Obama for real change
By Milton Crum, 9015 Saddle Drive - 09/23/08
McCain and Palin claim to be a change from Bush and Cheney, and they are.
Palin offers changes from Cheney: (1) Palin shoots animals, Cheney shot a friend; (2) Palin says “perhaps” to war with Russia, Cheney merely talks tough; and (3) as Palin says, she wears lipstick.
McCain has voted with Bush only 90 percent of the time, so he would be a 10 percent change.
Obama and Biden offer real change for the better: (1) better health care, not the Bush medical crisis; (2) lower taxes for 95 percent of us, no more tax-free corporate profits; (3) rebuilding our military, no more using them for unnecessary wars; (4) smart, targeted attacks on terrorists, no more killing dozens of innocent people and alienating thousands while trying to get one terrorist; and (5) letting the world know that we really believe that “all men are created equal” and that we are one nation of brothers and sisters under one God.
Palin offers changes from Cheney: (1) Palin shoots animals, Cheney shot a friend; (2) Palin says “perhaps” to war with Russia, Cheney merely talks tough; and (3) as Palin says, she wears lipstick.
McCain has voted with Bush only 90 percent of the time, so he would be a 10 percent change.
Obama and Biden offer real change for the better: (1) better health care, not the Bush medical crisis; (2) lower taxes for 95 percent of us, no more tax-free corporate profits; (3) rebuilding our military, no more using them for unnecessary wars; (4) smart, targeted attacks on terrorists, no more killing dozens of innocent people and alienating thousands while trying to get one terrorist; and (5) letting the world know that we really believe that “all men are created equal” and that we are one nation of brothers and sisters under one God.
Current rating: 2.7 with 387 ratings.
Click here to register
Reader Comments:
LegAdv wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:10 AM:
" kzeiler, thank you for your comments concerning my last post. I don't know how much help I could provide you with in the area of civics, but I'm flattered, nonetheless. Indeed, we do disagree on a number of issues and as you can see, I don't post here very often, but when I do, my primary objectives are to post accurate information and to avoid personal attacks. Thus far, I've never been censored by the editor, so I guess I must be doing something right. "
kzeiler wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:46 AM:
" Wow, purple your post is full of propaganda from the right. And full of fail.
Let's start with your first link to about.com that you say has the poll numbers for the congressional approval rating allegedly from November 2007. Why is the date of the article August 21, 2007? I've never heard of Kathy Gill, but I guess she can predict the future? That's amazing!
On to your second link that references current congressional approval ratings where to begin? I guess we can look at the date that's in the URL of the link and see that it's from 2008/07/08 - as in July 8, 2008. I'd hardly call that current. If anyone doubts my read on how to interpret that, check out the dates on the 2 comments posted there...July 8, 2008. That's almost 3 months ago now. So we'll move on to the part of the link's URL for the site itself, stuckon-stupid.com, I'd never heard of it before, but it's pretty clearly a right-wing oriented site. Coming from someone who admonishes those who disagree with him to stop (allegedly) parroting left-leaning sites like DailyKOS (I haven't even touched one of their pages for 2 years) and moveon.org (I'm pretty darn sure I've never been there ever), why the heck are you giving a link to a right-wing partisan site to prove your point? Though "stuckon-stupid" does seem to fit you....
Ok, so purple cherry-picked some polling numbers and assigned some wrong dates to them. But to borrow a phrase from my good buddy patriot I've done the research, and I can back it up. Let's look at some data that I've provided in the past from www.pollingreport.com and of course they've added some additional polling data since then. I'm providing 3 links here, but note that you can jump around using the links in the upper right-hand corner.
http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm
If you look at the polling results from the various organizations in August 2007, you'll see that Kathy Gill herself cherry-picked the low number during that time period. (Again, I'll reiterate those aren't November 2007 numbers there, purple!) And how about the current numbers congressional approval rating? Looks more like they're at least above 10 points....not like that's something to brag about though.
Yep, the congressional approval ratings have dropped during the past session. And yep, there's been self-admitted obstruction by the Republicans, notably Senator Trent Lott whining to CQ about Majority Leader Reid invoking cloture too much but still crowing about how obstructionism had been working for the Republicans. I can dig up the Congressional Quarterly article if anyone wants it. But do compare the Harris Poll approval ratings between the Democrats & Republicans. Note which party is ahead lately. (Hint, it ain't the Republicans!)
But I do agree with LegAdv on Article I Section 7 of the US Constitution. (LegAdv, I don't think we agree on a lot of issues, but can you please help me with civics lessons as need be? I'd greatly appreciate it!) The President does not have the final say on legislation. Which is why Sen. Reid & Rep. Pelosi should be dumped from their leadership positions. They should have forced President Bush to use his veto pen a whole lot more.
I'd like to take this moment to remind folks that MTRICH didn't find purple at intelligent.com & just got a blank page at www.purple.com. Actually, I just checked it out and I'll have to very slightly disagree with my friend MTRICH on this issue. It's not totally blank...it's purple in color (but completely devoid of any meaningful content). Actually for 1 second or so there's a link to an FAQ page that then disappears with some HTML tomfoolery. And here's the link to the purple FAQ page for reference:
http://www.purple.com/faq.html (like you couldn't have guessed it) C'mon, make it more purple! What's extra funny/weird is that the technical contact for purple.com on their Whois page is named Rick Perry...but at Villanova University, not the current Governor of Texas. http://www.purple.com/whois.html
And purple, when will you answer regarding your Military.com red herring? Or will you ever answer it?
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2008/09/16/opinions/readers_alley/rissman_080916.txt "
Let's start with your first link to about.com that you say has the poll numbers for the congressional approval rating allegedly from November 2007. Why is the date of the article August 21, 2007? I've never heard of Kathy Gill, but I guess she can predict the future? That's amazing!
On to your second link that references current congressional approval ratings where to begin? I guess we can look at the date that's in the URL of the link and see that it's from 2008/07/08 - as in July 8, 2008. I'd hardly call that current. If anyone doubts my read on how to interpret that, check out the dates on the 2 comments posted there...July 8, 2008. That's almost 3 months ago now. So we'll move on to the part of the link's URL for the site itself, stuckon-stupid.com, I'd never heard of it before, but it's pretty clearly a right-wing oriented site. Coming from someone who admonishes those who disagree with him to stop (allegedly) parroting left-leaning sites like DailyKOS (I haven't even touched one of their pages for 2 years) and moveon.org (I'm pretty darn sure I've never been there ever), why the heck are you giving a link to a right-wing partisan site to prove your point? Though "stuckon-stupid" does seem to fit you....
Ok, so purple cherry-picked some polling numbers and assigned some wrong dates to them. But to borrow a phrase from my good buddy patriot I've done the research, and I can back it up. Let's look at some data that I've provided in the past from www.pollingreport.com and of course they've added some additional polling data since then. I'm providing 3 links here, but note that you can jump around using the links in the upper right-hand corner.
http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm
If you look at the polling results from the various organizations in August 2007, you'll see that Kathy Gill herself cherry-picked the low number during that time period. (Again, I'll reiterate those aren't November 2007 numbers there, purple!) And how about the current numbers congressional approval rating? Looks more like they're at least above 10 points....not like that's something to brag about though.
Yep, the congressional approval ratings have dropped during the past session. And yep, there's been self-admitted obstruction by the Republicans, notably Senator Trent Lott whining to CQ about Majority Leader Reid invoking cloture too much but still crowing about how obstructionism had been working for the Republicans. I can dig up the Congressional Quarterly article if anyone wants it. But do compare the Harris Poll approval ratings between the Democrats & Republicans. Note which party is ahead lately. (Hint, it ain't the Republicans!)
But I do agree with LegAdv on Article I Section 7 of the US Constitution. (LegAdv, I don't think we agree on a lot of issues, but can you please help me with civics lessons as need be? I'd greatly appreciate it!) The President does not have the final say on legislation. Which is why Sen. Reid & Rep. Pelosi should be dumped from their leadership positions. They should have forced President Bush to use his veto pen a whole lot more.
I'd like to take this moment to remind folks that MTRICH didn't find purple at intelligent.com & just got a blank page at www.purple.com. Actually, I just checked it out and I'll have to very slightly disagree with my friend MTRICH on this issue. It's not totally blank...it's purple in color (but completely devoid of any meaningful content). Actually for 1 second or so there's a link to an FAQ page that then disappears with some HTML tomfoolery. And here's the link to the purple FAQ page for reference:
http://www.purple.com/faq.html (like you couldn't have guessed it) C'mon, make it more purple! What's extra funny/weird is that the technical contact for purple.com on their Whois page is named Rick Perry...but at Villanova University, not the current Governor of Texas. http://www.purple.com/whois.html
And purple, when will you answer regarding your Military.com red herring? Or will you ever answer it?
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2008/09/16/opinions/readers_alley/rissman_080916.txt "
purple wrote on Oct 2, 2008 9:55 AM:
" In November 2007, the approval rating for the congress was 18 percent.
http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2007/08/21/congressional-approval-rating-at-all-time-low.htm
The current congressional approval rating is 9 percent.
http://stuckon-stupid.com/2008/07/08/congressional-approval-rating-reaches-all-time-low-of-nine-percent/
What happened?
In the two years since the democrats became the majority party in the congress, the approval rating for that august body has fallen by 50 percent.
In the 2006 congressional races, democrats ran on "change". They got the votes they needed to change which party which controls the congress, however, they have done zip with it.
Oh of course, they blame those pesky obstructionist republicans, but somewhere along the line democrats have to accept responsibility for not living up to their 2006 campaign promises. It is far easier to blame someone else, that in itself is the real reason democrats won't admit it because it would mean they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. "
http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2007/08/21/congressional-approval-rating-at-all-time-low.htm
The current congressional approval rating is 9 percent.
http://stuckon-stupid.com/2008/07/08/congressional-approval-rating-reaches-all-time-low-of-nine-percent/
What happened?
In the two years since the democrats became the majority party in the congress, the approval rating for that august body has fallen by 50 percent.
In the 2006 congressional races, democrats ran on "change". They got the votes they needed to change which party which controls the congress, however, they have done zip with it.
Oh of course, they blame those pesky obstructionist republicans, but somewhere along the line democrats have to accept responsibility for not living up to their 2006 campaign promises. It is far easier to blame someone else, that in itself is the real reason democrats won't admit it because it would mean they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. "
LegAdv wrote on Sep 29, 2008 9:41 AM:
" gln, perhaps you should read Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, of the U.S. Constitution again. Contrary to your belief, the President does NOT have "the final word", based on his veto power alone, as Congress may override a veto with a two-thirds vote of the membership of both the House and Senate. And no President has the Constitutional power to 'take control' of Congress, as they are a separate and co-equal branch of government. "
gln wrote on Sep 24, 2008 9:45 AM:
" To skooter, again, another 5 star posting of the facts:
here is another website some should visit below
http://current.com/items/89317080_mccain_embraces_regulation_after_many_years_of_opposition.
It is good to se so many getting involved in this election knowing how critical it is to all. Getting correct info is really important with so much dis-information floating around. Economy is the #1 issue, bigger than all the other issues combined. People's savings gone by 25-50%, interest rates ready to just climb, You have no idea how things can get even worst.
So here are the two choices to help deliver us from this mess:
1- A candidate that graduated from school 894 out of 899, one that as of late last week said that the fundementals of our economy were sound, that was on record several times saying that economics was NOT his strong point...
2- A candidate that is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review(top of his class), worked as a community organizer and practiced as a civil rights attorney before serving in the Senate from 1997 to 2004. Taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004.
And as some do point out that congress is the problem, I agree that they seem to only get things done when we are in a melt down instead of proactively, but I got to tell you the president has the final word and it's called veto. Until we have a president that takes control of congress, this will all continue. "
here is another website some should visit below
http://current.com/items/89317080_mccain_embraces_regulation_after_many_years_of_opposition.
It is good to se so many getting involved in this election knowing how critical it is to all. Getting correct info is really important with so much dis-information floating around. Economy is the #1 issue, bigger than all the other issues combined. People's savings gone by 25-50%, interest rates ready to just climb, You have no idea how things can get even worst.
So here are the two choices to help deliver us from this mess:
1- A candidate that graduated from school 894 out of 899, one that as of late last week said that the fundementals of our economy were sound, that was on record several times saying that economics was NOT his strong point...
2- A candidate that is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review(top of his class), worked as a community organizer and practiced as a civil rights attorney before serving in the Senate from 1997 to 2004. Taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004.
And as some do point out that congress is the problem, I agree that they seem to only get things done when we are in a melt down instead of proactively, but I got to tell you the president has the final word and it's called veto. Until we have a president that takes control of congress, this will all continue. "
electstat wrote on Sep 23, 2008 10:09 PM:
" I'm ready for change as well. The democrats have been in control of the country for the past couple of years - the president doesn't have the real power, it's congress. There were a lot of promises made to get elected - the war would be over, gas prices lowered, etc. etc. I'm still waiting for a single promise from those in charge to be fulfilled. "
skooter wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:53 PM:
" Patriot, I'm not frustrated by life. Mearly frustrated by a government that doesn't work for its taxpayers and the bulk of its citizenry, that doesn't have a bit of fiscal sense, that thinks its ok that we have a little rocket fuel in our water, that hasn't always been very honest with us, that has wasted billions on iraq rebuilding boondoggles, that cherishes big money over doing what's right for the country...and now wants to give social relief to the wall street (even the firms doing ok - and foreign banks too) w/o a firm explanation of why. And McCain is that party's representative, he has backed their platform and he's sold whatever maverick image he ever had to get the backing of the Bush WH and its powerbase. And even know he's changing again to act like he's not for all of the policies he's embraced in the past since he's now about change.
You can repeat those old hack innuendo's about Obama's connections, most of them are disproven at factcheck.org. But I am much more worried about McCain's affiliation with Charles Keating, mastermind of the last big bailout, and Phil Gramm one of the main guys behind this one...and his cadre of lobbyists on staff he'll have to repay with favors if he does get elected.
I can't say 'game on'. This is too important. There are too many poor working families struggling to make it and middle class families feeling themselves slipping downward, one bad illness or tragedy away from ruin. Bush played around with this country over the last 8 years like it was a game. Time for some real change. "
You can repeat those old hack innuendo's about Obama's connections, most of them are disproven at factcheck.org. But I am much more worried about McCain's affiliation with Charles Keating, mastermind of the last big bailout, and Phil Gramm one of the main guys behind this one...and his cadre of lobbyists on staff he'll have to repay with favors if he does get elected.
I can't say 'game on'. This is too important. There are too many poor working families struggling to make it and middle class families feeling themselves slipping downward, one bad illness or tragedy away from ruin. Bush played around with this country over the last 8 years like it was a game. Time for some real change. "
Nutmeg wrote on Sep 23, 2008 5:55 PM:
" Well said. It is easy to see the big difference between Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin.
Is there ANY difference between McCain and Bush?
Read conservative George Wills' editorial on McCain - his scary behavior and hot-temper: angry, mean, impetuous (such as choosing the ill-prepared Governor) speaks volumes about how he would be a disastrous President. "
Is there ANY difference between McCain and Bush?
Read conservative George Wills' editorial on McCain - his scary behavior and hot-temper: angry, mean, impetuous (such as choosing the ill-prepared Governor) speaks volumes about how he would be a disastrous President. "
patriot wrote on Sep 23, 2008 2:02 PM:
" scooter,
You are obviously frustrated with life in general.
1. Healthcare. We can now create another government agency sucking the blood out of taxpayers, great ides for those who don't pay taxes. Just another burden on the middle income taxpayer. Who will pay for all these benefits Obama recommend? The government is the largest employer today and Obama wants it to grow, great plan. I have read the details and as you believe they are just more rhetoric. May I suggest that Barak be more specific. If you make 75,000 a year, the plan is to increase your taxes by say 7% so we can provide healthcare to all. How can he insure quality and efficient care for all. another hollow quote. Will he put in place another government agency like the healthcare police?
2. McCain does favor some deregulation but not in total. He came out three years ago wanting oversight on Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae which was soundly defeated by the democrats for example.
3. The military was as prepared as any in the past, probably more so. What does Barak and Joe Biden know of the military anyway. McCain has been a very staunch supporter of military appropriations, he has done his due diligence when voting against defense appropriation bills when filled with added earmarks not related. He is not afraid to speak out when many democrats tack on unnsecessary pork.
4. I do not have a country hit list and never mentioned one. The approach to the war in Iraq and Afganistan was based on the intelligence available at the time. There are mistakes in any war. We do use smart weapons,and are in use by smart military leaders. Are you saying bin Laden made a smart military attack?
5. I beleive we all have a right to free speech and have fought to preserve it. Religion is ones personal choice, whether to believe or not in a god or a goat. Makes no difference to me. Lot's of chuches,temples and synagogues abound to choose from. Worhship where you like.
Bottom Line: McCain does not offer the same as the last eight years, albeit those years were difficult due to 9/11 and subsequent circumstances. You don't trust McCain and I don't trust a man who claims a dedicated terrorist, convicted felon, a preacher who damms America and a PLO advance man as his closest friends and advisers.
William Ayers
Tony Rezko
Jeremiah Wright
Rashid Khalidi
You have made your choice and I have made mine, game on scooter! "
You are obviously frustrated with life in general.
1. Healthcare. We can now create another government agency sucking the blood out of taxpayers, great ides for those who don't pay taxes. Just another burden on the middle income taxpayer. Who will pay for all these benefits Obama recommend? The government is the largest employer today and Obama wants it to grow, great plan. I have read the details and as you believe they are just more rhetoric. May I suggest that Barak be more specific. If you make 75,000 a year, the plan is to increase your taxes by say 7% so we can provide healthcare to all. How can he insure quality and efficient care for all. another hollow quote. Will he put in place another government agency like the healthcare police?
2. McCain does favor some deregulation but not in total. He came out three years ago wanting oversight on Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae which was soundly defeated by the democrats for example.
3. The military was as prepared as any in the past, probably more so. What does Barak and Joe Biden know of the military anyway. McCain has been a very staunch supporter of military appropriations, he has done his due diligence when voting against defense appropriation bills when filled with added earmarks not related. He is not afraid to speak out when many democrats tack on unnsecessary pork.
4. I do not have a country hit list and never mentioned one. The approach to the war in Iraq and Afganistan was based on the intelligence available at the time. There are mistakes in any war. We do use smart weapons,and are in use by smart military leaders. Are you saying bin Laden made a smart military attack?
5. I beleive we all have a right to free speech and have fought to preserve it. Religion is ones personal choice, whether to believe or not in a god or a goat. Makes no difference to me. Lot's of chuches,temples and synagogues abound to choose from. Worhship where you like.
Bottom Line: McCain does not offer the same as the last eight years, albeit those years were difficult due to 9/11 and subsequent circumstances. You don't trust McCain and I don't trust a man who claims a dedicated terrorist, convicted felon, a preacher who damms America and a PLO advance man as his closest friends and advisers.
William Ayers
Tony Rezko
Jeremiah Wright
Rashid Khalidi
You have made your choice and I have made mine, game on scooter! "
rinnie wrote on Sep 23, 2008 2:01 PM:
" c'est moi wrote on Sep 23, 2008 9:06 AM:
" Senator Obama can't change the minds of the people fed up with his empty rhetoric.
And you can believe in that. "
Oh I see. I guess it is true then. He can't change empty minds.
I would just like to know one thing. Why has John McCain turned against his ol buddy GWB and the Republican party?
Is he a Dem. wanna be? He sure is copying Obama's theme, ideals and policies. Thus does that make his rhetoric empty? Just curious........... "
" Senator Obama can't change the minds of the people fed up with his empty rhetoric.
And you can believe in that. "
Oh I see. I guess it is true then. He can't change empty minds.
I would just like to know one thing. Why has John McCain turned against his ol buddy GWB and the Republican party?
Is he a Dem. wanna be? He sure is copying Obama's theme, ideals and policies. Thus does that make his rhetoric empty? Just curious........... "
skooter wrote on Sep 23, 2008 11:04 AM:
" Patriot: there's nothing I can say to convince you of the fallacies in your 5 point response to Mr. Crum. You believe the way the right has led this great country like a wealthocracy for 8 years is just perfect and peachy. But for those who might be confused by the distortions Patriot offered-here's a couple of rebuttals.
1. HEALTH CARE McCain's plan is to tax the health care benefits as taxable income. He also wants to deregulate health care and like he's done the financial sector (God help us). Obama's plan promises complete coverage at lower costs and a regulated environment where the families and patients get treat well - not just the insurance industry...its a detailed plan so you'll have to read the details at barackobama.com, but its at least a plan, and not more of the McSame.
2. TAXES/ECONMOMY. McCain has pushed for the kind of deregulation that lead us to this mess for the entire 26 yrs of his career. He surrounds himself with lobbyists who have been the architects of this mess-and you trust his plan more? Business week and many other economists have come out and said that Obama's plan will be better for the country and mean more money in more pockets. The 'god of economics', Greenspan, has said that McCain's plan will not work. Obama's tax plan just reduces the enormous gifts that the Bush's gave their corporate friends. Once we balance the budget, pay for the bush economic disaster/bailout and cut down bush's deficit - then we might be able to talk about more breaks for the wealthy. And the companies? Those companies that keep work and workers in this country will actually get breaks. We need jobs here, not in China. Sorry about that, but Wall Street and the CEOs have had and 8 year run of things, they got rich, botched it royally and we are paying all of the same.
3. MILITARY: If this military was so well equipped, why did it get sent into a theatre of war w/o proper equipment and armored vehicles and still didn't have them several years after (families were buying their own kevlar to send sons). Not to mention sending an army to fight a much debated war without a solid mission, solid intelligence, and a plan for once they won...which led to the chaos of the past years. And don't forget that Obama has well documented record of supporting veteran & military issues (well documented) than McCain. Polls are showing that Obama is clearly the popular choice amongst military personnel.
4. SMART TARGETED ATTACKS: You keep saying that that every idea you don't like is 'dumb' or thought less but don't offer an alternative. But why would a smarter approach to our defense be dumb? Why use a shotgun when a rifle will do? We can't invade every country on your hit list.
5. '"ONE NATION UNDER GOD" : Of course, all of us democrats are heathens, right? Or maybe we believe in the Constitution, you know that thing you like to hold up when it suits you? Separation between religion in state insures that all of us - not just the majority get a fair voice. Not everyone is catholic, protestant, jewish, buddhist or whatever - you can't run a country through one of these religions and not exclude people.
BOTTOM LINE: is that if you think the last 8 years haven't left us, this country and our economy weaker, stretched thin and out-of-touch with reality - then 4 more years with McCain is for you. Maybe he can double the Bush deficit! "
1. HEALTH CARE McCain's plan is to tax the health care benefits as taxable income. He also wants to deregulate health care and like he's done the financial sector (God help us). Obama's plan promises complete coverage at lower costs and a regulated environment where the families and patients get treat well - not just the insurance industry...its a detailed plan so you'll have to read the details at barackobama.com, but its at least a plan, and not more of the McSame.
2. TAXES/ECONMOMY. McCain has pushed for the kind of deregulation that lead us to this mess for the entire 26 yrs of his career. He surrounds himself with lobbyists who have been the architects of this mess-and you trust his plan more? Business week and many other economists have come out and said that Obama's plan will be better for the country and mean more money in more pockets. The 'god of economics', Greenspan, has said that McCain's plan will not work. Obama's tax plan just reduces the enormous gifts that the Bush's gave their corporate friends. Once we balance the budget, pay for the bush economic disaster/bailout and cut down bush's deficit - then we might be able to talk about more breaks for the wealthy. And the companies? Those companies that keep work and workers in this country will actually get breaks. We need jobs here, not in China. Sorry about that, but Wall Street and the CEOs have had and 8 year run of things, they got rich, botched it royally and we are paying all of the same.
3. MILITARY: If this military was so well equipped, why did it get sent into a theatre of war w/o proper equipment and armored vehicles and still didn't have them several years after (families were buying their own kevlar to send sons). Not to mention sending an army to fight a much debated war without a solid mission, solid intelligence, and a plan for once they won...which led to the chaos of the past years. And don't forget that Obama has well documented record of supporting veteran & military issues (well documented) than McCain. Polls are showing that Obama is clearly the popular choice amongst military personnel.
4. SMART TARGETED ATTACKS: You keep saying that that every idea you don't like is 'dumb' or thought less but don't offer an alternative. But why would a smarter approach to our defense be dumb? Why use a shotgun when a rifle will do? We can't invade every country on your hit list.
5. '"ONE NATION UNDER GOD" : Of course, all of us democrats are heathens, right? Or maybe we believe in the Constitution, you know that thing you like to hold up when it suits you? Separation between religion in state insures that all of us - not just the majority get a fair voice. Not everyone is catholic, protestant, jewish, buddhist or whatever - you can't run a country through one of these religions and not exclude people.
BOTTOM LINE: is that if you think the last 8 years haven't left us, this country and our economy weaker, stretched thin and out-of-touch with reality - then 4 more years with McCain is for you. Maybe he can double the Bush deficit! "
rinnie wrote on Sep 23, 2008 9:30 AM:
" Mr Crum:
Save your breath on these "dyed in the wool" Clinton haters.
What Clinton did in the Oval office was not acceptable. That being said...the Moral Majority aka the lunatic fringe right..made it impossible for him to do his job as he would have liked to. They cost the taxpayers millions on their witch hunt. Which brings me to this. Google Thomas Muthee and see what a "real" witch hunter does. More "perils for Pauline" the devout Christian.
I could spew out more hateful remarks but I guess I wouldn't hold a candle to these rabid closed minded folks.
This "messiah" thing is getting lame. Haven't you good people been taught not to use the name of the Lord in vain? Beat your Bibles but practise what you preach!
My fear is not from any foreign "terrorist attack" but from the division of this once proud country. Heck of a job Bushie. The uniter!!! "
Save your breath on these "dyed in the wool" Clinton haters.
What Clinton did in the Oval office was not acceptable. That being said...the Moral Majority aka the lunatic fringe right..made it impossible for him to do his job as he would have liked to. They cost the taxpayers millions on their witch hunt. Which brings me to this. Google Thomas Muthee and see what a "real" witch hunter does. More "perils for Pauline" the devout Christian.
I could spew out more hateful remarks but I guess I wouldn't hold a candle to these rabid closed minded folks.
This "messiah" thing is getting lame. Haven't you good people been taught not to use the name of the Lord in vain? Beat your Bibles but practise what you preach!
My fear is not from any foreign "terrorist attack" but from the division of this once proud country. Heck of a job Bushie. The uniter!!! "
c'est moi wrote on Sep 23, 2008 9:06 AM:
" Senator Obama can't change the minds of the people fed up with his empty rhetoric.
And you can believe in that. "
And you can believe in that. "
skooter wrote on Sep 23, 2008 8:31 AM:
" One more bit of change: despite all of his talk of kicking out lobbyists, McCain's campaign is run and staffed by lobbyists. His Campaign Mgr Rick Davis has been making millions (30K a month for 5 yrs) from Fannie Mae just to provide access to McC if he was elected. A former SVP at Fannie Mae says a McCain staff photo looks exactly like the team of lobbyists that served him for years - they are all working for McCain!
Phil Gramm the deregulator was a big Enron lobbyist (helped write the laws that dereg'd them - how that work out again?) and is representing USB now (big Swiss bank that wants to get in on this bail-out now too). Why run a smart company when you can just get bailed out and walk away with millions either way?
There's more - check out mclobbyist.com for the full lineup. "
Phil Gramm the deregulator was a big Enron lobbyist (helped write the laws that dereg'd them - how that work out again?) and is representing USB now (big Swiss bank that wants to get in on this bail-out now too). Why run a smart company when you can just get bailed out and walk away with millions either way?
There's more - check out mclobbyist.com for the full lineup. "
skooter wrote on Sep 23, 2008 8:15 AM:
" Especially now with the financial debacle the repubs created, even more deficit (Bush just asked to raise our debt ceiling!) and a dubious bailout plan (at best)...there shouldn't be too much of a choice here. McCain and his economic advisor Gramm are prime players in this deregulation, give em' rope approach to industry - all the way back to McCain's involvement with Keating and the S&L crisis in the 80's.
And McC promises more of the same - deregulation - with both health care and social security (I sure would feel trusting putting my SocSec money into the market - they do such a good job taking care of our money now).
We've all been kicked in the teeth: our 401Ks submarined, our taxes misused to bailout poor CEOs, you or I can't file for debt relief but Wall Street can no questions asked?? Its time that politicians who play with our money and lives like they don't matter pay too. Get them out of office. Civil penalties for those Wall street people responsible. No profiteering from this bailout.
If you've ever listened to financial advisor Dave Ramsey on local radio, he talks about living on Beans & Rice when you are in debt and trying to climb out. A large portion of republican leadership and a bunch of Wall Street CEOs should have to live like that until we work off this debt like a lot of working families will be... "
And McC promises more of the same - deregulation - with both health care and social security (I sure would feel trusting putting my SocSec money into the market - they do such a good job taking care of our money now).
We've all been kicked in the teeth: our 401Ks submarined, our taxes misused to bailout poor CEOs, you or I can't file for debt relief but Wall Street can no questions asked?? Its time that politicians who play with our money and lives like they don't matter pay too. Get them out of office. Civil penalties for those Wall street people responsible. No profiteering from this bailout.
If you've ever listened to financial advisor Dave Ramsey on local radio, he talks about living on Beans & Rice when you are in debt and trying to climb out. A large portion of republican leadership and a bunch of Wall Street CEOs should have to live like that until we work off this debt like a lot of working families will be... "
barest wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:52 AM:
" Hmmmm. This sounds a lot of what Hitler promised before he took over and tried to make a "one race" nation.
At least with McCain and Palin we know they are HUMAN and not Gods in sheeps' clothing. One man (and it's not OBAMA)is the only messiah. Obama is NOT running for the whole world but the United States, so why can't he please stop preaching to all the OTHER COUNTRIES? "
At least with McCain and Palin we know they are HUMAN and not Gods in sheeps' clothing. One man (and it's not OBAMA)is the only messiah. Obama is NOT running for the whole world but the United States, so why can't he please stop preaching to all the OTHER COUNTRIES? "
out_2_lunch wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:44 AM:
" Mr. Crum, but then again Biden said he might not have been the right selection for the Democratic vice-president. Would you rather have someone leading this country that is ready and willing or someone that doesn't think they're ready?...choose wisely... "
patriot wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:02 AM:
" Milton,
Your letter is short, concise aand only makes sense to those who don't understand the real issues facing American today. You simply restate the democratic mantra and offer little perspective and insight as to what each candidate hopes to provide if elected.
Democrats and Republicans affiliate themselves to the party which best suits their ideology. So you are obviously a democrat who desires a more liberal approach to solving issues facing Americans today.
1. McCain does offer a different plan than Obama for Health care. He wants to place the responsibility with the individual, provide incentives and drive down the costs. Obama wants the taxpayers in the higher income group to pay the health care cost for the 95% of Americans who don't fall into that category. Very American plan, what if there is a reversal and those who are in the higher income group decide it isn't worth the effort, cut back on their income and take advantage of the freebies.
2. Lets raise the tax on the 5% and increase the tax burden on corporations. Very innovative if you are a follower of Marxism. I can't even begin to answer such a dumb idea. It will just simply have such a negative impact on the economy that great thinkers and innovators will sit back and relax.
3. The military is already built, to use your term. Our military is the best equipped and trained fighting force in the world. They are there to protect our homeland and to fight tyrany where it exists. It's an all volunteer force and they have chosen to protect you and all Americans. The only issue is that our military is hampered by elected officials who only pursue personal agendas for governmnet projects. Kind of like when Boeing lost the contract for a new Air refueling tanker when their cost was $3 Billion higher than the competition. So they protested at the insistance of the elected senators from Washington and Kansas. Now out Military is forced to fly tankers that are half century old. Go figure!
4. Smart targeted attacks! So that is what Osama bin Laden did on 9/11/2001. Your comment is so thoughtless, it is difficult to respond to.
5. "One nation under God" Now I surely do believe in that statement but I doubt if your liberal friends could agree that God should be mentioned at all.
Your letter is at least amusing, and what I come to expect from the democrat affiliated liberal. Nothing new in the thought process, just a re-hash. Get more specific next time. Oh and one more thing, John McCain crossed the isle 10% of the time and worked from a non-partisan view. You can't say that for Obama. "
Your letter is short, concise aand only makes sense to those who don't understand the real issues facing American today. You simply restate the democratic mantra and offer little perspective and insight as to what each candidate hopes to provide if elected.
Democrats and Republicans affiliate themselves to the party which best suits their ideology. So you are obviously a democrat who desires a more liberal approach to solving issues facing Americans today.
1. McCain does offer a different plan than Obama for Health care. He wants to place the responsibility with the individual, provide incentives and drive down the costs. Obama wants the taxpayers in the higher income group to pay the health care cost for the 95% of Americans who don't fall into that category. Very American plan, what if there is a reversal and those who are in the higher income group decide it isn't worth the effort, cut back on their income and take advantage of the freebies.
2. Lets raise the tax on the 5% and increase the tax burden on corporations. Very innovative if you are a follower of Marxism. I can't even begin to answer such a dumb idea. It will just simply have such a negative impact on the economy that great thinkers and innovators will sit back and relax.
3. The military is already built, to use your term. Our military is the best equipped and trained fighting force in the world. They are there to protect our homeland and to fight tyrany where it exists. It's an all volunteer force and they have chosen to protect you and all Americans. The only issue is that our military is hampered by elected officials who only pursue personal agendas for governmnet projects. Kind of like when Boeing lost the contract for a new Air refueling tanker when their cost was $3 Billion higher than the competition. So they protested at the insistance of the elected senators from Washington and Kansas. Now out Military is forced to fly tankers that are half century old. Go figure!
4. Smart targeted attacks! So that is what Osama bin Laden did on 9/11/2001. Your comment is so thoughtless, it is difficult to respond to.
5. "One nation under God" Now I surely do believe in that statement but I doubt if your liberal friends could agree that God should be mentioned at all.
Your letter is at least amusing, and what I come to expect from the democrat affiliated liberal. Nothing new in the thought process, just a re-hash. Get more specific next time. Oh and one more thing, John McCain crossed the isle 10% of the time and worked from a non-partisan view. You can't say that for Obama. "
4061111 wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:01 AM:
" Milton, thank goodness you don't represent my opinions. You're right, good ole Obama really will create change. But not for the better. If you would like to see socialism in the US, vote Obama. For those of the youngsters that don't know what "socialism" refers to, it doesn't mean to go out and make more friends, to be more social, as some have thought. "
purple wrote on Sep 23, 2008 4:01 AM:
" "better healthcare" - change to socialized medical so folks have to wait in line for care like the healthcare system in canada. Not to mention that the "quality" of healthcare will disappear. How can the current healthcare system be President Bush's fault? Hasn't the current healthcare system been around for over a century? Damn, has he been in office THAT long?
"lower taxes for 95 percent of us" - lets see, the top 5 percent ALREADY pays over 50 percent of the total tax burden. I guess you're willing to pay higher prices for the food you buy in grocier stores, higher prices for the clothing you wear. I find it comical that everyone who supports obama "believes" that when the rich wind up paying higher taxes, they won't pass along the cost to those who purchase the products they sell in the businesses they own.
"rebuilding the military" - har har har, under the past two DEMOCRAT presidents defense spending declined. Had President Reagan rebuilt the military after Carter, it is highly likely that the number of casualties the U.S. suffered during Desert Storm would have rivaled those of the Korean War (35,000 killed in action in three years). Democrats historically view defense spending as their favorite cash cow when it comes to spending cuts.
"smart targeted attacks on one target" - oh you mean like how the Clinton administration had THREE opportunities to take Osama bin-Laden into custody. Now if only they had taken the Sudanese government up those offers, maybe, just maybe the events of 9/11 could have been avoided.
It doesn't really matter what the rest of the world thinks of us. While they have one hand stuck out palm up wanting our money, the other hand is behind their back with a knife ready to kill us. We saw what happens, on 9/11, when this nation repeatedly ignored multiple terrorist attacks. "
"lower taxes for 95 percent of us" - lets see, the top 5 percent ALREADY pays over 50 percent of the total tax burden. I guess you're willing to pay higher prices for the food you buy in grocier stores, higher prices for the clothing you wear. I find it comical that everyone who supports obama "believes" that when the rich wind up paying higher taxes, they won't pass along the cost to those who purchase the products they sell in the businesses they own.
"rebuilding the military" - har har har, under the past two DEMOCRAT presidents defense spending declined. Had President Reagan rebuilt the military after Carter, it is highly likely that the number of casualties the U.S. suffered during Desert Storm would have rivaled those of the Korean War (35,000 killed in action in three years). Democrats historically view defense spending as their favorite cash cow when it comes to spending cuts.
"smart targeted attacks on one target" - oh you mean like how the Clinton administration had THREE opportunities to take Osama bin-Laden into custody. Now if only they had taken the Sudanese government up those offers, maybe, just maybe the events of 9/11 could have been avoided.
It doesn't really matter what the rest of the world thinks of us. While they have one hand stuck out palm up wanting our money, the other hand is behind their back with a knife ready to kill us. We saw what happens, on 9/11, when this nation repeatedly ignored multiple terrorist attacks. "
Share Article
kzeiler wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:24 AM:
Anyway, accurate facts are always appreciated here but sometimes are a rarity. "