Well, maybe "narrowly escapes" isn't quite the right word for what happened, but it would seem that the folks over in the UK may have the right idea.

This year I injected myself into the political discussion.  Me.  I didn't care that I lacked an extensive political knowledge base or that I had never really taken the time to engage in productive political discussion before.  I felt that it was a resonsibility that must not be passed on.  Everyone has a responsibility to at the very least lend their voice to the national will.  I have lots of things I would like to see changed in this country.  I would like to see civil liberties restored.  I'd like to see an administration that does not feel it necessary to shred the constitution in order to torture individuals.  I'd like to see immigration reform.  I'd like to see discrimination against LGBT folks ended.  I'd like to see voting percentages rise.  I make no bones about the fact that I'd like to see marijuana legalized.

All of these things fall under the banner of Human Rights.  And here in Idaho, this is our banner.

Find out why I fight for Human Rights below the fold.

Students will write a 4-6 page paper containing an argument about whether developments[Progressive developments, that is] in the American liberal traditions constitute progress or decline; in other words, students are to represent the different American traditions and make an argument for the superiority of one over the others.

disclaimer:  I know this isn't really the proper use for a diary, but I figured that it's 2am and there's no other diaries going up right now anyways.  This is just as much a community building exercise as a pootie diary and even if noone wants to bounce ideas around with me, for some reason I think fleshing this out dkos style will help me get through this essay.  Further, the essay is very relevant to what we talk about here all the time.

I'll be up all night writing this and will likely update this diary as I add more to my essay so feel free to let me know what you think and critiqe me as I go along.  It might take me a little bit before I get anything of substance out[such as an intro lol], so bear with me.  Also feel free to spout out anything you feel about the topic matter.

I, of course, will be defending the Progressives in this essay.

Crossposted at OMS

That's right, you heard it here first.  The Obama campaign has opened up a campaign headquarters deep into enemy territory.  Here in the reddest of red states, where no Democratic presidential candidate has set up shop since 1982.  Republicans be wary because Obama is fighting BACK!  With the financial help of a few Idaho natives[the office space and much therein was donated by a single individual!] and the group effort by local volunteers the Obama Campaign Headquarters is officially OPEN!

Who ever decided that Idaho was a red state anyway?  Not me, that's for sure!

Last night was the grand opening of the brand new Idaho for Obama Headquarters and the grassroots were out in full force!

Disclosure:  This particular sign was made by the grassroots extraordinaire Terrapin Station84! [pretty sweet, eh?]

Some of the campaign's rationale for this unprecedented display of confidence in the Idaho grassroots below the fold:

No, not this one.

Wanted to share this with you all.  I was reading the Idaho Statesman yesterday and normally I scan the letters to the editor for anything that looks interesting.  There were a ton of letters on SCHIP, and since this is Idaho, there were a ton of letters about Larry Craig.  In the National Politics "letters to the editor" section there were two letters about Ron Paul.  One was entitled "Paul winning Internet by landslide," and the other was "Paul will abolish IRS, protect Constitution."

I thought to myself that I wouldn't bother reading either b/c they would be the typical Ron Paul supporter droll, but then I ended up reading them anyway.

Make no mistake.  I am Obama all the way and have been since January.  But NOTHING has shaken my support so much as THIS.  I'm a strong advocate of Marijuana decriminalization and to hear Dodd say the same thing makes me want to do whatever it takes to support him fully.  It has certainly caused me to take a very favorable second look at him.  It's fantastic really.  I could just see it:  Dodd forming an administration sympathetic to the plight of those affected by the tyrannical marijuana prohibition laws. . .

Barack seems to be making motions toward a stance on the upcoming Patraeus Report.  I went to his blog and found this:

I heard someone predict it yesterday and thought "No, that would be ridiculous, what a stupid correlation"--and then it happened.  Someone said that the Rethugs would try to link Craig to Bill Clinton somehow and I laughed and forgot about it.

But then. . .

The recent developments in the Obama/Clinton feud involving Stephen Sixta's thoughts on how they each answered the question seems to have put the matter to rest.  Obviously, Barack interpreted the question correctly, answered it correctly, and according to rasmussen polls, most everyone agrees with him[aside from everyone's favorite opinion shapers: the pundits].  However, there are still issues that concern me.

One thing that bothered me was Clinton, recently asking "whatever happened to the 'politics of hope?'"  Most recently, she had Tom Vilsack sound off for her:

"One could say they[Obama's "attacks" on Hillary] are certainly audacious, but honestly they are not particularly hopeful. . .It's not the Iowa way."

But wait.  Didn't Clinton start this by calling Barack "naive" and "irresponsible"?  Why is she making the argument that Barack is not allowed to hit back when attacked?

More after the jump

The common consensus seems to be that Hillary "schooled" Barack when she took this shot at him in a response to this question:

"In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since. In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"

 Kind of interesting, I guess, when you consider what she said back in April.  

Earlier this year, Senator Clinton claimed: I think it is a terrible mistake for our president to say he will not talk with bad people.  She reversed herself last night, disagreeing with Senator Obama's assertion that we should use every tool at the president's disposal to address problems before they become threats.

So I got home from work last night just in time to catch the second half of Bill Moyers on PBS.  First I saw an interview with Republican Stalwart Victor Gold being conducted by the venerable Mr. Moyers.  It was quite fascinating, and about his book, entitled "How the Neocons and HolyRollers destryoed the GOP."  Very interesting stuff, but not what this diary is about.

What is this diary about you may ask?  Well, I'll tell you.

After the Stalwart interview, Moyers offered his thoughts on Rupert Murdoch.

Here's the video link:  http://www.pbs.org/...

Here's the transcript link: http://www.pbs.org/...

Here's the highlights:  [pssst. . . they're after the jump]

This is my second diary ever, and I'm going to make it short and sweet.  With bulletins.  Hooray!

1.  Kudos to Rhode Island congress for overriding a gubernatorial VETO in order to make their Medical Marijuana law permanent.

2.  The U.S. House of Reps will be considering a Medical Marijuana amendement within a few weeks.  I'd like to suggest everyone write their representatives and demand they support the bill.

3.  the Marijuana Policy Project has been doing a really good job of informing representatives that Medical Marijuana is, in fact, a very politically expedient position.  Check out their website at www.marijuanapolicy.org

4.  I'm going to lead by example.  That is to say, I am going to make a donation to the Marijuana Policy Project[even though I am very poor] within the next week, so that they can  possibly make an impact before the House votes on the national amendment.

See you after the jump.

Hello Everybody:  So, remember a month or so back when Rush Limbaugh ran a parody song on air, entitled "Barack, the Magic Negro?"  Well, there have been some developments to this story I thought you all might find interesting.  It would appear that a morning news team on a CBS affiliate(KOVR) in Sacramento, after recently airing a story citing the controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh's "Barack the Magic Negroe" parody, has incurred the wrath of Rush.  Before you read this diary, check out the link:

http://www.cbs13.com

Part of what interests me about this is Rush Limbaugh's response to the KOVR news team.  I will provide the MediaMatters link that displays his story(that way noone will have to actually go to his website, ewww), and then I'll catch you after the jump.  Plus, a modest call to action.

http://mediamatters.org/...

Oh, and just for kicks, here is the link to KOVR newsteams response:
http://cbs13.com/...