Field Hands Are Everywhere: Cheshire County Group to Report from Unity, New Hampshire Today

By Al Giordano



Just a quick update on the progress of Field Hands, the self-organizing venture by readers of The Field.

The Cheshire County New Hampshire group is not waiting around for Local status to get busy. It has seven members so far, just three short of qualifying as a Local. Today - with a small assist by me, from a distance - they'll be on the press bus to and from the Unity, NH event - in next door Sullivan County - with Senators Obama and Clinton (in a town where both candidates tied last January with 107 votes apiece), with pen and paper, reporting the inside story for all of us.

Imagine a national (international) grassroots effort in which no matter what part of the country (world) news is happening, you can get the unmediated story from your fellow and sister readers and commenters. That is one of the potentials of the Field Hands phenomenon.

If you haven't already signed up as a Field Hand, do so here. There are now 439 members, 16 locals with at least ten members apiece, and many more already building toward that threshold.

Every Field Hand group is autonomous: you don't need permission from me or anybody else to self-organize in the ways that benefit your community and your world. I'm not responsible for your actions, and you're not to blame for mine. It's mutual aid at its finest.

This is a self-organizing movement that will not end on any country's election day. By November, at the rate this is growing, there will be a network in place to make sure that promises of "change" will be delivered.

Plus, you'll get to meet folks that live near you that you might never have met otherwise. What happens on the Internet screen only matters to the extent that it impacts the real life outside of it.

We'll be eager to read the on-the-scene eyewitness report later today from Dan Carr and the Cheshire County Field Hands, and compare it to what the commercial media tells us.

Update: I notice that the Texas Field Hands group is just one member away from becoming Field Hands Local #17. If you're a Longhorn that hasn't joined yet, you could put that group over the top, and it will then be added to the sidebar here at The Field.

Update II: Texas has now qualified as Field Hands Local #17. Yee-ha!

Update III: In case you missed it, Barry Crimmins weighed in again yesterday on behalf of those (including some that commented anew last night on his page) that have demanded but not received all or any of their refunds from the ex-hosts of the ex-Field. (Y'all wouldn't believe the number of emails and comments I've gotten from biggies in the nonprofit world astonished by such abusive treatment toward small donors.)

Update IV: We have contact! Dan from Cheshire County Field Hands has established a wi fi connection from the Unity event and has just posted this to the comments section below:

Hi everyone, They set up a WiFi here and we're live. People moving through the screening slowly. It's tough to find the cursor in the sunlight so I may be posting slowly. Not many Hillary or Obama buttons but the women from Unity I spoke to were Hillary supporters and were all on board without any big problems. Good local band warming up the crowd , a festive summer event in New Hampshire, just the largest ever in Unity!


Update V: More from Dan Carr, live from Unity...

The folks are filling up the field and while the band Public Seven from Boston is playing. They jusst had a cheer for Obama followed by aq cheer for Hillary. People are still coming through the detectors. There's a long line down the road outside. They're all in the shade of a line of trees in the center of town. The joke so far is "Is this the middle of nowhere, no but you can see it from here." That's the next town over Acworth. Congressman Paul Hodes and Congresswoman Caarol Shea-Porter are coming on stage.


Update VI: CNN has a livestream here (click "Live Video" at upper right corner of that page).

Update VII: Final on-scene comment from Dan (more already in the comments section, too):

“It was amazing”, Said a woman wheeling her baby out in a stroller. There were a few folks who didn’t want to go along with the mood, but by the end nearly everyone was smiling and the two Hillary supporters who brought rally signs were posing for the media more than taking things seriously. Earlier one had shouted “We need you Hillary.” We nearly got cleared out by one of those June rainstorms in new Hampshire but the sun is back out and the people in line are comfortably chatting. One older couple from Unity sat on the bleachers after most had left and said to, there’s no rush, that was great! The woman I posted about before left with a big smile and I think a little more open mind to the changing reality. You probably saw in the middle of Hillary’s speech a kind of realization caught up with her, she felt a pang of loss I thought. The crowd responding to what she had said chanted Obama, but seeing the pause in her demeanor switched to chanting Hillary. Though no one cheered when Hillary asked the crowd to support Barack and work for him like they did for her by the end a general elation was shared by all. It was as if we really could lift the pall of the last seven years. The WiFi has been extremely slow today here so My posts to you all have been more limited than I hoped. I have to take a look at the photos, if any are interesting I could share them.

Thanks, Dan! Through sun glare, rain shower and bad wi fi connection you went, you saw, you conquered! We're all looking forward to the photos and the post-show commentary.

Photo Update:

A New Hampshire "Nascar Voter" for Obama. Photo by B.J. Roche.

Saturday Morning Update: Dan has written a recap of what he saw and heard yesterday from the press section in Unity, NH. It now appears at the jump...

Immigration Issue About to Cross the Media Border

By Al Giordano

Today marks the opening round in a very “outcome determinative” contest among the US presidential candidates to either frame a clear position on immigration reform or be framed by it.

The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) holds its annual conference in Washington DC, and, there, the Democrats will have the upper hand. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson will receive their annual award tonight. New York Senator Hillary Clinton will address the group this afternoon. And it’s all preceded by a “leadership luncheon” at noon led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) and US Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA), all of them Democrats (as are most Latino elected officials across the country.)

But that’s just the pre-game show. On Saturday, both Obama and McCain will address the group.

During last year’s Univision debate among Democratic presidential aspirants, translated real-time, the Spanish-language network asked its viewers to send in questions for the candidates. It received thousands of responses, more than 70 percent of them asking about immigration reform. For the Mexican-American majority among Latinos in the US, as well as many others, that’s the big issue: whether 12 million undocumented Americans will continue to be harassed and hounded and forced into the shadows (and whether Hispanic-American US citizens will continue to be persecuted on the pretext of searching for "illegals"), or whether – as with all previous generations of immigrants – they will be provided a reasonable path to citizenship.

Interestingly, this is perhaps the one issue in which George W. Bush took real leadership during his two terms in office, bucking the fringe elements of his party to promote an Immigration Reform Bill last year, which was co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of Senators including McCain and Obama. The right-wing talk radio and blogosphere noise machines cranked up and divided the GOP, generated hundreds of thousands of calls into Congress (crashing the US Capitol switchboard) and senators of both parties that had said they would support the bill caved in to the haters.

As the video above recounts, McCain’s then front-running campaign for the Republican nomination crashed and almost burned out: he ran out of money, had to lay off most of his staff, and his poll numbers tanked until he was able to break through again last January in New Hampshire as his chief rivals – Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee – one-by-one fell from their own noticeable shortcomings, leaving McCain the last Republican standing.

There is a significant sector on the right that does not forgive McCain for his mainstream views on immigration. And there is a natural tendency among Hispanic-Americans to favor Democrats over Republicans – one that Spanish-speaking George W. Bush was able to minimize against Al Gore and John Kerry in the previous presidential elections.

Here’s a recent recount of what percentages of Hispanic-Americans cast their votes for Democratic presidential candidates in the past 28 years:

76 percent: Jimmy Carter's share of the Latino vote in 1976.

72 percent: Bill Clinton's share at reelection in 1996.

67 percent: Al Gore's share in winning the popular vote in 2000.

56 percent: John Kerry's share in his loss to George W. Bush in '04.


Note how the Democrats' lead among Hispanic-Americans has steadily decreased, mainly because of the inroads made, first in Texas, by George W. Bush. But as of today, Obama is surging ahead among Hispanic-Americans, with 60 percent to just 23 for McCain.

Gebe Martinez of Politico describes the pincer grip that has McCain squeezed on both sides of the issue, mostly through his own fault, because during the GOP primaries McCain backpedaled and turned against his own bill:

“I don’t think [McCain] can appease the hard-core xenophobes and convince the Latinos he is standing up for them at the same time,” said Cecilia Munoz, senior vice president of NCLR (National Council of La Raza), who has been in the middle of immigration bill negotiations. “I think he has to pick a side and make it clear. Is he going after the votes of the xenophobes?”
Were his failed bill to come up again, he would not vote for it, he said


Robert Oscar Lopez offers detailed nuance, via Counterpunch, on Obama and Hispanic voting groups:

Latinos are not a captive constituency like African Americans on the left, or white evangelicals on the right. We usually split 60/40 between Democrats and Republicans with a significant subset amenable to switching sides. The split is partly related to the differences among Central Americans and Cubans, who can lean Republican, and Chicanos and Puerto Ricans, who tend to lean Democratic. But we have a collective identity, as evidenced by the solvency of pan-Latino media companies (Univision in Spanish or SiTV in English). We feel a commonality even if we can never articulate what exactly makes us all Latino, so in spite of our diversity, we aren’t Balkanized. No umbrella group is so unpredictable and yet so culturally cohesive. If a party gets lost in the mixed signals, it can pay the price at election time; just ask Ken Mehlman. In 2006, when Republicans appeared nastier than Democrats on immigration, Latino support for the GOP dropped to around 28%, and the Democrats stormed Congress.


That nuance, however, is more relevant to the contest in Florida (where the more diverse Latino vote will be topic of separate upcoming threads here) than to the hotly contested western states targeted by Obama for liberation from GOP dominance in recent presidential elections: Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, as well as some potential for surprise in Texas and Arizona if he can solidify his big lead among those voters.

In the Southwest, Mexican-Americans are practically the whole ball game when it comes to “the Latino vote.” And there, the immigration reform question is that which matters ahead of all others.

This weekend’s NALEO conference in Washington, with 1,000 elected and appointed officials, is really, though, just the warm up: In a little more than two weeks both McCain and Obama will both address the National Council of La Raza conference in San Diego on July 13. An expected audience of 20,000 await them there. High stakes, much?

But we’ll know on Saturday a lot more about how McCain and Obama are going to navigate this river. McCain is going to have to choose which parts of the GOP base he will alienate: He can’t please both Hispanic Repubicans and the xenophobe fringe.

For Obama, though, there is also a whiff of precariousness in the current: If at any moment over the upcoming months he equivocates or is perceived as trying to establish a foothold to the right of McCain on Immigration Reform, he will risk his big lead and his chances in those important western swing states.

Beginning today, the immigration issue is crossing the media curtain - another kind of border - and into mainstream debate in the US presidential campaign.

So far, this sub-contest is Obama's to lose.

And if he plays it honestly, directly and coherently, it is also Obama's to win.

Alinsky Rises Again

By Al Giordano

It’s taken me a couple of weeks now to digest the symbolism and significance of the attempted censorship of my June 11 reference to Saul Alinsky and his Rules for Radicals as I continued our international teach-in on the subject of community organizing.

Beyond the evident and fundamental questions that are always raised by censorship, what’s really stuck in my craw is the gross strategic and tactical stupidity that this particular attempt to erase history reflected on the part of the would-be censors. They - and, they claim, some brain-damaged "potential big donors" - argued that the mere mention of Alinsky, the father of community organizing, in the context of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, would somehow harm his electoral chances in November. And in doing so, they demonstrated exactly why they – including a Democratic National Committee member and superdelegate – and party functionaries like them have been the dimwitted architects of so many losing campaigns in recent decades. They, and they alone, were responsible for their party's abysmal losing streak from 1994 to 2004. And they still think they know better than the rest of us about politics?

They don’t see how that kind of fear-based thinking shrunk their base over the years, leading many millions of Americans that have more in common ideologically with Democrats than Republicans to turn our backs on electoral politics, participation and voting, leaving them empty handed on election night after election night. They don’t “get” that the new wave of millions that flooded the primaries and caucuses among younger voters, alienated voters and never before voters delivered them a different kind of nominee this year precisely because of his community organizer profile that makes Obama visibly and substantially distinct from the standard Democratic Party hack politician that has more often led that party into defeat than victory.

They were offended, I think, by the mention of Alinsky, because under the surface of their misguided know-it-all-ism at politics, they sense that, yes, they really don’t understand what has just happened to their party as a result of the expansion of the base by these new or returned voters. Alinsky’s critique of the Democratic Party during his life is essentially that of so many of us that were turned off to electoral politics during the Clinton era: fearful, equivocating and, too often, corrupted in that very pursuit of large donors.

Since that moment two weeks ago, many Field Hands and others have brought to my attention the many public references to Obama’s community organizing in Chicago - that toddlin’ town where Alinsky developed the craft - that were not censored and clearly helped – not hurt – the candidate to clinch the nomination and, now, jump ahead of his GOP rival by every polling metric.

That book cover you see up top is that of the new work to be published on September 2, Taking On the System: Rules for Radical Change in a Digital Era, by Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (2008, hardcover, Celebra Books) which can be pre-ordered at that link.

Look carefully at that cover. Did you notice that subhed? Rules for Radical Change in a Digital Era. Sounds a lot like “Rules for Radicals,” no? It's clearly in tribute to Alinsky. And this, from the Democrat most responsible for his party’s sudden winning streak that began in 2006: When it came to recruiting, inspiring, generating waves of small donors and volunteers - and creating the online spaces through which they could self-organize - for the new generation of victorious Democrats, Kos has shown that he understands how to get his party to win elections far better than the old guard DNC types that keep telling us, in conflict with all evidence, that it’s they that have the secret decoder ring know-how.

Anyway, Kos went to some expense to send me, express mail across international borders, the galley proofs for the new book this week. The contents are embargoed: I can’t quote from it until September 2. But beyond the turn of Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” phrase in the book’s subtitle, y’all will be very interested to buy that book in September and see to whom the book is dedicated, and whose quotation opens the work.

I really hadn’t realized, when I posted that primer on Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, that others were thinking exactly along the same lines of what needs to be done, how to do it, and how adapting upon the innovations by Alinsky and other community organizers provides a key both for those that want to elect Obama as president and also for those that want to remain organized after November to ensure that the change that is promised can and will be delivered.

Interestingly, as the quotations and links I’m about to share with you indicate, some very knowledgeable journalists and columnists have also cited Alinsky in the context of Obama in recent months, causing zero damage to that candidate, and in fact – as the primary results demonstrate – those references helped to distinguish him from the kinds of party buffoons that had branded the reputation for failure upon the forehead of the Democratic Party in the United States.

To wit:

The Nation didn’t try to censor Nicolas Von Hoffman last March:


The person who invented community organizing, at least in its modern form, was Chicagoan Saul Alinsky (1909-1972). Articles about Obama often mention Alinsky and suggest that he has been influenced by him. (Google the two names together and you will get 29,000 hits.) Sometimes Obama is called a disciple, although Alinsky had no use for disciples, acolytes or slavish dedication to schools of thought.


The San Francisco Chronicle (and other newspapers) didn’t try to censor syndicated columnist David Sirota last month:


the more citizens will "become educated about various corporation policies" because they will realize "they can do something about them," as famed shareholder activist Saul Alinsky once said. That is what truly scares Corporate America - and what could bring the most "real change" of all.


National Public Radio didn’t censor Robert Siegel last month:


Two leading Democratic candidates for president — Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama — can trace their political character to teachings handed down indirectly from Alinsky, a community organizer from Chicago, who died in 1972. Alinsky is credited with developing a new approach to politics, using tactics that allowed ordinary people — the poor and disenfranchised — to fight city hall effectively.


The Seattle Post-Intelligencer didn’t try to censor reporter John Iwasaki last month:


The Industrial Areas Foundation was founded in Chicago by Saul Alinsky, whose work influenced Hillary Clinton (then Hillary Rodham) and Barack Obama, long before they would become Democratic presidential candidates.


Associated Press didn’t try to censor reporter Sharon Cohen on June 2:


Obama arrived in Chicago in 1985 with a college degree, a map of the city and a new job — community organizer.

Starting salary: Just over $10,000 plus enough money to buy a beat-up Honda.

Obama was a stranger to Chicago, but living abroad gave him experience as an outsider and a natural empathy for people without money and power, says Gerald Kellman, the man who hired him…

"He seemed to listen well and he learned fast," Kellman says. But even though Obama worked with people trained by Saul Alinsky, the father of community organizing, he didn't adopt hard-nose tactics.

"He did not like personal confrontation," Kellman says. "He had no trouble challenging power and challenging people on issues. When it came to face-to-face situations, he valued civility a great deal. ... When it came to negotiating conflict, he was very good at that. ... He was not one to get drawn into a protracted conflict that involves personalities."


MSNBC didn’t try to censor Chris Matthews on June 3:


"So it's Saul Alinsky against the beer baron… It's so funny, I never heard it put together, (Senator McCain) married into a beer fortune and he doesn't know how what it's like to sweat.”


Mother Jones didn’t try to censor James Ridgeway on June 5:


Saul Alinsky, the legendary community organizer on the South Side of Chicago who advocated confrontation with the Daley machine… encouraged his groups to engage in civil disobedience if need be… I can remember radicals attacking him for his lack of revolutionary fervor, in the same way, incidentally, they attacked Ralph Nader, who was seen as a patsy for the legal profession. "A guy has to be a political idiot," Alinsky scoffed at radicals back then, "to say all power comes out of the barrel of a gun when the other side has the guns."

Saul Alinsky believed that power flowed up from the streets and was there for the taking, if only people believed they could do so.


The Atlantic didn’t try to censor Marc Ambinder on June 13:


These house meetings form the core of the campaign's organizing model. The concept derives from organizing theory as taught by Saul Alinsky and as adopted by community organizers across the country. Never before has a major party presidential campaign used them to expand their support in a general election.


Politico didn't try to censor Ben Smith on June 19:


Obama has never been a traditional reformer. 

He came to politics through the community organizing movement, whose radical founder, Saul Alinsky, mocked highbrow reformers, and focused instead on the acquisition and use of power, with the ends often justifying the means.


And what about Barack Obama himself?

The drama-queening, off-message, money-grubbing, old guard performance of the past two weeks by one DNC member - in embarrassing email after email that failed to stem the exodus of former readers and what she suddenly recognized as valuable small donations - was often trying to justify its boneheaded behavior in his name, to "protect" Obama from any public acknowledgment of what everybody knows already: that he approached his campaign as a community organizer and did so expanding upon the techniques developed by Alinsky and others. They claimed to be speaking for him (a big no no, as any Obama staffer or fellow will testify), thus attempting to erase and censor, also, the ways he has already spoken for himself on these matters.

Here's something that Obama wrote, at the age of 29, and allowed to be published in a book with - gasp! - the word "Alinsky" in the title:


"Organizing teaches as nothing else does the beauty and strength of everyday people."

- Barack Obama, After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois (University of Illinois Press, 1990, Chapter 4).





Everyday people?

Oooooh. Scary!

Republican Senator's Ad Grabs for Democrat Obama's Coattails

By Al Giordano

Anybody that still doesn't see that 2008 is a map-changing, paradigm-shifting election year in the United States should be made to watch this ad:

It's paid for by the reelection campaign of Republican US Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon.

It's not unusual for legislators of a political party to seek to distance themselves from their own party's nominee. But it's extremely rare when they reach to associate themselves with the rival party's nominee. And it offers a pretty good sense of what Smith's own polling is showing in Oregon.

The Obama campaign, however, is having none of it, and just put out this statement:

“Barack Obama has a long record of bipartisan accomplishment and we appreciate that it is respected by his Democratic and Republican colleagues in the Senate. But in this race, Oregonians should know that Barack Obama supports Jeff Merkley for Senate. Merkley will help Obama bring about the fundamental change we need in Washington,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.


That ad demonstrates what I've meant each time I've written that this is a once-in-a-generation election.


Also: Staying hot on the trail of The Field's move to this new and better location are DKos blogger TheWurx and the always stellar Barry Crimmins.

Blogging will have to wait tonight while I'm playing host to the best saxophone player in the hemisphere and we've got carousing plans. Meanwhile, give those guys some comments love, Field Hand style.

A Message from Jamaica Kincaid

Dear Fellow Field Hands:

Once again, we have to pool our resources together and send Al to Denver. We did it once before and then events beyond our control came between us and our desire. But we mustn’t let the stupidity of others have the final word about this important moment in our communal and civic life. We can, we must and we will send Al to Denver.

Send a contribution, however small, or as big as you can through:

Or to:

The Fund for Authentic Journalism

PO Box 241

Natick, MA 01760 USA

We must not let others determine our fate. We must not let them deprive us of this unique voice that is beholden to no one other than its own truth.

So let us send Al to Denver and let him speak freely and come what may, I believe we will know that we have been participating in the American experience.

Jamaica Kincaid

(For more details on this fund drive, scroll down two posts or click here)

Gaffe Day at Camp McCain

By Al Giordano

If it was Monday it must have been Gaffe Day…

Three Republican bigshots made comments to the press yesterday that were outrageous enough to step on on virtual Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s own attempts to propose a $300 million US government prize for whoever invents an energy-saving car battery.

The “gaffes” were so boneheadedly off-message that they were the equivalent of dropping three anvils on McCain’s head in a single day. They also served to trip all over each other. The Field therefore concludes that at least two of the three gaffes were not planned as a matter of campaign tactics (as “gaffes” sometimes are).

There was religious right minister James Dobson saying of McCain's rival, Barack Obama:


"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."


This, from a minister (Dobson) whose own interpretation of The Bible leads him to conclude that “spanking should be of sufficient magnitude to cause the child to cry genuinely,” that women should avoid the workplace and stay home even when their children reach teenage years because “menopause and a man's midlife crisis are scheduled to coincide with adolescence, which can make a wicked soup,” and that “tolerance and its first cousin, diversity, 'are almost always buzzwords for homosexual advocacy.’”

Uh, which US presidential candidate has a “reverend problem”?

We might have spent today chattering about Rev. Dobson but along came Republican political fixer Karl Rove who at a breakfast with "GOP insiders" opined aloud about Obama:


"Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."


Karl must have two different guys confused. Who’s that guy with the drink and the cigarette and the fabulous date and all that snide commentary? I know that guy, too! That isn’t Obama…

Oh, my.

It’s me!

The richness of the revelation that Rove naturally presumes that those party insiders belong to country clubs that are expensively out of reach or discriminatory against most citizens might have also made for great chatter today, but then top McCain political strategist Charlie Black had to go and drop the A-Bomb on his own candidate.

Black told Fortune magazine that terrorists could save McCain's flagging campaign if they would only strike upon US soil before November:


The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an "unfortunate event," says Black. "But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us." As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. "Certainly it would be a big advantage to him," says Black.


Wow. Just, wow. That’s a pretty scary statement since it telegraphs a message to the sorts of folks that make such attacks. I sure wouldn’t want to be Charlie Black if his dark fantasy ever comes true, because a lot of folks will now be, naturally, viewing him as responsible for inviting such harm and destruction.

A campaign in which key staffers and surrogates believe in their candidate's own message and strategy doesn’t often veer so erratically off-message. Gaffe Day was a consequence of three men who each unilaterally decided that what they had to say was more important than whatever their candidate was saying on any given Monday.

As a reporter, this is very heartening, in a macabre sort of way. If anyone has been missing the searing and off-message drama supplied so regularly by the Clinton campaign and its surrogates during the primaries, and feared that the general election fight would be more controlled and thus boring, McCain’s got a whole herd of Wile E. Coyotes dropping anvils on him and each other to keep us entertained through November. Maybe he ought to offer a $300 million prize to any staffer or surrogate that can keep his mouth shut until then!

User login


RSS Feed