here?  Almost every comment that you make now seems very trollish.  

I understand that you're still angry, but do you think that you're helping anything, (other than McCain), with your behavior?


Obama/Adam West or Bruce Campbell or Lucy Lawless '08
by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:18:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

It's really funny to me that Obama is being accused of being part of the Daley machine. I volunteered early on for Obama's Senate run--I was from his district and had read his book (remaindered at Powell's!), and was thrilled to try and get my wonkish professorial state senator to Washington. Little did I know...

Of course, everyone told me that he had absolutely no chance, because the Daley machine hated him, and was backing Comptroller Dan Hynes. For that matter, Bobby Rush (still offended by Obama trying to unseat him in the House earlier) backed an African-American woman (Diane Washington) purely as a spoiler to try and split the South Side vote. In that earlier House campaign, Daley reportedly swung his support behind Rush--who is a constant thorn in his side and generally loathed by the Mayor--simply because he saw Obama as the only long-term threat to his continued mayordom, and wanted to cut Obama off before he got started.

By the way, on election day I was living in Dan Hynes' home ward--and Obama won there. That felt good...

To recap: Obama is a politician from Chicago. He is not a Chicago-style politician.


by tomchaps on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:38:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

How is moving the DNC operations to Chicago = "funneling millions of dollars of contributions through a notoriously corrupt political machine"?

Your hatred of Obama is blinding you.


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:01:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.17 / 23)

Well, your blind worship isn't doing wonders for your analytical skills.


by OtherLisa on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:06:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

I asked you a question, which you have failed to answer?  And blind worship?  What do you base this ridiculous assertion on?  Probably your superior analytical skills....

I supported Biden and Richardson before I settled on Obama after they dropped out.


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:08:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is there a machine that isn't? (2.00 / 1)

Where should we relocate it?

Louisiana?
Pennsylvania?
Boston?

Chicago can't be much worse than Washington.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

iooh! ooh! West Virginia! (2.00 / 1)

... the nation's most corrupt gov't.


His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?
by RisingTide on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:53:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a machine that isn't? (none / 0)

Minnesota, eh?

Those Lutherans are an honest bunch.


by zizzybalubah on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:10:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

True enough (none / 0)

Minnesota government is pretty clean.  In the rare cases that someone is corrupt, they're caught, oughted, pointed at, and made a joke of.

Any Obama operation here will have the advantage of being within rock-throwing distance of the Republican convention.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:39:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Because Washington, where it's currently located, is not notoriously corrupt.  haha


John McCain defends Bush's Iraq strategy.
by recusancy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:43:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

Although I agree this is a dramatic change and Chicago does have its reputation, how would keeping it in DC avoid the same issues of concern? The Presidential nominee always becomes the one in charge of the Democratic Party. Could you explain how the Obama campaign is "shutting down" donations to progressive organizations. Wouldn't people still have the right to donate directly to whatever progressive cause they wanted to?


Change Before It's Too Late
by Jeter on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:53:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

Where do you live?


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 10:18:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

One thing might be that they are scared the Lobbyists, mudslinging reporters and cronies in Washington won't have direct access to the campaign.

Another thing is that the Republicans might be scared because they are actually following through and going to fight this campaign hard.


by MarvinMouse on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:11:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

Scared?
The only one who should be scared is McCain.
His last hope was a large rift in the Democratic Party....that did not happen, will not happen, and he knows he's doomed.
I almost feel badly for him.
by Kysen on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:48:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

 I would think that since Obama beat Hillary, that he should make mince-meat out of the fwendly Senator McBush. Certainly Hillary is a more capable politician than John. But I digress.


by xdem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 10:24:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Now if he had out-sourced it to India a question or two would be in order. But this, what's the issue really?


by zerosumgame on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 09:51:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 9)

Oh FFS quit the lame stereotype about Chicago. You make it sound like the instant people set foot within the city limits they turn evil and corrupt.


by animated on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 01:59:06 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 10)

Well, it's true. I've been evil and corrupt since I moved to Chicago. I'm even more evil and corrupt when I sit in the bleachers of Wrigley Field, a place where it is apparently impossible for the Cubs to lose!!!


unapologetic Obama supporter
by dantes on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:24:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

Cubbies look pretty good this year...


by NewOaklandDem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:27:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 4)

This could be the year they lose to the Red Sox in the World Series!

What? You get to break the Billy Goat Curse by having a World Series, I get to continue my reign of smug superiority.


by TCQuad on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:43:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Until Soriano got hurt... (none / 0)

It's going to be tough to win the division with Soriano on the bench for the summer.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:20:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 9)

I am totally not in favor of this.  The DNC and democratic party is made up of lots groups with differing opinions.  This says the party is BO.

david


by giusd on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 01:59:14 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 7)

Tell it to every past nominee, Democrat or Republican. They always tie their folks to the DNC or RNC. Obama is just being more efficient and saving money for the party.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:02:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The party's leader IS BO (2.00 / 2)

Illinoisans will be a huge part of his administration, as Texans were to Bush, Arkansans for Clinton, Californians for Reagan, etc.

I'm sure Hillary would surround herself with New Yorkers and Arkansans if it were her.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:36:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Your first clue could have been when he sent someone in to run the day-to-day operations.  Pretty typical stuff.  This only affects the political staff, and if you're running a 50-state campaign, you probably want everyone on the same page.  Change, in this case, may actually mean changing the way things are done.


by niksder on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:21:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He's changed things less than most (none / 0)

He has changed this less than most.  He has left the head (Dean) in place, hasn't made wholesale changes, will retain many of the same overall strategies (which would not be the case if HRC had won since the DLC has very different ideas than the Dean 50 state strategy advocates).  He isn't firing anyone (they can remain working in DC, go to a state group or go to Chicago).  This allows message control, reduces redundancies and takes the DNC out of the DC bubble.


McCain = Iraq. John McCain = overturn Roe.
by PantsB on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:20:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 7)

Very smart.

I remember when Bill Clinton had his 1992 campaign based in Little Rock. That really helped his campaign team stay focused, away from the DC bubble.

This is even better since so many airports connect to Chicago.

BTW, I read the other day that the Obama campaign doesn't reimburse campaign staff for cab fares from O'Hare. They are expected to take the train to the city.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 01:59:54 PM EST

BC did not relocate the DNC (2.00 / 4)

he just located his campaign headquarters.

There are still state congressional and senate races to run, and Obama wants to run them out of Chicago.


by catfish2 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:08:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: BC did not relocate the DNC (2.00 / 7)

Read up fish. They get run out of the local offices for the most part.


John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.
by Travis Stark on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:14:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: BC did not relocate the DNC (2.00 / 2)

As I read it, state/local stuff is going to stay local. This is changing things up so that the DNC national staff is fully integrated with the campaign.


by Falsehood on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:55:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 3)

I am not worried or scared - this means he wants to win.  I think that Clinton would've done the same thing, excpet if would've been in NY or PA or AR.  Efficiency is good.  


by NewOaklandDem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:00:16 PM EST

Clinton would've done the same thing except (2.00 / 4)

she would have fired Howard Dean and replaced him with a DLC toady.


Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.
by Freespeechzone on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:02:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you mean like carville? ;-P (2.00 / 1)


His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?
by RisingTide on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:57:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you mean like carville? ;-P (none / 0)

Or his wife, perhaps.


Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.
by Freespeechzone on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 06:57:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

Makes sense to me. Obama can run the part that relates to his campaign and Dean can run the part he has been since becoming chair.


Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.
by Freespeechzone on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:00:44 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.87 / 8)

If you think Dean is running anything, you're delusional.  Team Obama began taking over the DNC weeks ago.  They let Howard keep the title.  That's all.


by Tolstoy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:06:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

We're so glad to have the inside story.


by ReillyDiefenbach on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:53:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

Not really. Think about how similar the two's strategies were. Yes, Obama is in charge now, but that doesn't mean Dean lack all authority.


by Falsehood on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:56:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yawn (2.00 / 10)

go tell Flowbee about it I am sure he can read some books and find a conspiracy theory to propagate...


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:00:55 PM EST

Re: Yawn (2.00 / 3)

Maybe they'll be a secret tape of staffers packing their offices to move to Chicago!


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:02:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I know (2.00 / 4)

that Larry would be all over that.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:12:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

I'm scared, but not about that.


by pomology on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:02:41 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 6)

You know what I am scared of?  Peole like this: http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discu ssion/showthread.php?t=16358


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:06:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 5)

These are folks who, before the internet, would be mumbling and handing out wadded handbills to people coming out of the subway.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:08:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 4)

That is exactly what I'm scared of. People like that and that they will force this country and the world to put up with John McCain's horrible policies.

Although, I do know somebody working to get EU citizenship based on the outcome of this election. Of course, that's if McCain should win.


by pomology on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:15:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

Don't worry. There are not as many as the net makes them appear. And they are so incredibly delusional - For example, there was a diary over at noquarter today about how Obama can't possibly win Hispanics, yet every recent poll has Obama around 25 points up over McCain among Hispanics.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:17:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I've never visited Noquarter (2.00 / 1)

What are their stated goals?  Are they pro-McCain, or simply anti-Obama?   And now that Hillary Clinton is out of the race, they can't really be pro-Clinton?  She's not an option.  Unless they are pushing for Obama's defeat as a tactical move to position Clinton for 2012.   Confusing.


by activatedbybush on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:39:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pro-insane. (2.00 / 2)


by grass on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:59:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I've never visited Noquarter (2.00 / 2)

Their pro-Clinton-ness morphed into a hatred of Obama, such that their dislike of him outweighed their support of her.

See: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 608/U_of_Iowa_Students_for_Hillary_CoCha irs_endorse_McCain_McKinney.html

It's not about what she stood for for these folks. Its about their dislike of him.

Those with the other balance have, for the most part, shifted.


by Falsehood on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:59:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I've never visited Noquarter (2.00 / 2)

I find what those students wrote sad, but since they haven't been through a tough nomination fight before, I guess they don't know that the norm is to let go and to unify behind the nominee.

I hope HRC reaches out to people like them on a personal level to talk to them about why McCain is dangerous for America.

As for the noquarter types, I don't know what they want. I've been visiting there a bit lately and they are very strange and frightening and often racist, calling Obama a "mongrel," asking if he ever dated white women and how to publicize it if they had, calling Obama and his supporters "savages."  It's hard to imagine that most of them ever supported Clinton but it sure looks like they really hate Obama.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:08:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No Quarter is the clearing house (1.50 / 2)

for everything anti-Obama. Texasdarlin and alegre are frequent diarists there if that gives you any idea.


by 79blondini on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I haven't seen the diarists you (none / 0)

mention writing racist or blindly hateful posts.  

It sounds like a completely destructive place, so much so that I wonder if it's not actually backed by the Republican party.

I have no interest in visiting.


by activatedbybush on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:20:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

The depressing thing about that page is that the people are advocating not participating, not helping anyone but themselves, not really fighting for a cause. Instead sulking like Achilles and letting life happen to them.
by patooker on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:29:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, because DC is much better (2.00 / 8)

You got nothing.

Next.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:06:53 PM EST

A very radical move (1.28 / 7)

Very extreme.


by catfish2 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:09:00 PM EST

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 3)

More extreme then this diarists proclamation, on this very site, of his LOVE for pornography? However does one combine that with his support for feminist causes?????


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:20:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (none / 0)

You have brought the pornography thing up before.  What is that all about?


by JustJennifer on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:24:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 3)

Ask hampster, he's the one who supports feminists and yet supports an industry that degrades and dehumanizes women, so maybe he'll answer how that is possible if you ask.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:33:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 3)

Uh, saying someone who likes pornography can't be for women's rights is a bit of a stretch.  What about women who like pornography?  


by JustJennifer on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:41:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 2)

So you support an industry that dehumanizes and degrades women? Tell me how does that further the womens movement?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:51:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 2)

It's merely your opinion that the pornography industry degrades women, not a universal truth.  Not only do many women use and enjoy it, as said above, but many feminists support its production, as it at least has the potential to ultimately empower and enrich the women involved.  A large number of pornographic actresses are now extremely wealthy individuals in control of publishing empires.  

That's not to say that there are aspects of the industry, especially historically, that are quite chauvinistic.  But to paint all people who support porn as anti-woman is oversimplifying and displays ignorance of feminist history.  

Wikipedia has a decent article on Sex-Positive Feminism.

Also the "dehumanizes and degrades women" line is the exact one the Catholic Church uses to oppose pornography.  If that's your angle, fine, but you might be more honest about it.


by semiquaver on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:26:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Always gives me a chuckle (2.00 / 2)

People who think of modern feminism as prudish and anti-sex are fun to watch when they're introduced to the fact that there are now feminist and bonafide lesbian porn producers.

We've come a long way, baby, indeed.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:51:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Always gives me a chuckle (none / 0)

We've come a long way

And they show that on some of the videos, right?

(Sorry, couldn't resist)


by synchronicity on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 11:53:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 1)

You do realize that main stream advertising does the same thing, on a much larger scale?

Do you advocate for the complete banning and censorship of pornography?


by JustJennifer on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:29:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 2)

Actually, I remember the dust-up with Hampster on pornography....

And I remember the comment he made that was along the lines of, you don't like it because you're ugly to venecian.

I stopped taking Hampster seriously a bit before that, but now I find the rants a little sad and pathetic because of that post.  


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:26:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not all feminists are in the Andrea Dworkin (2.00 / 1)

camp on pornography, dude.


by bobdoleisevil on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:12:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not all feminists are in the Andrea Dworkin (none / 0)

So then maybe you would like to explain how the porno industry furthers the feminist movement???????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:46:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow (none / 0)

Pretty sheltered, are we?

It's an industry where the women get paid ten times as much as the men.  You do the math.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:53:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wow (none / 0)

So because they get paid more then men, to degrade and dehumanize themselves, it should be viewed as a progressive industry, and women should seek out employment opportunites there?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:01:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not my place to tell women (or men) (none / 0)

what they should do for a living, unless it harms other people (undecided about themselves).


by bobdoleisevil on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:10:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I won't lie (2.00 / 1)

There are some pretty crappy porn producers out there... but there are a number who don't treat women badly and, quite frankly, there's nothing inherently sexist about the industry... or else there wouldn't be porn studios, for example, run by lesbians for lesbians (I used to frequent a magazine shop that had "On Our Backs" magazine which was definitely not designed for the appreciation of straight men...

The United States lags behind the rest of the world in tolerance of sex.  The sooner we stop letting fundamentalists decide what's taboo and what isn't, the sooner industries like that become more egalitarian.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:11:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I won't lie (none / 0)

Maybe it's that you haven't actually met any of these women in the industry, to actually see the damage. I live in Los Angeles and have met a number of these women. The vast majority are addicted to drugs and suffer from severe low self esteem. I recently met Jenna Jameson and have never before come in contact with someone, who when you looked in their eyes, they looked like they had no soul.
It's not about how producers "treat" them, it's about how they end up treating themselves, and how they get treated by men outside of the business. I agree with you about how sexually repressed we are here in the U.S., but the porn industry is doing nothing to help in that regard.
"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:46:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not just there. (none / 0)

If you don't think there's porn made in every part of the country, you're deluding yourself.  I met a girl at a nightclub that turned out to be a stripper and porn actress, and she's led a pretty decent life since then.

There are others who get sucked into drugs and drama and live sad lives, but that could be said of many different people and careers.

Look at Asia Carrera, who now runs a multimillion dollar media empire, or Katie Morgan, with her 165 IQ and cheerful attitude towards her craft:

"We're not all nympho sluts on drugs," she insists. "For the most part, we're pretty normal."

(from that seedy organization known as HBO: http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/katiemo rgan/synopsis.html )


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:09:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's not just there. (none / 0)

So for every 3 that are actually able to make something of themselves, how many end up addicts? Again, I live in the CAPITAL of the porn industry and see and have contact with these women all the time. I know it might make you feel better to think that this industry in some way improves the lives of women, but sadly it does not.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:17:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not disagreeing with you (none / 0)

There's no doubt that porn's a bad influence; that's because Americans look at it as a sleazy pseudo-legal black sheep industry that is, regardless, our dirty little secret obsession.

It's problematic for the same reason that prostitution or drugs are problematic: the laws and societal norms prohibit honest regulation and reform.

We're never going to get rid of porn.  That much is clear.  If we can stop plugging our ears, closing our eyes, and jumping up and down when confronted by the issue, maybe we can work out a plan to fix the worst excesses.  I've thought for a long time that adult film actors need a strong union to look out for their rights and concerns.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:34:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm not disagreeing with you (none / 0)

I don't think the problems can be fixed by a union protecting their rights. I think you're right that most of the problems occur because of the hang ups the U.S. has with sex, and even more so hang ups that women have with sex. I think it's women who in fact do more harm to other women with they way they judge and demean women in the industry. Which is not to say that men aren't doing the same thing, after all they can and do, end up objectifying women as "things"  meant only to pleasure them. But the way things stand now this industry is poison to furthering equality in America.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 06:27:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hey Venician (none / 0)

Have I ever told you that I like porn?

Seriously.  

I also have a thing for strippers, especially the ones in Vegas last year who told me they had registered to vote for the first time in their lives, so they could vote for Hillary.  Three of those women told me the same thing.  They thought Hillary was the first candidate to ever care about their children.  It was for their children, not themselves.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 06:46:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hey Venician (2.00 / 1)

No,  I read your comment, itwas "I LOVE Porn" and what's wrong with porn, they have to eat too.

And so now you think it's a noble profession because they're doing it for their children? Of course they're trying to raise their children, what with all the dead beat dads in the U.S., but did you ever stop to think what it must be like for a child to grow up with a mother who works in the sex industry? How hard must it be for them? What kind of stigma do they grow up with, all so you can get your rocks off?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:00:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hate to break this to you (2.00 / 2)

But many people see nothing wrong with working in the "Sex" industry.  I grew up with a friend, girl not girl friend, who couldn't wait to be making a ton of money for 10 years then investing the money in a bar in a resort area.  She loved sex and thought it funny that people wanted to pay her for it.

Just maybe everyone does not hold to your so-called morals.  Some people even abort unborn children which I strongly don't agree with.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:07:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hate to break this to you (2.00 / 1)

It has nothing to do with my morals. I believe a women should be free to use her body in what ever way she sees fit. The problem lies in very few women in this country, can manage working in the sex industry and not become psycologically damaged. And the industry ends up objectifying and degarding women. But I get it that you don't want to have to think about the repercussions of what your addiction does to other humans and only want what you want.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:14:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

quote (2.00 / 2)

 But I get it that you don't want to have to think about the repercussions of what your addiction does to other humans and only want what you want.

Sounds about how I feel about Obama supporters.
I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:22:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: quote (1.00 / 1)

Hey if you're not here to support the Democractic nominee for President, then please return to Noquarter whence you came. Maybe there you can explain how porn benefits the feminist movement.
Ciao
"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:45:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not all feminists are in the Andrea Dworkin (2.00 / 1)

How many industries do anything to further the feminist movement??  Can you name any?  One?  


by JustJennifer on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 05:17:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (2.00 / 4)

Catfish, you forgot to ad the snark tag to your entry.  You may want to do that so some don't get tricked into thinking you were serious.


United we stand, divided we fall.
by mefeck on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:21:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A very radical move (1.66 / 3)

Look at this persons comment history.

That was not snark.

I'm sure we'll see backpeddling though.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:24:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (1.70 / 10)

Umm... HELL YEAH!


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:13:54 PM EST

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 9)

Is this snark? Serious question.


by animated on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:17:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 4)

Sorry, been waiting to do that for awhile:D


by animated on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:17:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 7)

Are you really back? Please share more of your deep insights.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:18:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

The propoganda has stopped flowing from the campaign so I'm afraid "HELL YEAH" is about as good as it's going to get.



John McCain - That third Bush term you always dreamed of.
by Didion on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 03:25:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She was begged back (none / 0)

She was begged back, remember.  We admired her dedication to the other candidate and said we'd be really really nice if she would pwetty pwease support the nominee.


by mikeinsf on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 08:19:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 7)

What so now you're back. Did you post on hillary bloggers for all of your ilk to come back and rec. this diary?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:18:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

Myabe you shouldnt stand in judgement of others Until you apologize for your "irrogent white votes" post.  Until then i think you should stop standing in judgement of others.

david


by giusd on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:33:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

David,

What's an "irrogent?"  I can't find it anywhere.  Is it a soft, or hard "G?"


Obama/Adam West or Bruce Campbell or Lucy Lawless '08
by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:28:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this snark? (1.50 / 4)

Serious question.


by spunkmeyer on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:19:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this snark? (1.42 / 7)

Serious question.


by 1010101 on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:20:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 2)

Alegre,

Nice to see you are back.

david


by giusd on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:33:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hi Alegre (none / 0)

I'm glad to see you blogging here again.  Waiting for a new big post from you!


by activatedbybush on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:40:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

Welcome back, alegre.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:59:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're back??? (none / 0)

Where have you been?  We've so missed your diaries.


by ReillyDiefenbach on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:59:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

And what is it exaclty that you're afraid of.

Oh wait.  You won't answer will you?


by Same As It Ever Was on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:23:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (none / 0)

OMG Alegre!  Big HUGS!

How have you been doing? We've all missed you and your wisdom!


by HillarysDesire on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:29:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Alegre, When are you going to apologize?


Obama/Adam West or Bruce Campbell or Lucy Lawless '08
by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 04:30:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 1)

Is this snark?

Serious question.


Impeach Bush and Cheney.
by urban shocker on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 07:11:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What happened Alegra? (1.00 / 2)

Did you show up here by mistake? This site is about electing Democrats and Obama. This not your favorite site Flowbee (larry johnson's no quarter cesspool).

You're over there now, and at HIllary is 44, continuing your screaming, deranged, unbalanced blabberings about how much you hate Obama. You don't belong here with your vicious hatred. Neither does the sad, lonley, pathetic hampster. Just living for hate. Wow.

I notice that you can't post a coherent thought now that you can't go to hilliaryhub and copy and paste your screams. You're reduced to "ummmm, hell yeah. " As to be expected.

Sad. You must be so bitter and angry every day of your life.
I feel so sorry for you.

I really need to change my sig line but am too lazy too now that we've all been given anesty again.


I support our nominee President Barack Obama - and the Admins can't stand me, so I can't rec or rate. This is very mean if you were to ask me.
by TheFullBerry on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 08:18:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this snark? (none / 0)

Serious question.


by Skaje on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 01:17:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Moving DNC Operations to Chicago (2.00 / 7)

Only on MyRNC could this move be complained about.

I had once thought these No Quarter-lite posts would stop once we had a Democratic nominee, but then again these threads are probably for the best.  If posters on this site are going to criticize a move that has been universally lauded by the party and its supporters - not because they're "bought" but because it's just SMART - then they are obviously deeply concerned about the "Democrat" Party.

A crisp, streamlined, consolidated operation that is on message is a good thing.  For Democrats, that is.


by Pat Flatley on Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 02:14:15 PM EST

50-State Strategy. (1.50 / 8)

This is what a leader does when he not only wants to win the top of the ballot, but also all the downballot races as well.

If you're looking for something to pout about, may I suggest: