KUCINICH CAMPAIGN PRESS RELEASE

'Stunning admission' by Clinton, Obama, Edwards is tantamount to a permanent occupation of Iraq, Kucinich says

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Friday, September 28, 2007

DOVER - The stunning admission by Democratic frontrunners Clinton, Obama, and Edwards that they might keep U.S. troops in Iraq beyond 2013 "is tantamount to an announcement of a permanent occupation that could cost U.S. taxpayers $5 trillion and bankrupt any opportunity to address health care reform, education, jobs, or any other domestic policy initiatives," Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.

In remarks prepared for a speech in New Hampshire tonight, Kucinich is expected to challenge the credibility, motives, and fitness of the Democratic frontrunners to serve as President "when they either voted to go to war or voted to continue the war. They took us into this war, and, with every vote for continued funding, they have kept us there. Now, they're telling us we may be there forever, diverting trillions of dollars from desperate domestic needs to financing an illegal, immoral, and endless war. It is time to end this war, and it is time to expose their hypocrisy."

Kucinich noted that "Senators Clinton and Edwards were among the most outspoken advocates in 2002 for giving President Bush the authorization he wanted to invade and occupy Iraq. And, until he announced his candidacy this year, Senator Obama supported the war every time he voted to continue funding it. Whatever they say on the campaign trail, they have all voted in support of this war - repeatedly."

"It is absolutely astonishing that these candidates have the audacity to portray themselves as pro-peace and anti-war when their statements, their actions, and their votes reveal just the opposite. They must be held accountable and answerable for their roles in this illegal, immoral, and disastrous war, and, that's what I intend to do."

Kucinich will be the keynote speaker tonight (Friday) at the North Grafton County Democratic Party Annual John F Kennedy Dinner at the Peabody Lodge in Franconia, NH. Tomorrow, he will be in Durham, NH for an afternoon "Conversation/Dialogue" with students and faculty at the University of New Hampshire.

Kucinich is the only Democratic Presidential candidate who voted against the war authorization in 2002 and every supplemental funding appropriation since then.

In October 2002, eight days before the House and Senate approved the war-authorization resolution, Kucinich released his own analysis of intelligence and information that accurately predicted subsequent events, discoveries, and consequences. It pointed out that there was no connection between Iraq and the events of 9/11 and that there was no credible evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. He led the fight in the House against the war and rallied more than 120 other Congressman to oppose the resolution. Kucinich's analysis also argued:

* "This language is so broad that it would allow the President to order an attack against Iraq even when there is no material threat to the United States."

* "A unilateral attack on Iraq by the United States will cause instability and chaos in the region and sow the seeds of future conflicts all over the world."

"Unilateral action against Iraq will cost the United States the support of the world community, adversely affecting the war on terrorism."

In an interview today, Kucinich said, "Any candidate willing to continue risking the lives of our brave men and women in uniform, continue destroying the lives of millions and innocent Iraqis, and continue embracing the corrupt foreign policy that led us into Iraq and keeps us there is not fit to serve as President of the United States of America."

Posted by Michael McCord at 06:53 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Key political states weigh January dates to start presidential nominating season

By MIKE GLOVER
Associated Press Writer

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Iowans could still be humming Auld Lang Syne as they gather to choose among presidential candidates, thanks to decisions by other states to move up their election dates.
Party leaders in Iowa are edging toward holding the state’s leadoff caucuses as early as Jan. 3, although they’ll hold off on a decision until New Hampshire selects a date for the nation’s first primary.
“There are only a couple of days that work, and we don’t want to go into December,” said Iowa GOP head Chuck Laudner, who mentioned Jan. 3, 4 and 5 as dates being considered.
Iowa and New Hampshire have made clear they won’t stand pat as states such as Michigan and Florida move up their election dates, but don’t expect a decision soon. New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner has the sole power to schedule his state’s primary, and he’s not talking.
“I’m not any closer,” Gardner said Thursday. “I can’t (pick a date) at the moment because I don’t know.”
Iowa and New Hampshire party officials have been hearing that line for months.
“Tightly lipped, isn’t he?” noted Fergus Cullen, New Hampshire’s Republican chairman.
Party officials in the two states have frequently discussed election scenarios, and most think Gardner will opt for Jan. 8 as long as Iowa doesn’t move to mid-December. That would give New Hampshire a week of breathing room before Michigan, one of several states that have ignored demands by both national parties that they not schedule contests before Feb. 5.
But some in New Hampshire speculate that Gardner could move the primary into December — perhaps Dec. 18 — to ensure plenty of time before the contests to follow. Iowa is committed to being first, but officials clearly shudder at the thought of a December caucus. As Iowa Gov. Chet Culver put it, “In this state, we’re still going to have Christmas.”
On Friday, Gardner said he was moving up the filing period for the presidential primary three weeks to Oct. 15. Candidates will be able to file through Nov. 2. Gardner said he would try to have the ballots printed by Nov. 9 and ready to be distributed to town clerks.
“We look to have absentee ballots to be available 30 days before all our elections,” he said.
The filing period had been set for Nov. 5-23, but Gardner said he might need the extra time.
“It would allow the date of the primary to be earlier,” he said. He added,“I have not made a decision about setting the date. I just want to be prepared because this would give us some additional flexibility.”
For now, Iowa’s caucus date remains Jan. 14, eight days before the date when national Democrats want New Hampshire to hold its primary. But it is all-but-certain that the preferred calendar is wishful thinking.
The longer Gardner delays his decision, the less likely that other states would leapfrog in front of New Hampshire. But the uncertainty is creating headaches in Iowa, where the parties must arrange the caucuses, find spots to hold neighborhood meetings in each of the state’s 1,784 precincts, and get the word out to activists.
Iowa Democratic Party spokeswoman Carrie Giddins said the wait is frustrating, but the parties will make do.
“No matter when that date is chosen, we will run very serious, very correct caucuses,” Giddens said.
In his 31 years as New Hampshire’s secretary of state, Gardner has waited as late as December before selecting a primary date. But New Hampshire state Rep. Jim Splaine, who has worked with Gardner on primary issues since 1980, said he expects an announcement in November.
Analyst Jennifer Donahue at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., said she’s sure Gardner is talking with Iowa officials about a date that could work for both states.
“Iowa isn’t trying to make it harder for us,” Donahue said. “If anything, they’re trying to make it easier for us. They always have.”
Although Iowa law requires the caucuses to be held “at least eight days earlier” than any other contest, the rule has been ignored in past elections.
In 1988, Michigan held a delegate selection process before Iowa, but it got little attention. Later, Alaska held an earlier contest as well.
Brad Anderson, a spokesman for Culver, said the governor is willing to call a quick special legislative session if needed to change that law, but few think that’s necessary.
David Nagle, a former Iowa Democratic Party chairman who largely established the current calendar in 1984, argues it’s a matter of being adamant about the state’s place in the process, even while holding delicate talks with New Hampshire.
As Nagle put it in a memo to party leaders, “If New Hampshire chooses to move in front of us, then we will move again. New Hampshire must understand that if they go in July, we will go in June.”
———

Associated Press writers Philip Elliott and Norma Love in Concord, N.H., contributed to this report.

Posted by Michael McCord at 04:12 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Democratic debate attracts close to 1.5 million viewers, down from recent GOP debate
WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly 1.5 million people tuned in to a televised debate among Democratic presidential candidates Wednesday night in New Hampshire.
It was a better showing than the last Democratic debate in August, but less than the number tuning in for the most recent one involving Republican candidates, held just after Labor Day, according to Nielsen Media Research.
According to Nielsen, a television ratings firm:
—Wednesday’s debate on MSNBC drew more than 1.4 million viewers.
—A Sept. 5 Republican debate on Fox News Channel was seen by 3.2 million.
—An Aug. 8 AFL-CIO forum with Democratic candidates and broadcast by MSNBC drew just 939,000 viewers.
Debate viewership has been around 2 million, but Wednesday night the debate was up against season premiers on the major networks.
The novel CNN-YouTube Democratic debate in July attracted 2.6 million television viewers, a slight drop from the numbers who tuned in for a more traditional exchange in June involving the Democrats. That attracted 2.8 million viewers. In April, a MSNBC televised debate drew 2.3 million.
The White House hopefuls will have more opportunities to debate in October.
Republicans will meet in Dearborn, Mich., on Oct. 9; in Orlando, Fla., on Oct. 21 and in Iowa on Oct. 25. Democrats will meet on Oct. 30 in Philadelphia.

Posted by Michael McCord at 10:20 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Obama says Bush and his unpopularity are great for Democrats
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
Associated Press Writer

PETERBOROUGH (AP) — Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Wednesday that President Bush’s mistakes and unpopularity have been a tremendous boon for him and his Democratic peers.
Obama, appealing to Democratic activists on a southern New Hampshire farm before an evening debate at Dartmouth College, told voters that Bush, the war in Iraq and failures coping with Hurricane Katrina will help Democrats take the White House next year.
“George Bush has been a great advertisement for the Democratic Party,” he said, citing big crowds at campaign events as evidence.
“I admit that part of the reason that people are coming out is because in part they are sick and tired of George Bush and Dick Cheney. They are tired of an administration that treats our Constitution as a nuisance to be avoided. ... They mourned that day, two years ago, when we witnessed our fellow citizens standing on rooftops after a storm without water and without food and without rescue because of an administration that was either incompetent or indifferent to the plight of people in New Orleans.”
Obama, who continues to trail rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in recent polls, acknowledged concerns about his relative lack of Washington experience.
“I am absolutely certain that I may not have some of the experiences that Washington likes, but I guarantee you, I have the experience America needs right now to bring about the change that we’re looking for in this country. That I know,” said Obama, standing under towering pine trees in front of a red-sided barn
It’s a theme the first-term senator emphasizes in ads that started airing in New Hampshire this week. In them, he touts his outside-of-Washington resume.
“There are those in this race who tout their experience working that system as is. But what I have to remind them of is that the system has not been working for us,” Obama said. “There are those who say we just need someone who can play the game better in Washington. What I say is that we need to put an end to the game-playing.”
A stage light caught fire as Obama spoke, giving him an opening for a bit of humor.
“Uh-oh. There’s a light on fire. That’s not good,” he deadpanned. “Do we want to turn it off? Thank you very much. Everything OK? All right, I think we’re OK. We handled that crisis. Absolutely.”

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:41 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Clinton picks up endorsement from bricklayers union
By JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — The International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers endorsed Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday, saying she has the best chance to win the presidential election.
“Hillary Clinton has the strength and experience to deliver the change America needs,” union president John J. Flynn said. “After years of an administration that has turned its back on working families, we need a president whose priorities are our priorities.”
Flynn said the union’s executive council voted unanimously to endorse Clinton and that the New York senator was the clear winner in a poll of their members.
Clinton said that she was honored to get the endorsement.
“In my administration, America’s working families will again have a partner in the White House,” she said.
Founded in 1865, the bricklayers say they are the oldest continuous union in North America and that they represent about 100,000 skilled masonry-trowel tradescraft workers.
This is Clinton’s fifth union endorsement, the largest number of any presidential candidate so far.
Meanwhile, one of the largest municipal jail unions in the country said Monday that it will endorse Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois for president. The endorsement would be Obama’s first from a union.
“Barack Obama is the one candidate who will put an end to the divisiveness in this country so that we can finally achieve greater economic prosperity for the working class and health care coverage for all Americans,” said Norman Seabrook, the president of New York City’s Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association.
The group has about 9,000 active members.
Obama said in the same statement that he looked forward to working with the union as he continued to build his campaign for president.
“It’s an honor to have the endorsement of these men and women who put themselves at risk everyday to serve on the front lines of our nation’s criminal justice system,” he said.
———
Bricklayers union: http://www.bacweb.org/
Corrections officers union: http://www.cobanyc.org/

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:31 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee wins South Carolina group straw poll
By JIM DAVENPORT
Associated Press Writer

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Thursday that Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton isn’t tough enough to be president.
Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., told about 600 conservatives that his Senate colleague showed her lack of fortitude Thursday by voting against a resolution condemning the liberal interest group MoveOn.org for a newspaper ad calling Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, “Gen. Betray Us.”
“My conclusion is that if you’re not tough enough to take on MoveOn.org and their attacks on a decent and honorable member of the United States military, then you can’t be tough enough to be president of the United States,” McCain said.
McCain was among several Republican presidential candidates who spoke to the Palmetto Family Council’s stump and straw poll crowd by telephone. They emphasized the war, family, opposition to gay marriage and ending abortion.
Fred Thompson and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, also spoke by telephone. Mitt Romney sent regrets by video, saying he was out raising money.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who appeared in the flesh, said it was important to be with voters to talk about their issues.
“If we want to end poverty in this country, the best thing to do is to keep strong families and strong marriages together,” he said.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., also attended in person.
Huckabee won the straw poll with 206 votes. Paul finished second with 179 votes, followed by Thompson, a distant third with 43 votes.
The only candidate without a presence at the meeting was former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, whose campaign said he skips events linked to straw polls. The crowd booed his absence.

Posted by Michael McCord at 10:02 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson said Wednesday that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq has contributed to the sectarian violence rather than bringing stability to the war-torn nation.

"There's no question there's tribal and ethnic hatreds," Richardson told The Associated Press. "But when those tribal and ethnic hatreds are fueled by American policy of hostility, then you make the situation worse."

In an hourlong interview with AP editors and reporters, the New Mexico governor argued that all combat and noncombat troops should be removed from Iraq because their presence is only contributing to violence.

"It's not a guarantee of success, my plan, but at least it's stability," Richardson said.

"American foreign policy is being bled dry by the invasion of Iraq," he said.

Posted by Michael McCord at 08:34 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

OBAMA CAMPIGN press release

Obama to Announce Major Middle Class Tax Relief Plan

MANCHESTER — U.S. Senator Barack Obama plans to announce a bold and innovative plan to reform America’s tax code so that it works for the middle class in a speech to the Tax Policy Center today in Washington, DC. Obama’s plan would provide a substantial tax cut for nearly all working Americans, for homeowners, and for low- and middle-income seniors.

Obama will make the case that our current tax code reflects the wrong priorities by rewarding wealth instead of work, and pledge to restore fairness to the tax code to strengthen the American economy.

Obama’s middle class tax relief plan would provide $80-85 billion in tax cuts to America’s workers, seniors and homeowners by:
Cutting taxes for 150 million Americans and their families, allowing them to get a tax cut of up to $1000.
Easing the burden on the middle class by providing a universal homeowner’s tax credit to those who do not itemize their deductions, immediately benefiting 10 million homeowners, the majority of whom make under $50,000 per year.
Eliminating the income tax for any American senior making less than $50,000 per year, eliminating income taxes for about 7 million American seniors.
Simplifying tax filings so millions of Americans can do their taxes in less than 5 minutes.
Obama would pay for his tax reform plan by closing corporate loopholes, cracking down on international tax havens, closing the carried interest loophole, and increasing the dividends and capital gains rate for the top bracket.
The full plan with New Hampshire-specific information can be found HERE.

As Prepared for Delivery:

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama
Tax Fairness for the Middle Class
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Washington, DC

EMBARGOED for Delivery

Yesterday I spoke about the future of the American economy at the NASDAQ. And in many ways, NASDAQ is a symbol of the new economy that’s taking hold – the wealth created; the booms and bubbles; the technology that’s helping to drive growth, and the interconnectedness that now spans the globe.

It’s no secret that a fundamental transformation of our economy is taking place. In books and on balance sheets, at policy institutes and around kitchen tables, people are trying to make sense of where the swift and strong currents of globalization are taking us. What we do know is that Americans are living and working in a rapidly changing economic reality.

This isn’t the first time this has happened. Time and again, the American economy has undergone upheaval – from slave to free; from agriculture to industry; from peace to war-time, and from war-time to peace. And time and again, the American economy has emerged stronger.

The one constant has been the advancement of individual opportunity. There are few principles more basic to our country, and there is none more basic to our economy. We believe that there is a place in the American economy for every American’s dream. And we know that when we extend that dream of opportunity to more Americans, all of us gain.

Americans also know that opportunity doesn’t come easy. You have to work for it.

Here I think of my father-in-law, Fraser Robinson. He raised his two children with his wife Marian in 1960s Chicago. They faced what other African-American families faced at the time – both hidden and overt forms of racism that limited their effort to get ahead. And they faced an additional obstacle. At age 30, Fraser was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. And yet, every day of his life, even when he had to leave an hour earlier in the morning and rely on a walker to get him there, he went to work at the local water filtration plant while Marian stayed home with the children. And on that single salary, Fraser Robinson provided for his family, sending my wife Michelle and her brother Craig to Princeton.

This is an American story that plays out in millions of families each and every day. It is a story that is shared by the caregiver who is up before dawn and the teacher who never misses the bell; by the trader who works late and the janitor on the night shift. It is the story of a society that values work, and of people who work to create a better future for their families.

This story could not exist without a basic social compact in this country. That compact says that if you work hard, your work will be rewarded. That everybody has an opportunity to make a decent living, to raise a family, to give their children the best chance at success, and to look forward to a secure retirement. That people like Fraser and Marian Robinson can give their children the chance to dream bigger, and to reach new horizons.

That social compact is starting to crumble.

In our new economy, there is no shortage of new wealth. But wages are not keeping pace. Workers are more vulnerable to job loss and more worried about retirement. Those Americans fortunate enough to have health care are paying more for it – health care premiums have risen nearly 90% in the last six years. Americans are facing deeper personal debt. From filling up the gas tank to paying for a college education, everything seems to cost more.

This is not just happening by chance. It’s not something we can just chalk up to temporary shocks. It’s happening in part because of the choices we’re making, and the way that we’re making those choices. It’s happening because we’ve gone too far from being a country where we’re all in this together, to a country where everyone’s on their own.

Today, I’m going to focus on one aspect of our economic policy where we need to make different choices. Because nowhere is this shift in our priorities more evident than in our tax policies.

Instead of working to find ways to relieve the burden on the middle class, we’ve developed creative ways to remove the burden from the well-off. Instead of having all of us pay our fair share, we’ve got over $1 trillion worth of loopholes in the corporate tax code.

This isn’t the invisible hand of the market at work. It’s the successful work of special interests. For decades, we’ve seen a successful strategy to ride anti-tax sentiment in this country toward tax cuts that favor wealth, not work. And for decades, we’ve seen the gaps in wealth in this country grow wider, while the costs to working people are greater.

We’ve got a shift in our tax values that disproportionately benefits the wealthiest Americans; corporate carve-outs that serve no national purpose; tax breaks that allow companies to stash their profits overseas; a government that’s paralyzed when dealing with offshore tax haven countries; an overloaded tax code that’s too complicated for ordinary folks to understand, but just complicated enough to work for someone who knows how to work the system.

When big business doesn’t like something in the tax code, they can hire a lobbyist to get it changed, but most working people can’t afford a high-priced lobbyist. Instead of honoring that core American value – opportunity for all – we’ve had a system in Washington where our laws and regulations have carved out opportunities for the few.

The numbers don’t lie. At a time when income inequality is growing sharper, the Bush tax cuts gave the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans a tax cut that was twice as large as the middle class. At a time when Americans are working harder than ever, we are taxing income from work at nearly twice the level that we’re taxing gains for investors.

Talk about this in polite company, and sooner or later you’ll get accused of waging class warfare. As if it’s distasteful to point out that some CEOs make more in ten minutes than a worker makes in ten months. Or, as my friend Warren Buffet put it to me – “If there’s class warfare going on in America, then my class is winning.”

What Warren Buffett knows is what all Americans have to remember – to get through these uncertain times, we have to recognize that we all have a stake in one another’s success. When folks are hurting out there on Main Street, that’s not good for Wall Street. When the changes in our economy are leaving too many people behind, the competitiveness of our country risks falling behind. When that dream of opportunity is denied to too many Americans, then ultimately that pain has a way of trickling up.

We welcome success stories here in America. We admire those who have climbed to the top of the ladder. We just need to be sure that the ladder doesn’t get taken away from the rest of us. We want a system based on fairness – not special favors.

To steer a course through the change that’s taking hold, we have to hold tight to that core principle: that our economy must advance opportunity for all Americans.

My own experience over two decades tells me that when you give people a chance at that opportunity, they will take it. That’s what I found as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where we set up job training programs and after school programs and counseling programs to bring hope to places that had been hurt by change. That’s what I found as a state Senator in Illinois when we created the state Earned Income Tax Credit so we could put $100 million of tax cuts into the pockets of working families. That’s what I’ve been focused on as a United States Senator, as I’ve worked to expand the child tax credit to include children in minimum wage families, and to close loopholes that shift the tax burden on to working people.

And that’s what I’ll do as President. Because when it comes to our economy, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer.

I’ll restore simplicity to the tax code, and fairness for the American middle class. It’s time to stand up to special interest carve outs. I’ll end the preferential treatment that’s built into our tax code by eliminating corporate loopholes and tax breaks. We shouldn’t be distorting our tax code to benefit a few powerful interests – we should be insisting that everyone pays their fair share, and when I’m President, they will.

And it’s time to shed some sunlight not only on companies that abuse the tax code, but also on the secretive offshore tax havens that shelter them. We’ll create a list of countries where tax evaders hide their income and cost America untold billions of dollars every year. We’ll lead the international community to new standards of information sharing. And we’ll penalize companies and individuals who use those havens and illegally evade their tax obligations.

If we’re going to keep that social compact for a new century, we need a tax code that’s fair – a tax code that rewards work and advances opportunity. Every American who is ready to work for their American dream should be able to trust that they have a government that works for them. I’ll keep that trust by cutting taxes for working people, homeowners, and seniors, and by simplifying tax filing for middle class Americans.

First, I’ll give a tax cut to working people.

The American people work longer and harder than the people of any other wealthy nation in the world. But their hours are getting longer and their wages aren’t getting any higher. Their costs are going up, but their economic security is going down.

When a single mom gets her paycheck, that check gets taxed. When she goes to buy groceries, that purchase gets taxed. When she reaches her retirement, her social security benefit gets taxed. Meanwhile, her boss’s investments get taxed at a lower rate, and the corporation she works for has all kinds of loopholes built into the tax code because they’ve got lobbyists in Washington sticking up for their interests.

It’s time for that to change. It’s time for Americans to have a President in the Oval Office who makes decisions based on their interest, not the special interests.

Let’s not forget that even in this era of economic change, our wealth as a nation remains founded on work. I’d reward work by providing an income tax cut of up to $500 per person – or $1,000 for each working family – to offset the payroll tax that they’re already paying. At a time when confidence in the American economy is unsteady, this will give middle class Americans a break, and help them deal with the rising costs of energy, education, and saving for retirement. Under my plan, 150 million Americans – and their families – will get a tax cut. And because this credit would be greater than their income tax bill, my proposal would eliminate all income taxes for 10 million working Americans.

The second thing I’ll do to ease the burden on the middle class is provide a universal homeowners’ tax credit.

If work is how most Americans seek their dream, a home is how many families realize it. A home is a source of stability, a building block for communities, and the most valuable thing that most middle class folks will own. But – as has been made painfully clear through the sub-prime crisis – that source of stability can quickly become the source of economic insecurity. Too many Americans are struggling under the weight of their mortgages. Homeowners need a break.

Today, we have a mortgage interest deduction, but it only goes to people who itemize on their taxes. Like so much in our tax code, this tilts the scales toward the well-off. Only a third of homeowners take advantage of this credit.

I’ll create a mortgage interest credit so that both itemizers and non-itemizers get a break. This will immediately benefit 10 million homeowners in America. The vast majority of these are folks who make under $50,000 per year, who will get a break of 10 percent of their mortgage interest rate. For most middle class families, this will add up to about $500 each year. This credit will also extend a hand to many of the millions of Americans who are stuck in the subprime crisis by giving them some breathing room to refinance or sell their homes.

The third thing I’ll do is provide a progressive tax cut for America’s seniors.

Since the New Deal, we’ve had a basic understanding in America. If you work hard and pay into the system, you’ve earned the right to a secure retirement. But even though they’ve held up their end of the bargain, many seniors are struggling to keep pace with costs. And as so many Americans know, their worry becomes an entire family’s worry.

This strain has been greater since 1993, when taxes on social security benefits were raised. Millions of seniors saw their net benefits go down. They also had to take on the added strain – and sometimes cost – of filing a complicated tax return.

It’s time to give America’s seniors a break. So I’ll give retired folks the same kind of relief I’ll offer to working people. When I’m President, we’ll work to see that no retiree making less than $50,000 each year has to pay income tax. This will eliminate income taxes for about 7 million Americans, at a savings rate of roughly $1,400 each year. And 22 million seniors won’t even have to file a return and hire an expensive tax preparer.

The final part of my plan will be simplifying the process of filing a tax return for all Americans.

The tax code has become far too complex. Deductions and exemptions are built into the system, but ordinary people don’t have the time to figure them out without going to an expert preparer - yet another cost at tax time.

In 2004, the IRS estimated that it took 28 hours for an individual to complete her tax filing. According to the IRS National Taxpayer Advocate, “the most serious problem facing taxpayers today is the complexity of the Internal Revenue Code.” This past year, USA Today had five different professionals add up the tax bill for one working family – and they all got different answers.

It’s time to cut through the complexity. When I’m President, we’ll put in place a system where 40 million Americans with a job and a bank account who take the standard deduction can do their taxes in less than five minutes. The government already collects wage and bank account information, so there’s no reason the IRS can’t send Americans prefilled tax forms to verify. This mean’s no more worry. No more wasted time. No more extra expenses for a tax preparer.

Making this change would save Americans more than $2 billion in tax preparer fees, more than 200 million hours of work, and an incalculable amount of headache and heartburn.

All of these proposals are about making America’s tax code simpler, and making it work better for working Americans.

As we simplify the tax code so that it works for the middle class, we’ll have to address shifting costs. Americans are tired of an attitude toward taxing and spending in Washington that is leaving a legacy of debt to our children and grandchildren.

To ensure that we are fiscally responsible, we’ll gain revenue by shutting down corporate loopholes and tax havens. We’ll also turn the page on an approach that gives repeated tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans even though they don’t need them and didn’t ask for them. We've lost the balance between work and wealth. I will close the carried interest loophole, and adjust the top dividends and capital gains rate to something closer to – but no greater than – the rates Ronald Reagan set in 1986.

As we make these changes, we’ll be sure to encourage growth and innovation. So we’ll exempt start-up companies and small businesses from capital gains to give them an added boost. Because when more Americans tap that well of opportunity, all of us are better off.

You know, the truth is, most Americans aren’t asking for a lot. They don’t need overseas tax shelters or a long list of loopholes. They just want a fair shake. And they could stand a break. Because most Americans have simple dreams. A job. A place to raise their family. A secure retirement. A chance to create opportunities for their kids that might extend a little further than their own.

After all, the wealth of our nation is rooted in the work of our people. In his first State of the Union message to Congress, Abraham Lincoln laid out a core principle: “Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

It’s a simple proposition. That the wealth we earn comes from the work that we do. It’s a proposition that is lived, day in and day out, in the homes of millions of working Americans. The steady pursuit of simple dreams.

The American economy is the tally of all of those dreams. Now – at a time of rising costs and rising uncertainty – it’s time for polices from Washington that put a little wind at the backs of the American people. Now is the time for us to come together as a nation behind a new compact for the 21st century – one that gives the American people a lift, so they can lift up this country anew.

Posted by Michael McCord at 05:28 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Romney launches anti-gay marriage ad
By MIKE GLOVER
Associated Press Writer

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney is launching a radio ad touting the strength of his opposition to gay marriage.
Romney, who has come under criticism from conservatives for his past support of some gay rights issues, says he is the only major GOP candidate backing a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
“Not all Republican candidates agree, but defending marriage is the right thing to do,” Romney says in the 60-second spot to begin airing Wednesday.
The ad is meant to set him apart from Fred Thompson, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani in the minds of conservative voters.
Giuliani, meanwhile, takes a different approach his new Iowa radio spot — portraying himself as the Republican most likely to win over the more moderate electorate in the general election. Many conservatives are leery of Giuliani because of his views on issues including gay rights and abortion.
The ad Giuliani began airing Tuesday points to criticism of the candidate from the liberal group MoveOn.org and argues that Democrats fear Giuliani most as a potential GOP nominee.
“Why is MoveOn.org attacking Rudy Giuliani?” the ad asks. “Because he’s their worst nightmare.”
In contrast, Romney’s new ad is targeted directly at evangelical Christians who are crucial to Republican politics in Iowa, where precinct caucuses traditionally launch the nominating season.
The ad, coming as Iowa is embroiled in court fight over its gay marriage ban, points to Romney’s role in battling a Massachusetts court ruling that paved the way for same-sex marriages there.
“As Republicans we must oppose discrimination and defend traditional marriage: one man, one woman,” Romney says in the spot.
Romney’s conservative critics argue that his position on gay rights was more nuanced as Massachusetts governor and during his 1994 bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.
In focusing on the “major candidates,” Romney is separating himself from rivals such as Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback, who favor the constitutional amendment against gay marriage but have come in behind Giuliani, Romney and Thompson in most polls.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:18 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Romney urges U.N. not to admit Iran’s Ahmadinejad for speech

By GLEN JOHNSON
AP Political Writer
BOSTON (AP) — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should not be allowed to address the U.N. General Assembly next week, but instead should be greeted “with an indictment under the Genocide Convention,” Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney said Monday.
“The Iranian regime under President Ahmadinejad has spoken openly about wiping Israel off the map, has fueled Hezbollah’s terror campaign in the region and around the world and defied the world community in its pursuit of nuclear weapons — capabilities that make these threats even more ominous,” Romney said in a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon posted on his campaign Web site, www.mittromney.com.
In New York, Romney told reporters: “I think the invitatiom should be withdrawn. I think instead, Ahmadinejad should be indicted under the Genocide Convention.”
Romney routinely talks about the threat the United States faced from “radical jihadists,” and he has staked out a hard-line position against Iran in particular.
In January, he called for economic sanctions against the Central Asian nation “at least as severe” as those imposed on South Africa during its apartheid era, aiming to isolate the country and convince it to give up its pursuit of a nuclear weapon.
Last September, while still serving as governor of Massachusetts, Romney ordered all state agencies to refuse any assistance if requested when the former president of Iran visited Massachusetts. Romney said Mohammed Khatami oversaw torture and the murder of dissidents, as well as Iran’s secret nuclear program, while in office from 1997 to 2005.
“State taxpayers should not be providing special treatment to an individual who supports violent jihad and the destruction of Israel,” Romney said at the time.
Opponents of the current Iranian regime including Nobel Prize Winner Elie Wiesel and Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz have previously called for Iran’s explusion from the United Nations.

Posted by Michael McCord at 12:52 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

By LIBBY QUAID
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani criticized Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton in a full-page ad in Friday’s New York Times, accusing her of attacking Iraq war commander Gen. David Petraeus’ character.
The ad paid for by the Giuliani campaign attempts to link Clinton to another ad, paid for by MoveOn.org, a liberal anti-war group, that ran in the Times on Monday. The MoveOn ad accused Petraeus of “cooking the books” on the Iraq war and played off his name, asking, “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?”
Meanwhile, MoveOn’s political action committee will begin airing a new ad on television Monday that accuses Bush of a “betrayal of trust.” The ad will run from Monday to Friday in Washington on cable and nationally on CNN. The total ad buy is $60,000.
The MoveOn TV ad argues that, despite plans to withdraw about 30,000 troops added to the U.S. military presence in Iraq earlier this year, Bush remains mired in the war.
“Now he’s making a big deal about, you guessed it, pulling out 30,000 troops,” the ad states. “So next year, there will still be 130,000 troops stuck in Iraq. George Bush. A betrayal of trust.”
Giuliani’s ad in the Times quotes the GOP candidate as saying, “These times call for statesmanship, not politicians spewing political venom.”
The Giuliani ad accuses Clinton, a New York senator, of participating in a “character attack” against Petraeus, citing her comments during a congressional hearing that the general’s progress report on Iraq required a “willing suspension of disbelief.”
Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker told Congress that while Iraq remains mostly dysfunctional, violence has decreased since the influx of 30,000 additional troops earlier this year.
Responding Friday to Giuliani’s criticism, Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer said, “It’s hardly surprising that Mayor Giuliani is running the first negative ad of the ’08 campaign, given his inability to justify his unqualified support for President Bush’s failed Iraq strategy.
“Senator Clinton respects Gen. Petraeus’ service to our country. She knows the best way to honor our soldiers is to end the war in Iraq and bring them home,” Singer said.
A conservative group, Freedom’s Watch, which supports President Bush’s Iraq war strategy, also plans a print ad in the Times and has demanded the same $65,000 rate that the liberal group paid for its full-page ad. Giuliani is getting the same rate.
———
Associated Press Writer Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.

Posted by Michael McCord at 05:15 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

By BRENDAN FARRINGTON
Associated Press Writer

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson said Thursday that President Bush’s signature education program isn’t working and that he would provide federal education money with fewer strings attached.
“We’ve been spending increasing amounts of federal money for decades, with increasing rules, increasing mandates, increasing regulations,” Thompson said. “It’s not working.”
He added that there are problems with Bush’s No Child Left Behind program, which requires annual testing and punishes schools that don’t make progress.
“No Child Left Behind — good concept, I’m all for testing — but it seems like now some of these states are teaching to the test and kind of making it so that everybody does well on the test — you can’t really tell that everybody’s doing that well. And it’s not objective,” Thompson said.
Instead, he said the federal government should be providing block grants as long as states set up objective testing programs.
He said his message to states would be, “We expect you to get objective testing done and publicize those tests for the local parents and for the local citizens and suffer the political ramifications locally if things don’t work out right.”
The former Tennessee senator and star of NBC’s “Law & Order” was responding to a question as he began a three-day bus tour of Florida, his first visit to the state since announced his candidacy last week. A woman asked what he would do for education. He told her decisions on how schools are run should be made by local and state decisions, not dictated out of Washington.
“It’s your responsibility,” he said. “If you don’t like what’s going on, don’t get in your car and drive by your school board and maybe drive by the capitol and get on an airplane and fly to Washington and say, ’I don’t like the way the school down the street is being run.’”

Posted by Michael McCord at 12:50 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

GRANITEROOTS FOR JOHN EDWARDS TO CANVASS NEW HAMPSHIRE AND DISTRIBUTE TREE SAPLINGS

Edwards national campaign manager Congressman David Bonior to join canvass on Saturday and Sunday

Manchester – On Saturday, September 15th, and Sunday, September 16th, the Graniteroots for John Edwards will hold canvasses across New Hampshire, where volunteers will discuss Senator Edwards’ bold environmental policies and distribute tree saplings. Edwards for President national campaign manager Congressman David Bonior will participate in the canvass and help hand out tree saplings across the state.

“This Graniteroots canvass is not just about discussing John’s bold plans to combat global warming, achieve energy independence, and create good paying jobs,” said Congressman Bonior. “Giving out these saplings will also help get neighbors talking to neighbors about the steps we can all take in our own lives to protect our environment.”

The Graniteroots for John Edwards will be distributing 8,000 White Spruce saplings at canvasses throughout the state. Exact times and locations can be viewed at: http://johnedwards.com/nh/events

The White Spruce is a medium-sized evergreen tree that grows 60-90 feet tall on average. It grows well throughout New Hampshire and New England, and is often used for erosion control and site reclamation because it is adaptable to a wide range of planting sites.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:15 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Ron Paul campaign PRESS RELEASE

Former State Representative Tom Langlais Endorses Paul

CONCORD – The Ron Paul Campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of former State Representative Tom Langlais, Merrimack County District #8.

"Dr. Paul is a candidate all Americans can embrace as their model for common sense conservative values," said Rep. Langlais. "He has opposed sell-out, managed trade deals, authored legislation to protect the unborn, and fought for the rights of homeschoolers—even when those positions were unpopular within his own party. Ron Paul's steadfast defense of the Constitution, his refusal to abandon principle for politics, and his down-to-earth family values make him an easy choice for the GOP nomination; he is truly a Republican's Republican, and Washington is in dire need of his help."

Tom Langlais was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives in 2004, where he served the towns of Allenstown, Epsom, and Pittsfield. While in office, Representative Langlais was recognized for his conservative voting record by Gun Owners of New Hampshire, the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance, New Hampshire Right to Life, Cornerstone Policy Research, and the National Federation of Independent Business. He is a 20-year resident of New Hampshire, and a homeschooling father of five.

Posted by Michael McCord at 02:12 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)

Obama campaign PRESS RELEASE

Obama Unveils Comprehensive Plan to
Turn the Page in Iraq
Excerpts Provided Below

CLINTON, IA—In a major national security address at Ashford University in Clinton, Iowa, U.S. Senator Barack Obama will today outline his plan to end the war and his vision for what America can achieve once it turns the page in Iraq.

Obama, who opposed the war from the beginning, called for an end to the politics of division and conventional Washington thinking that first led us into Iraq, and said that ending the war is necessary to restore a sense of unity and common purpose among Americans as we face the many challenges that confront us at home and abroad.

Obama’s comprehensive plan to turn the page in Iraq has four parts:

Obama would immediately begin to pull out troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of next year.
He would call for a new constitutional convention in Iraq, convened with the United Nations, which would not adjourn until Iraq’s leaders reach a new accord on reconciliation.
He would use presidential leadership to surge our diplomacy with all of the nations of the region on behalf of a new regional security compact.
He would take immediate steps to confront the humanitarian disaster in Iraq, and to hold accountable any perpetrators of war crimes.
The plan can be viewed in full HERE.

Turning the Page in Iraq
Speech Excerpts
Clinton, IA

“Conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war. The pundits judged the political winds to be blowing in the direction of the President. Despite – or perhaps because of how much experience they had in Washington, too many politicians feared looking weak and failed to ask hard questions. Too many took the President at his word instead of reading the intelligence for themselves. Congress gave the President the authority to go to war. Our only opportunity to stop the war was lost.”

“There is something unreal about the debate that’s taking place in Washington… The bar for success is so low that it is almost buried in the sand. The American people have had enough of the shifting spin. We’ve had enough of extended deadlines for benchmarks that go unmet. We’ve had enough of mounting costs in Iraq and missed opportunities around the world. We’ve had enough of a war that should never have been authorized and should never have been waged.”

"I opposed this war from the beginning. I opposed the war in 2002. I opposed it in 2003. I opposed it in 2004. I opposed it in 2005. I opposed it in 2006. I introduced a plan in January to remove all of our combat brigades by next March. And I am here to say that we have to begin to end this war now.”

“Let me be clear: there is no military solution in Iraq, and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now. We should enter into talks with the Iraqi government to discuss the process of our drawdown. We must get out strategically and carefully, removing troops from secure areas first, and keeping troops in more volatile areas until later. But our drawdown should proceed at a steady pace of one or two brigades each month. If we start now, all of our combat brigades should be out of Iraq by the end of next year.”

“Some argue that we should just replace Prime Minister Maliki. But that wouldn’t solve the problem…The problems in Iraq are bigger than one man. Iraq needs a new Constitutional convention that would include representatives from all levels of Iraqi society – in and out of government. The United Nations should play a central role in convening and participating in this convention, which should not adjourn until a new accord on national reconciliation is reached.”

“The President would have us believe there are two choices: keep all of our troops in Iraq or abandon these Iraqis. I reject this choice... It’s time to form an international working group with the countries in the region, our European and Asian friends, and the United Nations…. We should up our share to at least $2 billion to support this effort; to expand access to social services for refugees in neighboring countries; and to ensure that Iraqis displaced inside their own country can find safe-haven. …. Iraqis must know that those who engage in mass violence will be brought to justice. We should lead in forming a commission at the U.N. to monitor and hold accountable perpetrators of war crimes within Iraq.”

“I’m here today because it’s not too late to come together as Americans. Because we’re not going to be able to deal with the challenges that confront us until we end this war. What we can do is say that we will not be prisoners of uncertainty. That we reject the conventional thinking that led us into Iraq and that didn’t ask hard questions until it was too late. What we can say is that we are ready for something new and something bold and something principled."

Posted by Michael McCord at 10:04 AM| Permalink | Comments (0)

By GLEN JOHNSON
AP Political Writer

BOSTON (AP) — A spokesman for Republican Mitt Romney said Tuesday that the presidential candidate did not approve the creation of a Web site severely critical of the personal and political life of his GOP rival, Fred Thompson.
The Web site, PhoneyFred.org, was created by Wesley Donehue, a business partner of Warren Tompkins, a South Carolina political operative on the Romney payroll and Romney’s top adviser in the early voting state.
The site was created without the knowledge of Tompkins or Romney, said Romney spokesman Kevin Madden. After the campaign received media inquiries about it, Romney aides traced the site to Donehue and complained.
“We made it clear that we did not approve of the site and asked for immediate action to make sure it was again in no way affiliated with the campaign,” Madden said. “The person responsible is not an employee of ours, but we took immediate action to make sure it was clear the site was not affiliated with the campaign.”
The Web site attacked Thompsons conservative credentials. It also labeled him Fancy Fred, Five O’Clock Fred, Flip-Flop Fred, McCain Fred, Moron Fred, Playboy Fred, Pro-Choice Fred, Son-of-a-Fred and Trial Lawyer Fred.
It asked, “Once a Pro-Choice Skirt Chaser, Now Standard Bearer of the Religious Right?”
Romney has said he welcomes Thompson to the race for the GOP presidential nomination, which the former Tennessee senator and actor joined last week. However, Romney has also questioned Thompson’s leadership experience, and aides to the former Massachusetts governor have highlighted the Tennessean’s lobbying record and his support for campaign finance reform legislation, as well as suggestions he lacked legislative accomplishments.
The site made light of Thompson’s acting career, saying of the “Law and Order” star: “You’re probably in the same boat: You can’t get the theme to ’Law and Order’ out of your head, but can you name one thing that Fred did during his eight years in the United States Senate?”
It went on to note that Thompson once provided legal services to a family planning group, and also served as a lobbyist.
The Web site was hosted by a company called bluehost.com, based in Orem, Utah. It had links to Under the Power Lines, Tompkins’ political consulting firm.
Tompkins, a former executive director of the South Carolina Republican Party, is a veteran of Palmetto State politics. He served as President Bush’s 2000 Southeast regional director at a time when Bush attacked then-rival Sen. John McCain and defeated him in the state’s GOP primary.
Tompkins has been paid $12,000 monthly to guide Romney’s effort in South Carolina, whose primary the campaign views as a pivotal test of strength of support among conservative voters. It follows the leadoff states of Iowa and New Hampshire, two other areas of concentration for Romney.
“Once we received inquiries about the site, we discovered it was created by an individual who works at an Internet firm who parked the site temporarily on the company server space of a firm whose financial partner is a consultant to the campaign — Mr. Tompkins,” said Madden, who later identified the individual as Donehue. “Mr. Tompkins did not know about the development of the site.”

Posted by Michael McCord at 01:41 PM| Permalink | Comments (0)