Elect Richard Mott To Supreme Court On Tuesday

My friend, Richard Mott, has received the Democratic and Working Families nominations for Supreme Court Judge in this area of upstate New York. The Supreme Court is New York's top trial court. It has trial jurisdiction over many kinds of important civil cases. And the district here covers seven counties: Albany, Rensselaer, Greene, Columbia, Ulster, Sullivan, and Schoharie.

Richard is an experienced trial lawyer and father to five children. He was raised in Ulster County and now lives in Columbia County. This is his first election. I have known him for 25 years or more, and I consider him an honest, fair, impartial, talented candidate for judicial office. I am happy to be able to vote for him and support his candidacy.

A very little bit about him:

A native of Esopus in Ulster County, Richard Mott has resided in Columbia County since 1976 in the Town of Kinderhook. He has been in private practice at his Albany office since 1982. Mott also served in the Columbia County Public Defender’s Office from 1982 to 1987. He was the Kinderhook town attorney from 1984 to 1986 and has extensive experience in all phases of the law. He's also a veteran and a former special education teacher.

The race he is in is a four-way race. There are two Republican incumbents and two Democratic challengers. The top two vote getters are elected. Richard has been found Qualified for the job by the Independent Judicial Screening Committee. But because it's a judicial election, there is very little he can say about his views. Or about his incumbent opponents, who were appointed (and not elected in a contested election) to Supreme Court fourteen years ago.

Obviously, getting the word about this wonderful candidate out in a 7-county area is an enormous, time consuming, expensive undertaking. This is a sprint. The election is on Tuesday, November 6.

Richard deserves and needs your support. It's an undertaking you can help along by sending a donation of any size to:

Committee to Elect Richard Mott to Supreme Court P.O. Box 112 Kinderhook, NY 12106

But far more important than the money at this late stage, is your vote. Please vote for Richard Mott for Supreme Court on Tuesday. There are also good reasons why voting for Richard should NOT be and is not a partisan issue. This is important if you are a Greene or Columbia County voter. As I wrote in a Letter to the Editor to the Hudson Register Star,

On election day voters in Columbia and Greene counties enjoy the rare opportunity of electing their own resident Supreme Court Judge in the seven county Third Judicial District ... Richard Mott of Kinderhook.

Although each county within the district has a Supreme Court, only the three largest, Albany, Rensselaer and Ulster, have their own resident Supreme Court Judges. Albany has 8; Rensselaer and Ulster have 4 each. Columbia and Greene counties have none. In fact, Columbia hasn't had a resident Supreme Court Judge since 2006; Greene, since 2002. These counties have had to depend exclusively upon periodic visits by judges from the three largest counties to resolve their local disputes. This inequitable distribution of judges within the district clearly delays justice to the residents of the smaller counties within the district. But if prominent trial attorney, Richard Mott, is elected to the Supreme Court, the administration of justice in both Columbia and Greene counties will be significantly enhanced and local dispute resolution will be expedited because Richard would sit in Supreme Court in Hudson, and very likely, in Catskill. Richard Mott has been rated qualified for this position by the Independent Judicial Election Qualifications Commission. I urge you to vote for Richard Mott for Supreme Court Justice on November 6.

Please join me in voting for Richard Mott on Tuesday. It doesn't matter what line you use to vote for him. But it does make a world of difference who you vote for in this race.

Why Walruses?

Funny you should ask. Although your Bloguero is officially on hiatus, he has been posting walrus photos and videos on Facebook. And he will continue until the election has been decided.

Why is that? inquiring minds might ask. It might just be that your Bloguero is fascinated by Walruses, and particular the baby walrus in New York City. But that's not all there is to it. No, it's not.

Your Bloguero offers The Walrus And The Carpenter as a partial, but probably too metaphorical explanation. Surely you remember Lewis Carroll's "Through the Looking Glass." No problem if you can't summon up the details. This is, after all, the Internet and Wiki always refreshes your memory (or creates a new one for you):

The Walrus and the Carpenter are the eponymous characters in the poem, which is recited by Tweedledum and Tweedledee to Alice. Walking upon a beach one night when both sun and moon are visible, the Walrus and Carpenter come upon an offshore bed of oysters, four of whom they invite to join them. To the disapproval of the eldest oyster, many more follow them. After walking along the beach (a point is made of the fact that the oysters are all neatly shod despite having no feet), the two main characters are revealed to be predatory and eat all of the oysters. After hearing the poem, the good-natured Alice attempts to determine which of the two leading characters might be the more sympathetic, but is thwarted by the twins' further interpretation.

Ralph Nader, of course, seized on tweedledum/dee in 2009, saying,

"Our two parties are basically one corporate party wearing two heads and different makeup," Nader said. "There is a difference between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, but not that much."

"

Oh was he ever right about that. Yet, there are important differences between the candidates on a whole host of issues. Your Bloguero accepts the received wisdom that returning the White House to those who destroyed the economy and created Iraq would be a mistake. At the same time, your Bloguero has no illusions about how very far to the right the Obama White House has migrated. And your Bloguero is saddened, when he's not angered by that. Where, he asks, is the single payer? The closing of Gitmo? The repeal of NDAA? On and on your Bloguero goes. It is ok to tune him out before he starts ranting about this.

In 2012's election race, your Bloguero feels he should draw your attention to and quote this part of the poem:

"I like the Walrus best," said Alice, "because you see he was a little sorry for the poor oysters."

"He ate more than the Carpenter, though," said Tweedledee. "You see he held his handkerchief in front, so that the Carpenter couldn't count how many he took: contrariwise."

"That was mean!" Alice said indignantly. "Then I like the Carpenter best—if he didn't eat so many as the Walrus."

"But he ate as many as he could get," said Tweedledum.

This was a puzzler. After a pause, Alice began, "Well! They were both very unpleasant characters—"

Both very unpleasant characters. Indeed.

This is not to say that your Bloguero will not vote. He will. Definitely. He always does. He always votes against the callous, the out of touch, the plutocrat, the oligarch, the racist, the moralist, the sentamentalist. Whatever you've got. But he has few, if any illusions that this voting against someone for more than 10 elections leads to good governance. It doesn't. Where, your Bloguero wants to know, is the candidate who embodies your Bloguero's idealistic views? Will there ever be one for him to vote for?

Please Support This Judicial Candidate In Upstate New York

Richard Mott

My friend, Richard Mott, has received the Democratic and Working Families nominations for Supreme Court Judge in this area of New York. The Supreme Court is New York's top trial court. It has trial jurisdiction over many kinds of important civil cases. And the district here covers seven counties: Albany, Rensselaer, Greene, Columbia, Ulster, Sullivan, and Schoharie.

Richard is an experienced trial lawyer and father to five children. He was raised in Ulster County and now lives in Columbia County. This is his first election. I have known him for 25 years or more, and I consider him an honest, fair, impartial, talented candidate for judicial office. I am happy to be able to vote for him and support his candidacy.

A very little bit about him:

A native of Esopus in Ulster County, Richard Mott has resided in Columbia County since 1976 in the town of Kinderhook. He has been in private practice at his Albany office since 1982. Mott also served in the Columbia County Public Defender’s Office from 1982 to 1987. He was the Kinderhook town attorney from 1984 to 1986 and has extensive experience in all phases of the law.

The race he is in is a four-way race. There are two Republican incumbents and two Democratic challengers. The top two vote getters are elected. Richard has been found Qualified for the job by the Independent Judicial Screening Committee. But because it's a judicial election, there is very little he can say about his views. Or about his opponents.

Obviously, getting the word about this wonderful candidate out in a 7-county area is an enormous, time consuming, expensive undertaking. This is a sprint. The election is on November 6.

Richard deserves and needs your support. It's an undertaking you can help along by sending a donation of any size to:

Committee to Elect Richard Mott to Supreme Court

P.O. Box 112

Kinderhook, NY 12106

Tuesday's Election In Columbia County

Disclaimer: The author has not endorsed and will not endorse any candidate for any position in the November, 2011 election. This essay is directed entirely at steps voters may wish to take to cast intelligent, responsible votes in November's DA and judicial contests. This essay is updated from an April, 2011 essay on the same topic.

"Every nation that has ended in tyranny has come to that end by way of good order. It certainly does not follow from this that peoples should scorn public peace, but neither should they be satisfied with that and nothing more. A nation that asks nothing of government but the maintenance of order is already a slave in the depths of its heart; it is a slave of its well-being, ready for the man who will put it in chains."
— Alexis de Tocqueville

Good order. Which brings me ever so briefly to Tuesday's election in Columbia County, New York. This is an off-off year election. There are no national or statewide races. There are only four county-wide races. There are no coat tails. And, to nobody’s surprise, there may be very little voter interest. The two most important countywide races are for County Judge and for District Attorney. The others are for coroner and treasurer. In other words, the race, if it’s about anything other than personality and party political power, which is doubtful, is about good order. It remains to be seen whether it is about more than that.

Let’s face it, the electorate doesn’t really know much about either job. If the voter’s house hasn’t been burglarized, or s/he hasn’t been arrested for DWI, or her kids aren’t hauled in for smoking pot, the voter has no direct experience of what the District Attorney does and does not do. And since most people want nothing at all to do with being victims of crimes, somebody who is aggressively against crime— isn’t everybody?— seems to be a good enough candidate to maintain good order. There’s more, but if the campaigns have illuminated these additional points I may have missed it.

The County Court job is far more opaque. There are very few people who know what goes on in Columbia County’s County Court. Most of them are participants. Virtually nobody shows up at the County Courthouse just to watch and find out what is going on, to observe the process, and how it is carried out. The stories in the newspaper don’t help educate about this. They discuss the outcomes of criminal cases, which are a relatively small part of the Court’s business, and they don’t talk about Family Court. Ever. That’s odd, because the overwhelming majority of the County Court’s business is Family Court. An unscientific estimate: 2/3’s or more of the Court’s business is Family Court.

The odds are that most voters know absolutely nothing about Family Court. The odds are that they have never been there, know no one who has been there, have no friends who have been there, and might not even know what is supposed to go on there. That’s because although Family Court is the county’s busiest Court, most of the litigants there are not “frequent voters.”

Who are the litigants in Family Court? They are almost entirely the County’s poorest residents on one side and the Department of Social Services on the other. Or there are cases between the poorest residents on both sides. It is extremely unusual for wealthy and middle class litigants to end up in Family Court. Why is that? Because they and their lawyers do everything humanly possible to avoid it. At all cost. And because “good order” means different things in different places, the Department of Social Services tends to ignore the questionable parenting of Columbia County’s most comfortable citizens.

If you’re solidly middle class and you are having a bad day and you had too much to drink before dinner and you throw a plate of spaghetti on the floor and curse and yell and scream and have a meltdown with your children present, the chances that you will ever be charged by DSS with neglect or abuse in Family Court are extremely remote. Nobody will call the cops or Child Protective Services. More likely, you’ll do a mandatory 8-count in a neutral corner, walk around the block, apologize profusely, and try again the next day to do better. In other words, nothing will happen to you. Commit this same conduct when you are poor, and it is far more likely that the event will be reported to some agency: 911, the cops, DSS, Social Services. The report of the event will be your engraved invitation to a Family Court experience that may last years.

In Family Court it is likely that your every facet will be investigated. These investigations are legion. You will eventually be told to participate in “services.” Parenting classes, anger management, mental health counseling, substance abuse treatment. The list is as extensive as its results are undocumented. And you may end up under the supervision of DSS and the Family Court for years, if not for all eternity, and you may end up losing your children to Foster Care or have your parental rights terminated if you don’t comply. In other words, this is serious business for you and your family. If you are poor, all of this is about good order, though it is more often couched in terms of protecting children from bad parenting.

Tuesday's election is about many things, but chief among them is who will be the Family Court judge who will impose good order on the County’s poorest families. And how, one wonders, do political leaders who themselves have never been to Family Court and don’t know the first thing about it, decide whether someone is or is not a good candidate for this important and powerful position? Short answer: they have no real clue about the job, so they decide this the same way they decide other questions. They ask the circular question: who will be a good candidate, meaning who can get votes. Nothing else really matters to them.

This means that the voter cannot really rely on the wisdom of the nominations. They might be good; they might not. Nor can the voter rely on the campaigns. Judicial campaigns have rules that prevent the most basic confrontations between candidates on issues. The campaigns are designed to promote clichés about efficiency and justice and fairness and respect.

There is a better idea for voters. An idea better than blindly accepting a candidate because he or she is on your favorite political party's line. It’s about education. Before casting a ballot for County Court Judge in November, the voter would be well advised to take just a couple of hours off, sit in the gallery and watch Family Court churn out its cases some afternoon. Observe the judges (none are running for re-election in November), observe the litigants, listen to the lawyers. See for yourself what’s at stake in these horrendous cases. Talk to litigants in the hall about their experiences. Talk to the lawyers too. Once you’ve seen this you’ll be far more equipped to decide which candidate is best suited to the position.

Is it too late for that now? Probably. The next best idea: talk to people who are engaged in the process: lawyers, social workers, litigants, those who provide services. Ask them about their experiences.

Without that most minimal investigation, your vote is just buying a pig in a poke. And as deTocqueville argued, shouldn’t voters really be asking for more than just good order? Shouldn’t voters be asking for understanding, wisdom, compassion, restraint, and intelligence? In fact, shouldn’t voters be asking that the candidates have human qualities that bend toward justice? And as important, shouldn't voters conduct their own investigations so that they are trying actually to determine which candidate best fulfills the requirements of this very difficult job?

The November Judicial Race In Columbia County

Disclaimer: The author has not endorsed and will not endorse any candidate for any position in the November, 2011 election. This essay is directed entirely at steps voters may wish to take to cast intelligent, responsible votes in November's judicial contest.

"Every nation that has ended in tyranny has come to that end by way of good order. It certainly does not follow from this that peoples should scorn public peace, but neither should they be satisfied with that and nothing more. A nation that asks nothing of government but the maintenance of order is already a slave in the depths of its heart; it is a slave of its well-being, ready for the man who will put it in chains."
— Alexis de Tocqueville

Good order. Which brings me ever so briefly to the upcoming November, 2011 election in Columbia County, New York. The races are just beginning to materialize. This is an off-off year election. There are no national or statewide races. There are only fourth county-wide races. There are no coat tails. And, to nobody’s surprise, there will be very little voter interest. The two most important countywide races are for County Judge and for District Attorney. The others are for coroner and treasurer. In other words, the race, if it’s about anything other than personality and party political power, which is doubtful, is about good order. It remains to be seen whether it is about more than that.

Let’s face it, the electorate doesn’t really know much about either job. If the voter’s house hasn’t been burglarized, or s/he hasn’t been arrested for DWI, or her kids aren’t hauled in for smoking pot, the voter has no direct experience of what the District Attorney does and does not do. And since most people want nothing at all to do with being victims of crimes, somebody who is aggressively against crime—isn’t everybody?—seems to be a good enough candidate to maintain good order. There’s more, but the campaigns will illuminate these additional points.

The County Court job is far more opaque. There are very few people who know what goes on in Columbia County’s County Court. Most of them are participants. Virtually nobody shows up at the County Courthouse just to watch and find out what is going on, to observe the process, and how it is carried out. The stories in the newspaper don’t help educate about this. They discuss the outcomes of criminal cases, which are a relatively small part of the Court’s business, and they don’t talk about Family Court. Ever. That’s odd, because the overwhelming majority of the County Court’s business is Family Court. An unscientific estimate: 2/3’s or more of the Court’s business in Family Court.

The odds are that most voters know absolutely nothing about Family Court. The odds are that they have never been there, know no one who has been there, have no friends who have been there, and might not even know what is supposed to go on there. That’s because although Family Court is the county’s busiest Court, most of the litigants are not “frequent voters.”

Who are the litigants in Family Court? They are almost entirely the County’s poorest residents on one side and the Department of Social Services on the other. Or there are cases between the poorest residents on both sides. It is extremely unusual for wealthy and middle class litigants to end up in Family Court. Why is that? Because they and their lawyers do everything humanly possible to avoid it. At all cost. And because “good order” means different things in different t places, the Department of Social Services tends to ignore the questionable parenting of Columbia County’s most comfortable citizens.

If you’re solidly middle class and you are having a bad day and you had too much to drink before dinner and you throw a plate of spaghetti on the floor and curse and yell and scream and have a meltdown with your children present, the chances that you will ever be charged by DSS with neglect or abuse in Family Court are extremely remote. Nobody will call the cops or Child Protective Services. More likely, you’ll do a mandatory 8-count in a neutral corner, apologize profusely, and try again the next day to do better. In other words, nothing will happen to you. Commit this same conduct when you are poor, and it is far more likely that the event will be reported to some agency: 911, the cops, DSS, Social Services. The report of the event will be your engraved invitation to a Family Court experience.

In Family Court it is likely that your every facet will be investigated. These investigations are legion. You will eventually be told to participate in “services.” Parenting classes, anger management, mental health counseling, substance abuse treatment. The list is as extensive as its results are undocumented. And you may end up under the supervision of DSS and the Family Court for years, if not for all eternity, and you may end up losing your children to Foster Care or have your parental rights terminated if you don’t comply. In other words, this is serious business for your and your family. If you are poor, all of this is about good order, though it is more often couched in terms of protecting children from bad parenting.

The coming election is about many things, but chief among them is who will be the Family Court judge who will impose good order on the County’s poorest families. And how, one wonders, do political leaders who themselves have never been to Family Court and don’t know the first thing about it, decide whether someone is or is not a good candidate for this important and powerful position? Short answer: they have no real clue about the job, so they decide this the same way they decide other questions. They ask the circular question: who will be a good candidate, meaning who can get votes. Nothing else really matters.

This means that the voter cannot really rely on the wisdom of the nominations. They might be good; they might not. Nor can the voter rely on the campaigns. Judicial campaigns have rules that prevent the most basic confrontations between candidates on issues. The campaigns are designed to promote clichés about efficiency and justice and fairness and respect.

There is a better idea for voters. It’s about education. Before casting a ballot for County Court Judge in November, the voter would be well advised to take just a couple of hours off, sit in the gallery and watch Family Court churn out its cases some afternoon. Observe the judges (none are running for re-election in November), observe the litigants, listen to the lawyers. See for yourself what’s at stake in these horrendous cases. Talk to litigants in the hall about their experience. Talk to the lawyers too. Once you’ve seen this you’ll be far more equipped to decide which candidate is best suited to the position.

Without that, your vote is just buying a pig in a poke. And as deTocqueville argued, shouldn’t voters really be asking for more than good order? Shouldn’t voters be asking for understanding, wisdom, compassion, restraint, and intelligence? In fact, shouldn’t voters be asking that the candidates have human qualities that bend toward justice?

NY-20: I Voted Today

At about 12:30 today, I walked across Route 203 and cast a ballot in the First District, Town of Austerlitz, Columbia County, New York in the NY-20 congressional election. I'm in the southern part of NY-20, right up against the Massachusetts border, and I've lived here for more than 20 years. I know that Murphy now has one vote.

I live close to the fire department, where the poll is. The polling place was not very busy. The fire trucks were parked outside. This is a small, rural town of 900 people. You can win any town election if you get 300+ votes. The Town voted for Obama, and Gillibrand twice, and Gore and Kerry, and it voted for Hilary Clinton for Senate, but the margins of victory were always quite small. The town supervisor is a Democrat; town board members are from both parties.

Turnout so far today has been brisk. There had been 200+ votes cast when I got there. Apparently, there were about 100 votes as of 9:30 am. The poll workers (why do they always have cakes and cookies?) said they thought there would be a sizeable (their word) turnout today even though there was only one race. They did not think it would be a "heavy" turnout. In other words, my predictions of a slight turnout were, well, wrong. That means that the GOTV effort might be working. Or at least the publicity is getting people to vote.

Most people I talk to, regardless of political persuasion, were amazed at the amount of attention this race has generated in the last few weeks. We all received tons of glossy mailings from both sides. In fact, we received so many that we stopped even looking at them. Had I known there were going to be so many, I would have saved them all so I could do a tally of who sent what. I would have liked to send them back to the originators with a note that they were being profligate, that their campaign was wasteful and not particularly effective. My impression is that we received at least 25 mailings, maybe more.

We also received numerous robo calls. Last night, I got one from Vice President Joe Biden. I also got one from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. And, of course, I also got one from Disco T. I would have liked one from President Obama, but evidently, that was not to happen.

On Northeast Public Radio (WAMC) they are today saying authoritatively (do they say things any other way?) that the race is extremely close, that the turnout is big, and that the win might be determined by just a few votes. Maybe that's so.

Regardless of all of that, it's really unusual for this district to be in the spotlight. You'll recall that for years and years we were represented by Gerry Solomon, a proto-militarist who decided that people convicted of simple marijuana possession should lose their federal financial aid for a year, and then by John Sweeney, Solomon's hand picked successor. When the Republicans ruled this district, its vote was taken for granted and it went unnoticed. It was only recently, very recently, that Kirsten Gillibrand won here. We aren't used to receiving national attention.

I am not surprised that people claim this election is some kind of referendum on the Stimulus. My neighbors all seem to acknowledge that the economy is a mess, and I think they're voting for Murphy because he supports the Stimulus and Disco T doesn't.

You The People

In Ireland, I am informed, they have some venerable traditions about drinking. When you go to a party, you bring two bottles: one for tonight, and one for the host at a later time. You uncork the one for tonight and throw away the cork. That way the bottle will have to be consumed tonight.

And so we celebrate the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States. Let's drink the entire bottle. Let's deal with the hangover. And then, let's go back to work.

Join me with Advil below.

I cried when Barack Obama was elected. In many ways, it was the culmination of work I had done as a community organizer and as a civil rights lawyer for the past 40 years .

If you had told me 40 years ago, when I was an organizer in Alabama, sleeping with a loaded .38 under my pillow, that in 2008 the Democratic Party would nominate an African American and that he would be elected president, I would have explained to you that you were delusional and f*cking crazy. I might have thought that you were a visionary, an idealist, someone I dearly loved, but I would have thought you were completely crazy. I would have explained to you how dangerous Alabama was, that you had to watch your back, and I would have explained the psychic and symbolic qualities of having a .38. You couldn't hit anything at a distance, but the muzzle flash was enormous. It was solely a defensive weapon. It would scare anyone away.

40 years ago at Thanksgiving 1968, a friend of mine, who was then living in New Jersey, told me that she was worried about me being an organizer in Alabama. She gave me a switchblade to protect myself. I told her I had no clue how to use it, and that if I had to cut somebody, I doubt I'd be able to do that without maiming myself as well. She smiled and said it would be a good idea for me to practice. I did practice.

In 1977 I appeared in Circuit Court in Tupelo, Mississippi, as a lawyer trying to get a client out of the Mississippi State Hospital in Whitfield. The judge made it clear that he didn't appreciate having a communist (maybe he had a big "C") like me in his court. I cried later because my client needed to be released, but he wouldn't be. He would continue in confinement for no reason I could fathom.

In 1984 I was the lawyer for a man on death row. The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed his conviction and sent him home. I was thrilled. Then I saw that one judge had dissented. His argument was that the law of evidence should be changed in this very case so that my client could be killed. I read the decision and I wept. I was infuriated. I couldn't understand such a lack of regard for human life.

I could go on and on about with these stories. If this were a saloon and you were buying I would. I could go on all night.

I can provide you with 40+ years of anecdotal evidence, stories, incidents, remarks. I could elaborate on these and exaggerate them. I could itemize my scars, my injuries, my failures, my disappointments, my mistakes. I could explain to you how my first marriage died in pathetic, heartbreaking failure because of threats, crank phone calls, the movement, stress, pressure. I could trot out all of my hurts. I could catalog them. But I won't. Suffice it to say, I cried when Barack Obama was elected.

And now what?

You made Barack Obama president. You led him to the White House. You raised the money, you distributed the literature, you knocked on the doors, you got out the vote, you wrote the essays, you made the arguments, you discussed and analyzed the policies, you hooted and hollered and cried and screamed, you pulled the levers, you watched the returns. You led him to the White House. You won this election.

And then we all cried. But it wasn't the end. Not at all. It was just the very beginning. He is only what you have made him. He was who you had faith in. He was who you trusted. He was who you elected. It was just the beginning of us telling him what we wanted, what we needed, what was right, what was wrong, what was fair, what was oppressive, what was unnecessary, what was required. It was the beginning of participatory democracy. It was the beginning of we the people saying what should be done and what shouldn't.

Can we enjoy the victory for a few days? Can we enjoy the end of the reign of terror? Sure. Can we savor the end of an administration that would terrorize us into giving up our rights? Can we bask in the glow of taking back our country? Sure. Can we smile at the lame duck congress and the retarded duck executive? Yes. And then? And then? And then?

Folks. We made Barack Obama in our image, and we're not done. We need to lead the country. We need Barack Obama to follow our lead. We need to define what should be done. We need to be present. And active. And speaking. And demanding. And explaining. We made him. That means we need to continue to inspire him. That means we need to continue to speak and argue and debate and think and express.

This is democracy. This is what it looks like. Our leader follows us. Our leader follows the people. He listens to what we say. He responds to what we demand. He enacts what we tell him to enact.

Folks. It is bottom up, not top down. He is president, but he responds to us. Not to lobbyists. Not to arms merchants. Not to failed bankers. Not to those who are really "special interests." To us. To you. To me. To the people. He is our president, and he is responsible to us. We made him president, we gave money, we made calls, we knocked on doors. This is not, this cannot be US business as usual. He is there to listen to us.

I will wipe my tears now. Because I know what's ahead. And that is that we have to lead and continue to inspire the nation. We have to make it clear what should happen. We have to be the people who dictated what should be done, what should happen. It's not the lobbyists. It's not the industrialists. It's not the union leaders.

Folks. It is us. You and me. The People of the United States of America. We need to step up and assume our place as the voice of the United States. We need to speak. And our elected leader needs to respond.

Jubilation. Yes We Can!

Union Square, New York City. This is what making history looks like. This is what jubilation feels like.

h/t to Cassandra for cellphone photo

It's Election Day At Last! Let's Make History! Let's Vote For Barack Obama! Let's Make It A Landslide!

Today we're making history.

I voted this morning at about 7:30 am in the First District of the Town of Austerlitz, Columbia County, New York, a blue district in a blue town in a blue county in a blue state. The poll is just across the road at the firehouse. The polls opened at 6 am. There is one voting machine for District 1, and another for the other District. I was the 60th person to vote in this district. That, I think, means that even here, where there are no real contests (I think Kirsten Gillibrand is a shoe in for NY-20), there will be an extremely heavy turn out.

I voted for Barack Obama. Forty years ago, when I was a community organizer in Alabama, if you had told me that I'd have the opportunity to vote for a black man for president of the United States on the Democratic Party line, I would have thought you were utterly crazy. A crazy optimist. An idealist. A dreamer. Out of reality. So I was utterly delighted to pull the lever today for Barack Obama. And to help out our friends in the Working Families Party, I pulled the lever on their line.

The turnout here and the predictions in the media suggest that across America there will be a gigantic turnout, perhaps a record one, certainly an historic one.

In cities and suburbs across America there will be huge lines and delays. It's only in rural places like here that you can vote within 15 minutes of arriving at the polls. Voters have to anticipate long delays. Voters have to be willing to put up with this. So it is important that people just stay. in. line. until their votes are cast. However long that might be. And if you're inclined to help these folks standing in line, bring them water, food, gloves, whatever will help them just stay. in. line.

It's also important that any of the common irregularities be corrected, and that the large scale ones, if there are any, be reported immediately to the Obama campaign.

Please vote. Please vote for Barack Obama. Please vote for hope and change. And please help us make history today.

Yes We Can

Vote No on Proposition 8

h/t to thereisnospoon, hekebolos, theKK, and Reality Bites Back.

If you're in California, please vote NO on Prop 8.

Less Than One Week To Go: Yes We Can!!!

Kenya: Vote Obama!

Change

Yes, Yes, Yes.

Well, Homer Simpson's For Obama....

But what about a paper trail for each vote? What about verification of votes? What about not having another a stolen election?