Flyfisher Wrote:

acrosierc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What does Barack Obama and Osama Bin Liden have in
> common? They both have friends who bombed the
> Pentagon!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cassa: "What do McCain and bin Laden have in
> common? Both crashed at least four planes."
>
> You never cease to amaze me.

You mean you thought Republicans have the monopoly on speciousness? It certainly seems that way often enough...

Lets get this straight: It is not germane to a person's qualifications to be president of the United States that, while running as a middle-of-the-road, center-left politician, his record is actually hard left, with longstanding ties to an unrepentant domestic terrorist and a record of having accepted payoffs from a convicted recipient of governmental largess arranged by the politician? I don't think so!

The end of debate had Obama extending his hand to McCain to shake, McCain refused.
I wonder if McCain lost his marbles in prison.

What is up with the, no eye contact thing, does McCain hate B-rock that much? will he interact with other nations this way?

My neighbors and I stood outside tonight and discussed debate, the McCain supporters were angry and unable to speak.


I'm happy
VOTE OBAMA

mccain and the link to right wing death squads??? God, is it christmas already??? to my pitbull with lipstick, come back home and sing some of that "drill, baby, drill to me" one dog to another and lets see if todd approves

It's not about whether Obama wins, it's about how the GOP loses. Looks like they want to be a fringe kooky party going forward. Too bad really. I knew it waaaay back in the day....

ABORTION FOES DISRUPT GOP, STASSEN SAYS//CANDIDATE RELEASES HIS LONE CONVENTION DELEGATE

Forthrightly stating an opinion held but seldom voiced by many moderate Republicans, former Gov. Harold Stassen said Wednesday that anti-abortion extremists are ruining the Republican Party. By focusing on one issue and preventing candidates from concentrating on important economic issues vital to the nation's future, abortion foes ``are disrupting the very fundamental way in which people express their preference for president in both parties,'' he said.

Published on June 25, 1992, Page 1B, St. Paul Pioneer Press (MN)

The rot continued and got worse after that. Covered up at times, exposed at others, now we see the end state. Really no regard for country, honor, or history.

These Republicans, the Atwater-Rove crowd, deserve their exile. "America First" what a sham....

Yeah, I was not calling that your stance. I think most Americans whether pro-choice or pro-life would agree on some general principals.

1.) Abortion is never a good answer.
2.) Responsibility will prevent more abortions than any law ever will.
3.) There are certain situations were abortion might be necessary or is unavoidable - Rape, Incest, Women's Health

I am pro choice, but at the same time I don't think it is without limits.

Mark A. Sadowski Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brad, I hope that it's clear, from my response to
> that question, that in such a situation it would
> not be my choice to make.

Arianna,

I really feel sorry for you. Your entire being is still a reaction from your earlier 'life'.

This new persona is just as misguided. Just as off the wall. Just as sad.

My suggestion is to take a deep breath, take several months off and get a new life.

This life will be your own. It will be a first. You owe it to yourself. All your doing
is displacing your past. Renew. Move on. Transcend. Give it up.


Best wishes,

Brad

I subjected myself to Prager's hypothetical interview ("Gotcha Questions for Katie Couric") and this is what I came up with:

Q: Critics of the war in Iraq argue that prior to the invasion of Iraq, America had never attacked a country that had no plans to attack it. How then do you explain the Korean War?

What are you implying? That the only previous time the U.S. attacked a country that had no plans to attack us was while the President was a member of the Democratic Party? What about Guatemala in 1954, Indonesia in 1958, Cuba in 1960, Cambodia in 1969, El Salvador and Nicaragua throughout the 80s, Grenada and Lebanon in 1983, Libya in 1966, Iran in 1987, and finally Panama in 1989?

Q: Is there any point in a woman's pregnancy at which you would call an abortion immoral?

At conception. However, I do not believe in criminalizing abortion. It will not help in reducing them. I am a firm believer in a consistent ethic of life.

Q: Members of the news media believe, correctly, that individuals running for political office, because of their potentially great impact on American life, should subject themselves to interview after interview about their views, values, personal life and knowledge base by often hostile members of the news media. But, the most powerful members of the news media, people who have more impact on American life than almost any politician in America, do not allow themselves to be interviewed about their views, values, personal life and knowledge of the issues. Why not?

They are not running for elected office. Next question.

Q: Which of the Federalist Papers do you think is most important? Why?

That would be Federalist paper number 10. Paper No. 10 is a famous argument regarding factionalism authored by Madison. A faction, according to Madison, is a group of citizens who are united by some special interest or passion that is either adverse to the rights of other citizens or contrary to the common good.

Q: In a question to Palin, you said that "women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes." If that is so, why don't employers only hire women whenever possible? What employer wouldn't want to save 23 percent for the same work? Is it possible that many women choose more flexible hours, want jobs with less travel and may choose less demanding work given their desire to be home more?

It is possible that many women choose more flexible hours, want jobs with less travel and may choose less demanding work given their desire to be home more. But there are a few women who do not make these choices. Shouldn't they be offered the same opportunities as men?

Q: On one of your CBS newscasts this year, you said: "A new study on teens and sexual harassment should give every parent pause. ... In a study that appeared in the journal Child Development, 90 percent of teen girls say they've been harassed at least once." Did you read that report? If not, how do you justify reporting it on a national newscast in order to alarm "every parent"? The report defines sexism and sexual harassment as including "sexist comments about their academic abilities, sexist comments about their athletic abilities ... demeaning gender-related comments, teasing based on their appearance, and unwanted physical contact." In other words, if a boy says to a girl, "You throw a ball like a girl!" that is deemed an instance of sexual harassment. Isn't that somewhat hysterical?

What if someone said, "You throw a ball like a Negro," "you throw a ball like a Hispanic," or "you throw a ball like a Jew?" Do you find that hysterical?

Q: What did you think of any articles in the most recent issues of Commentary, The Weekly Standard, National Review or any other conservative journal? Or do you only read liberal writing?

I read all of the magazines you mentioned online. However, I would be hard pressed to mention a recent article in any of those magazines that I found genuinely persuasive. It seems to me the closer we get to the election the more extremist they become. They clearly are out of touch with how the vast majority of the country thinks.

Q: Many Americans believe that the most important way of understanding the effects of taxation on government revenues is the Laffer Curve. What is your opinion about this?

In my opinion any diagram drawn on a cocktail napkin more than a quarter century ago by an inebriated economist who now is completely discredited is with out doubt dubious. The problem with the Laffer Curve is that it is a anti-tax fantasy. Do you really think cutting marginal income tax rates increases tax revenue? For example, consider the last major increase in marginal income tax rates (1993) and the last major cut in marginal tax rates (2001-2003). In 1993, the top federal marginal personal income tax rate was increased from 31% to 39.6%. The first year this tax increase was implemented tax revenues increased by4% in real terms. In 1999 real federal personal income tax revenue had increased 64.2% above what it was in 1992 (seven years later) before the tax increase. Between 2000 and 2003 the top marginal federal income tax rate was reduced from 39.6% to 35%. In 2003 real tax revenue was 27.1% below what it was in 2000 before the tax cuts. In 2007 real federal personal income tax revenue was still 2.5% below what it was in 2000 (seven years later). Laffer Curve? What a laugh!

Munk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can somebody please state when was it at anytime
> in our Republic that a party won three elections
> in a row? It is a very rare occurrence, even more
> so when the economy is down. McCaine is history.


Republicans in office from 1869 to 1885; 1897 to 1913; 1921 to 1933; 1969 to 1977 and 1981 to 1993.

Democrats in office from 1933 to 1953.

It's happened somewhat rarely, but more often for Republicans.

Cassa: "What do McCain and bin Laden have in common? Both crashed at least four planes."

You never cease to amaze me.

Drizzit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama voted 100% with Bill Ayers on the board, and
> Bill had a party for Obama and his campaign.
> Bill's girlfriend blew up while making a nail bomb
> to kill Americans. Ayers never repented, and this
> is who Obama associates with. He also voted the
> same way ayer's did on every issue. Learn who
> you're voting for. Actions speak louder than
> words, even though, the Post tries to hide it.
>
> A Racist who attends a racist church for 20 years
> does not repent by saying he never witnessed
> racism in his church. Just because he's not
> frothing at the mouth spewing hate doesn't mean
> he's clean. I love it how liberals say facts are
> smears. The proof is in his votes. Obama voted
> against our national defense, against listening in
> on suspected terrorist's phone calls, and voted to
> hurt the efficiency of our army.
>
> Even worse! Obama voted against oversight of
> Freddie and Fannie. The liberals are 100%
> responsible for the world economic crisis, and the
> vote went down in 2005. Obama and Dodd received
> the most blood money of any of the DemocRat
> sellouts!! This is not a smear, this is a
> coverup, and one of the democRats was literally in
> bed with one of the CEOs from Freddie, Barney
> Frank.
>
> A MUST SEE VIDEO BEFORE YOU VOTE!!!!
>
>
> [citizenwells.wordpress.com]
> -barney-frank-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-democrats-cau
> se-of-crisis-mccain-warned-mccain-reformer-youtube
> -video-democrat-coverups-bailout-truth/


-What were the issues that Obama and Ayers voted the same on?

-How is Obama racist?

-Voting to include a pullout plan isn't voting against the troops.

-Obviously you have no idea what caused the current crisis. You should research the deregulation of the banking industry, lead by the Republicans. Google Glass-Steagall act. Learn.

I hope that's not his message. I really would prefer "Obama's plan makes no logical sense, has no budget substance, can't be done right now, and if you elect him, you will be placing a common con artist in to the position of SCOTUS."

unfortunately, the type of vetting sen mccain is now attempting is something that both the original field of democrats--and the investigative media--should have undertaken.


Obama's associations are troubling to me-- but should have been THOROUGHLY investigated months ago!!! Having lived in Nyack when those policemen were killed, unrepentently intolerant of "rev' wright's theology, troubled by the Rezko association(s), concerned about how--and to whom--obama was steering $$$ to, concerned about ACORN's known steps to undermine our electoral process--and the recent relevations about ties to a Palestinian supporter of terrorist activities.....i'd like to know HOW a presidential candidate in this country cannot be viable with such "associations".

Oh, as much as I agree with much of what Huffington says, McCain doesn't have contempt for this country. He just doesn't see it the way people with about 350 electoral votes see it.

TheNest, VA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More than attacks on Obama (I think he can handle
> them quiet sufficiently), what concerns me is the
> growing malevolence and vitriolic extremism which
> McCain unwittingly, in his desparation to salvage
> a failing campaign, has unleashed -- fueled by a
> beast he's unleashed called "Sarah Palin."

Did you see the Daily Show interview with actual Wasillans? They said it would be "mean" to actually _wish_ for a McCain heart attack during the first term, but mind it they would not. Chilling indeed. That's the lady who's already calling for VP powers to be expanded.
>
> Cries of "terrorist!" "kill him!" and verbal and
> physical lashing out at the press attending
> rallies ...? Maybe I'm too much of an easy-does-it
> generation child, but this I find repulsive,
> alarming, and deserving of much more attention its
> been given.

Clear Heads Prevail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Take a look at the Palin rallies. They're turning
> into Nuremberg rallies! People are actually
> shouting "kill him!" at Obama and yelling at
> African Americans, brandishing guns, etc.

In all fairness, the "Kill him" whackjob might have been talking about Ayers. Not that lynchmobs are pleasant with any target.

Patrick Britton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Real Clear Politics or Real Liberal Politics? Give
> me a break. Huffington Puffington on a so-called
> bipartisan website?

Bipartisan, not non-partisan. In other words, partisans from both sides.... you did notice National Review, Sowell, and other rightwing hacks, right? Huff is the left-wing hack. RCP reveals its right leanings by not picking the really smart lefties at The Nation or In These Times.

Can somebody please state when was it at anytime in our Republic that a party won three elections in a row? It is a very rare occurrence, even more so when the economy is down. McCaine is history.

Funny how the Republicans have totally given up on trying to convince the voters they have any policy that works. Instead they fall back on their tried and true recipe for victory of telling you why you’ll die if you vote for someone else. Palin has gone complete nuts. Holding rallies for people that scream, “kill Obama”… she just smiles and keep doling our her message. Yes, that is what the Republican have been reduced to a part of hate and fear. So sad. Alas I still see people who would support them if Palin walked out in a Nazi uniform and shot a Jew.

Steve in Florida Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberals absolutely crack me up! Being vocal and
> declaring indignation at the rejection of BO is
> just going to make the victory by the "Silent
> Majority" just that much more sweeter. I'm really
> going to love it when the rejection of their
> philosophy is going to be branded as racism
> instead of the unpopularity of socialism.

What polls are you relying on?

Patrick Britton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Real Clear Politics or Real Liberal Politics? Give
> me a break. Huffington Puffington on a so-called
> bipartisan website?


There is a lot more to life than moose hunting!

The Real O B A M A!

Obama Helped Stranded Stranger 20 Years Ago

Sun Oct 05, 2008 at 03:47:48 PM PDT

The Norwegian newspaper VG has reported a truly amazing story about a newly-wed trying to get to Norway to be with her husband, and the stranger who helped pay an unexpected luggage surcharge. The blog "Leisha's Random Thoughts" has translated the story.

It was 1988, and Mary Andersen was at the Miami airport checking in for a long flight to Norway to be with her husband when the airline representative informed her that she wouldn't be able to check her luggage without paying a 100 surcharge:

When it was finally Mary’s turn, she got the message that would crush her bubbling feeling of happiness.You’ll have to pay a 103 dollar surcharge if you want to bring both those suitcases to Norway, the man behind the counter said. Mary had no money. Her new husband had travelled ahead of her to Norway, and she had no one else to call.I was completely desperate and tried to think which of my things I could manage without. But I had already made such a careful selection of my most prized possessions, says Mary.

As tears streamed down her face, she heard a "gentle and friendly voice" behind her saying, "That's okay, I'll pay for her."

Mary turned around to see a tall man whom she had never seen before. He had a gentle and kind voice that was still firm and decisive. The first thing I thought was, Who is this man? Although this happened 20 years ago, Mary still remembers the authority that radiated from the man.
He was nicely dressed, fashionably dressed with brown leather shoes, a cotton shirt open at the throat and khaki pants, says Mary. She was thrilled to be able to bring both her suitcases to Norway and assured the stranger that he would get his money back. The man wrote his name and address on a piece of paper that he gave to Mary. She thanked him repeatedly. When she finally walked off towards the security checkpoint, he waved goodbye to her.

Who was the man?

Barack Obama.

Twenty years later, she is thrilled that the friendly stranger at the airport may be the next President and has voted for him already and donated 100 dollars to his campaign:

He was my knight in shining armor, says Mary, smiling. She paid the 103 dollars back to Obama the day after she arrived in Norway. At that time he had just finished his job as a poorly paid community worker* in Chicago, and had started his law studies at prestigious Harvard university.

Mary even convinced her parents to vote for him:

In the spring of 2006 Mary’s parents had heard that Obama was considering a run for president, but that he had still not decided. They chose to write a letter in which they told him that he would receive their votes. At the same time, they thanked Obama for helping their daughter 18 years earlier.

And Obama replied:

In a letter to Mary’s parents dated May 4th, 2006 and stamped ‘United States Senate, Washington DC’, Barack Obama writes**:

‘I want to thank you for the lovely things you wrote about me and for reminding me of what happened at Miami airport. I’m happy I could help back then, and I’m delighted to hear that your daughter is happy in Norway. Please send her my best wishes. Sincerely, Barack Obama, United States senator’.

The parents sent the letter on to Mary.

Mary says that when her friends and associates talk about the election, especially when race relations is the heated subject, she relates the story of the kind man who helped out a stranger-in-need over twenty years ago, years before he had even thought about running for high office.

Truly a wonderful story, and something that needs to be passed along in the maelstorm of fear-and-smear politics we are being subjected to right now.

This small act of kindness speaks volumes about this man, he was not after anyone's vote, a simple gesture, revealing his empathy for a fellow traveller's troubles. We are all his fellow travellers right now, on the way to the White House - God Willing.