On CNN’s Larry King Live Thursday night, Cynthia Ruccia of Women For Fair Politics debated Ellen Moran (a different Ellen) who represents Emily’s List — which has disappointingly decided to back Barack Obama instead of sticking to its founding charter of supporting women candidates:

Don’t miss all of Ellen4Hill’s story here, “My Response to Emily’s List’s E-Mail.”

Emily’s List should stick to its fundamental goal: To elect qualified women across the country.

The last thing that Emily’s List should be doing is seeking to dilute its funds needed for female candidates by backing Barack Obama, who permitted and participated in the sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton.

::::::::

This, and many other videos, are available at the JustSayNoDeal.com channel at YouTube, as are videos at our NoQuarter channel.

When you read the I Own My Vote Pledge, keep in mind that the demands it contains are not admissions of defeat, nor are they conditions precedent to your vote. Hillary’s campaign is only suspended, not ended. And only you can decide when your vote has been earned. Whether you are a PUMA activist, a WomenCountPAC donor, a Just Say No Deal blogger, a Clinton Democrat for McCain, a yellow dog Democrat for VoteBoth, or simply a Hillary Clinton supporter who feels like the Party leaders and their presumptive nominee are ignoring everything that you value, the most powerful statement you can make right now is that YOU OWN YOUR VOTE. Only in finding that common ground will we be counted, for only in that common ground will we be able to count ourselves.

I stand together with Hillary Clinton’s 18 million voters to demand that Senator Obama and the Democratic Party:

• Bring us together by seating 100% of the Florida and Michigan delegations in Denver with 100% of their votes, allocated in accordance with the popular vote of each state.
• Bring us together by adopting policies on the Platform Committee that Hillary Clinton has championed.
• Bring us together through reform of the primary and caucus system to reflect the basic principle of one person/one vote.
• Bring us together through outspoken denunciation of all gender bias, racism and other forms of discrimination.
• Bring us together by fairly and respectfully including Hillary and her supporters at the Democratic National Convention in Denver by, among other things, placing her name in nomination for President, conducting a roll call vote, and providing her a prominent speaking role during prime time on August 26th, the 88th anniversary of women’s suffrage.

I own my vote. It does not belong to any party. It does not belong to any candidate. It does not belong to any mob that would impose its will on me. Only I can decide how to use my vote, and I can decide based on any criteria I choose. Therefore I pledge not to give my vote to anyone who does not earn it.

Click here to sign the pledge: http://iownmyvote.com/

Via Clinton Democrats, today’s action item of the day:

Today Senator Barbara Mikulski joined Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) to announce their “Checklist for Change,” a list of ten issues Congress can immediately address to improve the lives of the American people. They include: providing equal pay for equal work, keeping jobs in America, making health care affordable, taking care of our military families and veterans, restoring America’s credibility in the world, protecting our environment, making America energy independent, preparing for future disasters, enforcing fiscal accountability and protecting the family checkbook. This is a blatant pander - a “checklist” of hot button items to women.

Call me cynical, but this sudden urge to “do something” about issues most important to women strikes me as “just words.”

Please contact these leaders and tell them if they really care about the concerns of women they should stand up and endorse Hillary Clinton. If they care about equal rights and equal treatment that they should stand up against sexism in the Democratic party.

If they care about women’s rights they should investigate the treatment of Hillary Clinton by the media. If they care about reforming healthcare, they should help Hillary Clinton get into the White House. If they care about keeping jobs in America, they should not be endorsing the guy that once again has flip-flopped on NAFTA.

Specifically ask Senator McCaskill “Why, after accepting approximately $500,000 from Emily’s List did you feel no obligation to back the more qualified female candidate for President?”

Sen. Klobuchar accepted roughly $300,000 from Emily’s List. Why didn’t she endorse Hillary?

Sen. Boxer was mum during this whole primary season. Why the sudden concern about women’s issues now? Senator Boxer launched an investigation into the horrific treatment of the Dixie Chicks after one of them publicly criticized Bush. Where is that outrage about the treatment Hillary has received? Where is the investigation?

Senator Claire MCCASKILL Contact Senator McCaskill

Senator Debbie STABENOW Contact Senator Stebenow

Senator Barbara BOXER Contact Senator Boxer

Senator Amy KLOBUCHAR Contact Senator Knobuchar

And remind them that it is hypocritical to support Barack Obama as an advocate for energy independence when he voted for the Bush-Cheney Energy Policy that was nothing more than than a giveway of taxpayer money to oil and energy companies. Remind them that Barack Obama has received more contributions from energy companies that all other candidates combined.

_________

From my blog, By The Fault.

Now I know that some say Dick Morris knows women’s toes, and I know that he has been suspected of paying for women in lieu of being able to have one for free, but his assessment of what women are thinking with respect to Barack Obama is Toe-tally off.

Dick Morris Inaccurate Assessment Number One: Women are only making a fuss because they want Hillary to be Barky’s VP.

The thing is, Dick, that’s the last thing most of us want. Some of us have spent enough time in Corporate America to recognize the habit of hiring a superior woman to hold up a mediocre man, while he prances around and preens and takes the credit. This describes Barack Obama’s character completely.

Most women would not only regard the “bridesmaid” idea as degrading, but most of us don’t want Hillary to be caught standing next to Barack Obama when he goes down in flames in November. We know that she could help him win and we do not want him to be President. Therefore, the thought of Hillary as the VP candidate is not attractive to us. We intend to provide as much help to defeat him as possible, although we probably won’t have nearly as much impact as all those “bitter hicks”. And finally, most of us wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama if he picked our own Mother as his VP.

It’s not about Hillary at this point. It’s about Barack Obama. We don’t trust him with our country and we don’t trust him with our lives. And mostly, we don’t trust him with our rights as women. So get that idea out of your head, Dick, mkay? We wouldn’t want you to appear as out of touch as Howard “The Confident” is.

Dick Morris Inaccurate Assessment Number Two: Women will vote for Barack Obama “because of the Supreme Court”. Those were his words yesterday, no kidding. I didn’t make that up.

I am going to assume here that Dick means the ominous Roe v. Wade scare. Well, Dick, I’m here to tell you that this has been a tool the Democrats have used to keep us in line for far too long. With this tool, Tools like Howard Dean have gotten women to make their phone calls, do their precinct work, carry their water and otherwise do the grunt work for “The Party”. I’m also here to tell you that this argument means nothing to us any longer.

For starters, if the Democratic party cared about a woman’s right to choose, big shots like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would have done something about it legislatively long ago. But that wouldn’t have been any fun, would it? I mean, how would they keep all those women in the voting line pulling that “D” lever if that were to happen?

We’re onto the Democratic Party patriarchs and we aren’t buying the threat any longer. Roe v. Wade is going nowhere, and we all know it. If it could have gone anywhere, the other side of the Barack Obama Extremist Whackjob Coin, namely George W. Bush, would have made it happen long ago. And even if Roe v. Wade were in danger of being “overturned,” the only result would be that the Federal government would be out of the picture and states would take over. Then you would all have to find something else to threaten us women with in order to get us to vote for a sexist pig like Sweetie Obama.

Ok, I’ll be the devil’s advocate here. Let’s assume that this lame threat that the Democratic Party has used on us for decades were to come to fruition by some absolute freak of luck. I have an opinion about that too–and it in no way resembles Dick Morris’ opinion.

In my opinion, any woman who falls for the misogynist pig named Barack Obama is already in danger of losing her rights as a complete person. Roe v Wade is the least of her worries after that happens, because once Sweetie Obama starts setting the Example for the workplace, it will be downhill all the way. The President of the United States has always set the tone in the workplace. As his attitude goes, so goes the attitude of all those corporations. Considering that Barack Obama has already set gender relations back 30 years, good luck with the thought that things will be just fine for women when he is President.

In my opinion, if my younger sisters lose Roe v Wade it will be their own fault for taking the rights they have for granted, because they didn’t fight for them. They think these rights will always be there and nothing could be further from the truth. If this year’s Democratic Primary showed us one thing, it’s that these rights are precarious. In fact they would be completely gone in the wrong hands. And the wrong hands belong to Barack Obama, the man who secretly chuckled with glee as women were bashed by-proxy by his surrogates, his followers, the press and him.

I see many very young women who are dangerously complacent enough to take the time to swoon over a sexy empty suit who has already set gender relations back a minimum of 30 years. And we haven’t even gotten to the General Election campaign yet. If these women lose Roe v Wade because they all want to be the Obama Girl, then it serves them right. Not my problem. I know how not to get pregnant.

It’s my job to protect the rights I fought for that matter to me. I do not take these rights lightly. This is a misogynist’s campaign and if squealing young women are too busy spawning over Leland Gaunt handing out Needful Things and discussing his vibrating cell phone when he leans on one of them, then they will have to learn to take the consequences of their own folly along with the consolations. Maybe then they will Get It. I have already done well enough in my life. Complacency is their enemy, not mine. If they don’t appreciate what the previous generation of women went through so that they could act like they want to spawn for Barack Obama, then they don’t deserve our help any longer. Let em eat vibrating cell phones.

I sincerely hope this clears things up for Dick Morris.

On June 7th, 2008 the New York Times published a piece about disaffected Hillary Voters. A Hillary supporter, Cynthia Ruccia of Women for Fair Politics, was interviewed.

Clinton Bloc Becomes the Prize for Election Day

When Mr. Dean reached out to Cynthia Ruccia, who started an organization of female Clinton swing-state voters threatening to vote for Mr. McCain, Ms. Ruccia asked that the Democratic convention include a symbolic first ballot for Mrs. Clinton’s delegates. Mr. Dean discouraged the idea on the grounds of unity.

Party Unity? When Dr. Dean lost his bid for the nomination his name was placed onto the first ballot. And he had a total of 167.5 delegates. Ted Kennedy had the right to contest the nomination when he was 1000 delegates behind Carter. So since when is recognizing and rewarding someone with 1640 pledged delegates discouraging party unity?

Being unable to find a definitive answer to this question I called the DNC this morning and spoke with a woman in the Chairman’s office. HERE is what I learned in that phone call today:

I explained to DNC employee in the Chairman’s office that I was confused by what I had read and asked her if what the New York Times article said was true. Was Dr. Dean discouraging placing Hillary’s name onto the first ballot because of party unity?

Her answer shocked me. She told me it was true. She said that Hillary Clinton had decided to support Barack Obama, therefore her name would not be placed on the ballot.

So I then asked her if Hillary Clinton had decided that she did not want her name placed into nomination on the first ballot. Her answer was that she couldn’t speak for Hillary Clinton. At least she got that much right. And she and the DNC do not speak for Hillary supporters either.

I do not know where this will go from here but I do know that history and precedent favor placing Hillary’s name on the first ballot. If Dean and his puny 167.5 delegates got onto the ballot (in 2004), then the person with the most votes in Democratic primary history certainly deserves equal treatment. Anything less isn’t fair or right. And it sure isn’t party unity.

Stay Tuned!