This diary is meant mainly for the low information voters. Others can ignore.

Many low info voters think that majority of Obama's campaign money come from small donors. This is a clever piece of work by this campaign.
Majority of his donors are small donors, but majority of his money doesn't come from small donors. His campaign says 90% of his donors are small donors. This is true. But 90% of his money doesn't come from small donors. Something like 50% does.

What this means - lets see with an example.
Say he has 10 donations totaling to 3600$.
This may be something like
200$,200$,200$,200$,200$,200$,200$,200$, 200$,1800$

So 90% of his donors donated 200$ or below.
But only 50% of the money is from these small donors

Over the last few days the McCain camp has started to get desperate with all the good news for Obama. So what does a campaign run by the architect of negative campaigning do?

Do some good 'ole negative campaigning of course. Here's a recap.

In late March of this year, I posted a diary entitled: "Concern Re: McCain's Brain," and caught all sorts of flack for referencing a February 22nd, 2008 diary post from Firedoglake by Kirk James Murphy, M.D., entitled: "McCain's Brain--How's It Doin'?"

At the time, I was lectured by many of my fellow bloggers and admonished about how politically incorrect it was to point out that a real, live doctor actually had the temerity to suggest that maybe--just maybe--at 72 years of age (which McCain will be around the time Obama's inauguration rolls around), and after many years of existence in inhumane conditions while a P.O.W. in North Vietnam, that the guy might just have worn out a few of the cards within the original set of 52 he was supposedly given at birth.

by YouTube.

Yuval Azoulay of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported this story recently, that B'Tselem cameras pay off for victims of settler attacks.

Three months ago, B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization gave 100 video cameras to ordinary Palestinians living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in order that they might document human rights abuses. One of those cameras recorded an incident in which a nonviolent peace activist in Ni'ilin, while in custody: blindfolded and handcuffed, was shot in the foot by a rubber-coated bullet.

Fifteen years ago yesterday, President Clinton in one of the more craven acts of his Presidency--after a storm of protest from the likes of Colin Powell and Sam Nunn--reneged on a promise to let gays serve openly in the military.

Instead he ushered in  a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy whereby the government would no longer ask recruits whether they were gay; and in turn, service members would be able to remain in the military as long as they didn't reveal their sexual orientation.

This policy didn't serve either gays or the military very well.

Since 1993, the military booted 12,300 service members under DADT, including at least 58 valuable Arabic language specialists.

Today, the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel held the first congressional hearings on DADT in 15 years--no doubt  because support for repealing the policy  is soaring. A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, for example, found that 75 percent of Americans believe:

"Gay people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military.

This is a a huge jump from the 61 percent who supported it in 2001.

However, no Pentagon officials testified at today's hearings.

Subcommittee chairwoman Susan Davis (D-CA) said that she put in a request to the Defense Department:

But at this particular time...they're really not quite willing to come forward.

Gay rights activists lambasted this no-show. Steve Ralls of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays  declared:

At a time when the military is relaxing every possible standard to attract new recruits...one would hope and expect that Defense Department leaders would be first in line to call on Congress to repeal the law.

Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, who is gay and was the first U.S. soldier wounded in Operation Iraqi Freedom testified today. He recently told the Washington Blade, a gay newspaper:

We're allowing our prejudice to be put into action by allowing this discriminatory policy of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' to still exist, even in this day and age.

In 2006, Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) introduced the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would overturn DADT. The legislation now has 133 co-sponsors, including five Republicans. Chief Kook and gay-hater President Bush, however, has said he will veto it.

Of course, at time when the military is struggling to recruit and retain soldiers the policy is wearing thin. A 2005 study by the Williams Project at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, found that as many as 41,000 new recruits could be found if the ban were repealed. The report said:

This would be enough people to entirely staff half a dozen aircraft carriers.

And it is now common knowledge that gay service members pose no risk to the unity or effectiveness of the armed forces. In fact, there is increasing evidence that many soldiers are already aware of the sexual orientation of other soldiers.

CBS's "60 Minutes" recently did a segment on whether commanders were becoming less strict in enforcing the ban on openly gay servicemembers. During the segment, correspondent Lesley Stahl spoke with Army Sgt. Darren Manzella, who said he was very open about his homosexuality and even introduced his fellow soldiers to his boyfriend.

The Army was forced to open an investigation, but Manzella was eventually cleared to go back to work. He said he was basically told by his commanders:

"I don't care if you're gay or not.

Only after the CBS story was Manzella discharged. He said:

My sexual orientation certainly didn't make a difference when I treated injuries and saved lives in the streets of Baghdad. It shouldn't be a factor in allowing me to continue to serve.

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is aware of more than 500 U.S. soldiers who are out to their colleagues and continue to serve.

Calls to repeal DADT are growing, even from the law's original architects and supporters. As chairman of the Armed Forces Committee in the 1990s, then-senator Sam Nunn led a series of hearings that helped undermine Clinton's attempt to lift the ban on gays in the military. But last month, Nunn said:

I think [when] 15 years go by on any personnel policy, it's appropriate to take another look at it.

And last month, Joint Chiefs Chairman Michael Mullen  said that the military was ready to accept gay servicemembers if Congress repeals DADT.

A December 2006 survey of servicemembers who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan found 73 percent of those polled were:

comfortable with lesbians and gays.

And a new report by four retired senior military officers and sponsored by the Palm Center in California also calls for a repeal of DADT. This report declared:

This is the first time a Marine Corps general has ever called publicly for an end to the gay ban.

The officers concluded that allowing gays to serve openly:

is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline, or cohesion.

Also in a significant shift, last year, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John M. Shalikashvili said that he no longer supported DADT and said:

If gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces.

This stupid, stupid policy has long been a blot on the Clinton Administration which caved to bigoty and prejudice. It meant that gay service members could not have their loved ones in their military lives.

Of course, their loved ones did appear at their funerals.

It is waaaaay past time for this creepy dead-end compromise to bite the dust.

many thanks for the round up of information here goes to the Progress Report:

http://www.progress@mx3.americanprogress action.org

Bob Novak seems to be having a bad week. I first noticed this on Hardball and dug up these interesting articles about my favorite prince of darkness.

<Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak was cited by police after he hit a pedestrian with his black Corvette in downtown Washington, D.C., on Wednesday morning. </p>

A Politico reporter saw Novak in the front of a police car with a citation in his hand; a WJLA-TV crew and reporter saw Novak as well. The pedestrian, a 66-year-old man who was not further identified by authorities, was treated at George Washington University Hospital for minor injuries, according to D.C. Fire and EMS. Novak was later released by police and drove away from the scene.

"I didn't know I hit him. I feel terrible," a shaken Novak told reporters from Politico and WJLA as he was returning to his car. "He's not dead, that's the main thing." Novak said he was a block away from 18th and K streets Northwest, where the accident occurred, when a bicyclist stopped him and said, "You hit someone." He said he was cited for failing to yield the right of way.

It seems we are having similar fundraising issues across this country. Have we democrats become a little complacent or are we just hitting our financial limits?

Rossi tops '04 fundraising
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seatt lepolitics/archives/144094.asp

Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's campaign reported Tuesday that it has topped its fundraising total from the 2004 campaign, having now raised more than $6,254,035.80.

Rossi is again challenging Gov. Chris Gregoire, the Democrat who prevailed in '04 by 133 votes out of almost 3 million cast after two recounts and a court fight.

As of May 31 Gregoire had reported raising about $6.8 million.

I am not suggesting that Gov. Chris Gregoire is not raising money. I am suggesting that she should be doing better, much better! I do not see this as just a fault of her or her campaign, because in my opinion, this is also partly the fault of all of us.

More below...

1) It's topical. Ms. Logan has some very trenchant views on the war and it's coverage.

2) It's refreshing to see a mainstream journalist that takes her craft so seriously. Cronkite would be proud.

3) Lara Logan has a fraction of the exposure of her cable news counterparts, while deserving much more. The fact that she got the first Obama interview of his junket indicates I am not alone in this opinion. Finally,

4) The lady is just a flat-out badass. (watch her calmly describe her hotel blowing up). We need more like her.

Apologies if you've seen this before, if you haven't, it's 7 minutes well spent - enjoy.