by Nick Stone of Drawnlines Politics.
Dear President Obama:

Though it's more than a little unnatural feeling to offer you free advice, here it is:

Don't take the bait from any side on the Iran issue.

The American Right is trying to bait you into speaking out against Ahmadinejad by asking you to stand up for free and fair elections everywhere. That's actually bull. We can't police the world, and we can't allege voter fraud just because the election results weren't what we expected. We really didn't know what to expect because the polling data was all over the place. In much of the polling that put Ahmadinejad tied with or behind his lead challenger, nearly half of the Iranian public was still undecided. That is to say nothing of the fact that Iranian public opinion is notoriously difficult to measure because of cultural taboos and difficulties of sampling in poorer, more rural areas where the people are more conservative (and more likely to have voted for the incumbent).

The American Left wants you to feel lulled into a false sense that you can wash your hands and stay above the fray on the issue of the election. That's not going to work either. The signs that the protesters are holding for the cameras are in English. They're sending out their messages on Facebook and Twitter. They want the American people and the American government to see crystal-clearly that they are asking us to speak up for them. If we do nothing, we will have squashed the hopes of a people clamoring for freedom by simply not showing up. That's a terrible message. We are their target audience, and they are begging us to help them. The problem of course is that these people may well represent a minority opinion after all the tallies are counted and recounted. Just because they're louder doesn't make them more important. In elections, often times the other guy wins.

Finally, the Iranian regime clearly wants the US to get suckered into the fight so that we own the outcome of the revolution. No single move would do more to please the Iranian government. They would love to say with evidence and conviction that they have to strike down these protests on the grounds that they are American-led, and therefore meddling with internal affairs and so-called free elections. We cannot be seen as forcing regime change in Iran YET AGAIN.

Defending the unpopular Shah in 1979 brought about a revolution and put on hold the lives of 52 Americans for 444 days. Let there be no doubt, while 52 people were held captive, our entire nation's interests were hostage because of our actions and commitments. Regime management failed us with the Shah, and it failed us when we promoted the government reforms that ironically led to Ahmadinejad coming to power in the first place. The same tendencies got us in trouble in Iraq and landed Saddam Hussein into power. How many times must we touch the stove before we realize it burns us?!



Oddly enough Mr. President, it's incumbent upon this writer to speculate that your current policy on the situation in Iran is appropriate given the complexity and sensitivity of the circumstance. Speaking out decisively and curtly for free and fair elections while avoiding the appearance of any meddling with the results of a flawed but presumably representative election is the only way to walk the tight rope without falling flat on our faces.

After all, if Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah stay in power, it will be them we have to play nice with on the world stage. Better we don't show our teeth before we're sure if it's Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde answering the door in Tehran. If you underestimate the severity of the situation in Iran or if you choose to take the bait and own the results of these elections, our nation will be held hostage by Iranian meddling once more. Only another 1980 election could save us then. That's no joke.

Respectfully yours,


Concerned Citizen

Dear Mr. President:

It's not that I despise what you believe in or what you stand for, per se. I believe that you love your country. I believe you think you've heard all the arguments, and I believe you think you have the best judgment and most objective, pragmatic ideals to navigate our nation out of our economic disaster. We both want this nation to succeed.

Please, if you'll allow, let me tell you why as a recent convert from the Democratic Party, I'm mortified by the plans you have laid forth for America.

On the campaign trail, while not patting yourself on the back for the historical nature of your candidacy, you often reminded us of your blueprint for change - especially as it concerned getting America back on the road to fiscal solvency.

On a whim, I Googled some of what you had to say on the matter as I pondered and brooded over the mess we currently find ourselves in.

Surely you're getting advice from everybody these days about what you should and should not do. No doubt your email and voicemail are full of people's ideas and concerns. Rather than interjecting my own, allow me to simply flash you back to some basic guiding principles outlined by the one person for whom you hold the very highest regard - yourself. Only, this is you before you entered the Oval Office.
Still up on your campaign website is your plan to get Washington back on the "right path" so that our economy can be healthy in the long run. "The Problem", as you rightly point out at the very beginning, is increasing debt. That was true when you began your campaign for president, it was true in September when this financial crisis began, and it is true now that you occupy the White House. Beside the severity of the problem we now face, only one major factor has changed: your perspective.

A brief parousal of your plan highlights several concerns and solutions, and you must admit that the stimulus package you championed strays severely from the principles you outlined. So does your budget. So do your bailouts. In fact, Mr. President, I can safely say you just became the posterboy of the problem. You are the problem.

You detailed for us in very specific terms that in order to return to fiscal responsibility, we must:

• Reinstate pay-as-you-go
• Cut pork barrel spending
• Make government spending more accountable and efficient
• End wasteful government spending

Is any one of those principles present in the Obama spending plan? Any one at all?

Nearly half of America voted for the other guy in November, and many of us did so because of our inability to figure out who you really are. It's not that we don't read the newspapers or listen to your speeches. The problem is that you reinvent your core beliefs from the ground up depending on circumstance. You say one thing, then do the other. You champion one idea, then fight for the other. You tell one group what they want to hear, then backtrack in front of another. The sudden and dramatic shifts in your priorities is enough to cause whiplash.

Bipartisanship doesn't mean "I won the election, so now you need to do whatever I say." It means hearing and heeding the concerns of people who don't agree with you fundamentally. It means incorporating the ideas of the other half of America that isn't in control but still needs a voice. "The Problem", Mr. President, is that House and Senate Democrats took your stimulus package as an opportunity to pile on any goodies they could conceive of, but couldn't otherwise get. "The Problem" is that this is your first major push as president, and it's disasterously off message and off base. Sir, this problem is likely to catch up with you the next time Americans go to the polls.

More Democrats voted against your stimulus than Republicans that voted for it. The budget was a strict party line vote, and any reporter left or right will tell you that the Blue Dogs had to be shoved back in line to get on board with you. Are ALL Congressional Republicans crazy? You know that the answer to that is "no". While you disagree fundamentally on whether more spending or more tax cuts should be the backbone of an economic stimulus, one thing we must all agree on is that your children's children's children will likely still be paying off the money you just put on the nation's credit card.

When you put Sacha and Malia to bed tonight, explain to them just how much money $1,000,000,000,000 is. Explain to them how many dollars they would have to spend every day for the rest of their lives to ever spend that much money. Explain to them how much money you would have to take out of their paychecks to ever recoup that money. Explain to them how that debt takes money away from their children's schools, from their social security funds, from the police that protect their neighborhood, from the campaign to nationalize our healthcare system.

Can you look them in the face and explain this to them? Do you even understand the gravity of a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR deficit? If a ten trillion dollar national debt in 232 years of this country was deplorable, why is it palatable to increase it to 13 trillion in less than 100 days? If the previous president was wrong to increase spending and decrease taxes at the same time, how then do you reconcile a so-called tax cut for 95% of Americans while pushing forth the largest expansion of government in modern history? At what point do we claim fair game on intellectually dishonest claims and proposals?

Like so many Americans, I understand the severity of the crisis that confronts us now because I know personally many who have lost their job or their home, or whose debt burden has forced them into bankruptcy. And so while I welcome the proposal of bold, new ideas over the status quo, I cannot in good faith sign a blank check in the name of my children, written on a Chinese account. That is, of course, until you can explain how the money will ever be repaid.

And so, as your first 100 days in office come to a close, we must look back and ask ourselves, are we better off? Are people's savings more secure? Are their investments worth more or less than 100 days ago? Are more or fewer people safe in their homes? Is unemployment higher or lower? Are American companies stronger or weaker? Is health care more or less affordable than it was? And most importantly, will our children inherit easier or harder circumstances than we did?

I think you know the answer to those questions, Mr. President, and I hope you join with me in toasting to your successor in a few short, tumultuous years. I'll bring the tea.

Patriotically yours,



Concerned Citizen

In spite of the odds and the metrics standing against him, John McCain is pushing as hard as ever for a win in Blue State Pennsylvania. Many Pennsylvania insiders on both sides agree that the 11.4 RCP deficit he is working against is overblown, but still the records show this is a huge uphill battle. President Bush lost the state 51/48 to Kerry despite a massive ground game. Now, over the next two weeks, McCain must find a way to turn the tide.

If he's going to do it, I strongly feel this is what he HAS TO do to get through to keystone voters:


Senator McCain,

Now that your campaign finds itself backed into the corner, we both know that it's going to come down to whether or not you can - in addition to holding on to the vast majority of the Bush swing states - turn Pennsylvania around.

This will be no small task, as you well know. I'm not usually in the business of offering up free advice to political candidates, and I'm a Democrat anyway. But this election is so important - and the imperitive that Barack Obama not win this election so urgent - that I'm obligated to give with you some insight. If any of it helps at all, you're welcome. If not, I'm truly sorry. Please win anyway. I'll send money.

I've arranged my urgent advice to you into a few basic points, in no particular order. They are as follows:

1) Spend more time there. Spend LOTS more time there. Every other day, you or Governor Palin needs to be in Pennsylvania. No, I'm not kidding. You can't spend as much money as Barack has to spend, but you can beat the amount of face time he gives. He's spread thin by trying to visit red states that will end up coming home to you anyway. Use that to your advantage and get up close and personal with the voters there. No more trips to Wisconsin for you. And bring your friends if at all possible! Where the heck has Lieberman been? Where's Tom Ridge? Got some generals and admirals up your sleeve? Bring them too!

2) Turn Obama's advantages into disadvantages. Obama has a ton of money because he backed out of public campaign financing. He broke his word in an attempt to buy this election, and it just might work. People don't like being taken for fools, especially not the people of Pennsylvania. At your rallies, explain to them that you came personally to talk with them, while Senator Obama would rather attack them through their television sets and talk at them. Also, he's opening up campaign offices like crazy to enlist an army of footsoldiers to go twist people's arms. If that sounds familiar, it's because that's classic old-school Chicago style politics. Pennsylvanians won't care for that.

3) Don't give up the ad war in Philadelphia. You'll never win in Philly obviously, but you need to stay in the faces of voters in the city and suburbs. Kerry won Phildelphia County by 412,000 votes. Obama will never get that - unless you concede the area. He didn't get the margin he was hoping for in the primaries, and he won't now. Likewise, Clinton beat him in Montgomery County and mopped the floor with him in Bucks County. Both of these are in the Philly media market, and you desperately need them in your column. People in this part of the state aren't as conservative as other parts of the state - so play up the sensible solutions thing - and throw in the maverick thing a few times for good measure. No pictures of dead fetuses or gays holding hands.

4) Forget the "T" strategy. You simply don't have the ground game that Bush had in 2004, and he lost the state anyway. You will win this region, but will likely not enjoy the turnout he did. Focus instead on Western - especially Southwestern PA. If you don't tie it up in Allegheney County, it's over. Drop some money and as much time as possible in and around Pittsburgh. But forget about TV ads here. Spend it on street crews, signs, and rallies. Get as much free press as possible. You're gonna need it. Obama didn't win a single county in Western PA in the primaries. Racism aside, this is the part of the state most skeptical of him. Hit him hard. There are plenty of votes here to tap.

5) Keep your message on contrast. Don't attack his personality. Instead, draw clear, specific contrasts between the two of you. For everything negative you say about him, you'd better offer something positive about yourself. If you're going to talk about Obama increasing taxes on small businesses, remind them EXACTLY how much an average small business makes in Pittsburgh. Then tell them how much money you'd like to save them a year, and how many employees' salaries would be affected. He wants to raise taxes on "big corporations"? Ask the people who used to work for US Steel about that. Ask the people who used to work for US Airways about that. Ask the people who used to work in coal mines about that.

6) Remind people of Hillary Clinton as much as humanly possible. I know that advice sounds silly, but hear me out: She won over Pennsylvania because she was one of them, and because she offered specifics - not because she is white. Tell people exactly what you want to do for them and offer simple, specific answers to tough questions. You come from humble beginnings and made something of yourself by working hard and striving to be a better person. Remind people of that, and tell them that you want them to be rewarded for doing the same.

7) And maybe most importantly, don't shy away from the underdog theme. Shake every hand possible, look them in the eye and tell them in no uncertain terms that you need them to come to the polls for you so that you can fight for them. Let them know that if they bring their friends and family to the polls on election day, you will win. And above all else, make sure they know that a vote for you is a vote for them. You're in the land of Rocky. Whatever you do, keep getting off the mat. The people have saved you before, and your fate is in their hands once more.

Good luck, Senator. You're going to need it, and I'm counting on you.

Sincerely,



Nick Stone
Voter, FL-20

Senator Clinton,

I saw you speak at FAU in Boca Raton last month, and I was moved. I'd vote for you all over again if I had the chance. You worked so hard for us 18 million and lots more without voices during the primaries, as you have for four decades (though you would want me to shout no way it's been that long). I know you continue to stand for us - the people - and we can tell that fighting for us is personal to you. Thank you for that.

I'm writing today because I'm deeply concerned. I try every time I see him, but I'm having a very very hard time getting behind Senator Obama. To be clear, I'm not a long time Clinton fan. I was 17 in the year 2000, raised in a Republican household just like you, and turned into a Democrat on my own. I'm now a 25 year old gay man living in South Florida, and and I'm deeply and personally concerned over the direction of our country.

I fell in love with your causes during the primaries as I saw you campaign across the great nation, and by Iowa I was hooked. It was crystal clear who the best president would have been, and I'm personally still hurt that we didn't succeed together in that mission. Though I wasn't able to travel from state to state, I was involved in talking to my family and friends around the country. I helped raise money for you and changed a few hearts and minds too. I urged people I'd barely met to go stand up and make a difference, and many of them did.

Now that the dust is settled, and we go full speed ahead to November, I'm still confused and I'm still hurting. The journey we went on together was deeply personal, but I'm not holding out due to bitterness or resent over defeat. I'm actually scared of the journey Senator Obama wants to take this nation on. There are many reasons I didn't get behind Obama in the primaries, and you know them well.

After hearing him speak across the country, I still feel like I don't know what to expect from the Senator. He says one thing about Middle Americans in Scranton and another in San Francisco. He campaigned against you on NAFTA, then crossed the border to Canada to assure them it was just rhetoric. He campaigned on the idea of public campaign finance, then backed out once he secured the nomination. At Saddleback Church, he described the question of 'life' as above his paygrade. My fear is that in trying to appease everyone, Senator Obama stands for no one. From his law school beginnings to his community organizing in Chicago, from his work in the state Senate to the US Senate, Barack Obama hasn't been standing up for ordinary Americans -he's been practicing running for president.

Finally, you continuously warn us against John McCain with the notion that he's a far worse alternative than Barack Obama, and you may have a point. In truth, on many of the issues that matter to us, you are more closely aligned with Obama by a lot. But that argument doesn't really resonate with me. The "he's not as bad as the other guy" argument doesn't send me running to my polling place to pull the lever. I need more.

As I said before, I'm deeply concerned over the direction of our great country, and I'm looking for an inspriational leader. I found one, but that journey ended in June. Though I'm terrified of another 4 or 8 years down the same road, I'm not exactly excited about being taken for a ride on the Obama bus either. The question for me as for many Americans is not about bringing change for he sake of change, but rather for making sure that we do things better than before. It's not about whether we can, but if we really will. I have my doubts.

Reluctantly yours,


Nicholas Stone
Voter, FL 20th

The polls aren't lying- the election really is extremely close. So far.


So I, like many of my colleagues, find myself in a quandry.


I am a twenty-five year old white gay man from suburban Florida. My vote matters quite a bit, and I intend to use it.

Written Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

------


Senator Clinton,

Thank you so much for standing up for us every day. I represent a portion of the 18 million people who have stood up for you too.

Together we have said it loud and clear: don't count us out!

Senator, I'm scared. I'm scared for our party, our sense of direction, our diversion from our core principles, and frankly our choice of candidate.

How can we not count every vote fully? One person, one vote is a core democratic principle. Telling people they are only half a voter in Michigan and Florida is a disgrace, especially when we have to go in front of FL and MI voters now and ask for their votes against John McCain.

Forget the fact that Senator Obama doesn't happen to be my choice, and believe me he isn't. Instead consider the following: The person who has won the most votes isn't our candidate. Nor the big states. Or the swing states. Not even the traditionally Democratic ones. Not the border states. Not the bellweather states. Our candidates is not the person carrying women, the majority of the party. Not the candidate winning Hispanics, Jews, Catholics, or gays. A truly historic choice indeed, and not in a good way.

Hillary, I don't know if we can win this battle or not, but if you think we can, please let's fight on. Many many of us are firmly behind you until you win.

But I urge you NOT to accept a VP nomination. You would be so much more useful and powerful in the Senate than as VP. You should not be muzzled into aligning your positions with Senator Obama. You can champion real legislation that helps real Americans in real ways by flexing your political muscle on Capitol Hill. Please consider this.

Thank you again, and remember we stand firmly with you until you make a decision. We, your foot soldiers await your signal.

-Nicholas Stone
Voter, FL-20

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008

Dear Superdelegate:

I'm a Florida voter, and a supporter of Hillary Clinton.

Unfortunately, my voice has been silenced in addition to the 2.5 million voters that came out to the polls in Michigan and Florida to overwhelmingly vote for Hillary.

This remains a razor thin election, and I URGE you to consider standing up with me to support Senator Clinton in her continuing bid as our candidate.

You have been given a role that we both know includes a substantial responsibility. It is extremely important that together we get this choice right, because we can't take it back in November. It is true that this is an historical election, and many of the old rules have been broken. One very important thing that has not changed is electoral MATH. I cannot impress upon you enough that we must put our most qualified, best leader up against John McCain so that we can take the White House back.

Senator Clinton will deliver the swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, West Virginia, and yes, Florida, as well as many others into our column in November.

The Rules Committee meets in just a few days. They will determine the fate of Florida and Michigan, and I truly believe in my heart that they will determine to seat a full delegation and fair apportionment of votes from our states. Imagine how silly the democrats will look campaigning for votes in these states when we refuse to count their votes to determine our candidate. That doesn't make sense, and we can't afford to lose these states in the Fall.

By counting all 50 states, plus the territories including Puerto Rico, Senator Clinton will have a majority of popular votes. In fact, I read the other day that Senator Clinton has more primary votes cast for her than any democrat ever, including Senator Obama. That means something.

The people are standing up and speaking out today, just as they did in West Virginia, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, California, New Hampshire, Florida and Michigan, and many crucial battleground states.

I urge you to hear our voices. Will you stand with us?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,


Nicholas Stone

Written: Monday, May 26th, 2008

-----

The Honorable Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
10100 Pines Blvd
Pembroke Pines, FL 33026

Dear Representative:

I am writing to you today to thank you for your service and to implore you to stand firmly with me in an historic quest to elect Senator Hillary Clinton to the office of president.

Your early support of Senator Clinton, coupled with the support from many prominent state leaders, gave our candidate a huge boost over her rivals.

We both know that the Rules Committee will meet in just a few days to decide how many of our delegates get seated at the convention in Denver. I believe in my heart that the committee will come to the same conclusion we know to be right – they will seat all of our delegates.

I believe that if Senator Clinton is given a fair apportionment of pledged delegates from our state, coupled with a full party of automatic delegates, she will significantly close the advantage that Senator Obama now has.

Accomplishing this task requires that our candidate's early supporters stand firmly with her now.

I am speaking out daily for Hillary by raising money as well as donating my own. I'm speaking out by changing every mind I can, and reassuring those who already stand with me.

Please hear my plea that you be a vocal and resolute supporter of Senator Clinton in her presidential bid.

She is counting on party leaders like you and voters like me to stand up in every way we know how.

Will you stand with me?

Sincerely,

Nicholas Stone

Voter, FL 20^th District

Written May 22, 2008

-----

Senator Obama,

I am a Democratic voter in Florida, and I have some urgent concerns to convey to you and your campaign. I pray for your sake as well as for our country that you consider my thoughts.

This is not a fan letter.

I am as resolute in my support for Hillary Clinton today as I have ever been. However, I'm not blind to the increasing probability that in November I will be casting a ballot for either yourself or for John McCain. I do not intend to stay home that day. This is not a decision I take lightly, and I assure you that I'll give both candidates an open mind to win over my vote. Still, I have to warn you Senator that John McCain has a lot less work to do to win me over. I'd like to sincerely and openly tell you why, if you'll listen.

It has really caught my attention that you are campaigning across my state right now in a three day tour, trying to court hispanics, jews, and I-4 corridor voters that will prove crucial in the general election, as they always do.

I've got to tell you that I'm more than a little offended that you are waiting until now to reach out to us in Florida at all. We know too well how important our votes can be, especially when only 537 of us can determine a president. Florida is very much a bellweather state, and we are absolutely a swing state. That's as true in this election as it has ever been. Yet, until this week, we've gotten nothing from you. Alcee Hastings perhaps paraphrased our feelings best when he asked you in Washington, "Shall I kiss your ring now, or shall I wait until you come to Florida?" In an NPR interview, he added that in his conversation with you, he reminded you that you do, in fact, have to come to Florida.

Senator, you continue to make the argument to superdelegates as well as to voters that you are a different type of candidate in a different type of election than we are used to. That may be true, but one thing that will not be different in this election is MATH. It is appaling to me that superdelegates have been swinging your way since Super Tuesday, not because you aren't my candidate, but because of the basic and obvious realities of this race. When you were ahead in the popular vote and Senator Clinton was ahead in superdelegates, the media made a huge outcry over the concept, using terms like "overruling the voters". Over the past two months in particular, Senator Clinton has been picking up votes steadily and now at least ties you in total votes cast by any measure. Under any fair calculations, she beats you. Yet you continue to pick up superdelegates. You are ahead now with supers and building steam, yet there is no outcry. Senator Clinton has now received more primary votes than any candidate in any race ever. That sir, includes you. How then are your supporters not overruling voters now?

There are certain unfortunate realities that have affected this election throughout the primaries, and we must talk about them honestly before it's too late. The clock is ticking.

Voting blocs:

Your problem with working class white voters is that they don't believe you. They're not buying what you're selling, and they've heard plenty of speeches from you that don't translate into anything solid. They've heard great politicians traverse their states only to have their steel mills shut down or their auto plants hurt by unfair trade practices. They need something concrete, not abstract, and they need more than a soundbite to feed their families or pay their mortgages.

Race baiting has been accused of the Clinton campaign, and I submit to you that both you and Senator Clinton have used your whiteness or blackness to your advantage to drum up support among your bases. But when we look at voting blocks, we see where racism has presented itself most. White voters have voted in favor of Senator Clinton by about 55%-45%. But black voters have voted for you by an overwhelming majority, nearly 85-15. You tell me which group represents race-based voting.

Other voting blocs that are crucial to the democrats in November have presented you their own challenges. You will in fact have a hard time carrying hispanics and Jews in the general election.

I urgently warn you to expect a mutiny from one other crucial voting bloc, and that's gays. This may come as a surprise. I encourage political debate among my many gay friends nearly every day. We all come from different backgrounds, represent different cultures, different political backgrounds and different lifestyles. Besides our love of the same gender, one very important thing we almost unanimously agree on is that we are far more likely to vote for John McCain than for Barack Obama in November. You would be floored by how weak you are in the gay community, despite your gay media buys and your liberal ideologies. Like working-class whites, we too need more than words to inspire us. We too have been sold on a dream too many times, only to wake up disappointed. Whether or not we agree with all of his political stances, we do see John McCain as a strong leader, and as someone who represents integrity. We see him as someone who has consistently stood up for what he believes to be important, often in the face of opposition from his own party.

In spite of my concerns, there are some things you can do to win in November.

First, focus on specificity. You have done a much better job of this in past weeks, and it is already beginning to resonate with voters. When we go to the voting booth in November, we want to know in concrete terms what to expect from you. Abstract candidates are scary to us in uncertain and unstable times.

Second, do not discount swing states! It is true that you may be competitive in states that most democrats would not be, but you also have a weakened advantage in true blue states. So, don't get caught in a situation where you're begging for Ohio and Michigan and Florida to listen to you in the eleventh hour after you hose us in the primary. Get out of the way and accept a full delegation from Florida and Michigan. Believe me, you've got the delegate advantage to spare.

Third, don't discount John McCain and his acceptability to voters. Many of us already know that he does not and will not represent a third Bush term. Just as you are a 'different breed' of democrat, he is not a typical republican. It is true that a democrat won't take the White House if black voters stay home on election day. But against John McCain, many many white voters won't stay home either. They'll simply go vote for the other guy, and that hurts twice as much.

Thank you sincerely for your time.

You have 5 months to convince me to believe in your brand of change, and that will be one tall order.


-Nicholas Stone

Written April 24th, 2008

-----

Senator Edwards,

I'm writing you today to implore you to endorse Senator Clinton.

You and I both know how important healthcare is for all Americans. We're talking about TRULY universal healthcare.

We know how hard it's going to be to stand up every day against incredible opposition to our ideas on the economy, foreign relations, social security, the environment, and of course our national security.

I truly believe that no one in this race has a better record of working with Republicans and Democrats, building a coalition of support on a broad range of policy, and fighting for change instead of talking about it.

Senator Clinton will take the fight to the mat every time, and I know that she's doing it for us - Americans who are counting on a strong leader who knows what she's doing.

If ever there was a time for you to speak up in support of one candidate or the other, it is now. Your endorsement could make the difference in North Carolina and many other closely contested states still yet to be counted.

Please carefully consider speaking up at this crucial juncture.

I know as you search deeply to choose the candidate that can lead us to victory in November and toward a much better America, you will know that candidate is Hillary Clinton.

Thank you for your time.

-Nicholas Stone

Written: April 11, 2008

-----

This lady pissed me off, so she got a piece of my mind.

http://blog.niemanwatchdog.org/?p=213

-------------------------------------------

Dear Carolyn,

Respectfully, you're full of it.

The media has made a big deal about Senator Clinton wanting it both ways, but frankly, they are STICKING IT TO HER both ways.

The media and Obamamaniacs hate for Hillary to cite her experience as first lady as evidence of experience for presidency, but they don't mind criticizing her for being a part of the administration when it comes to NAFTA or a host of other topics.

She also had the daunting task from the beginning of proving herself formidable, tough, leader, and she was labeled a mean bitch.

Then she shows her humanity for one brief moment in New Hampshire and the media eats her alive for it. Thank God, NH women came out in droves to tell them that wouldn't stand.

She's been told her campaign 'is over, if she doesn't...' two handfuls of times during this election cycle, and every time like a warrior, she does what we say she must. She does it, she does it against all odds, against a CLEARLY biased media, and she often exceeds what is required of her.

Remember when her campaign was over in New Hampshire? Nevada? California? New Jersey? Now, Ohio and Texas.

Well guess what: EVERY time she's done what the media say she must, and still they find a way to call for her head on a platter.

Toward the beginning of this race, I was undecided between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.

With our current two options, it's not hard to imagine why so many Americans - including a majority of women - have come out for Hillary. Thank you, ladies!

After hearing her ideas, comparing them against Obama's, and after listening to them enough to realize who has solutions and who has soundbites, I'm more proud today than yesterday, and I was more proud yesterday than the day previous to stand up - loudly and proudly. I'm as proud as I've ever been to open my wallet and show my support. I'm more joyous than I've been yet to stand before you and shout from the rooftops that we need Hillary Clinton for president.

-Nick

Originally Titled: "My letter to CNN"

Written: Friday, March 21, 2008

-----

Dear CNN,

What’s the deal?

I’ve gotta tell you, you might as well be offering Senator Obama an extra pillow after all.

If you’ve ever needed a reason to be harsh on Obama, here is your golden opportunity.

It’s been almost 24 hours since Obama’s gaff on the Philly radio program where he described his grandmother as a "typical white person."

Perhaps not surprisingly, this story has yet to make it onto your front page. If I search for it on your page, it doesn’t even turn up at all.

Equally unsurprisingly, what DOES come up on your front page is the eleventh hour endorsement of Obama by Bill Richardson.

If endorsements are more important than gaffs, then answer me these two questions:

Why is Richardson right in front of my face when I have to hunt for news on Murtha’s endorsement of Clinton? On a national scale, he’s far and away more relevant than Richardson. He’s also much more likely to sway voters than Richardson since (aside from Puerto Rico), all of the states with sizable hispanic populations have already voted.

Why is it that when Geraldine Ferraro - not a true Clinton surrogate - makes a possibly divisive statement, you are all over it, but when Obama, the candidate himself, makes such sweeping generalizations, you’re asleep at the wheel?

If you find yourselves wondering why people think you’re biased toward Obama, it’s only because it’s so blatantly obvious time and time again that - well - YOU ARE!