Thursday, February 28, 2008

MoveOn Moves on to Flemington

Under the broad umbrella of MoveOn, MoveOn.Org Civic Action and Political Action are grass roots organizations that are funded by citizens and designed to give citizens a voice and collective power to influence among things… candidate selection, legislators, media and national issues by alerting individual members of pending issues via the internet.

This Sunday MoveOn will be hosting an event in Flemington intended to cinch the nomination of Barack Obama for President of the United States. Nationwide, this Sunday, MoveOn members will be hosting meetings or Obama Parties, in their homes. These parties will be kicked off by conference calls featuring Halle Berry, Senator Ted Kennedy and popular Texas radio host, Jim Hightower. Then local MoveOn members, cell phones in hand, will dial up their cohorts in Texas hoping to lock in the nomination Tuesday in Texas.

The “Yes We Can” Obama Party in Flemington will be on March 2 at 4:oo 0’clock hosted by

Kathleen J---MoveOn member
At: Kathy and Michael’s in Flemington
Please bring a cell phone and charger

To RSVP and get more details click below,

So Flemington Obama fans here is your moment to have an impact…Move on to contact Kathleen and let her know you will be there, phone in hand.

For additional information on MoveOn check

Stay tuned.


bob said...

Thank you for posting this. Kathy has been a hardworking MoveOn leader for quite some time, and this shows that the people in Flemington (as well as the rest of the state) are more than just cash machines for the rest of the country.

And Halle Berry is welcome here any time.

Courier News Flemington blog said...


It is my pleasure and should you have further info here please feel free to share. I will be glad to do follow up posts anytime.

ReagensRight said...

I have been reading your blog on and off for a about a month [a Borough Council member told me of it]. I generally agree with your concerns and intelligent writing. I am sorry that your husband is no longer on Borough Council, and I am glad to see Mr. Hauck as mayor. But your promotion of "Move.On.Org"! Do you know about this group?

This is the group that called General Petraeus "betray us"---calling a war hero a traitor. This is the group you promote? Also, they support Barack Obama, the socialist type Democrat candidate. Is this who you support for President? Although I do not like John McCain, but he is heads above Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama.

bob said...

In response to post #3:

It's hard to know where to begin, as it is with most right-wingers. So I'll start here: assuming your moniker refers to our 40th president, you should spell his name correctly: Reagan. As in Ronald Wilson Reagan. The President whose legacy has been thrown in the scrap heap by Mr. Bu$h and his sycophants.

As for Sen. Obama, his plan includes tax relief for the middle class instead of the ultra-wealthy, simplifying the tax code, fair trade that protects individuals and the environment (now that we've done a good job of protecting multinational corporations), assisting workers moving into service jobs as manufacturing jobs dry up, investing in training and workforce development, making mortgage lenders more accountable to borrowers, ending predatory lending, investing in green technologies and renewable energy, expanding high-speed Internet service and preserving net neutrality. Sounds pretty capitalist and family-friendly to me.

As for MoveOn, name calling is childish, whether done by MoveOn or by Rep. Mike Ferguson. But the sentiment about Gen. Petraeus is correct and he deserves a court-martial, not a medal. His lies betrayed the American people and our soldiers by escalating Bush's war, claiming that violence is down – because car bombs don't count and assassinations count only if you're shot in the back rather than the front. And never mind that "ethnic cleansing" of neighborhoods reduced some of the violence (once people are dead, you can't kill them any more). Like Sen. McCain, Petraeus has said that American troops may have to stay in Iraq for 10 years. The more corrupt and incompetent the misfit, the more Bush likes them. Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job.

ReagensRight said...

I respond to Bob:

Talk about 'name-calling'! Calling Mr. Bush and his outstanding administration "sycophants". And talk about being a bad speller and a name caller! The spelling is "psychophant", and it is not appropriate to question this president's mental capacities, no matter what you think of his policies.

Your description of Mr. Obama is correct---his policies are those of the ultra-left wingers. Your right about that. Those Democrat candidates who attack the 'rich' (never quite sure what that means---sometimes the Democrat Part calls people who make 40,000 'rich') I never understand. Why shouldn't those who pay the highest in taxes get the most in tax cuts?

The job in Iraq is not done yet. We need to stay there until peace is at hand. Americans do not cut and run, even though Mr. Obama would like us to.

And as far as name calling I never said anything about Congressman Ferguson calling General Petraeus names. That's just hogwash and more liberal mumbo jumbo.

You and your liberal friends are lucky to live in a nation where we can exercise our free speech on the streets, and in the newspapers without getting arrested and taken off to jail.

All we are trying to do in Iraq is establish the same kind of democracy we have here, where majority rules and we have freedom.

But I know liberals have a problem with that. I, sir, do not.

Betsy said...


LOL. Repukicans: changing the english language one word at a time.

it is not appropriate to question this president's mental capacities, no matter what you think of his policies.

Actually, it's rather patriotic to question authority and the thought processes behind it. Ask the founding fathers of our nation.

Courier News Flemington blog said...

Hi ReagensRight and Bob,

Welcome, ReagensRight. Thank you for your kind words about my husband and me. I also think the mayor is doing a good job.

Re: MoveOn.Org...This is a blog that features Flemington and so I put up events that occur in Flemington and I am very happy to do so in order that every view can be aired respectfully.

I appreciate several things about MoveOn in that it is a grassroots organization that gives people a means to be politically active and awaken Americans from their political slumber. I think this is vital to maintaining the health of our country. I certainly support its hard work and activism, even if I am may not support its candidate at the end of the day.

RE: Dave Petraeus...No, I do not agree with everything MoveOn does and I do not think it was wise to take out the ad in the NY Times.

We are in war and people view General Petraeus depending on how they view the war. From what I know of him, he is an honorable soldier who has had innovative ideas in helping the people of Iraq for years now. And I would have liked to have seen him take over there as early as 2003 because with his successful plans for community work maybe the surges of the past few years would not have occurred.

Petraeus is a soldier and the very nature of this work is that soldiers operate in the absence of conventional moral law. Hence it is very difficult to judge against him using conventional moral standards. But my sense is that in these warring circumstances, Petraus is not a renegade but is trying to achieve our national security even if others disagree that this is the road to take to do so. I believe he is a very ethical person operating in very difficult circumstances and I salute him.

When we entered Iraq, our Allies also agreed that Iraq was fraught with weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein admitted this deception and provoked the world at a very dangerous moment in history, thinking France would prevent the invasion by the US.

I peruse several newspapers across the US and I have read, violence is down due to the Awakening group, Sunni insurgents turned US supporters, supported by Petraeus…,pubID.26335/pub_detail.asp,0,7596784.story?page=2&coll=la-home-center


PLEASE note this most recent editorial, February 29, 2008, below by Angelina Jolie in the Washington Post.

As far as candidates go, I am still shopping. I have lived through enough elections to have become cynical...all candidates promise us everything and Obama tends to do so on a pretty grand scale.

I have a healthy skepticism… if these things were so easily had, I think, we would have them …

I do not think Ahmadinejad of Iran will be moved by the Golden Tongue of Obama…but Ahmadinejad will take notice of our fleet in the Gulf of Hormuz…the Russians and the insurgents understand action more than my view…

I think the reality of it is that we will have to be Iraq for the years to come .The Middle Easterners know this. Note this quote made at the US-Islamic World Forum in Doha on President’s Weekend.

”Obama and Hillary Clinton can’t be serious about leaving Iraq in 12 to 16 months, a well- informed Jordanian said to me (Joe Klein). “If you do that, there will be chaos. The Turks will attack in the north. The Iranians will take over the south.” Source “Time” Magazine March 3, page 27. The next US president must address these world realities.

McCain too is no shoe in…

I am a national security person and I believe the president’s primary job is national security...not legislation

We currently have a Democratic Congress. I also do not like the executive branch and the legislative branch to be of the same party…same party rule presents the worst of times for the US.

I need to see running mates…but for national security reasons I am leaning toward McCain at the moment…

I think it will be a heck of a campaign season and I look forward to all the commentary...I would love to see our youth get more whipped up over the the 60's we certainly were...they were vintage years on so many levels...

bob said...

To Reagen/Reagan:

LOL. I was arrested for exercising my right to free speech! But now that I've been vindicated and am on good terms with those on the other side, I'd rather not dredge it up.

And I did indeed spell "sycophantic" correctly. Consult any paper or electronic dictionary ( is a good one). I admit that poor spelling isn't the greatest sin, but this demonstrates the right-winger mentality: even though you guys are so often mistaken, you'll still hammer those who are correct. That's how Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, et al -- you know, the liberal media -- make their living. They'll concoct stuff out of thin air and get caught red-handed by media watchdogs, but they know their listeners never bother to investigate beyond slogans and dittos. That's what it means to be progressive: to be informed.

On that note: it's now 1,768 days and 3,834 American soldiers killed since Mission Accomplished (3,973 total and 29,203 wounded, not including hundreds of thousands of non-American casualties). And if you're between the ages of 18 and 40 and you want the job "finished", tell me -- when are you shipping out?

So please do me this favor: continue telling everyone that Obama's platform is liberal, and that Republicans oppose the liberal platform of protecting homeowners from predatory lenders, protecting the environment and the economy with green technologies, retraining laid-off workers and keeping mega-media companies from pushing everyone else into low-speed Internet service. Also tell everyone that Republicans think Bu$h is mentally competent.

Hey, I say potato, you say potatoe.

ReagensRight said...

If your the same young man who was arrested, protesting the war, you should have been arrested. While you have the right to your opinion, you do not have the right to shove it down everyone's throat, and not support the troops. They are in Iraq preserving your freedoms and mine. To waste them with not supporting the troops is just wrong. And of course, like every other liberal, you would rather not "dredge" up the wrongs that you have committed. When I do something wrong I admit it, and move on. That is something liberals seem to have trouble doing.

It's the "Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly" and their patriotism that keeps this country great. They are using the First Ammendment and the Freedoms of Speach in the Constitution that you protest against when you get arrested. You can learn alot by listening to ABC radio.

The liberal media spins things the way they want us to believe, and it is up to people to tell the truth.

The Americans who gave their lives in Iraq are heroes, no matter what numbers you sight. It has been 1700 days and more, and for each day our troops are there, they are heroes each and every day. That is something the liberals never seem to talk about.

I served my time in Viet Nam, and I left heroes back there too. George W. Bush served this country proudly in the military as a pilot so he knows of military committment and service. Where and when did you serve?

and potatoe is spelled "potato", without the extra "e", by the way! Check the dictionary sometime,

Betsy said...

They are using the First Ammendment and the Freedoms of Speach

Check the dictionary sometime, are a funny person, Mr. Dead President.

ReagensRight said...

I respond to Betsey here,

So, it's my spelling that you object to? Not my opinions on the issues that matter?

I find most liberals believe in the same sham things: abortion on demand [I happen to be pro-choice, but do not believe that women should be able to use abortion as birth control, nor should tax payer dollars go to pay for an abortion.

I believe in single-payer universal health care---and the single payer should be every single person. This nation has the best medical delivery system in the world, and no one is ever turned away at an emergency room. And there are lots of charities willing to provide health care---so no one need be without health care. Anyone who lacks health care simply does not want it.

The serge is working---liberals have troubling admitting that.

Anyway, I will be supporting John McCain, although he is too liberal on most issues, he will be better than Obama or Clinton.

Betsy said...

So, it's my spelling that you object to? Not my opinions on the issues that matter?

Given that you insist on having others consult a dictionary while admonishing others about spelling, no, not really. As is typical with your type, IOKIYAR.

As far as your opinions go, I find anyone in the 32% club to be rather inconsequential. Even more so, anyone who thinks the drug addict comedian Limbaugh is right, that the racist Hannity is worthwhile, and that racist voter fraud perpetuator Coulter influential is very simply, a moron who probably should take lessons in civics.

And it's Betsy with only one e.

ReagensRight said...

Why is it always the liberals that profess to be the passionate ones, but horrendously attack those of us who are disabled with dyslexia about our spelling? I would hope that you would find a better way to engage in the area of issues rather than name calling and attacking someone who is disabled/

Both you and B ob are typical "libs" who have less substance on any argument made. You attack Bush for his mispronunciation of words, rather than on his policies---because you know they are working.

The serge is working to tamp down the violence, and those Iraqi people who depend on us will be free soon. That may bother you 'libs', but it shows how Republican poloicy rather than Democrat policy is working.

Betsy said...

Why is it always the liberals that profess to be the passionate ones, but horrendously attack those of us who are disabled with dyslexia about our spelling? I would hope that you would find a better way to engage in the area of issues rather than name calling and attacking someone who is disabled/

Hold on, let me go find a violin to play along. In any case, you shouldn't throw stones in glass houses then. Oh, and if you are getting any sort of disability for your disablement, thank a democrat. Your fine friends in Washington would prefer to leave you hanging. You can thank the democratic decency for preserving those benefits for you if you are indeed disabled as you claim.

It's surge by the way. To quote your own words, "check a dictionary".

Courier News Flemington blog said...


I know that words are cheap but thank you for your extraordinary and brave service to our country.

I too am pro choice with the reservation that abortion is not a form of birth control. I am leaning towards McCain for national security reasons but you think McCain is too liberal in other areas...what areas?


I thought Obama was going to wrap up the nomination on Tuesday.

With the neck in neck with Obama and Clinton, where does that leave you ?

ReagensRight said...

I think that McCain is too liberal on the Iraq War---I support the serge as a step in the right direction. But, I think he is too soft on the answer to the war---I think only a scale escalation would work, with a draft and an increase in the draft age from 18-35, period, like in other wars. The only wars we have ever won have been wars where the Senate has clearly declared war as it is stated in the Constitution. I would keep women and gays out of the war, they lower morale, the army during a time of declared war is no time for social experiments that puts men's lives in danger with people u qualified to fight. I hope that when McCain gets to the White House, he changes the policies that Clinton started.

Another area where he is too liberal is the McCain-Feingold, limiting freedom of speaches. That must be rescineded. Finally, his support for the illegals. The Hispanics should be sent back to where they came from, period. tax dollars should not be used to support the illegals. You had a good handle on that a few weeks back, and I agree with your opinion on the illegals. National ID cards for everyone, that the police can request. If you are here legally, what's the problem? If you hire an illegal, fines and then jail time.

So, I will hold my nose and support McCain, but he is too liberal for me, but Mrs, Clinton and Mr. Obama are worse. And it has nothing to do with the fact that he's an "Afro-American". I respect him for what he has accomplished, but he;s too liberal.

bob said...


re "potatoe is spelled "potato", without the extra "e", by the way! Check the dictionary sometime"

I know that; but tell it to Dan Quayle. Also, "a lot" is two words, not one.

As for my arrest, you can rest assured we most certainly WERE supporting the troops -- that's why we were there -- so please spare us the right-wing slogans and dittos. The Bushevik Regime wants us to ignore casualties. His Fraudulency doesn't visit wounded soldiers (I think he visited one, once) and he hasn't attended even one funeral. We aren't even allowed to see the flag-draped coffins returning, for the first time in American history. The Pentagon knows it makes bad PR. We're supposed to root for glory while ignoring the cost. Those of us who are progressive patriots refuse to accept that. What we did was hold a memorial, plain and simple. Not a single protest sign in sight.

The concept of "supporting the troops" has meaning, it isn't just empty words.

And thank you for your service to our country. I would hope that experience would make you more aware of how Bu$h mistreats men and women in uniform. He supports defense contractors instead of our soldiers.

Joan: I think Obama did wrap up the nomination. Hillary just hasn't figured it out, yet!

She needed to score big to remain viable, but at most she got a net gain of only 4 delegates. But when everything is counted in Texas, even that small gain will probably be wiped out.

For Hillary to get the nomination at this point, she would have to win something like 75% of all remaining delegates.

bob said...

Sorry everyone if I'm being too prolific, but I can't pass up "You attack Bush for his mispronunciation of words, rather than on his policies---because you know they are working."

LOL again. His policies are working, all right -- if his goal is to wreck America for the next two generations. Let's look at just a small sample of the numbers of the last 7 years:

The day Bu$h took office
Real GDP growth: 4.09% over 8 years.
Today, after 7 years of Bu$h
Real GDP growth: 2.65% over 7 years.

The day Bu$h took office
National debt: $5.7 trillion
Today, after 7 years of Bu$h
National debt: $9.2 trillion

The day Bu$h took office
Budget surplus: $431 billion
Today, after 7 years of Bu$h
Budget deficit: $734 billion

The day Bu$h took office
Americans in poverty: 31.6 million
Today, after 7 years of Bu$h
Americans in poverty: 36.5 million

The day Bu$h took office
Median household income: $49,163 ($6,000 increase in 8 years)
Today, after 7 years of Bu$h
Median household income: $48, 023 ($1,100 decrease in 7 years)

Courier News Flemington blog said...

ReagensRight and Bob,

Y’all have put out some meaty stuff to chomp on.


It think the surge was long over due. You remember before the invasion that General Eric Shinseki was marginalized by Rumsfeld for saying there had to be a large number of boots on the ground to maintain the peace. This was the conventional military wisdom after Bosnia and had it been followed I suspect there would not have been an insurgency and Iraq would have been a far safer place. I think women in combat heighten the danger. They should not be there. As for gays in the military, I recall the Brits have their own gay units that seem to workout well. The joint chiefs I do not think support the draft for 2 reasons. First, it takes too long to train draftees in all the technology that is in use and then let them go after only 2 years and second, Vietnam taught the military that troops had to have some stay power. There were too many inexperienced soldiers in Vietnam and that had negative impact on the war.

Illegal immigration on the magnitude the US is experiencing is definitely a socio/economic and ethical issue that needs immediate redress. Your plan on immigration sounds like Romney’s as do your thoughts on a health care program. How would you feel about a McCain/Romney ticket?


I think you have a point here about Clinton maybe needing to raise her awareness. But then too ---it ain’t over ‘til it’s over… I learned that as the mother of too highly trained gymnasts…you should not throw in the towel before the last event no matter how badly you flubbed the first three. I have seen my daughters walk away with prize ribbons under the most unbelievable of circumstances.

But why Obama for you?

Now there are those who would say that the economic successes seen under Bill Clinton were the results of what was put in place under the senior Bush….but no doubt that Bush the younger has been spending and is an epidemic these days, this rampant government spending…

Wondered if you ever checked out this site……I think you might like it.

How could you possibly dub yourself too prolific after the epistles I write…I make St. Paul look brief ….ROTFLOL….

Courier News Flemington blog said...


Re: the Democratic nomination...I thought these articles on Florida and Michigan and the possibility of a re-vote may interest you...

"Democrats Try to End Impasse over Delegates" NY Times, March 7


"Michigan and Florida Have Delegates in a State", Wash.Post, March 7

Courier News Flemington blog said...


I am very sorry about the posting problem. That thread should not be closed. It seems to be OK now. I am posting this response there too so that the political discussion can continue there…

Your answer surprised me some and I am not savvy enough on the inner Democratic Party workings to comment on your analysis but here is where I came on the Democratic campaign and some of it is consistent with some of what you discuss.

I see Hillary as old time party and exploiting the sisterhood. We woman have nothing to prove…and we never did. She also tends to embellish her experience as first lady but back peddles when challenged like with NAFTA. And she presents as the woman for all seasons with no base line. I like flexibility, but not that much.

Now as for Obama he threw a bit of a curve to the party and I think this stance of his is a long time coming and should be carried forth no matter the outcome of the Democratic nomination--- namely he is talking about us as a country that is moving past its racism and sexism and dirty campaigns, opening the way to a new era…raising the dignity of the American citizen as a people who can get it right.

Now you are calling yourself a progressive in this movement in the Dem Party.This movement has been noticed in the British weekly publication the “Economist”. It analyses what is going on here and Obama’s style in general as open field politics, the message that appeals to the independents, meaning the group of voters in both parties who are sick to death of partisanship...which I think Hillary harbors to the core…here is where Obama is getting his following even though he is just a junior senator with really no hands on nationwide or foreign policy experience. Now I think there is something very interesting going on here with this type of political movement, i.e. potential for a new era in campaigning in general and transcending the open wounds that have kept our country divided. This is necessary and is a real breath of fresh air. So I think he is dancing rings around Hillary… and wouldn’t we American welcome these changes over the nasty politicking we have seen in previous years? So no matter the nomination, the parties, both of them should learn something here.