First he supports FISA.

Next he throws Wesley Clark under the bus for making a true statement about John McCain's military inexperience.

Now he wants to provide even more funding for unconstitutional "faith based" initiatives

Did Obama suddenly switch parties?

Why can't we have a democrat that's a real democrat?
Obama hasn't even made it to the convention and he's already starting to sound like Joe Lieberman.

No matter who you support in this race and who you have donated money to. Chances are there is a lobbyist, PAC or special interest that has given more cash to your candidate than you did. Take a look at the top donors, especially in the Obama and Clinton campaigns. Do you think that Goldman Sacks, Big Pharma and Excelon energy have the same interests that you do? When your candidate gets elected whose calls do think they will be taking?

Clearly not yours...

...so here's what might be a novel idea.

Let's buy back our democracy.

Target the most embarrassing and corporate donor on your candidate's top donor list. It is easy to find out.
Find the one you'd least like to be influencing your candidate.

Bring together a group in the blogs or in the real world and set a goal to raise the same amount of money for your candidate on the condition that they give back the money they got from that compromising donor.

Notify the campaigns of your intentions and get a pledge from the campaign to give back to corporate and K Street sleezebags what your group pledges to  raise. Maybe even raise the stakes.

Make it an event, like a PBS telethon. Use all the digital tools at your disposal to make it a mega community event. Call the press and tell them what you are doing.

It will be good press for your chosen candidate's campaign...and it will give you the opportunity to buy back YOUR candidate.

Don't just give money, buy influence!!!

They used to talk about "Clinton Fatigue." At least the press did "inside the beltway." Meanwhile in the rest of the country there was no such thing. Bill Clinton remained engaged and popular to the last minutes of his term. But for the press, there was just no news once they ran out the Blue Dress storyline. The country felt relatively good and upbeat. There were problems still to be dealt with, but there was no "fatique" among the regular folk.

Now we are about to enter the final year of the Bush presidency. You have to think about what those inside the beltway should be saying. Is there Bush Fatigue? With juicy stories of massive impropriety still unfolding, the press is just starting to do their job instead of just waving the flag for the White House inhabitant. So they are not tired of the story this time. If there is Bush Fatigue it is only because the press may have to put in some hours outside of the waterholes and can't just phone it in.

But selling cable news and news weaklies (sic) requires some branding. So it's time for the press to have a handle, a brand, for the final phase of the Bush misadministration. They need a marketing phrase on par with "Clinton Fatigue" to grace Newsweek and Time as well as Sunday talk shows.

For the creatively challenged at these publications I offer a suggestion. A new nomenclature in which to clad the Bush White House and brand press coverage...
...and frankly it is natural unifying theme.

"THE MISERY PRESIDENCY"

It is so perfect - a unifying marketing theme that covers it all.
The death and destruction in Iraq, the health of WTC recovery workers, Katrina and the lack of recovery program, the exporting of jobs and reluctance to provide health care for kids. Misery. Misery. Everywhere the Bush presiduncey touched there is misery.

So cable news and news magazines I'm ready to see you rise to the challenge and fill in the blank pages utilizing the afore mentioned "brand" as an organizing principle. It is so easy that you won't have to reach much. There is always something new. So really you don't need to suffer from the dreaded "fatigue" over the next year. This is easy work.

As I engage with people all over the nation I find more and more regular people feeling that neither Hillary nor Obama really represent dramatic change. Sure there is novelty in ethnicity and gender, but once you get beyond that the story of change starts to fade. Rather than me go on about it, here's a great piece that I just picked up on the net.

http://www.getunderground.com/undergroun d/features/article.cfm?Article_ID=2267