Democracy for New Mexico

(Updated) My Turn: Bill Richardson and GLBT Issues

UPDATE 8.15.07: Two of New Mexico's notable leaders in the GLBT rights effort, Linda Siegel and Liz Stefanics, have recorded a video describing Bill Richardson's long-time support of GLBT issues and people:

************
I'm gay, and I'm also a progressive Democrat. I write this blog and help coordinate a progressive grassroots group. I have both supported and been opposed to any number of Gov. Bill Richardson's actions and positions during his time in office here in New Mexico, whether related to health care, campaign funding, ethics, the environment, energy, education, budget matters or paper ballot voting (where election reform activists worked closely and sucessfully with Richardson and Dem legislators). I haven't decided on a presidential candidate and I'm keeping my options open. I have no axe to grind.

Sometimes I've applauded what Gov. Richardson has accomplished. At times I've been highly critical of him. Sometimes I've lacked trust in what he's saying. But one thing I've learned to trust him on over time is his strong support on issues of importance to the GLBT community -- because I've watched him push through a number of pro-equality initiatives, even when it's been difficult to do so in a state that's conservative in many respects. And I've witnessed him keep trying when a measure like a domestic partnership bill is being bashed by legislators on both sides of the aisle. (During our last legislative sesssion, such a bill lost by one vote.) And as far as I know, he has always interacted with members of the GLBT community with real ease and compassion, whether at pride events, or at a GLBT retirement community ribbon cutting or in other settings.

Do I wish Richardson and every other Democratic politician would just be done with it and proclaim their unequivocal support for gay civil marriage? Of course. I strongly believe that anyone who says they support equal rights for all under the law should have no qualms about doing that. Unfortunately, we're not there yet. I have confidence we will be someday soon, but in the meantime I applaud Democrats for taking positions in support of the fullest domestic partnerships and civil unions that might be achievable legislatively right now. Richardson is one of those Dems.

In other words, despite all the negative punditry about Bill Richardson's performance at last week's GLBT presidential forum on LOGO, I have no fears that he is a bigot in terms of GLBT folks. None whatsoever. We all know that at times he can be verbally clumsy, inarticulate or unclear, especially when he's harried or tired, and I think this was what caused the snafu at last week's GLBT presidential forum on LOGO. I just wanted to get that said publicly so primary voters will make their decisions pro or con based on analyzing other facets of Richardson's character and positions -- but not on any misperception that he's biased against members of the GLBT community.

I think the media and others are giving him a real hard time on this, and I just wanted to say my piece. Bill Richardson is many things, but in no way is he an enemy of the GLBT community -- just the opposite in fact.

More Info: For video clips of the LOGO forum and a view of Richardson and the GLBT presidential forum that differs from that of many of critics, read this. Here's an Advocate article reporting on an interview with Richardson he requested to clarify his positions.

Citizens Restless About Real Health Care Reform

Jerry Ortiz y Pino has an excellent column in last week's alibi about the recent community forum in Albuquerque on NM health care reform sponsored by Health Care for All -- and about Gov. Bill Richardson's stance on reform. I highly recommend you read the whole thing, but here's an excerpt:

... the event did have an emotional highlight. It came when a speaker cautioned those in attendance that the prospects for true reform of our health care system were dimmed significantly by a pronouncement from Gov. Richardson that he would never approve any measure that didn’t include a role for private insurance. The chorus of boos, hisses and angry shouts that greeted this statement was immediate and deafening.

Speculation afterward on why Richardson would have made such an unpopular public statement at a point in the process far, far before he needed to take any position on it at all (to say nothing about it also being in the midst of an uphill campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination) ranged from the cynical to the outright libelous.

Clearly, it is a stance he might want to reconsider, as no other issue likely to come up in the campaign would be as effective in propelling him up into the top tier of racehorses as would an enthusiastic endorsement of single-payer health care.

... But our governor is quoted by his health care advisor, Michelle Welby, as believing that the 80 percent of New Mexicans who have health coverage are “happy with the current system,” so he won't likely want to end the blood leech role played in our current health financing system by our legion of private insurers.

That is, unless he begins to listen to the thousands who have coverage but who are desperately unhappy with it--citizens like Pam Parker, a businesswoman in Taos, who tearfully detailed for a Legislative Committee last week how her eight-year struggle with breast cancer has left her family financially devastated because her insurer raises the premiums and deductibles annually so that she now pays $1,500 a month … for a policy with a $5,000 deductible. She doesn’t dare switch as her health history makes her essentially uninsurable by any company other than the one she has now.

... The War over Health Care will soon be bigger news than the War in Iraq. Gov. Richardson needs to switch sides. [emphasis mine]

I couldn't agree more.

Make Your Views Known
Right now, Gov. Richardson's presidential campaign website is soliciting questions from the public in a sort of continuation of the recent CNN-YouTube Dem presidential forum. to submit a comment or question about why he has said he won't support a health care reform plan that doesn't preserve a strong role for insurers. If we want an affordable universal health care plan here and nationally, we need to be relentless in pushing for a single-payer type plan (like the NM Health Security Act) that removes the number one cause of rising health care costs -- the for-profit brokers and insurers.

The NM Legislature will take up health care reform at the 30-day session in January, and the Interim Health and Human Services committee is meeting now in various parts of the state to discuss the issue. Contact members of the committee and your legislators and let them know where you stand.

Sign up here with What If You Knew, to stay current on what's happening at the grassroots level to advocate for an effective universal care plan. Join the Health Action NM alert list to get news on Health Care for All New Mexicans activities.

Click here to get the facts on why single-payer universal coverage is the only effective way to cover everyone while keeping costs down -- in a detailed article by none other than noted economist and New York Times journalist Paul Krugman.

Health Care Reform Community Forums
Health Care for All has held two recent, heavily attended health care town halls in Albuquerque and Las Cruces. Such community forums on health care reform in NM will be held in many other parts of the state. In August, town halls are scheduled for Farmington, Taos and Las Vegas, NM, with more on the way. Click here for Health Care for All's calendar of events for more info, and pledge to attend and express yourself at a forum in your area.

YearlyKos

I'm headed to YearlyKos at the McCormick Place Convention Center in Chicago, so things may be a bit slow around here for awhile. I set up some auto-posts and I'll try to check in when I can, but no guarantees. There's so much going on at the convention that I think down time and web time will be hard to muster. Very exciting.

Lots of sources will be covering the gathering so you can follow things right from your couch or computer. A YearlyKos follow it at home page will have frequently updated links to all the coverage they know about. Both CSPAN and CNN plan TV and web video coverage -- no details yet. Talking Points Memo will have something called TPMtv with interviews and live coverage. So will PoliticsTV and UstreamTV online. No doubt participants will be uploading stuff to YouTube and flickr. And I'm sure just about every progressive blog will be on the story to some extent.

There are a multitude of panel discussions, workshops, roundtables and film screenings, which you can browse in the convention schedule. Major events, official and unofficial, include (all times Central Daylight Time):

Wednesday, August 1

• Evening: Various receptions and parties
• 8-9:30 PM: DFA Health Care Forum with Jim Dean, health care advocates and experts

Thursday, August 2

• All day: Interest group and blogger caucuses, panels, workshops, roundtables, films
• 7-9 PM: Kickoff keynote speech by DNC Chair Howard Dean, with welcomes from Markos and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL)
• 9-10 PM: DFA Grassroots Victory Caucus

Friday, August 3

• All day: roundtables, panel discussions, workshops, films
• 8-9 AM: Keynote speech by Wesley Clark
• Luncheon speech by Andy Stern of SEIU
• 5:30-7:30 PM: Netroots Candidate Celebration (one of the cosponsors is Don Wiviott, Dem candidate for NM Senate)

Saturday, August 4

• All day: roundtables, panel discussions, workshops, films
• 8-9AM: Ask the Leaders Forum with Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid, Sen. Chuck Schumer, Rep. Rahm Emanuel
• 1-2:45 PM: Presidential Candidate Forum with Bill Richardson, John Edwards, Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel
• 3-3:45 PM: Individual breakout sessions with presidential candidates
• 4:30-6:30 PM: Teamsters' Rally and BBQ
• 7-10 PM: Closing Keynote by Markos plus surprises

Sunday, August 5

• 11AM-1PM: Bloggers' Brunch

Other Info:

• An unbelievable list of Speakers, Panel & Workshop Leaders
• Exhibitors

(Updated) Gov. Richardson Criticizes Desert Rock Power Plant

UPDATE 6:38 PM: The complete statement by Gov. Bill Richardson about the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant is now available. Click here.
*****************

"Woman in Gas Mask" (Credit: Small Axe Organization)

According to an article (also see audio-visual) in the New York Times on the controversial coal-fired Desert Rock Power Plant proposed by the Diné Power Authority and Houston-based Sithe Global Power, which in turn is majority-owned by Blackstone, a large and much in the news private-equity firm:

The staff of Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democratic presidential aspirant, recently issued a statement saying that the plant “would be a significant new source of greenhouse gases and other pollution in the region” and that Mr. Richardson “believes, as planned, it would be a step in the wrong direction,” undoing his proposed reductions in emissions.

To my knowledge, this is the first time Gov. Richardson or his staff has spoken out publicly on the proposed plant, which is projected to increase greenhouse gas emissions in New Mexico by at least 15%, and produce significant amounts of other toxins like mercury. According to the New York Times, "each year, it would emit 12 million tons of carbon dioxide, the equivalent of adding 1.5 million average cars to the roads. Coal-fired electricity contributes more than half of the 57 million tons of annual carbon-dioxide emissions in New Mexico. Together, the two existing plants emit 29 million tons."

The fight against the power plant has received growing attention nationally, with increased coverage in the media and on progressive blogs. Gov. Richardson has made his generally very positive environmental record a cornerstone of his presidential campaign, but until the recent statement had refrained from speaking out clearly against Desert Rock.

The Four Corners region, where the plant would be sited, already has two coal-fired power plants that produce copious amounts of pollution, turn the skies in the area brown and deposit other dangerous substances in water sources for hundreds of miles.

Hearings on Desert Rock EIS
A series of public hearings in New Mexico on the projected environmental impacts of Desert Rock was completed yesterday. Environmental groups like the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, San Juan Citizens Alliance, as well as Diné groups like Dooda Desert Rock (their blog has lots of information about their vigil against the plant and more) and Diné CARE, joined many ordinary citizens in strongly criticizing both the plant and the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs that reports on its potential impacts.

Dem-Proposed Tax Break Defeated in NM Legislature
In the NM Legislative Session earlier this year, a proposed bill to provide an $85 million tax break to Desert Rock was introduced and pushed by two Democratic leaders, Senate Pro Tem Ben Altamirano and House Speaker Ben Lujan. The bills were eventually defeated with the help of state representative Ray Begaye, a Navajo, and lobbying by many others in the state in a process that often featured heated battles within legislative committees and behind the scenes. (See previous posts listed below.) According to a recent article in The Economist:

Ray Begaye, a Democratic state representative and a Navajo, worries that the new power plant will suck water out of the area's aquifer and contaminate it with mercury and other toxins.

What Gov. Richardson and NM Could Do
The state of New Mexico has no real jurisdiction over whether Desert Rock gets built since the plant would sit on lands within the sovereign Diné Nation. However, critics have suggested that Richardson and others could speak out publicly against the plant and apply other pressures to discourage or at least improve the project. The state, perhaps working with the federal government or private business interests, might also come up with a plan to offer financial and other incentives for the tribe to pursue green energy projects that might produce significant jobs and revenues for the Navajos. They might also help to attract capital and other resources in support of renewable energy development on Dine land. After all, the Four Corners has an abundance of sun and wind that could be harnassed to produce large amounts of power without adding to the already heavy coal-fired plant pollution in the region and beyond.

Another possible strategy would be to pass legislation to encourage Sithe's investment in rapidly developing carbon-sequestration technology to lessen the global warming impact of the plant's emissions. Again, according to the New York Times:

Some backers of the plant hope that Desert Rock could be a proving ground for an experimental technology to reduce carbon emissions by capturing them and injecting them deep in the ground.

Mr. Johns of Sithe Global Power and Senator Jeff Bingaman, the New Mexico Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, expressed hope that the carbon-capture technology could be incorporated into the plant with an additional $1 billion investment.

The Senate Finance Committee approved a measure for a production tax credit of $20 a ton for sequestered carbon dioxide, and Mr. Bingaman said he was looking for [a] bill to attach it as an amendment.

Many will be watching to see what Gov. Richardson says and does next on the power plant issue. Only time will tell if his critical statement was merely a political response to growing publicity about Desert Rock or if Richardson will be as outspoken against the plant as he has been against oil and gas drilling on New Mexico's Otero Mesa and other environmentally dangerous projects.

More Information
Some of our previous posts, including guest blogs, about the Desert Rock Power Plant issue:

• July 16, 2007
• July 13, 2007
• June 27, 2007
• June 14, 2007
• April 20, 2007
• February 27, 2007
• February 21, 2007
• February 17, 2007
• February 13, 2007
• February 5, 2007
• December 15, 2006

Also see an article on the plant and the recent EIS hearing in Albuquerque in this week's edition of the alibi.

Random Thoughts on the Dem CNN-YouTube Debate

(OK, I've reposted this after it disappeared due to the TypePad power outtage. Now you may get it twice.)

These are my off-the-top-of-my-head, personal thoughts on last night's debate and the Dem candidates. What are your thoughts?

Some questions were more pointed than those usually posed by the MSM, but others were plain silly. It's unfortunate that the poobahs at CNN provided the screening as I'm sure there were many great video questions that CNN wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

CNN is completely biased putting the perceived "frontrunners" at the center of the stage with Kucinich and Gravel at the ends.

CNN is completely biased in giving the perceived "frontrunners" way more questions and way more time than other candidates.

When not every candidate gets to talk about some of the most important issues of the campaign -- like health care reform and environmental degradation -- the format is not serving the interests of voters.

No questions on campaign finance reform, the death penalty, "free" trade, labor issues, the increasingly evil role being played by hedge funds and private equity outfits, military spending, the silencing of real journalism, Iran or many other issues I wanted to hear about. But we did get questions on Hillary's gender, whether Obama is "black enough" and favorite teachers of the candidates. Go figure.

Anderson Cooper obviously doesn't know much about the issues and seemed most concerned with getting all the video questions aired rather then getting comprehensive answers. Let the candidates talk! He gave certain questions to certain candidates without regard to their experience. For instance, you'd think a question about nuclear power would go to Richardson given his experience as Energy Secretary and the fact that NM is so entangled in all things nuclear.

Gay Marriage: The answers from most of the candidates (except Kucinich) were weasling, confusing and just plain wrong. Civil unions or domestic partnerships DO NOT provide the same benefits as civil marriage as they omit hundreds of rights provided by federal civil marriage, like all the rights married couples get regarding Social Security survivorship, portability between states and nations, etc. Gay couples are already getting married in select churches -- it's the civil rights provided by civil marriage , which have absolutely nothing to do with religion or spiritual matters, that are unavailable. I did like that Richardson talked about what's "achievable" instead of talking about how "conflicted" he is about gay marriage, like Edwards did.

The Word Liberal: It really irked me that Hillary couldn't bring herself to respect the word "liberal." She claimed she's a "modern progressive," whatever that is. I guess it means you've abandoned the needs of those living in poverty, the working class and the middle class, and refuse to push for such things as single payer health coverage, in order to please the deep pocket donors from Wall Street and big corporations. But you don't hate gay people, African-Americans or Hispanics. Big whoop. DLC allegiance all the way, just like with Bill.

Health Care: Despite this issue generally being number 2 with the public behind Iraq, it got very little play. They crammed three questions on this into one and then didn't give many candidates a chance to answer. The health reform plans of every candidate except Kucinich preserve the role of for-profit insurance companies, brokers, HMOs etc., when it's clear that a majority of Americans want single payer NOW.

Say It Loud: As in previous debates, Kucinich and Gravel spoke the truth in no uncertain terms on a number of issues, making Cooper and the other candidates uncomfortable. How dare they not stay inside the box of accepted spin talk! They must be crazy! I especially liked Gravel calling out the others on the big donations they take from those connected with global finance and global corporatism. I liked Richardson's clear answer on No Child Left Behind: "I'd scrap it. It doesn't work."

The Dem Field: At this point in the race I have to say that no Dem candidate inspires me enough to get excited. Each one seems to have a gap where they need more substance and/or courage. Maybe I'm just too cynical or I'm still pining for the excitement and status quo challenges of the Dean campaign in 2004. It seems to me we need an incredibly high degree of wisdom, boldness, genuine leadership, passion, creativity and ethical purity if we're even to begin solving the profound problems we face.

Do you see those qualities in any of the current candidates? They all still seem so business as usual to me. Platitudes and spin. Of course, any one of them would be an incredibly better president than any of the Repubs. I'm just not very pumped up by any of them. Craving more charisma and truth! I also wonder if any of them realize we have a constitutional crisis going on ....

Hillary Clinton: The more I see her, the more I think she'll win the nomination based on her toughness, her ability to recite calculated talking points perfectly and her incredible intellect. What I question is what, exactly, she'll use that huge intellect to try and achieve. I don't trust her. Her links to corporatist forces are just too strong and many. Given that the Wall Street and big media forces are aligning behind her, I have a hunch she'll win the nomination hands down. She also uses her "first woman president" schtick to great advantage.

Barak Obama: Very good at using many words that sound substantive on their face but actually communicate little specific meaning. Yes, we're all for "hope" and solving problems and "turning the page." The devil is in the details, not the generic slogans. I tend to mistrust any politician who seems to entirely lack anger at what's going on in America and who seems to view anti-constitutional neocons as being amenable to bipartisan negotiation.

John Edwards: I like his wife much more than I like him. Although he voices positions that are often strong, creative and focused on the real problems we're experiencing as a nation, he doesn't seem tough enough to me to win against the Repub machine or to take on the powers he'd have to confront to achieve his stated plans. He often comes across as too slick and packaged. His populism is attractive but it's anyone's guess how sincere he is about it.

Bill Richardson: Too often, the Governor still seems not ready for prime time in his presence. I question many of his statements about what he wants to do in terms of education, health care and other issues. If he's being sincere, why hasn't he done more in New Mexico to achieve these aims? You have to wonder what he's promising away to raise the funds he's raising. I always get the sense he's really the DLC-oriented politico he's always been with some liberal, anti-war frosting added by consultants to make him more palatable to the Dem base. While he's done some very good things in NM, there's always that lingering sense that he does everything with an eye toward political gain rather than deep-seated values.

Joe Biden: Ever since he badgered Anita Hill at the Clarence Thomas hearings I've had a negative view of him. He often comes across as a bully to me. I don't believe his claim that he prays the rosary every day. He has deep connections with the financial and military establishments.

Chris Dodd: I like many things about Sen. Dodd, but he voted for the war and repeats Repub talking points like "I believe marriage is between one man and one woman." Given the power of corporate players and the severe economic inequalities within his home of state of Connecticut, he's got some 'splainin' to do. Not enough charisma.

Dennis Kucinich: Great positions on many issues coupled with a very weak record of successful achievements in the Congress and beyond. He lacks any degree of pragmatism or realism on many issues. Still, I like that he's on the stage saying what the majority of base Democrats believe on the important issues. Somebody has to do it.

Mike Gravel: I like his ferocity, even if it can be a little over the top. I like his freedom to say things like all the troop deaths in Nam were a complete waste. Almost everyone knows that, but few will say it out loud. He did some really important things that I respect when he was a Senator in the Nam era, like filibustering against the draft and standing up for the release of the Pentagon papers. While he expresses a number of fringe views, I think he should be given his due instead of repeatedly being cut off and dissed by pundits, candidates and debate organizers.

See for yourself:

• Debate transcript Part 1 and Part 2.
• Complete video of debate.
• Video clips from PoliticsTV.

Dem CNN-YouTube Debate Today at 5PM

The first of six presidential "debates" officially sanctioned by the DNC starts today at 5:00 PM MDT at The Citadel military college in Charleston, SC. It's a joint presentation by CNN and YouTube, with more than 1300 3000 video questions being submitted by the public. Candidates reportedly reviewed 600 of the 30 second clips, and about two dozen will be used in the forum tonight. Anderson Cooper of CNN will moderate. The debate will be shown live on CNN TV and streamed live on CNN.com. I'm sure there will be repeats on the cable news channel and clips available online.

Candidate websites will be hosting chats and other debate companion features, including Gov. Bill Richardson's campaign online. You can join their live chat with campaign staff and other supporters from around the country at 4:30 PM MDT. You can also submit your feedback on the debate to here.

Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Dodd Agree to First Ever TV Debate on Gay Issues

A live, one hour presidential debate on August 9th in Los Angeles will focus on issues of importance to GLBT Americans and others who believe equality under the law is a central tenant of any real democracy. Sponsored by the LOGO TV network and the Human Rights Campaign, the first of its kind TV forum will be aired on LOGO at 7:00 PM Mountain Time, as well as streamed live at LOGOonline.com. Panelists will include Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese and singer Melissa Etheridge, who will ask the presidential candidates questions on such issues as relationship recognition, marriage equality, workplace fairness, the military, hate crimes and HIV/AIDS. LOGO is broadcast on Channel 163 on Comcast cable in Albuquerque.

According to this story at 365Gay.com, "Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards and Chris Dodd have confirmed they will participate. Several other Democratic candidates also may join the debate." No word yet on whether Gov. Bill Richardson will appear.

As a side note, Richardson is currently the focus of a story about his use of a negative Hispanic term for gayness during a joke sequence with Don Imus on one of his shows about a year ago. I certainly don't approve of Richardson using the term, but given his generally strong record of being supportive of the GLBT community, expect this story to fade fast. The Governor has issued an apology for using the word. I hope he makes it to the LOGO debate to demonstrate his continuing respect for the issues of the GLBT community.

(Updated) Thursday: Tavis Smiley to Moderate PBS Dem Prez Forum on Domestic Issues

Tavis Smiley will host the All American Democratic Presidential Forum from Howard University in DC on Thursday night, June 28th, from 7-8:30 PM Mountain Time on PBS stations, including KNME, with a live stream at the PBS Forum website. The show will also be available as a video download or podcast after the show, and will be rebroadcast on PBS at 2 AM MDT.

For the first time, a panel exclusively comprised of journalists of color will be presented in primetime. Questions to the candidates will be posed by Tavis and journalists Michel Martin of National Public Radio, nationally syndicated columnist Ruben Navarrette, Jr. and USA Today and Gannett News Service columnist DeWayne Wickham. The topics of the questions will be limited to top domestic issues including healthcare, education, criminal justice, immigration, affordable neighborhoods, voting, rural development, economic prosperity, environmental justice and the digital divide. All eight declared Dem candidates will participate.

Unfortunately, PBS has selected much criticized Republican pollster Frank Luntz to do its after-event analysis on public response to the forum. As reported on Media Matters:

... Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who the Public Broadcasting Service has announced will provide "public feedback" following PBS' coverage of the June 28 Democratic presidential forum, has shown open disdain for Democratic priorities and candidates and has reportedly been reprimanded and censured by his peers for withholding and misrepresenting polling data and methodology. But, in addition to leaving out these facts from its press release announcing Luntz's participation, PBS, which referred to Luntz only as a "noted pollster," made no mention of the fact that Luntz has worked for former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a potential general election opponent of one of the forum's participants, and has heaped praise on Giuliani this year.

... Luntz worked for Giuliani during each of Giuliani's three previous political campaigns: his campaign for New York City mayor in 1993, re-election bid in 1997, and aborted campaign for U.S. Senate in 2000. On the second page of the introduction to his book, Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear (Hyperion, January 2007), Luntz describes himself as "[t]he man who worked for Rudy Giuliani, two-time Republican mayor of a city where Democratic voters outnumbered Republicans 5-to-1 (xii)."

6.28.07 UPDATE: Frank Luntz will no longer be providing presidential forum analysis on PBS' after-forum commentary, but he's still scheduled to appear on Tavis Smiley's Friday show discussing the forum. Here's the latest from Media Matters.

Saturday Music Hall: Sweet Home ...

From Young Turks , who ask that we merely think about it ...

We went to a magical, magnificent Joan Armatrading concert last night at my favorite New Mexico venue, Paolo Soleri Amphitheater, where the spectacular sunset provided an especially ethereal character to Joan's powerful performance. However, since I'm still soaring on a natural high from it, I don't have it in me to follow up with a Saturday Music Hall post on the experience yet. In the meantime ....

Participate in Take Back America and AFSCME Events Via Web

Two big political events are taking place in DC over the next few days. The Take Back America conference put on by the Campaign for America's Future is providing a lot of interactive web features that involve Dem prez candidates, bloggers and more. Meanwhile, the AFSCME Leadership Forum includes a presidential candidate forum and more. MyDD, among others, is blogging both conferences.