Slashdot Mirror

Or, dare I say it, political stooges. "Fair and balanced", haaaaaahahaaa. Fox, CNN and ABC are all *appalling* and I, for one, am glad that the BBC exists, and that the (unfair) grilling they got in the Hutton report hasn't taken all of their bite away. It's a shame that the Butler report didn't get quite the same coverage, but the Iraqi invasion is already old news now. Funnily enough, that reminds me: I was listening to the Bill Hicks's Chicago 1991 bootleg (Google for the Bill Hicks archive and you'll find it) and I swear that if you didn't know the date that it was recorded you could well believe he was talking about Dubya.

What's tragic is that I think the general public have such short memories that by the time Bush and Blair go to the polls it'll all have been forgotton, and they'll both get back in :( Considering that we both have what is basically a two-party race, and the state of the opposition... oh dear...

Yeah, it's called moveon

Check out these FCC peitions:
http://www.stopfcc.com/
http://www.moveon.org/stopthefcc/

We CAN make a difference!

They're responsible for Bush in 30 Seconds an anti-Bush site.

CNN refers to them as an anti-Bush powerhouse.

And, most tellingly, the MoveOn PAC held an online Democratic primary and declared they would officially endorse a candidate if they received over 50% of the votes. Note that they stated that even if no one candidate received 50% of the vote they would still "work to defeat Bush".

It really doesn't matter what they decide to call themselves if their actions are to work to support Democrats and oppose to Republicans. Even if it were just the latter you could claim they were an "anybody but Bush" site but they're not even that, they didn't even consider endorsing any third party candidates, just Democrats.

Over on the Democrat political site MoveOn.org they are also pushing for voting with a paper trail.

They have a petition to sign... it would be nice to see a corresponding Republican site do their own petition, since I doubt any Republicans would sign a petition on MoveOn.org but at the same time I imagine there are plenty of Republicans who also see the dangers of closed-source, paperless e-voting.

There are a lot of conflict of interest issues here (as mentioned in the article) but I think these would actually be lessened if there were grassroots pressure from both major parties to use more secure and auditable voting systems.

The GOP convention is three weeks later than the Dems, so they end up with more to spend over the remaining campaign period, unless the Kerry campaign were to go quiet/dark for those three weeks, which they can't afford to do either. That's some fancy strategery Bush has got going there.

Of course, the way to combat this is to give money to orgs like MoveOn.org that can run issue advertising against Bush as long as it is not coordinated by the Kerry campaign. What a fun, convoluted political system we have.

And get beat up like like this guy? I used to respect MoveOn.Org but some of it's members and supporters are out of control. This is Brown Shirts stuff.

Yet anothr reason for me to vote Nader.

1) Saudi-arabia is a dictatorship. Not even a very benevolent one. Torture and random assassination of political enemies is commonplace there.

The interesting thing about Saudi Arabia is that there is a constant battle between the House of Saud and the religious leaders. Saud rules, but they know that they'd get overthrown quick if they tell the Islamic leaders to back off.

Shouldn't that make you more critical of current US policies in Iraq and the middle east in general, given that they are creating a fresh generation of terrorists hellbent on attacking america?

Why? Just because the Liberal Left hates Bush with a passion doesn't mean that they are CORRECT. Actually, I find their bias completely laughable. The end result of their ranting gives us such things as an animatedAl Gore, a group of folk that take movies at face value (let's check our laws of Physics at the door, shall we?), and a religious fervor against war that hasn't been seen since the Viet Nam era. Here's a shock for you: I'm an IT Geek, and I actually support our purpose for being in Iraq! <gasp!>

So, no, before Gulf War II there was no credible indication of cooperation between Saddam and Bin Laden. If there was, they would have found it already.

Well, if Russia is to be believed....

I blame the bush administration for lack of planning and lack of insight into Iraq. They screwed it up, they should pay the price, not the people on the ground giving their lives trying to help people.

Hm. So Bush and Company didn't take into consideration that a loon like Saddam would have his army melt into the general population and resort to guerilla warfare and terrorism, and you want to blame him? Please.

Like the way Bush uses God to excuse his policies is an insult to christians the world over?

No, like the Democrats claiming that they are looking out for the Little Guy, when they are making a complete ass of them. (look how things are happening in Boston, with respect to the Democratic National Convention. That's one complete fuck-up if i ever saw one. It's already $10M over budget. They can't get their heads out of their ass for a peaceful conference like this, and they want us to believe that they can run a war?!? Whoever writes their game plan should get into comedy. they'd make a killing.

By dehumanizing al qaeda you make it ok to treat whoever you believe to be a part of it as non-human or sub-human. We've seen the pictures of what that kind of attitude leads to. If you want the moral high ground, you've got to stick to the facts, and not let your emotions and hate get in the way.

That is exactly why I do not advocate a blanket "shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out" attitude. The majority of the local people there aren't looking for trouble; they are just living day-to-day. The general population should not be punished for the extreme actions of a (relative) few.

Whoah, stop right there. Got any evidence to back that up? A half-dozen prison guards out of 135,000 soldiers does not constitute general psychosis.

One Defense Secretary Getting Away With It While The General Population Changes The Channel == GRAND PSYCHOSIS.

The relative term "last week" used by parent is misleading. The speech was actually delivered November 9, 2003, and the full version (longer than the excerpt posted by parent) can be read here.

Why should they refuse ads from Microsoft? Aren't the readers smart enough to make up their own minds about the benefits of Linux? This reminds me of a recent "outrage" when The Nation ran some full-page ads for Faux News. Most of their readers just laughed at Fox for throwing their money away.

I'd rather that organizations who sell ad space have less editorial control. For instance, Adbusters and the MoveOn PAC have repeatedly been denied airtime on network TV, even though they are able to pay for it, simply because the network execs don't like their message. This is a far greater injustice.

Posting AC b/c I've already moderated part of this thread.

I'm a citizen of the USA and I couldn't agree with you more. Personally, I've voting against the Bible Thumping Hate Monger in November, but I can't say the same for the rest of the country.

The sad thing is, here in the land of the free and the home of the brave, less than 1/2 of the citizens can be bothered to show up to vote. The United States is actually a fairly liberal place, until you survey those likely to vote.

We have serious issues in this country both domestic and foreign, but they aren't going to get fixed when half of the country doesn't speak out.

We've got an energy crisis in the making. Bush Inc is tied to oil cartels, which means we're stuck in the crisis until the profit margins decline rather than until it damages the economy.

We've got a government running ripshod over our Constitutional rights and over the human rights of an appreciable portion of the world. Unfortunately Herr Bush is in bed with the radical right, which is a big fan of making government small enough to fit into your bedroom and seems to regard human rights as something of an inconvenience.

We've got the largest military and most powerful arsenal of weapons ever assembled in the history of the world. Unfortunately our Cold Warrior president doesn't realize that the cold war ended under his father's inglorious reign and that it's time to start fixing the problems the cold war caused.

The list goes on and on. What is comes down to is this. The United States has a drunk at the wheel. Regrettably he remains at the wheel, and with the dumbing down of America it is likely he will remain at the wheel.

I would like to personally apologize to you and my other international friends and acquaintances for the actions of my country. On a Flash related note, this from moveon.org seems to summarize pretty well.

I don't want to get into a flamewar (i think they're silly) but this portion seems a bit misinformed:
Yeah. Remind me of one "flaky driver" or "questionable stuff" that was recently added to a stable Linux kernel release. The 2.4 maintainer is EXTREMELY hesitant to include anything new, to the point of frustrating people (see XFS).
Linux 2.4 changed its VM subsystem, and its scheduler in the middle of the 2.4 branch. They worked, but the "extremely hesitant to include anything new" label doesn't fit. The fact that these changes worked will little ill effect cause a lot of people not to remember these. Linux 2.4 also shipped with a corruption bug in it's default filesystem (ext3) in a common (though not default) journal mode.

These are not attacks against Linux, I use it at work, have used it for years. Just it does have a different development model. Kindly stop the "my freely developed x86 UNIX workalike is SO much better than your freely developed x86 UNIX workalike" arguments. Very silly, and we have better battles to fight.

The UNMOVIC report you linked to doesn't seem to buttress your arguement, despite being released on March 6, 2003. (Weeks before the war) It states, "No proscribed activities, or the result of such activities from the period of 1998-2002 have, so far, been detected through inspections." If you really want to convince me, please show me some evidence like David Kay or similar, who in the end concluded that there were no WMDs.

"Not without interference, delay, and attempts to keep them out of various places." That's what Bush said. He has no credibility with me now. I was actively watching the events during that time, and the response by the experts in the field, including the Americans, was that Saddam isn't going to give any excuse for Bush to go to war, and he allowed them free access anywhere. See my emphasis on "caved in," by the time the war started, Saddam was willing to put on a leash and bark like an Abu Ghraib victim if it meant the US wasn't going to move in.

Go even further back and look at the signs that Bush was eager for war. The fact is, the US had 60,000 troops in the region of Iraq even before the weapons inspectors went in. Paul O'Neill said that at the first cabinet meeting in January 2001, Bush was already making plans for Iraq. Richard Clarke said that Bush was ignoring Al Qaeda before 9/11 unless he could tie it into Iraq.

Nobody said imminent threat? (Alternate link)Did you watch Donald Rumsfeld stutter when he was denying the claim and got caught with his own quotation?

Iraq's ties to Al Qaeda are still tenuous, despite the single article you showed me. Saddam had links to Ansar Al-Islam, which might have links to Al Qaeda. Before, they said that Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi went to Iraq to have medical treatment; his lef amputated. Well, it turns out that he didn't after all, and he may have been the man in the Nick Berg video, according to the US. The US' intelligence concerning Iraq is now under review, since Ahmad Chalabi was found to have fudged some information.

"Of course, you would have to have an open mind."
Now, now, I don't insult you, if you can't prove your case adequately then you shouldn't engage in ad insultium attacks

Interesting, I didn't really get to read Kay's report before. Kay did find some weapons, but not stockpiles as we were led to believe. His findings still fail to prove any of Powell's claims to be true, the "four tons of VX nerve gas" were not in Kay's report.

"We've found two [WMDs] so far..." Which? And why only 2?

"... uncovered research for biological weapons, work on missiles that constitute serious breaches of the UN resolutions, and many other activities."

*Groan*, not more hair-splitting over the missiles again. The UN set limits on how far Iraq's missiles could go, and when UN inspectors stripped the inside of one and launched it, it went slightly further. Not much of a big whoop, and if we went to war over that, I'd call the US just itching for a minor excuse to launch a war. They're no threat to the US. As for the rest of these "serious breaches," you will have to show me more.

"Regarding WMDs, even if we did know exactly where they were, are you saying Saddam's government couldn't have moved them? That is silly. It would only take a couple of tractor trailers to move them and they had a country the size of California to hide them."

Then why did the US and David Kay give up the search? It's because they realize it was futile. Even Bush isn't saying "soon" anymore, because those who continue to persist in the belief despite the evidenc

The 7 tuners are so that you, the ordinary democratic or independent or republican or ... voter can watch the debacle that is Donald Rumsfeld resigning in disgrace, on CNN, ABC, ComedyCentral (best coverage!), MSNBC, PBS, CSPAN, and TheWeatherChannel.

Then, you can live the moment over and over again, watching from different angles, getting voiceovers from multiple perspectives. For instance, if you were completely bereft of common sense, you could watch the Pro-Bush FOX coverage. Or, you could watch PBS interview 12 people that have resigned in disgrace and an analysis of how things really work. Or, you could put on The Weather Channel and find out if it's sunny where Rumsfeld will be going home to sit in his backyard, a useless shell of a man.

Let's move on.

I heard Donald Rumsfeld is going to go over to educate "old Europe" how to keep their military and police from mistreating their prisoners. The Germans with their Nazi past don't know what liberty and freedom really means, that is why they are not in the coallition of the willing.

You've got it all wrong.

This is the face of the traitor and it was his lies that were exposed yesterday.

Do the right thing and donate for perhaps the most important cause of this decade: getting rid of Bush.

Does other more established and related lobby groups know this, who can possibly help with PR? How about EFF?

MoveOn.Org has, in the past, had a significant impact - maybe we can get them behind this?

Anti-Bush it is (for me). He's just tooooo dumb.

But thats not the reason to go after M$. Using your Power is something europeans are a little more careful about.

daim

Except when it comes to starting World Wars, which this might do.

Then again, Bush isn't the only idiot. Rummy is quite dumb himself: http://www.moveon.org/censure/caughtonvideo/

An interesting piece about politicians grades in the New York Times, gives a rare acknowledgement to Dan Quayle since Dan actually had a C+ average while Bush only managed a straight C. But the one everyone forgets about is Cheney who flunked out of Yale twice. I wonder if Cheney manages to spell potatoe.

Is it worth it?

While we may not have slipped that far yet (I stress *may*, as CBS's refusal to run pro-democratic ads during the Superbowl while running pro-Republican ads tells a very different story IMHO), we are most certainly well on our way.

Interesting. Citation, please?

Aside from several (non-CBS) newscasts, including the BBC, there is this at moveon.org.

so for those of you opposed to the war, it's time to MOVE ON.

First the NFL says NO to ads for Las Vegas during the superbowl. Then CBS says NO to ads against Bush during the game. The NFL says NO WAY to Casinos in las vegas showing the game on anything bigger than a 55" TV. They say its copyright law, but last I checked copyright law didnt say anything about TV Size. Its just the NFL's arbitrary size. The Palms was planning to show it on their huge movie theater screens. Oh well, I guess the NFL doesnt like its superbowl party being upstaged by Vegas. Now they're just taking their ball and going back to Houston. Paul Tagliabue caused lots of casinos to lose lots of money because of the NFL's childlike behavior. Hello, only so many people can go to the game! What are the rest supposed to do, wait outside and be happy they're near the game?? Paul also threatened the players with fines or possibly suspensions for "excessive celebration" during the Superbowl.

The NFL is definately the No Fun League.

I'm a little surprised the story didn't mention CBS's censorship of an ad by MoveOn.org. The ad reflects a negative view of the Bush administration. CBS, which has donated massive amounts of money to Bush, as well as received favors from the administration and Congress, has decided they won't show "controversial" ads. Which is to say, political speech is apparently unacceptable. Odd, given that they're showing an ad from the White House.

I'm a little surprised the story didn't mention CBS's censorship of an ad by MoveOn.org. The ad reflects a negative view of the Bush administration. CBS, which has donated massive amounts of money to Bush, as well as received favors from the administration and Congress, has decided they won't show "controversial" ads. Which is to say, political speech is apparently unacceptable. Odd, given that they're showing an ad from the White House.

it seems cbs is deciding who can talk to US peoples, censoring dissenting voices.

more infos on cbs censoring superbowl adv at moveon.org

Please Sign this petition to have the commercial aired during the Super Bowl.

Here's the real story on the 12 year old.

Ahh yes, our dear Slashdot, where tinfoil is headwear and 1984 is the bible.

The reason for the recesion is clear. Clinton/Gore kept pumping and pumping the bubble. Where were they when Enron / Worldcom / Wall Street were up to their shenanigans? That's right hitting, up the ChiComs for campaign donations and hitting up interns for BJ's.

Clear to only the hard-line Clinton haters. Do you really think any significant regulation of Wall Street would have made it out of the Republican majority Congress? You can blame Clinton all you want, but hardly anybody outside of Alan "irrational exuberance" Greenspan and Warren Buffett was saying much during the bubble. It was most assuredly a bipartisan bubble.

And James K. Glassman, the author of Dow 36,000, one of the most notorious of the pro-bubble books, is now a "well-respected" fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and making big bucks on the corporate lecture circuit. Your claim about Clinton/Gore causing the bubble is disingenuous at best.

And it seems you right-wingers are just obsessed over this BJ thing. As the advocacy group group said, censure and Move On.

Bush's approval rating is at 61%

As was mentioned in the same article that you quoted, it was a 5 point rise (61-5=56) from the previous poll taken four days before Thanksgiving, and it was probably caused by the pictures from his Thanksgiving trip to Baghdad.

And as an added bonus, he's now got new pictures to use on the campaign to replace those discredited "mission accomplished" flight suit photos.

We know what (the Democratic Agenda) is. 1. Raise taxes. 2. Surreder to Hussein.

Ann Coulter? Is that you?

Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.

Or are they blocking Estrada because

Who is Miguel Estrada? We all have a right to know before we make him a judge. Yet he's done his best to hide his views on the law from us.

Miguel Estrada has never served as a judge before, so he's never issued a written opinion on a case. Nonetheless he has a reputation as a right-wing ideologue. Paul Bender, a former Deputy Solicitor General who once supervised Estrada's work, said he found him so "ideologically driven that he couldn't be trusted to state the law in a fair, neutral way."**

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus are among a wide range of civic groups opposing the Estrada nomination.

During hearings held in the last Congress, Estrada refused to answer Senators' legitimate questions about his legal and judicial views. His silence is designed to make it hard for Senators to oppose him.

http://www.moveon.org/news/1011.html

and

Estrada is a member of the law firm that represented Bush in his successful Supreme Court fight for the presidency. He came to the United States from Honduras as a teenager and graduated from Harvard Law School in 1986. He has practiced constitutional law and argued 15 cases before the Supreme Court.

But Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota accused Estrada of refusing to explain what his judicial philosophy would be if he became a federal judge. The D.C. circuit, which is evenly split between judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents, has been a steppingstone to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Every nominee who comes before the Senate has the obligation to be forthcoming with information about his position, with information about his record," said Daschle. "Until he does, we don't believe that it is in the Senate's best interest to allow this confirmation to go forward."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/02/12/senate.e strada.ap/

and

At a press conference Wednesday afternoon with various Hispanic organizations, Congressional Democrats, including Daschle, Leahy and Rep. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, said it hasn't been easy for the Hispanic community to oppose a Hispanic nominee to the bench.

The key word is "qualified," Menendez said, adding that Estrada has no judicial experience or a "critical understanding" of Latino issues.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77667,00.html

At least Al Gore seems to have "moved on" from those days and taken a stand in favor of freedom (more in opposition to the outrageous Bush "enemy combatant" designation than the Patriot Act, but this is definitely in the category of Bush's refusal to respect basic civil rights.) And Howard Dean, whom I support for President, has as well. So there are alternatives, even if there weren't previously.

Where the hell are the politicians on this list?

Scew the ex's on lecture circuits. Where are the idiots getting paid to ruin America?

Don't know what I'm talking about? Check out Al Gore's recent speech on Freedom and Secutity (http://www.moveon.org/gore/speech.html).

Move on - helps busy people be effective citizens.

Make them Accountable - Make Media and Politicians Accountable.

Fallout Shelter - News and Views from the shelter.

Citizens for Legitimate Government - Undo the Coup - opinion and discussion.

Petition to Senate to investigate "Oddities" of 9/11 - by Lori R. Price.

Education for Peace in Iraq Center - Speakers & projects.

War Resisters' League - promoting peace.

American Friends Service Committee - Quakers for peace.

Black Radical Congress - Election reform and voting rights.

Z-Net - Activist Community.

>I would like to see just one online petition that has carried any weight.

There was a success with webtv, its probably still linked at the petition site, but unless someone prints these damn things out and hands them to the politicos (like in this photo from moveon.org) its a waste of bits.

I would like to see just one online petition that has carried any weight. It's the height of "slacktivism".

HTH. HAND.

(All that said, I do agree that most online petitions are nearly worthless and don't carry anywhere near the weight of individually addressed messages. If you really care, take the time to express your position in your own words and send it as a letter (send an email in addition, if you like)).

I would like to see just one online petition that has carried any weight. It's the height of "slacktivism".

HTH. HAND.

(All that said, I do agree that most online petitions are nearly worthless and don't carry anywhere near the weight of individually addressed messages. If you really care, take the time to express your position in your own words and send it as a letter (send an email in addition, if you like)).

http://www.moveon.org/images/dorganlott-big.jpg. This one weighs about 150 pounds.

Note that 55 voted Yea, and 5 weren't present... including 4 Dems, who overwhelmingly voted Yea.

That's almost certainly 59 Yeas -- 67 would need to Yea to override the veto. It isn't likely for the Dems to find 8 Pubs to override a Republican POTUS veto, but it is possible, especially if the grassroots efforts by folks like Move On continue to be effective.

Of course, a veto that isn't overriden is just one more thorn in the side of Bush come election time, although it's unlikely to be an issue that will swing many voters.

I suspect a large majority of moveon.org members (and the petition signers) vote - those who don't vote probably couldn't care less about FCC rules either.

It's great to see an actual online petition have *some part* in changing things - with all the online petitions that are passed around, congrats to moveon.org for actually making it effective! Score 1 for democracy (for the moment, at least...)!

Proud patriot and republican voter.

But so many people focus on left vs right that it's easy to forget the model of political philosophies as a circle. As your example points out, it seems that many of our issues show where the ends of the circle join together!

Let's stick together and put our action where are mouths are:
MoveOn.org
EFF.org

MoveOn.org recently ran a campaign on this issue.

I heartily recommend their newsletter.

Dean is dragging not only his group, but the entire Democratic wing to the left. Hint from American history "Centrists Win."

He is way out of step with where America is. There has been a severe step right in America the last couple of years as Jacksonians took the reigns of power after 9/11. Even among women, Anti-Abortionists are now in the majorty. Insert one extremly liberal pro-choice, pro-gay marriage democrat? Insert McGovern like defeat here.

Gebhardt has been locking down the super delegates and unions very very quickly. This will give him some staying power. Observe what happened to McCain in 2000 when you just run on media PR.

Bush is running uncontested. Not only that, he is arguably the first republican to run in a long long time with both wings of the party firmly in support of him. (Moderates and Conservitives). Top this off with the fact that Karl Rove is a political genus, and that Bush in a single week outraised the entire democratic fund raising in the last six months means bad times for Democrats.

Karl Rove has already rigged the timing of the election in Bush's favour. Where the National Convention for each party reveals a lot about what the party thinks it must and can win. The Democrats are holding there in a traditional liberal bastion, Boston. Bush is holding his in New York, which is also traditionally a liberal bastion, and he is holding it fairly close to 9/11. On top of that, Bush is fairly sure that he is going to be uncontested, which allows him a much longer period of raising money, and a much shorter and intensive race. In addition, because the convention is soo late, Bush may still be on his Convention Bounce by the time election day rolls around.

Dean has already started a undeclared war with the DNC when he attacked Terry McAuliffe (Current head of the DNC and Clinton Stooge). Any attempt by Dean to outshine the Clintonistas could start a civil war inside the DNC/DLC.

Although Dean has been trying to pass himself off as a progressive on everything from the war to intellectual property, a lot of it is spin. His record in Vermont shows that Dean's no progressive , that he'll cave to corporate interests when it's politically expedient. The real progressive presidential candidate is Rep. Dennis Kucinich , Chair of the Progressive Caucus in Congress. Not only is Kucinich's progressive vision and record unambiguous, he has also refused to take any form of assistance from corporations, like law firms and financial firms, in contrast to the other candidates. That's why I trust him to maintain his position on intellectual property rights *after* he's elected.

He recently wrote an article titled "The Case for Public Patents," in which he explains how public patents and nonexclusive licensing of publicly funded R&D could lower health care costs in the US. He likens the system he envisions to "an 'open source' system that makes data and findings publicly available, instead of held secret as proprietary data." He goes on to say: "Open source is how the Linux computer operating system has become a competitive force against Microsoft's Windows." When's the last time you heard a presidential candidate talking about open source and Linux? This position is also indicative of his view on copyrights and intellectual property rights more generally.

He got a late start (February), but he's been making some real strides lately. The MoveOn primary and a long string of endorsements have given a real boost to his campaign. Also, the grassroots network of volunteers is growing exponentially on the internet , where it looks like the primaries will be determined.

partition asking Congress to look into this.

If you remember MoveON started as a movement with the purpose of lobbying for maybe there is more important things in this world tha a Presidential Blowjob.

They recently held the first Internet Prmary that gave Dean the top spot. Now this.

It is becoming a major political force,

well, according to MoveOn's Democratic Party "pseudo-primary" vote this week, Lieberman only got 1.92% of the 317,647 votes. He will probably NOT be the next Democratic Party nominee. Of course, MoveOn's members are a self-selected group of very liberal, very politically active people, so their results might not mirror the voting public's. :-)

http://moveon.org/pac/primary/report.html

btw, Dean had 43.87% and Kucinichi had 23.93%.

I'm pleased that Lieberman garnered only 1.9 percent of the vote in the MoveOn.org primary. This puts him right next to Al Sharpton on the (lack of) poularity scale with likely democratic voters. I'm pleased the days of sell-out, wannabee Republican DLC democrats like Lieberman, Gore and Clinton are coming to an end. Goodbye and good riddance, Joe. L