Morning Brief Contributions by David Loomstein

MUCH NEEDED LIBERAL BIAS >>>
As far as US news outlets, the least bad that I've found are: Frontline documentaries on PBS, BBC America ("news for grown-ups"), and for a sorta palatable news channel, MSNBC (Olbermann is the best of the lot, by a long shot.)

On radio, listen to Thom Hartmann, 9-12 noon on Mon-Fri on 1150am Air America. He's a Jefferson scholar and a brilliant, level-headed decent American. A national treasure. Try him for a week. Trust me. Just do it.

Also on Air Amereica, Rachel Maddow is also good, and Randi Rhodes is good, but tends to get a wee bit strident. But Randi has a wicked sense of humor (she's noon to 3) and brings up stuff that is cutting edge.

Ed Schultz (7-10pm) is great. A beer-drinking, truck-driving, hunting, grilling leftie who has the balls to take on anyone. He has no call screeners at all, ever. He just literally picks up the phone and talks to anyone at all, at any time. On live radio. That's guts.

Mark Germain (Mr. K) (3-7 pm) is an absolute waste of time.

But anyhoo -- check out Thom Hartmann. He's the best of the best.
-- Mike Conley.

SUPER TUESDAY SUGGESTIONS >>>
This Saturday I offered my space in Venice to a public forum to hear the platforms presented by four democractic candidates' representatives and the voices of a very articulate group of local residents. Up until that time I was torn between ALL the candidates, but was more comfortable with the Clinton 'promise'. After all was said I had a change of heart and today I made my decision to support Barak Obama for a number of reasons but primarily to secure a democratic win in November.
1. Polls indicate that Clinton has polarized the democratic vote. I'm afraid that dem voters that just don't like her would not turn out for the final election in November.

2. More importantly, polls indicate that there are many Republicans who are disenchanted enough with their party platform (the war, economy, foreign policy, civil rights,etc) that they WOULD vote for Obama, but WOULD NOT vote for Clinton.

3. Personally, I've decided that it would be better to hand the job to someone new, but qualified, if for no other reason than to say to the world that we are willing to hand things over to a new guard with the hope that he will do better. The fact that he is of African descent and has an arabic name is, if not an interesting coincidence, a strong sign that we are a tolerant, accepting and progressive nation (even if we really aren't).

4. Clinton is a solid candidate with good qualities and a lot of experience, but the record indicates that she really has not driven a lot of great legislation home despite all her much touted experience and ability.

Obama, on the other hand, has been a devoted politician as a two term state senator for Illinois and US senator for the last 4 years. Is that not enough? If not, perhaps the fact that he has been creditted as the greatest legal mind the Harvard Law Review of his alma matre has ever had, as well as their first African American president. He's pushed some very progressive legislation through the Illinois senate and his record on community service speaks for itself. He's a powerful man with a fervent spirit and a strong vision.

Thanks for reading and good luck voting on Tuesday.

-- Glen Irani