Poetic Truth

Tim Russert's Successor Named

Melissa — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 11:16:36 EST

NBC names David Gregory host of 'Meet the Press'47 mins ago

NEW YORK – David Gregory's new job as moderator of "Meet the Press" is official with the announcement on the long-running NBC interview program that he will take over starting next Sunday.

The 38-year-old chief White House correspondent for NBC News was introduced Sunday by Tom Brokaw, fill-in moderator for "Meet the Press" since the death last June of Tim Russert, the program's moderator since 1991.

Gregory described it as "an incredible honor."

Unconfirmed reports that Gregory would likely win the job surfaced last week. Andrea Mitchell, Chuck Todd and Gwen Ifill had also been under consideration.

"Meet the Press" dominates the Sunday morning political landscape and is network TV's longest-running series. It premiered in November 1947.

___

[He has big shoes to fill. Tim Russert was a perfect fit for the show with his tough but fair questions and his genuine excitement just to be a part of politics. I do think that Gregory has the potential to grow into the role and I wish him all the best.]

Apparently Unknown User missed my previous post and/or doesn't know how to do research.

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:17:45 EDT

The truth about Obama's birth certificate.SummaryIn June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.
AnalysisSince we first wrote about Obama's birth certificate on June 16, speculation on his citizenship has continued apace. Some claim that Obama posted a fake birth certificate to his Web page. That charge leaped from the blogosphere to the mainstream media earlier this week when Jerome Corsi, author of a book attacking Obama, repeated the claim in an Aug. 15 interview with Steve Doocy on Fox News.

Corsi: Well, what would be really helpful is if Senator Obama would release primary documents like his birth certificate. The campaign has a false, fake birth certificate posted on their website. How is anybody supposed to really piece together his life?
Doocy: What do you mean they have a "false birth certificate" on their Web site?
Corsi: The original birth certificate of Obama has never been released, and the campaign refuses to release it.
Doocy: Well, couldn't it just be a State of Hawaii-produced duplicate?
Corsi: No, it's a -- there's been good analysis of it on the Internet, and it's been shown to have watermarks from Photoshop. It's a fake document that's on the Web site right now, and the original birth certificate the campaign refuses to produce.

Corsi isn't the only skeptic claiming that the document is a forgery. Among the most frequent objections we saw on forums, blogs and e-mails are:

The birth certificate doesn't have a raised seal.
It isn't signed.
No creases from folding are evident in the scanned version.
In the zoomed-in view, there's a strange halo around the letters.
The certificate number is blacked out.
The date bleeding through from the back seems to say "2007," but the document wasn't released until 2008.
The document is a "certification of birth," not a "certificate of birth."

Recently FactCheck representatives got a chance to spend some time with the birth certificate, and we can attest to the fact that it is real and three-dimensional and resides at the Obama headquarters in Chicago. We can assure readers that the certificate does bear a raised seal, and that it's stamped on the back by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka (who uses a signature stamp rather than signing individual birth certificates). We even brought home a few photographs.

The Obama birth certificate, held by FactCheck writer Joe Miller

Alvin T. Onaka's signature stamp

The raised seal

Blowup of text

You can click on the photos to get full-size versions, which haven't been edited in any way, except that some have been rotated 90 degrees for viewing purposes.

The certificate has all the elements the State Department requires for proving citizenship to obtain a U.S. passport: "your full name, the full name of your parent(s), date and place of birth, sex, date the birth record was filed, and the seal or other certification of the official custodian of such records." The names, date and place of birth, and filing date are all evident on the scanned version, and you can see the seal above.

The document is a "certification of birth," also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate, but their short form has enough information to be acceptable to the State Department. We tried to ask the Hawaii DOH why they only offer the short form, among other questions, but they have not given a response.

The scan released by the campaign shows halos around the black text, making it look (to some) as though the text might have been pasted on top of an image of security paper. But the document itself has no such halos, nor do the close-up photos we took of it. We conclude that the halo seen in the image produced by the campaign is a digital artifact from the scanning process.

We asked the Obama campaign about the date stamp and the blacked-out certificate number. The certificate is stamped June 2007, because that's when Hawaii officials produced it for the campaign, which requested that document and "all the records we could get our hands on" according to spokesperson Shauna Daly. The campaign didn't release its copy until 2008, after speculation began to appear on the Internet questioning Obama's citizenship. The campaign then rushed to release the document, and the rush is responsible for the blacked-out certificate number. Says Shauna: "[We] couldn't get someone on the phone in Hawaii to tell us whether the number represented some secret information, and we erred on the side of blacking it out. Since then we've found out it's pretty irrelevant for the outside world." The document we looked at did have a certificate number; it is 151 1961 - 010641.

Blowup of certificate number

Some of the conspiracy theories that have circulated about Obama are quite imaginative. One conservative blogger suggested that the campaign might have obtained a valid Hawaii birth certificate, soaked it in solvent, then reprinted it with Obama's information. Of course, this anonymous blogger didn't have access to the actual document and presents this as just one possible "scenario" without any evidence that such a thing actually happened or is even feasible.

We also note that so far none of those questioning the authenticity of the document have produced a shred of evidence that the information on it is incorrect. Instead, some speculate that somehow, maybe, he was born in another country and doesn't meet the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural-born citizen."

We think our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, who also dug into some of these loopy theories put it pretty well: "It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice of the world’s biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything’s possible. But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what’s reasonable has to take over."

In fact, the conspiracy would need to be even deeper than our colleagues realized. In late July, a researcher looking to dig up dirt on Obama instead found a birth announcement that had been published in the Honolulu Advertiser on Sunday, Aug. 13, 1961:

Obama's birth announcement

The announcement was posted by a pro-Hillary Clinton blogger who grudgingly concluded that Obama "likely" was born Aug. 4, 1961 in Honolulu.

Of course, it's distantly possible that Obama's grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday. We suggest that those who choose to go down that path should first equip themselves with a high-quality tinfoil hat. The evidence is clear: Barack Obama was born in the U.S.A.

Update, August 26: We received responses to some of our questions from the Hawaii Department of Health. They couldn't tell us anything about their security paper, but they did answer another frequently-raised question: why is Obama's father's race listed as "African"? Kurt Tsue at the DOH told us that father's race and mother's race are supplied by the parents, and that "we accept what the parents self identify themselves to be." We consider it reasonable to believe that Barack Obama, Sr., would have thought of and reported himself as "African." It's certainly not the slam dunk some readers have made it out to be.

When we asked about the security borders, which look different from some other examples of Hawaii certifications of live birth, Kurt said "The borders are generated each time a certified copy is printed. A citation located on the bottom left hand corner of the certificate indicates which date the form was revised." He also confirmed that the information in the short form birth certificate is sufficient to prove citizenship for "all reasonable purposes."

–by Jess Henig, with Joe Miller SourcesUnited States Department of State. "Application for a U.S. Passport." Accessed 20 Aug. 2008.

State of Hawaii Department of Health. "Request for Certified Copy of Birth Record." Accessed 20 Aug. 2008.

Hollyfield, Amy. "Obama's Birth Certificate: Final Chapter." Politifact.com. 27 Jun. 2008.

GOP Pulls Funding for Bachmann After Remarks on Hardball

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:26:19 EDT

GOP pulls TV ads for politician who slammed Obama
Bachmann also urged patriotism probe of Congress

ASSOCIATED PRESS

October 23, 2008

WASHINGTON – National Republicans have yanked TV advertising for Minnesota GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann's re-election bid after she suggested Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama might have “anti-American views” and urged an investigation of unpatriotic lawmakers.

Bachmann is one of four at-risk Republican incumbents left to fend for themselves by a cash-strapped House campaign arm in the crucial final days of the campaign amid a tough political environment for the GOP. The National Republican Campaign Committee also has canceled planned TV ads to help GOP Reps. Marilyn Musgrave in Colorado, Tom Feeney in Florida and Joe Knollenberg in Michigan, spokeswoman Karen Hanretty confirmed.

Musgrave, Feeney and Knollenberg are extremely vulnerable, and Democrats – who are eyeing double-digit gains in their House majority – have been targeting them heavily. Bachmann, whose district is solidly conservative, has only recently emerged as a prime target after her controversial remarks on MSNBC's “Hardball,” which sparked a flood of campaign contributions to her Democratic opponent and have reshaped the race.

Democrats' House campaign group is dumping $1 million on TV ads in the district in hopes of helping Bachmann's challenger, Elwyn Tinklenberg, unseat her.

In a statement, Carrie James, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Bachmann, “crossed the line by launching negative and divisive personal attacks.”

Bachmann told the St. Cloud Times yesterday that she regretted using the term “anti-American” about Obama, saying her appearance on “Hardball” was “a big mistake.”

Earlier, she told the St. Cloud Rotary Club that she wished she could take back the statement, and she denied that she had said Obama was anti-American or suggested an investigation of members of Congress.

But during her “Hardball” appearance Friday, Bachmann said of Obama, “I'm very concerned that he may have anti-American views.”

Of lawmakers, she said, “I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America?”

Republicans downplayed the decision to abandon Bachmann, noting that she still has more than $1 million to get her through until Election Day.

The GOP's House campaign committee – far behind its Democratic counterpart in fundraising – had already cut its advertising substantially in competitive races, scaling back planned buys in the districts of Rep. Jon Porter of Nevada and Rep. Bill Sali of Idaho.

Also reduced were ads for candidates in southern Minnesota and central New Mexico who are in close contests with Democrats seeking to replace retiring Republicans, and districts in Florida, Kansas, Louisiana and Texas that are home to vulnerable Democrats.

The Real John McCain

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:10:38 EDT

Senator John McCain’s Record on Troop and Veterans’ Issues

Voting Against Veterans

· Veterans Groups Give McCain Failing Grades. In its most recent legislative ratings, the non-partisan Disabled American Veterans gave Sen. McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans’ issues. Similarly, the non-partisan Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a "D" grade for his poor voting record on veterans’ issues, including McCain’s votes against additional body armor for troops in combat and additional funding for PTSD and TBI screening and treatment.

· McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

· McCain Voted At Least 28 Times Against Veterans’ Benefits, Including Healthcare. Since arriving in the U.S. Senate in 1987, McCain has voted at least 28 times against ensuring important benefits for America’s veterans, including providing adequate healthcare. (2006 Senate Vote #7, 41, 63, 67, 98, 222; 2005 Senate Votes #55, 89, 90, 251, 343; 2004 Senate Votes #40, 48, 145; 2003 Senate Votes #74, 81, 83; 1999 Senate Vote #328; 1998 Senate Vote #175; 1997 Senate Vote #168; 1996 Senate Votes #115, 275; 1995 Senate Votes #76, 226, 466; 1994 Senate Vote #306; 1992 Senate Vote #194; 1991 Senate Vote #259)

· McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

· McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)

· McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

· McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

· McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

· McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

· McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

· McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

· McCain opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

· McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

· McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

· McCain Opposed the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Was Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would "encourage more people to leave the military." (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

· Disabled American Veterans Legislative Director Said That McCain’s Proposal Would Increase Costs For Veterans Because His Plan Relies On Private Hospitals Which Are More Expensive and Which Could Also Lead To Further Rationing Of Care. "To help veterans who live far from VA hospitals or need specialized care the VA can’t provide, McCain proposed giving low-income veterans and those who incurred injury during their service a card they could use at private hospitals. The proposal is not an attempt to privatize the VA, as critics have alleged, but rather, an effort to improve care and access to it, he said. Joe Violanti, legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, a nonpartisan organization, said the proposal would increase costs because private hospitals are more expensive. The increased cost could lead to further rationing of care, he said." (Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/08)

Lack of Support for the Troops

· McCain co-sponsored the Use of Force Authorization. McCain supported the bill that gave President George W. Bush the green light--and a blank check--for going to war with Iraq. (SJ Res 46, 10/3/02)

· McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

· McCain voted against holding Bush accountable for his actions in the war. McCain opposed the creation of an independent commission to investigate the development and use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. (S.Amdt. 1275 to H.R. 2658, Vote 284, 7/16/03)

· McCain voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

· Senator McCain opposed efforts to end the overextension of the military--a policy that is having a devastating impact on our troops. McCain voted against requiring mandatory minimum downtime between tours of duty for troops serving in Iraq. (S.Amdt.. 2909 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 341, 9/19/07; S.Amdt. 2012 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 241, 7/11/07)

· McCain announced his willingness to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for decades--a statement sure to inflame Iraqis and endanger American troops. McCain: "Make it a hundred" years in Iraq and "that would be fine with me." (Derry, New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, 1/3/08)

· McCain voted against a ban on waterboarding--a form of torture--in a move that could eventually endanger American troops. According to ThinkProgress, "the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding." McCain voted against the bill. (H.R. 2082, Vote 22, 2/13/08)

· McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center--outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a "disgrace." (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

· Senator McCain has consistently opposed any plan to withdraw troops from Iraq--a policy that has directly weakened American efforts in Afghanistan. Senator McCain repeatedly voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. (S.Amdt. 3876 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #438, 12/18/07; S.Amdt. 3875 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #437, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.3164 to H.R. 3222, Vote #362, 10/3/07; S.Amdt. 2898 to S. Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #346, 9/21/07; S. Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R.1585, Vote #345, 9/21/07; S.Amdt.2 087 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #252, 7/18/07; S.Amdt. 643 to H.R. 1591, Vote #116, 3/27/07; S.Amdt. 4320 to S. 2766, Vote #182, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766, Vote #181, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 2519 to S.1042, Vote #322, 11/15/05)

· McCain said it’s "not too important" when U.S. troops leave Iraq. This exchange occurred on NBC’s Today Show with Matt Lauer:

LAUER: If it's working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that's not too important.

(NBC, Today Show, 6/11/08)

Cheerleading for War with Iraq--While Afghanistan was Unfinished

· McCain suggested that the war in Iraq could be won with a "smaller" force. "But the fact is I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past. But I don't believe it's going to be nearly the size and scope that it was in 1991." (CBS News, Face the Nation, 9/15/02)

· McCain said winning the war would be "easy." "I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women." (CNN, 9/24/02)

· McCain also said the actual fighting in Iraq would be easy. "We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies." (CNN, 9/29/02)

· Continuing his pattern, McCain also said on MSNBC that we would win the war in Iraq "easily." "But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily." (MSNBC, 1/22/03)

· McCain argued Saddam was "a threat of the first order." Senator McCain said that a policy of containing Iraq to blunt its weapons of mass destruction program is "unsustainable, ineffective, unworkable and dangerous." McCain: "I believe Iraq is a threat of the first order, and only a change of regime will make Iraq a state that does not threaten us and others, and where liberated people assume the rights and responsibilities of freedom." (Speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2/13/03)

· McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s rationale for going to war. McCain: "We're going to win this victory. Tragically, we will lose American lives. But it will be brief. We’re going to find massive evidence of weapons of mass destruction . . . It’s going to send the message throughout the Middle East that democracy can take hold in the Middle East." (Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03)

· "But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators." (NBC, 3/20/03)

· March 2003: "I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short." (NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03)

· McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s talking points that the U.S. would only be in Iraq for a short time. McCain: "It’s clear that the end is very much in sight . . . It won’t be long . . . it’ll be a fairly short period of time." (ABC, 4/9/03)

Staunch Defense of the Iraq Invasion

· McCain maintained that the war was a good idea and that George W. Bush deserved "admiration." At the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain, focusing on the war in Iraq, said that while weapons of mass destruction were not found, Saddam once had them and "he would have acquired them again." McCain said the mission in Iraq "gave hope to people long oppressed" and it was "necessary, achievable and noble." McCain: "For his determination to undertake it, and for his unflagging resolve to see it through to a just end, President Bush deserves not only our support, but our admiration." (Speech, Republican National Convention, 8/31/04)

· Senator McCain: "The war, the invasion was not a mistake. (Meet the Press, 1/6/08)

· McCain said the war in Iraq was "worth" it. Asked if the war was a good idea worth the price in blood and treasure, McCain: "It was worth getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He had used weapons of mass destruction, and it's clear that he was hell-bent on acquiring them." (Republican Debate, 1/24/08)

Dangerous Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge

· When questioned about Osama bin Laden after the 1998 U.S. missile strikes in Afghanistan, McCain surmised that the terrorist leader wasn’t as "bad" as "depicted." "You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before." (Interview with Mother Jones magazine, 11/1998)

· McCain was unaware of previous Sunni-Shia violence before the Iraq War. "There’s not a history of clashes that are violent between Sunnis and Shias. So I think they can probably get along." (MSNBC, Hardball, 4/23/03)

· McCain said our military could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan. While giving a speech, McCain was asked about Afghanistan and replied, "I am concerned about it, but I’m not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I’d be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan." (Speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, 11/5/03)

· McCain stated that Sunni al Qaeda was "supported" by the Shia Iranians. (2/2008)

· McCain again confused Sunni Muslim al Qaeda operatives with Shi’a Muslim insurgents. The Washington Post reported of McCain: "He said several times that Iran, a predominately Shiite country, was supplying the mostly Sunni militant group, al-Qaeda. In fact, officials have said they believe Iran is helping Shiite extremists in Iraq.

"Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives ‘taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.’

"Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was ‘common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate.’" (Press conference, Amman, Jordan, 3/18/2008)

· Yet again, McCain demonstrated that he didn’t know whether al Qaeda was a Sunni or Shiite organization. While questioning General David Petraeus during a Senate hearing, the following exchange occurred:

MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.
MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi'ites overall?
PETREAUS: No.
MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else.

(Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, 4/8/08)

· McCain incorrectly thought General David Petraeus was in charge of Afghanistan. The Army Times reported: "Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

‘I would not do that unless Gen. (David) Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,’ McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

"Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq." (Annual meeting of the Associated Press, 4/14/08)

· McCain credited the "surge" for the "Anbar Awakening"--even though the Anbar Awakening preceded the surge by nearly a year. (7/22/08)

· John McCain has also recently demonstrated either serious knowledge gaps in terms of foreign policy, or mounting confusion, when discussing an array of other countries:

Spain: McCain refused to commit to meeting with the president of Spain, a NATO ally, after becoming confused about America’s relationship with Spain, its leader, and, possibly, exactly where Spain is located. (9/17/08)

Czech Republic and Slovakia: McCain referred to the two countries using the name "Czechoslovakia" several times--despite the fact that Czechoslakia split apart and hasn't existed since 1993. (7/15/08; (7/14/08))

Venezuela: McCain said that Venezuela was a Middle Eastern country. (9/30/08)

More Republicans on Board

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:01:28 EDT

Poll finds Obama strong with some Bush backers By Jim Rutenberg and Marjorie Connelly
Friday, October 24, 2008

Senator Barack Obama is showing surprising strength among portions of the political coalition that returned George W. Bush to the White House four years ago, a cross section of support that, if it continues through Election Day, would exceed that of Bill Clinton in 1992, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News polls.

Underscoring the building strength of Obama's candidacy in the final phase of the campaign, he was ahead of McCain among various groups that voted for Bush four years ago: those with incomes greater than $50,000 a year; married women; suburbanites; white Catholics, and is even competitive among white men — a group that has not voted for a Democrat over a Republican since 1972, when pollsters began surveying people after they voted.

Of potential concern for Obama's strategists, a third of voters surveyed said they knew someone who does not support the Illinois Democrat because he is black. And, coming shortly after Obama's running mate, Senator Joseph Biden Jr. of Delaware, warned a group of Democratic donors that foreign leaders would test a President Obama in the first months of his term, voters are closely divided about Obama's ability to handle a crisis.

But, overall, the poll found that Obama would defeat Mr. McCain if the election were held now, with 52 percent of those identified as probable voters saying they would vote for Obama and 39 percent of them saying they would vote for McCain. Among registered voters, the spread between the two is almost identical, with 51 percent saying they would vote for Obama and 38 percent saying they would vote for McCain. A New York Times/CBS News poll taken a week ago showed a similar margin of victory for Obama.

The latest nationwide telephone poll was conducted Sunday through Wednesday with 1,152 adults nationwide, of whom 1,046 said they were registered to vote. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points. To measure support for the candidates among specific voting blocs, The Times combined data from the latest poll with that of the one conducted last week because some of the sub-groups were too small to be statistically reliable when extracted from a single survey.

Despite McCain's continued questioning of Obama's readiness, the number of voters surveyed who say Obama has prepared himself well enough for the presidency was at its highest yet in the newest poll, at 56 percent. When The Times and CBS News first asked the question, more voters said they believed Obama was not ready, 49 percent, than believed he was not, 44 percent. McCain still holds an edge on that front, with 64 percent saying they believe he is prepared for the presidency.

And there was fresh evidence that McCain's attacks on Obama's character and qualifications in tough commercials, mailings, speeches and robotic telephone calls were, if anything, harming McCain. The percentage of people who view McCain unfavorably was at its highest level since The Times and CBS began asking the question in 1999 — 46 percent said they held unfavorable views of him, with 39 percent saying they viewed him favorably. Obama was viewed favorably by 52 percent of the voters surveyed, and unfavorably by 31 percent of them.

Voters were almost evenly split over Obama's ability to handle a crisis wisely: 49 percent said they were confident he could, and 47 percent said they would be uneasy. But respondents showed less ease with McCain: 51 percent said they would be uneasy with his approach and 46 percent expressed confidence.

Obama fared still better than McCain on economic matters: 65 percent said they were somewhat confident or very confident in Obama's ability to handle the economy; 47 percent said the same thing about McCain.

In spite of McCain's sustained attack on Obama's proposal to raise income taxes on households and businesses that earn more than $250,000 a year — attacks often delivered with allusions to "Joe the Plumber" — Obama's plan received significant support in the new poll. It was called a "good idea" by 62 percent and a "bad idea" by 33 percent.

Yet, at the same time, voters were evenly divided over McCain's plan to make permanent Bush's 2001 tax cuts.

In another area where McCain could take heart, the last two polls offered fresh evidence that his choice of Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate had helped to excite two traditional bases of support for Republican presidential candidates — white people who say they attend church every week, who preferred McCain over Obama by 61 percent to 29 percent, and people from the South, 51 percent of whom said they would vote for McCain, compared with 40 percent who preferred Obama.

But the percentage of people who view Palin unfavorably, 40 percent, was still higher than the percentage of people who view her favorably, 31 percent.

Senior strategists of both parties have viewed the unpopularity of Bush and the Republican Party as major drags on McCain's chances. And the favorability ratings for both are at all-time lows: Bush's approval rating of 22 percent is tied for its worst in the history of the Times/CBS poll, and opinions of Republican Party are at their lowest since the poll first included questions about the political parties in 1985. Only 36 percent expressing a favorable opinion of the Republicans, compared with 56 percent who expressed a favorable view of the Democrats.

That difference in standing was reflected in comments from some respondents who said they had voted for Bush in 2004 but were now planning to vote for Obama.

"I've always been a Republican, but I've switched in the last four years," said Helen Taylor, 64, of Los Fresnos, Texas, in a follow-up interview. "I voted for Bush because I knew more about him than Kerry and I stuck with the Republican stance on things at that time. But I became concerned about things Bush was doing and now I'm more in line with the Democratic platform. I also like Barack Obama because he has intelligence and class and the ability to think on his feet."

Obama has a 16 point advantage over McCain among women in the combined data of the last two polls; Senator John Kerry outpolled Bush by three percentage points among women in 2004, according to exit polls conducted then.

Obama is supported by 45 percent of white women, and McCain is preferred by 42 percent; Bush had beaten Kerry with 55 percent of the vote among white women, according to exit polls.

Obama is tied with McCain among white men, a group that Bush won with 61 percent of their vote. Even Bill Clinton lost to George H.W. Bush among white men when he won the White House in 1992.

Yet some voters still ascribe racial motives those opposing Obama this year.

Among the 33 percent who said they knew someone who does not support Obama mainly because he is black was Robert Richter, a Democrat from Dunbar, Pennsylvania. "Some people are prejudiced and don't want to vote for him, for one thing, because he's black and for another, because they feel he's a Muslim," said Richter, who works at a gas station. "I think for some people saying Obama is a Muslim is their way of getting around the black issue."

Obama is Christian but a number of e-mails have circulated falsely alleging he is Muslim.

Goldwater's for Obama

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:28:50 EDT

Post subject: Goldwater’s for Obama
Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:59 am
Why McCain Has Lost Our Vote
Being Barry Goldwater's granddaughter and living in Arizona, one would assume that I would be voting for our state's senator, John McCain. I am still struck by certain 'dyed in the wool' Republicans who are on the fence this election, as it seems like a no-brainer to me.
Myself, along with my siblings and a few cousins, will not be supporting the Republican presidential candidates this year. We believe strongly in what our grandfather stood for: honesty, integrity, and personal freedom, free from political maneuvering and fear tactics. I learned a lot about my grandfather while producing the documentary, Mr. Conservative Goldwater on Goldwater. Our generation of Goldwaters expects government to provide for constitutional protections. We reject the constant intrusion into our personal lives, along with other crucial policy issues of the McCain/Palin ticket.
My grandfather (Paka) would never suggest denying a woman's right to choose. My grandmother co-founded Planned Parenthood in Arizona in the 1930's, a cause my grandfather supported. I'm not sure about how he would feel about marriage rights based on same-sex orientation. I think he would feel that love and respect for ones privacy is what matters most and not the intolerance and poor judgment displayed by McCain over the years. Paka respected our civil liberties and passed on the message that that we should conduct our lives standing up for the basic freedoms we hold so dear.
For a while, there were several candidates who aligned themselves with the Goldwater version of Conservative thought. My grandfather had undying respect for the U.S. Constitution, and an understanding of its true meanings.
There always have been a glimmer of hope that someday, someone would "race through the gate" full steam in Goldwater style. Unfortunately, this hasn't happened, and the Republican brand has been tarnished in a shameless effort to gain votes and appeal to the lowest emotion, fear. Nothing about McCain, except for maybe a uniform, compares to the same ideology of what Goldwater stood for as a politician. The McCain/Palin plan is to appear diverse and inclusive, using women and minorities to push an agenda that makes us all financially vulnerable, fearful, and less safe.
When you see the candidate's in political ads, you can't help but be reminded of the 1964 presidential campaign of Johnson/Goldwater, the 'origin of spin', that twists the truth and obscures what really matters. Nothing about the Republican ticket offers the hope America needs to regain it's standing in the world, that's why we're going to support Barack Obama. I think that Obama has shown his ability and integrity.
After the last eight years, there's a lot of clean up do. Roll up your sleeves, Senators Obama and Biden, and we Goldwaters will roll ours up with you.
http://www.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=6258095

Obama Leads By Double Digits in CBS-NY Times Poll

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:59:15 EDT

Obama leads by double digits in CBS-NY Times pollBy The Associated Press The Associated Press 24 mins ago

THE POLL: CBS-New York Times poll, national presidential race among registered voters.

THE NUMBERS: Barack Obama 52 percent, John McCain 39 percent.

OF INTEREST: About two-thirds say they are comfortable with Democrat Obama, while people were evenly split on whether they are comfortable with Republican McCain or uneasy about him. Three-fourths said Obama has the temperament and personality to be president, while just over half said that about McCain. By more than 3-1, likely voters expect Obama to win the election.

DETAILS: Conducted Oct. 19-22 by telephone with 771 likely voters. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Please, everyone give a warm welcome to Scott McClellan!

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:48:10 EDT

Former Bush press secretary backs ObamaBy DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer 1 hr 45 mins ago

NEW YORK – Scott McClellan, President Bush's former press secretary, says he is backing Barack Obama for president.

McClellan made the endorsement during a taping of Comedian D.L. Hughley's new show that is premiering on CNN this weekend. The former Bush administration official said he wanted to support the candidate that has the best chance for changing the way Washington works and getting things done.

He's the second former Bush administration figure this week to publicly back Obama, following former Secretary of State Colin Powell. McClellan caused bitterness among his former co-workers with a tell-all book that criticized Bush.

Warren Buffet gets it.

Melissa — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 02:32:55 EDT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_wEPff6QCA

Yes I am a real Christian and Yes I voted for Obama.

Melissa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:20:47 EDT

Who is mentioned at least 30 times in the bible? That would be the poor. Dt. 15:11 states: 'For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.'

I will say inregards to posts about abortion, that studies prove abortions decrease during a Democratic Presidency.

I am for the party that can cut taxes for the majority of Americans, grow our economy and actually help people in the process.

I am a new Democrat. I am a Christian. I voted for Obama.

My response to K from Saint Louis

Melissa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:59:22 EDT

My dear, you could not be more mistaken,

http://www.ontheissues.org/Soc ial/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm

He is not a Muslim. He isn't reading a book on how to take down America. I would stop being so anti-Muslim if I were you. You have Muslim members of your party. Our country was founded on religious freedoms. People have a right to worship in the way of their choosing. I would encourage you to read this story: Link

Obama is a Christian. I am a Christian. That being said, all religious beliefs of citizens of this country are protected by the Constitution and it's Amendments.

The Republican party has swung too far right for the good of the country. They have lost perspective. They have fought, not for the majority of Americans, but for the top earnings bracket and for power.

Economists are for Obama 2 to 1. Greenspan doesn't support McCain's tax plan because it is unbalanced. McCain can't cut enough spending to balance the cuts to the top earnings bracket. We are engaged in 2 wars. Our country is in an economic meltdown. We are undergoing a major shift in the job markets due to globalization. Cutting and freezing all spending is not feasible.

I am not okay with our govt sending my husband to war without properly funding him, without the proper equipment to save his life and without just cause. McCain has voted for our troops and veterans only 20% of the time according to Disabled American Veterans. IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) gave McCain a grade of D. Obama votes for our troops and veterans 80% of the time according to Disabled American Veterans and received a grade of B+ from IAVA.

I researched the voting records and platforms of both candidates. I chose Obama. I already voted, as have many on this site. I did actual research from respected sources. I did my homework and made an educated choice.

This country gives everyone the right to vote, yet it is also a responsiblity. You have a responsiblity to know the truth. BTW, smears do not equal truth. I understand that republicans and democrats will never fully agree on the issues. Smears are not issues. I will debate on the actual issues. Your smears, however, are not welcome. They are counter productive to your cause and a bi-product of Karl Rove's tactics. Congratulations, Rove assumed you would not do your research. He was right.

OPEN MOUTH, INSERT CAMPAIGN

Melissa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:52:07 EDT

RNC is reportedly pulling funding for Rep. Michelle Bachmann's campaign. (For those that missed it, Bachman made claims that Obama may have antiAmerican views. Then went on to say that the media should do an expose on Congress as to who is pro America and anti America. She basically was calling for a return to McCarthyism.) Before Bachmann made these statements, she was favored to win. She is now fighting for her seat. Her opponent has raised over 800,000 because of this.

This sends a clear message as to the weight of one's words. She has since tried to apologize, then blamed Chris Matthews of Hardball for misinterpreting what she said. Judge for yourself: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27328295#27328295

Men vote Barack Obama "most influential man"

Melissa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:32:32 EDT

Men vote Barack Obama "most influential man"Tue Oct 21, 3:56 pm ET Reuters – U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) speaks at a campaign rally in Fayetteville, …

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Barack Obama was voted the most influential man of 2008 in an online poll released on Tuesday that asked men to decide who most impacted the way they behave, buy and think.

The U.S. Democratic presidential candidate was ranked No.1 by readers on the AskMen.com lifestyle Web site, beating Apple chief executive Steve Jobs and Olympic swimming champion Michael Phelps, who landed in the No. 2 and No. 3 spots, respectively.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain was ranked No. 10 on the list, which was compiled on the basis of 200,000 votes from readers of the Web site whose average age is 27-28 years-old.

Last year's winner, British soccer star David Beckham, fell to No. 25 on the 2008 list, which asked men to go beyond professional success and likeability when picking their top 49 choices.

James Bassil, editor-in-chief of AskMen.com, said he thought Obama's top place was not so much a political endorsement of his candidacy as "a reflection of the interest the presidential race has ignited in the United States."

Stephen Colbert, host of the satirical news show "The Colbert Report," was the only other politically-minded name in the Top 10 of the 2008 list, which was dominated by sports stars, actors and musicians.

The Top 10 on the AskMen.com Most Influential Men list:

1) Barack Obama (Democratic presidential nominee)

2) Steve Jobs (Apple CEO)

3) Michael Phelps (Olympic swimmer)

4) Robert Downey, Jr (actor)

5) Stephen Colbert (political TV commentator)

6) Gordon Ramsay (celebrity chef)

7) Christian Bale (actor)

8) Rob Kay ("Rock Band" video game designer)

9) Cristiano Ronaldo (soccer player)

10) John McCain (Republican presidential nominee)

(Reporting by Jill Serjeant; Editing by Bob Tourtellotte and Dean Goodman)

My response to Clara from Omaha....

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:41:30 EDT

This is regarding her post about why we should vote for McCain. This was my response:

It isn't that cut and dry. Why would I vote for a man that hasn't represented my best interests? Why would I vote for a vet that has NOT supported veterans and our troops overall? Why would I vote for a man that is not for equal pay between men and women? Why would I vote for a man that has driven strong conservatives away from voting for him? Why would I vote for a man that is not as supportive of utilizing diplomacy? Why would I vote for a man that cuts more taxes for the wealthy, than those he referred to as the 'fundamentals of our economy'? Why would I vote for a man that came out in opposition of the 21st century GI Bill that will allow so many veterans to attend college? Why would I vote for a man with a tax plan that Greenspan said was unbalanced? (McCain can't cut enough spending to balance said plan because we are fighting 2 wars, undergoing an economic meltdown, facing recession, undergoing a major shift in our job markets due to globalization, etc)

HA!

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:00:03 EDT

Times retracted the story regarding Michelle Obama ordering lobster from room service. Why? Because Michelle Obama wasn't staying at the Waldorf. This is just a clarification of what trolls were posting yesterday. Silly trolls, smears are not facts. I love that truth is on our side.

OBAMA '08!

Interesting....

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:29:09 EDT

Role of the Vice President as laid out in the Constitution

(courtesy of http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Vice_President.htm ):

Vice-Presidential Duties

The framers also devoted scant attention to the vice president's duties, providing only that he "shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3). In practice, the number of times vice presidents have exercised this right has varied greatly. John Adams holds the record at 29 votes, followed closely by John C. Calhoun with 28. Since the 1870s, however, no vice president has cast as many as 10 tie-breaking votes. While vice presidents have used their votes chiefly on legislative issues, they have also broken ties on the election of Senate officers, as well as on the appointment of committees in 1881 when the parties were evenly represented in the Senate.

The vice president's other constitutionally mandated duty was to receive from the states the tally of electoral ballots cast for president and vice president and to open the certificates "in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives," so that the total votes could be counted (Article II, section 1). Only a few happy vice presidents — John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George Bush — had the pleasure of announcing their own election as president. Many more were chagrined to announce the choice of some rival for the office.

Several framers ultimately refused to sign the Constitution, in part because they viewed the vice president's legislative role as a violation of the separation of powers doctrine. Elbridge Gerry, who would later serve as vice president, declared that the framers "might as well put the President himself as head of the legislature." Others thought the office unnecessary but agreed with Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman that "if the vice-President were not to be President of the Senate, he would be without employment, and some member [of the Senate, acting as presiding officer] must be deprived of his vote."

Under the original code of Senate rules, the presiding officer exercised great power over the conduct of the body's proceedings. Rule XVI provided that "every question of order shall be decided by the President [of the Senate], without debate; but if there be a doubt in his mind, he may call for a sense of the Senate." Thus, contrary to later practice, the presiding officer was the sole judge of proper procedure and his rulings could not be turned aside by the full Senate without his assent.

The first two vice presidents, Adams and Jefferson, did much to shape the nature of the office, setting precedents that were followed by others. During most of the nineteenth century, the degree of influence and the role played within the Senate depended chiefly on the personality and inclinations of the individual involved. Some had great parliamentary skill and presided well, while others found the task boring, were incapable of maintaining order, or chose to spend most of their time away from Washington, leaving the duty to a president pro tempore. Some made an effort to preside fairly, while others used their position to promote the political agenda of the administration.

During the twentieth century, the role of the vice president has evolved into more of an executive branch position. Now, the vice president is usually seen as an integral part of a president's administration and presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions or when a tie-breaking vote may be needed. Yet, even though the nature of the job has changed, it is still greatly affected by the personality and skills of the individual incumbent.

Now, compare that with what Govenor Palin believes the role of the Vice President to be:

Q: Brandon Garcia wants to know, “What does the Vice President do?”
PALIN: That’s something that Piper would ask me! … [T]hey’re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.

[courtesy of http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/palin_vice_president_in_charge_of_the_senate/ ]

THE POWER OF POWELL'S REBUKE

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:50:16 EDT

The Power of Powell's Rebuke

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, October 21, 2008; A17

Colin Powell demonstrated his eponymous "Powell Doctrine" of overwhelming force on Sunday when he endorsed Barack Obama on "Meet the Press." The one-time chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff systematically marshaled his assets to neutralize the Republican endgame strategy, which is to suffuse the air around Obama with a vague mist of terrorism, socialism and "otherness."

Powell was so definitive that it was easy to forget the disconnect: Obama made his reputation with a speech in 2002 warning against war in Iraq, while it was Powell who went before the United Nations and used his credibility to build support for the Iraq invasion.

Powell told Tom Brokaw that he still believes that war was the right course of action, on the basis of what he and other officials knew -- or thought they knew -- at the time. He said he believes the war was mishandled. And he said he still opposes a "deadline" for withdrawing U.S. troops, though he added that a "timeline" for withdrawal is beginning to emerge.

That would be a fair summation of John McCain's position on Iraq, not Obama's. Powell framed his endorsement largely in terms of how McCain, Sarah Palin and their supporters have conducted the campaign against Obama -- and what that conduct says about McCain's judgment. It was hard not to conclude, as my Post colleague Jonathan Capehart has as well, that Powell is offended by some of the Republican tactics and that he has decided to fire back in a way that Obama cannot.

On the attempt by McCain and Palin to use Obama's acquaintance with Vietnam-era radical William Ayers to suggest that Obama is somehow linked to terrorism:

"This Bill Ayers situation that's been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he's a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him? And why do we have these robo-calls going on around the country trying to suggest that, because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow, Mr. Obama is tainted? What they're trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings."

On the campaign of lies, spread by whisper and e-mail, to convince people that Obama is a Muslim:

"Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, 'What if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country?' The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some 7-year-old Muslim American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, 'He's a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.' This is not the way we should be doing it in America."

And on Palin's qualifications and readiness to assume high office, an issue that a few conservative commentators have taken on but Democrats refuse to touch, as if it were radioactive:

"I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She's a very distinguished woman, and she's to be admired, but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made."

As the highest-profile Republican to defect to the enemy camp, Powell knew that his endorsement would create a huge stir. What I found fascinating was how he framed it more as a set of reasons to vote against the McCain-Palin ticket than a set of reasons to vote for Obama and Joe Biden. In talking about the Wall Street meltdown and the economic crisis, for example, Powell spoke of how McCain's herky-jerky response made it seem that he "didn't have a complete grasp" of what was going on. Powell went on to praise Obama's "steadiness" -- but mentioned nothing in particular that Obama did.

To those who would say he is only supporting Obama as a fellow African American, Powell pointed out that if this were the criterion, he could have made his endorsement months ago. Much more important, I think, is that Powell is a moderate Republican who listens to all this innuendo about terrorism and all this nonsense equating the income tax with socialism and wonders what in the world has happened to his once-grand old party.

The rhetoric he used to take his party to task followed the principle he made famous in the Persian Gulf War: overwhelming force.

eugenerobinson@washpost.com

KEN ADELMAN BACKING OBAMA

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:34:31 EDT

Ken Adelman Backing Obama

By Michael D. Shear
First Colin Powell. Now Ken Adelman?

Adelman is the latest Republican foreign-policy heavyweight to endorse Sen. Barack Obama, telling the New Yorker's George Packer that he intends to vote for the Democrat in two weeks.

"When the economic crisis broke, I found John McCain bouncing all over the place. In those first few crisis days, he was impetuous, inconsistent, and imprudent; ending up just plain weird," Adelman wrote, according to Packer. "Having worked with Ronald Reagan for seven years, and been with him in his critical three summits with Gorbachev, I've concluded that that's no way a president can act under pressure."

Adelman was a key part of George Bush's defense agency and has held senior policy positions under Presidents Reagan, Ford and even Nixon. He's a staunch conservative, though he has broken with Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld over the handling of the Iraq war.

But he told Packer that Sen. John McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate was the last straw.

"That decision showed appalling lack of judgment," he wrote in an e-mail, according to Packer. "Not only is Sarah Palin not close to being acceptable in high office -- I would not have hired her for even a mid-level post in the arms-control agency. But that selection
contradicted McCain's main two, and best two, themes for his campaign -- Country First, and experience counts. Neither can he credibly claim, post-Palin pick."

In today's Post-ABC tracking poll, Obama is winning 22 percent of conservatives. That's his best showing yet among these voters, and if the percent holds on Election Day, it would be higher than conservative support for any Democratic nominee since 1980.

Obama also wins 12 percent support among Republicans in the tracking poll -- exactly double Kerry's 2004 Election Day haul.

SORTING OUT THE FACTS

Melissa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:32:28 EDT

Barack ObamaThe Daily Double: Obama and Palin's Time on the Job

By Juliet Eilperin
GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. -- For the third time today, Sarah Palin mocked Barack Obama for serving less than a year in the U.S. Senate before running for president.

"Now let's talk about experience for a minute," the GOP vice presidential nominee told an audience of several thousand tonight at Suplizio Field. "After a few terms as a Chicago politician, Barack Obama served about 300 days in the Senate" -- here the crowd interrupted Palin with a loud round of boos -- "Barack Obama served about 300 days in the Senate before he decided to run for president. Now, John McCain has spent his entire life serving his country, and serving you."

To make that charge, the Alaska governor used some creative math. According to her spokeswoman Maria Comella, the campaign estimates that Obama served a total of 304 days in the Senate before setting his sights on the White House. The calculation is based on the number of days the Senate was in session from the day of Obama's swearing-in, on Jan. 3, 2005, to the day he announced his exploratory committee, on Jan. 16, 2007.

Including the days not spent on the Senate floor -- when senators such as Obama and McCain, spend much of their time working in their home states or traveling overseas -- Obama served 743 days as a senator before announcing his presidential bid.

Palin, meanwhile, served 633 days as Alaska's governor before McCain picked her as his running mate. For 312 of those days, Palin stayed in her Wasilla home rather than in the state capital of Juneau, according to state records. Under the McCain-Palin calculus, that would give her 321 days on the job in Juneau as governor before deciding to run for higher office.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Melissa — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:09:57 EDT

The Obama birth certificate, held by FactCheck writer Joe Miller

Alvin T. Onaka's signature stamp

The raised seal

Blowup of text

Yeah, that's the ticket!

Melissa — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:20:51 EDT

I keep waiting for Senator McCain to say "yeah, that's the ticket" after some of his statements. (For those that are unfamiliar with that phrase: it's a phrase coined by John Lovitz playing the character Tommy Flanagan, a pathological liar.)

Here's a snippet of a transcript from the SNL archives:

Oh, you'd be surprised how many famous people belong. [referring to Pathological Liars Anonymous] In fact.. at one of the meetings I met my wife - Morgan Fairchild! Yes, I'm a changed man now, and all because of Pathological Liars Anonymous. Why, I - I even have my picture on the cover of Newsweek magazine. Yeah. Every day! Yeah.. that's the ticket! Yeah, you betcha!

Pay special attention to that last line:)

Michelle Focus Group: Military Families

Melissa — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:20:27 EDT

Michelle's focus group: Military families
By: Carrie Budoff Brown
October 20, 2008 10:32 AM EST

FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. – Once portrayed as unpatriotic, Michelle Obama has quietly carved a niche on the campaign trail as a sounding board for military families, taking up a cause that could define her agenda as first lady.

Every few weeks, Obama meets with military spouses in swing states, where she presents herself as a kindred spirit and Barack Obama as the best choice for their families. She attended the two debates with military family members. And at the Democratic National Convention, she led a day of service on behalf of Blue Star Families for Obama, a two-month old group with the tagline: “Pro-Military, Pro-Obama.”

Obama aides say her work with military families has nothing to do with the controversy created by her February comment suggesting that the presidential campaign made her proud of the United States for the first time. But the effort could be viewed as an exercise in counterprogramming, serving as a rebuttal to criticism from Cindy McCain and others for a comment that Michelle Obama insists was misinterpreted – and the notion that her husband, a Democrat with no military service, cannot peel off voters from John McCain, an ex-Navy pilot and war hero.

“Barack and I know that too often it feels like you are alone, on your own,” Obama told military spouses last month in Santa Fe, N.M. “I know you become everything. In a small way, I have experienced that over the course of this campaign, but in no way does it compare to what you are going through.”

Michelle Obama's focus on military families puts her at the leading edge of the Democratic nominee's campaign to reclaim some of the military vote from Republicans – an effort that brought Barack Obama here Sunday for a rally near Fort Bragg, where a military wife introduced him and he touted his endorsement from Colin Powell, the retired four-star general and President George W. Bush's first Secretary of State.

My Response to E from Seattle....

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:57:59 EDT

E from Seattle believes Obama is a communist. Here is a great definition of communism I found on Think Quest:

'Communism is a type of totalitarianism. It has the following characteristics: a massive repression system run by a well established secret police forces, an official and far-reaching system for denunciatory activities, single party rule, censorship, imposition of an official (“the only correct”) state ideology and appearance of newspeak.'

Wow, kind of sounds like the Bush Adminstration to me.....

In more positive news.......

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:39:14 EDT

100,000 Turn Out For Obama Rally In St. Louis

by Don Gonyea and Jacki Lyden

Listen Now [2 min 51 sec] add to playlist

Enlarge
Jae C. Hong

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., right, waves as he arrives at a rally in St. Louis, Mo., on Saturday. AP

All Things Considered, October 18, 2008 · As many as 100,000 people gathered under the Gateway Arch in St. Louis, Mo., on Saturday for a rally for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. With just 17 days left before the election, the candidate has been focusing on battleground states like Missouri, which is seen as critical to winning the race.

"Missouri, of course, is a red state," NPR's Don Gonyea tells host Jacki Lyden. "George W. Bush carried it twice, and it's a state that John McCain needs, and polls show it very close, a tossup."

Gonyea says Obama has been known for his big rallies, but the one in St. Louis was by far the biggest.

"With the size of this particular crowd, in this location, Sen. Obama wanted to make a big statement," Gonyea says. "And he did."

YOU'VE LOST THAT LOVING FEELING.....

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:34:17 EDT

ACORN to McCain: Have You Lost That Loving Feeling?October 13, 2008

Senator Allied with ACORN as Recently as 2006, Now Turns Cold Shoulder

October 13, 2008, Miami, FL - U.S. Senator John McCain's recent attacks on the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) are puzzling given his historic support for the organization and its efforts on behalf of immigrant Americans. As recently as February 20, 2006, Senator McCain was the keynote speaker at an ACORN-sponsored Immigration Rally in Miami, Florida at Miami Dade College – Wolfson Campus.

The rally, co-sponsored by ACORN in partnership with the New American Opportunity campaign (NAOC), Catholic League Services – Archdiocese of Miami, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, Florida Immigrant Coalition, Miami Dade College, People for the American Way/Mi Familia/Vota en Accion, the Service Employees International Union, and UNITE/HERE, was intended to call attention to the need for comprehensive immigration reform.

Senator McCain spoke at the rally attended by hundreds of ACORN members, most of whom were dressed in the red shirts typical of its members. Senator McCain's speech focused on the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, a bipartisan, comprehensive reform bill, which McCain sponsored with Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA).

Bertha Lewis, Chief Organizer of ACORN, said, "It has deeply saddened us to see Senator McCain abandon his historic support for ACORN and our efforts to support the goals of low-income Americans. Maybe it is out of desperation that Senator McCain has forgotten that he was for ACORN before he was against ACORN; he was for immigration reform before he was against immigration reform; and he was a maverick before he became erratic. We were thrilled to partner with him to help reform the outdated immigration laws in this country, and were pleased to work closely with him on this issue."

Lewis continued, "We expected Senator McCain to support our efforts to give voice to millions of Americans who have never participated in an election before. We are surprised at his efforts to vilify an organization that, until recently, he saw as an ally. Maybe this surprise attack and change of heart is indicative of his state of mind, and the way he would govern."

Senator McCain and his campaign have recently launched a series of coordinated attacks on ACORN, the nation’s largest community organization of low-and moderate-income families.

Ms. Lewis went on to say that, "We are sure that the extremists he is trying to get into a froth will be even more excited to learn that John McCain stood shoulder to shoulder with ACORN, at an ACORN co-sponsored event, to promote immigration reform."

Senator McCain was joined at the rally by Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-FL), Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL), leaders from both political parties, immigrant communities, and members of labor, business, and religious organizations.

Since Unknown user wants to play the who can we link them to game....

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:32:35 EDT

McCain linked to group in Iran-Contra affairBy PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer Pete Yost, Associated Press Writer Tue Oct 7, 7:53 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama has his William Ayers connection. Now John McCain may have an Iran-Contra connection. In the 1980s, McCain served on the advisory board to the U.S. chapter of an international group linked to ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America.

The U.S. Council for World Freedom aided rebels trying to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua. That landed the group in the middle of the Iran-Contra affair and in legal trouble with the Internal Revenue Service, which revoked the charitable organization's tax exemption.

The council created by retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub was the U.S. chapter of the World Anti-Communist League, an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. After setting up the U.S. council, Singlaub served as the international league's chairman.

McCain's tie to Singlaub's council is undergoing renewed scrutiny after his campaign criticized Obama for his link to Ayers, a former radical who engaged in violent acts 40 years ago. Over the weekend, Democratic operative Paul Begala said on ABC's "This Week" that this "guilt by association" tactic could backfire on the McCain campaign by renewing discussion of McCain's service on the board of the U.S. Council for World Freedom, "an ultraconservative right-wing group."

In two interviews with The Associated Press in August and September, Singlaub said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain launched his political career. McCain was elected to the House in 1982.

Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member.

"McCain was a new guy on the block learning the ropes," Singlaub said. "I think I met him in the Washington area when he was just a new congressman. We had McCain on the board to make him feel like he wasn't left out. It looks good to have names on a letterhead who are well-known and appreciated.

"I don't recall talking to McCain at all on the work of the group," Singlaub said.

McCain has said he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group's letterhead.

"I didn't know whether (the group's activity) was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a 1986 newspaper interview.

Singlaub does not recall any McCain resignation in 1984 or May 1986. Nor does Joyce Downey, who oversaw the group's day-to-day activities.

"That's a surprise to me," Singlaub said. "This is the first time I've ever heard that. There may have been someone in his office communicating with our office."

"I don't ever remember hearing about his resigning, but I really wasn't worried about that part of our activities, a housekeeping thing," said Singlaub. "If he didn't want to be on the board that's OK. It wasn't as if he had been active participant and we were going to miss his help. He had no active interest. He certainly supported us."

A news article and two documents tie McCain to the council in 1985, a year after he says he resigned. The group's Internal Revenue Service filing in 1985, covering the previous year, lists McCain as a member of the council's advisory board. In October 1985, a States News Service report placed McCain, Rep. Tom Loeffler, R-Texas, and an Arizona congressman at a Washington awards ceremony staged by the council.

On Tuesday, the McCain campaign addressed the resignation by saying the candidate disassociated himself from "one Arizona-based group when questions were raised about its activities."

Taking an opportunity to attack the Obama-Biden ticket, the McCain campaign added that as a House member and later as a senator, McCain fought against communist influence in Central America while Sen. Joe Biden tried to cut off money for anti-communist forces in El Salvador and Nicaragua.

The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as his campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with Ayers, now a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground in the 1960s and years later worked with Obama on the board of an education reform group in Chicago. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

In McCain's case, he was a House member and a board member of Singlaub's council when, as a new congressman, he voted for military assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras, a CIA-organized guerrilla force. In 1984, Congress cut off military assistance to the rebels.

Months before the cutoff, top Reagan administration officials ramped up a secret White House-directed supply network run by national security advisers Robert McFarlane and John Poindexter. The operation's day-to-day activities were handled by National Security Council aide Oliver North, who relied on retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard Secord to carry out the operation. The goal was to keep the Contras operating until Congress could be persuaded to resume CIA funding.

Singlaub's private group became the public front for the secret White House activity.

"It was noted that they were trying to act as suppliers. It was pretty good cover for us," Secord, the field operations chief for the secret effort, said Tuesday in an interview.

The White House-directed network's covert arms shipments, financed in part by the Reagan administration's secret arms sales to Iran, exploded into the Iran-Contra affair in November 1986. The scandal proved to be the undoing of Singlaub's council.

In 1987, the IRS withdrew tax-exempt status from Singlaub's group because of its activities on behalf of the Contras.

Peter Kornbluh, co-author of "The Iran-Contra Scandal: A Declassified History," said the Council on World Freedom was crucial to diverting public attention from the Reagan White House's fundraising for the Contras.

Singlaub and the council publicly urged private support for the Contras, providing what Singlaub later called "a lightning rod" to explain how the rebels sustained themselves despite Congress' cutoff.

In October 1986, the secrecy of North's network unraveled after one of its planes was shot down over Nicaragua. One American crewman, Eugene Hasenfus, was captured by the Nicaraguan government. At first, Reagan administration officials lied by saying that the plane had no connection to the U.S. government and was part of Singlaub's operation.

"I resented it that reporters thought it was my plane. I don't run a sloppy operation," Singlaub told The AP.

In an interview last month, Downey, the full-time employee of Singlaub's council, said she has a clear memory of McCain resigning in 1986, but not earlier.

"It was during the time when the U.S. Council had been wrongly accused of being owners of the Hasenfus plane downed in Nicaragua," said Downey. "A couple of days after that, I was in Washington and called home to get messages from my mother. I returned that call and a staff person wanted to ask for the resignation of Congressman McCain."

When Hasenfus was shot down, McCain was in the final month of his first campaign for the Senate seat he still holds.

McCain's office responded quickly. McCain said he had resigned from the council in 1984. Further, McCain said that in May 1986 he asked the group to remove his name from the letterhead. McCain's office produced two letters from 1984 and 1986 to back his account.

The dates on the resignation letters in 1984 and May 1986 coincided with McCain election campaigns and increasingly critical public scrutiny of the World Anti-Communist League, the umbrella group Singlaub chaired.

In 1983 and 1984 for example, columnist Jack Anderson linked the league's Latin American affiliate to death squad political assassinations.

The Latin American affiliate was kicked out of the league. At the time, Singlaub told the columnist the Latin American affiliate had "knowingly promoted pro-Nazi groups" and was "virulently anti-Semitic."

"That was putting it mildly," Anderson wrote in a Sept. 11, 1984, column on alleged death squad murders, an article that appeared two months before the U.S. election day.

Two weeks after Anderson's column, a letter from McCain addressed to Singlaub asks that the congressman's name be taken off the board because he didn't have time for the council.

Singlaub told AP that "certainly by 1984," he had purged the World Anti-Communist League of extremists. Singlaub complains that American news media wrote that the league hadn't gotten rid of extremist elements and tried to tarnish the league's credibility, "making something evil out of fighting communism."

Colin Powell on Meet the Press this Sunday

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 15:03:42 EDT

Why the Powell Endorsement (Could) Matter

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The news that retired Gen. Colin Powell will appear this Sunday on "Meet the Press" has set off a frenzy of speculation that former secretary of State could throw his endorsement to Barack Obama.

Powell has made little secret of his admiration for the Illinois senator in the past but has always stopped short of outright endorsing him.

Will that change on Sunday? And, if it does, how much is Powell's endorsement really worth?

Seen through the prism of our handy-dandy endorsement hierarchy, Powell's endorsement of Obama would qualify as the highest powered of all endorsements: a symbolic one.

Here's several reasons why a Powell endorsement could matter:

1. Turnabout is Fair Play. Powell is best known for his most recent job in government -- as the secretary of State for President George W. Bush. The idea that a high-ranking cabinet official in a Republican administration would come out for the Democrat is simply too juicy a story for the media to ignore. That it would be someone as high profile as Powell would only add to the titillation.

2. The Most Popular Man in America? Powell, unlike almost no other official with ties to the Bush Administration, has retained remarkable popularity ratings. In an August Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, more than three-quarters (76 percent) of voters viewed Powell favorably while just 13 percent saw him in an unfavorable light. A large part of Powell's appeal is his perceived bipartisanship -- a direct result of his decision to repeatedly turn down overtures to run for president in his own right. For a certain (not insubstantial) portion of the electorate, when Powell speaks, they listen. The Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll reinforces that fact; more than one in three voters said a Powell endorsement of Obama would make them more likely to vote for the Democrat. (Hat tip to Jon "The Numbers Man" Cohen for the polling data.)

3. Iraq, All Wrong. Powell, thanks to his immense popularity, was the Bush Administration's choice to make the case in front of the United Nations for the invasion of Iraq. Powell has since called that incident a "blot" on his record, and made clear his disappointment with the prosecution of the war. An endorsement of Obama, who built his candidacy on his early opposition to the conflict, would mark a clean break with the Bush Administration on the war and would add significant heft to Obama's argument that he alone possesses the judgment to lead the U.S. in a dangerous world.

4. The Final Straw. With polling -- both in the key battleground states and nationally -- showing that voters trust Obama more than John McCain to handle the current economic morass, one of McCain's last hopes is that the the election turns back somehow to a foreign policy focus. If Powell does endorse Obama, it would shore up the Illinois senator even if that eventuality occurred; it would be hard for McCain to slam Obama's approach on the war if the Democrat had a Powell endorsement sitting in his back pocket.

By Chris Cillizza | October 17, 2008; 4:09 PM ET | Category: Eye on 2008
Previous: Friday House Line: House GOP Prospects Grow Dimmer |

Obama's Republican Support...and these are just the ones in the limelight:)

Melissa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 00:06:14 EDT

As we wait for Powell (and Hagel?), here's a recap of some of the biggest Republicans, Republicans-turned-independents, and conservatives who have come out to support Barack for President.

If you know of any I've missed, please add them.

Elected Officials:

Jim Leach, Former Congressman from Iowa

"For me, the national interest comes before party concerns, particularly internationally. We do need a new direction in American policy, and Obama has a sense of that."

Lincoln Chafee, Former United States Senator from Rhode Island

"As I look at the candidates in order who to vote for, certainly my kind of conservatism was reflected with Senator Obama, and those points are that we're fiscally conservative, we care about revenues matching expenditures, we also care about the environment, I think it's a traditional conservative value to care about clean air and clean water."

Richard Riordan, Former Mayor of Los Angeles

"I'm still a Republican, but I still will always vote for the person who I think will do the best job."

Lowell Weicker, Former Governor and Senator from Connecticut

"At issue is not the partisan politics of two parties, rather the image we have of ourselves as Americans. Senator Obama brings wisdom, kindness, and common sense to what is both his and our quest for a better America."

Jim Whitaker, Fairbanks, Alaska Mayor

"If we are as a nation concerned with energy, then our consideration should be a national energy policy that is not predicated on crude oil 50 years into the future. We need to get to it, and I think Barack Obama is very clear in that regard."

Linwood Holton, Former Governor of Virginia

"Obama has a brain, and he isn't afraid to use it."

Government Officials:

Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush 41

"I was first attracted to government by Ronald Reagan, who lives in our national memory as a great leader and an inspiring communicator. Senator Obama has these gifts as well, but of course, more rhetorical flourish without substance would be worth little. Is there more to Senator Obama? I believe there is."

Jackson M. Andrews, Republican Counsel to the U.S. Senate

"Barack Obama is a thoughtful visionary leader who as President will end the decline of American law, liberty, and fiscal responsibility that are the hallmarks of the extremist policies of the current Administration, now adopted by John McCain."

Susan Eisenhower, Granddaughter of President Eisenhower & President of the Eisenhower Group

"Given Obama's support among young people, I believe that he will be most invested in defending the interests of these rising generations and, therefore, the long-term interests of this nation as a whole."

Francis Fukuyama, Advisor to President Reagan

"...Obama probably has the greatest promise of delivering a different kind of politics."

Rita Hauser, Former White House intelligence advisor under George W. Bush

"McCain will continue the wrong-headed foreign policy decisions of Bush, while Obama will take us in a new direction."

Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor

"I suspect Obama is more free-market friendly than he lets on. He taught at the University of Chicago, a hotbed of right-of-center thought. His economic advisers, notably Austan Goolsbee, recognize that ordinary citizens stand to gain more from open markets than from government meddling."

Bill Ruckelshaus, served in the Nixon and Reagan administrations

"I'm not against McCain, I'm for Obama."

Lilibet Hagel, Wife of Republican Senator Chuck Hagel

"This election is not about fighting phantom issues churned out by a top-notch slander machine. Most important, it is not about distracting the public-- you and me-- with whatever slurs someone thinks will stick."

Columnists and Academics:

Jeffrey Hart, National Review Senior Editor

"It turns out that these political parties are not always either liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican. The Democrat, under certain conditions, can be the conservative."

Andrew Bacevich, Professor of International Relations at Boston University

"For conservatives, Obama represents a sliver of hope. McCain represents none at all. The choice turns out to be an easy one."

David Friedman, Economist and son of Milton and Rose Friedman

"I hope Obama wins. President Bush has clearly been a disaster from the standpoint of libertarians and conservatives because he has presided over an astonishing rise in government spending."

Christopher Buckley, Son of National Review founder William F. Buckley & former NR columnist

"Obama has in him-- I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy 'We are the people we have been waiting for' silly rehtoric-- the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for."

Andrew Sullivan, Columnist for the Atlantic Monthly

"Obama's legislative record, speeches, and the way he has run his campaign reveal, I think, a very even temperament, a very sound judgment, and an intelligent pragmatism. Prudence is a word that is not inappropriate to him."

Wick Alison, Former publisher of the National Review

"I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses. But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history."

Story from: http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/3341

DEAR TROLLS.....

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:27:10 EDT

McCain's past affiliations:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/6045648.html

http://www.ourfuture.org/progressive-opinion/keating-five-legacy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-posner/mccains-pastor-problem_b_102257.html

http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12439&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=22386&tx_ttnews[backPid]=12387&cHash=5706e23a2f

What have I solved there.....NOTHING. With the exception of some members of the extreme right base, most Americans want to know about the candidate's platforms. They want to know what the candidate's are going to do to get us out of our major economic downturn. They want to know about healthcare, tax plans, economic plans, social security, education, stances on the Iraq War, etc, etc.

Obama is ahead because he has the better plan in all of the above mentioned. Obama is ahead because he isn't trying to distract Americans from the issues with smears. He isn't trying to divide our country like the McCain Palin ticket. He inspires Americans. These are just a few of the reasons why I voted for Barack Obama.

From one of my favorite writers at The Washington Post

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:59:18 EDT

Time to Be Outward Bound

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, October 14, 2008; A17

Since George W. Bush became president, the Republican Party has presided over massive, out-of-control government spending, converted a federal budget surplus into a half-trillion-dollar deficit, and looked the other way while Wall Street's greed and stupidity turned the hallowed free market into scorched earth. Now the party has to watch as a Republican president orchestrates the biggest government intervention in the workings of the private sector since the New Deal.

Can any Republican candidate claim with a straight face to represent the party of small government? For that matter, can any Republican candidate plausibly explain what the party is supposed to stand for these days?

It's pathetic to hear right-wing talk radio blowhards try to associate Barack Obama with "radical" or "socialist" views when a Republican administration is tossing aside "Atlas Shrugged" and speed-reading "Das Kapital."

The Federal Reserve announced yesterday that it will make unlimited quantities of dollars available for currency swaps with the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Swiss National Bank, as these institutions scramble to keep major commercial banks from failing -- and potentially taking U.S. banks with them. None of Bush's Cabinet members could be heard sniffing about the irrelevance of effete "Old Europe."

This attitude adjustment is necessary, mind you. The question isn't whether some kind of drastic, frankly socialistic measures are needed to save the American economy but which measures -- buying up toxic mortgage-based investments (as the White House said it would do), buying up the troubled mortgages themselves (as John McCain wants to do), or pouring money into selected banks and taking part ownership (as the White House now says it will do). Sitting back and letting the dire situation correct itself is not an option, because the market's phoenix-like solution begins with self-immolation.

Politically, though, there is at least some justice in the fact that a Republican president has to deal with this Republican-made crisis. That little piece of irony isn't worth $700 billion, but so far it's all we're getting.

After eight years of the Bush administration, the Republican Party -- to put it bluntly -- is a mess and a fraud.

There is an intellectual case to be made for the economic philosophy that the party purports to represent. I disagree with it strongly, but I respect its integrity -- in a way that this administration and the Republican leadership in Congress clearly did not.

The Republican Party said it believed in free and unfettered competition, but it picked winners and losers through a system of crony capitalism. All it takes to make my point is a name: Jack Abramoff.

The Bush tax cuts, which heavily favored the wealthy, showed that the president and his allies in Congress didn't believe in progressive taxation. I think that's outrageous, but the administration goes further and actually seems to prefer a regressive tax scheme. That's the only explanation I can think of for why hedge fund managers making hundreds of millions of dollars a year pay taxes at a lower rate than their chauffeurs.

Now that it's election time, the party -- as usual -- is trying to convince Americans that it stands on the side of the little guy. Sarah Palin has been trotted out to convince everyone that the party cares deeply about the eternal roster of cultural issues -- God, guns, gays, abortion, etc. If McCain and Palin were elected, the party would doubtless return these issues to the storage locker until the next election, at which point they would be dusted off once more.

Oh, and isn't the Republican Party supposed to stand foursquare against intrusions on privacy? Then why were Republicans so unmoved when it was revealed that the Bush administration had been conducting unprecedented surveillance of Americans' private electronic communications?

When Ronald Reagan was president, I had a sense of what ideas and principles his party stood for. When Newt Gingrich and his "Contract With America" brigade took Washington by storm in 1994, I knew what they believed -- loopy though it was -- and what they hoped to accomplish. I defy anyone to give a coherent explanation of what today's Republican Party, under George Bush and now John McCain, wants to do except perpetuate itself in power.

When a political party reaches the point of lurching incoherence, the most effective cure is a good, long spell in the wilderness. Americans should help Republicans out by sending them home to get their act together.

Read about the truth on this issue and more at fightthesmears.com

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 21:55:52 EDT

The Truth about Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi

Ugly insinuations about Barack Obama’s relationship with a former neighbor and university colleague, Rhashid Khalidi, are completely false.

Barack’s record on Israel is clear: he strongly supports the U.S.-Israel relationship. He believes that our first and incontrovertible commitment in the Middle East must be to the security of Israel, America’s strongest ally in the Middle East.

Barack and Joe Biden believe strongly in Israel’s right to protect its citizens. They have consistently supported foreign assistance to Israel. They have called for continuing U.S. cooperation with Israel in the development of missile defense systems.

Barack has nothing to hide: he has openly described his relationship with Rashid Khalidi:

“[Khalidi] is not one of my advisors; he’s not one of my foreign policy people. His kids went to the Lab school where my kids go as well. He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel’s policy…To pluck out one person who I know and who I’ve had a conversation with who has very different views than 900 of my friends and then to suggest that somehow that shows that maybe I’m not sufficiently pro-Israel, I think, is a very problematic stand to take…So we gotta be careful about guilt by association.”

Bipartisanship — getting along with people we disagree with — is something we prize in our politicians. For example, Barack has been widely praised for working with conservative Republican Senator Tom Coburn to pass a bill making government spending searchable over the Internet (Obama bio). So why should it be any different that Barack knows a respected scholar, former university colleague, and former neighbor who disagrees with him about Israel?

Smears, insults, and innuendo about the nature of Barack’s relationship with Khalidi are completely unfounded. Guilt-by-association is always a questionable tactic.

BARACK OBAMA AND RASHID KHALIDI

Obama: “I Do Know” Khalidi But “He Is Not One Of My Advisors;” “We Gotta Be Careful About Guilt By Association.” Obama said, “You mentioned Rashid Khalidi, who’s a professor at Columbia…I do know him because I taught at the University of Chicago. And he is Palestinian. And I do know him and I have had conversations. He is not one of my advisors; he’s not one of my foreign policy people. His kids went to the Lab school where my kids go as well. He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel’s policy…To pluck out one person who I know and who I’ve had a conversation with who has very different views than 900 of my friends and then to suggest that somehow that shows that maybe I’m not sufficiently pro-Israel, I think, is a very problematic stand to take…So we gotta be careful about guilt by association.” [ABC News, 5/22/08]

Khalidi Denied Reports That Obama Used To Sympathetic To The Palestinian Cause And Said He Held A Fundraiser For Obama Because They Were Friends, Not Because Of His Position On Israel. The New York Daily News reported, “Obama got help from an unlikely source yesterday when pro-Palestinian Prof. Rashid Khalidi denied a report that Obama used to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and had recently shifted his stance to pro-Israel. Khalidi spoke to the Daily News to rebut a report on a pro-Palestinian blog that was circulated by Clinton supporters. The blog, the Electronic Intifada, offered no evidence that Obama used to be supportive of the Palestinian cause, but cited private conversations, including one at a 2000 Obama fund-raiser hosted by Khalidi. Khalidi, now head of Columbia University’s Middle East Institute, said he hosted the fundraiser because he was friends with Obama while the two lived in Chicago. ‘He never came to us and said he would do anything in terms of Palestinians,’ Khalidi said. [New York Daily News, 3/6/07]

Sorry about the length QB, but this needed to be posted in its entirety

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 21:54:17 EDT

Apparently publishing the slimiest attack book of the year against Barack Obama wasn’t enough for the man behind the Swift Boating of John Kerry, Jerome Corsi (see our full entry on Corsi and his despicable book).

He recently took a trip to Kenya to publicize some of the more bizarre and easily disproven lies in his book, but he got himself in some trouble with the local authorities and was deported. As soon as he got back, he was out peddling a completely fake, manufactured email allegedly from Barack to Raila Odinga. The email is so obviously made up, it’s been openly mocked.

There’s more to the smears behind Corsi’s latest stunt. He apparently started with an email attack that earned a “pants on fire” rating from PolitiFact for truthfulness. The email claimed familial, financial, and political ties between Barack Obama and Kenyan politician, Raila Odinga, so all Corsi had to do when he “wrote” his book was commit it to paper. Everything in the email was debunked months before the book came out, but Corsi went with his illegitimate smears anyway.

The truth is Raila Odinga claimed to be related to Barack during a politically dangerous moment for himself, and no Kenya experts believe his claim. Having made that unsupported boast, even Odinga himself says he never received money from Obama, as the original smear email and Corsi’s pathetic rehash would have us believe.

This latest ridiculous Corsi smear is turning up in email boxes all across the country. Fight back with the truth: make sure anyone who has seen this smear, also sees this page.

*Learn more about Jerome Corsi and his long history of smear peddling: Corsi: Unfit for Publication.

OBAMA NEVER CONTRIBUTED MONEY TO ODINGA

Politifact: The Claims That Obama Contributed $1 Million To Odinga “Are As Baseless As Anything You’ve Read From An Anonymous Blogger” And Earned A Rating Of “Pants On Fire” Wrong. “A chain e-mail that originates with a letter from American missionaries working in Kenya warns about Sen. Barack Obama’s ties to Kenya and its opposition party, encouraging readers ‘not to be taken in by those that are promoting him.’ Among the many allegations is one about Obama’s ties to Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga: ‘Obama under ‘friends of Obama’ gave almost a million dollars to the (Kenya) opposition campaign who just happened to be his cousin, Raila Odinga, who is a socialist trained in East Germany.’ The e-mail reads like a bad game of ‘telephone,’ its claims drawn from assorted people and sources that have been stitched together. And yet, because it is signed by real people, who have a life in Africa, it somehow carries more credence than your average blog posting — and it’s spreading rapidly. But even with the credibility of a real author, the claims in this e-mail are as baseless as anything you’ve read from an anonymous blogger.” [Politifact, 4/18/08]

Obama Never Gave Money To Prime Minister Odinga. “Not to mention, the Obama campaign says the senator never gave money to Kenyan Prime Minister Odinga. And Salim Lone, spokesman for Odinga whom we spoke with in Kenya, confirms that. ‘That is absolutely ridiculous,’ Lone said in an interview with PolitiFact. ‘Mr. Obama did not donate a single cent to Mr. Odinga’s campaign.’ Just to be certain, we did an analysis of Federal Election Commission reports of disbursements from Obama’s principal presidential campaign committee, Obama for America, during the 2008 election cycle. We searched for ‘Kenya,’ ‘Odinga’ and ‘ODM,’ (the Orange Democratic Movement) the latter being Odinga’s political party, and came up with no matches.” [Politifact, 4/18/08]

There Is No “Friends Of Senator BO” PAC. “On the legible version, you can see the underlined entry says, ‘Friends of Senator BO,’ presumably Barack Obama. Only, there is no political action committee named Friends of Senator BO or Friends of Barack Obama. So says Obama’s campaign. And a search of the Federal Election Commission Web site and Opensecrets.org, the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics, pulls up neither. In fact, there’s no PAC name even close.” [Politifact, 4/18/08]

ODINGA IS NOT OBAMA’S FIRST COUSIN

Barkan: Odinga And Obama Are Not First Cousins And “To My Knowledge, There’s Absolutely No Relationship At All.” “‘It’s stretched to the point of ridiculousness,’ said Joel D. Barkan, political science professor emeritus at the University of Iowa and senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. ‘To my knowledge, they are not first cousins in the normal sense. To my knowledge, there’s absolutely no relationship at all.’” [Politifact, 4/18/08]

Awiti: Raila Odinga Was Using Obama To Add Some Political Points And It Should Be Totally Disregarded. “Alex Awiti, a Kenyan postdoctoral fellow at Columbia University, says you have to consider the context of when Odinga was speaking, that being in the middle of a political crisis. ‘Raila Odinga was groping all over the place, trying to find some political legitimacy to get on a high pedestal to claim leadership and using Obama was basically going to add some political points,’ said Awiti, who lived in Kenya until three years ago. ‘This is very opportunistic and it should be totally disregarded.’” [Politifact, 4/18/08]

WE WELCOME DEBATE, NOT HATE

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 21:15:56 EDT

I welcome a healthy debate on the issues. I do not tolerate hate, smears or lies. UNKNOWN USER, you assign to hateful speech and spewing lies because you have nothing substantive to say. You would rather spew lies than debate on the issues.......because a debate on the issues means a loss for McCain. I will be praying that God removes the blinders from your eyes and the hatred from your heart.

J-O-B-S

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:41:00 EDT

Biden says Obama would create 2 million jobs In appeal to middle class, VP hopeful pushes second stimulus packageThe Associated Pressupdated 3:55 p.m. CT, Wed., Oct. 15, 2008

LANCASTER, Ohio - Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said Wednesday that Barack Obama's plan to rebuild the nation's crumbing roads and bridges would help reverse the loss of 240,000 jobs in Ohio during the Bush years.

Biden told an audience in this economically distressed battleground state that the Democratic presidential candidate's public works projects would create 2 million jobs nationwide, including 76,000 new jobs for the middle class in Ohio.

He also criticized Republican candidate John McCain's idea for the federal government to spend $300 billion to buy distressed mortgages at full face value and renegotiate them at a reduced price.

"Think about that, that means every single bank in America gets off Scott-free and the taxpayers foot the bill," Biden said a campaign stop in Lancaster, about 30 miles southeast of Columbus. "That's the only fundamentally new idea John has come up with."

Biden spoke earlier at a county fairgrounds near the campus of Ohio University in Athens, where he wondered if McCain would mention the middle class by name in Wednesday night's third and final presidential debate, a forum focused on pocketbook issues and domestic policy.

Biden said McCain and his vice presidential running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, don't understand the plight of struggling Ohioans, and he decried the fact that the median income of a middle class family in the state has dropped $2,000 in the last eight years and that health care premiums have doubled nationally from eight years ago.

"Everything we will propose for the economy will be targeted toward the middle class," he said of a Barack Obama administration. "When the middle class is growing, everybody benefits. That is the tide that rises all boats."

In Athens, Biden said a second economic stimulus package, which Democrats in Congress have called for, would help Ohioans afford the $3,500 that it will cost to heat the average home this winter.

He compared a tax rebate from the stimulus package to a check that Alaska residents receive each year from the state government, a stipend from the proceeds of the state's more than $30 billion oil-rich investment account.

"If a $1000 rebate is good enough for them in Alaska, it sure as heck good enough for the people of southern Ohio," he said.

Biden was in Ohio for the second straight day of campaigning in the eastern and central part of the state.

Heading in the right direction

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:35:14 EDT

Obama leads among white independentsDavid Paul Kuhn David Paul Kuhn 1 hr 1 min ago

Barack Obama has taken a slight lead with white independent voters for the first time in the presidential race, positioning him to capture a key demographic group that has eluded recent Democratic nominees, according to a Politico analysis of independent voting patterns.

According to Gallup’s weekly average of some 6,400 registered voters, Obama now holds a 45 percent-43 percent edge over Republican John McCain with white independents. About eight in 10 independents are white.

Should Obama’s support hold, he is positioned to become the first Democrat to win white independents in a two-man race since the advent of exit polling.

As recently as last week, McCain led within this group by eight percentage points. His lead was as high as 16 points in mid-September, in the week before the stock market's first meltdown.

Obama’s gains with white independents, who represent more than one in five voters overall, are a particular problem for the GOP. Unlike four years ago, Democrats significantly outnumber Republicans heading into Election Day, and John McCain will need to win these voters to overcome the gap.

At the outset of the general election, Republicans were optimistic that McCain’s “maverick” image would make him an especially attractive candidate to independents. But it now appears that the recent economic crisis has undercut McCain’s appeal to this centrist bloc.

According to a recent Associated Press-GfK Poll, independents and Democrats tend to view recent market events with similar levels of alarm — 82 percent of independents and 89 percent of Democrats are concerned that the economic crisis will cause a “long-term toll on them,” compared with only 65 percent of Republicans.

Independents also join Democrats in viewing the next president’s capacity to handle the economy as more important than his capacity to handle national security, and both groups trust Obama more on the economy itself.

White independent women believe Obama can better improve U.S. economic conditions, 44 percent to 29 percent, while white independent men also have slightly more trust in Obama to handle the economy, 44 percent to 39 percent, according to recent polling by the Pew Research Center. Obama holds even larger margins on the economic issue among white men and women classified by Pew as persuadable “swing voters,” the bulk of which are independents.

White voters overall believe that Obama would do the “best job of improving economic conditions,” 46 percent to 38 percent, according to Pew.

Obama's advantage on the economy stretches into voter concerns over gas prices. Fifty-five percent of white independent men and a plurality of white independent women, 40 percent, believe Obama would do the "best job" of "dealing with the nation's energy problems."

Still, white independents, like all white voters, remain suspect of the $700 billion bailout package supported by both Obama and McCain. Pew finds that overwhelming majorities of all whites, independents included, are concerned that the government is “too involved in financial markets,” that those responsible for the financial crisis are being “let off the hook” and that the bailout “won’t fix what caused problems.”

For McCain, there is some promise among this white independent cohort. Only about a third of independent white men and women believe McCain would “continue Bush’s policies,” while half of all independents — 57 percent of those who are white men and 47 percent, a plurality, of those who are white women — believe McCain would “take the country in a different direction.”

Independent white men also believe, 62 percent to 23 percent, that McCain is more capable of making “wise decisions about what to do in Iraq.” White female independents say the same, 52 percent to 29 percent. More than six in 10 white independents believe McCain would do the “best job of making wise decisions about foreign policy.” These voters believe McCain could better defend against a terrorist attack by more than a 2-1 ratio. Taken as a whole, this data suggests that a national security or terrorism-related event could suddenly move these voters toward the Republican nominee.

Among independent whites, men are more prone to view Obama as not “well qualified” to be president, 57 percent to 37 percent. A slim majority of independent white women agree, though the margin is considerably narrower — 51 percent to 43 percent.

Signs for Rally on Saturday

Melissa — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:50:32 EDT

I have spent the last six hours making signs. My knees hurt, my right hand is cramping and I'm covered in marker. I couldn't be happier. I don't have a lot of money, so I haven't been able to donate much. What I do have is time and a willingness to help. I don't say these things to pat myself on the back. (There are so many that do so much; my efforts pale in comparison.) I say these things to emphasize the point that every little bit matters. We are so close and we all need to keep working towards the goal. What a wonderful goal!

YES WE CAN! OBAMA ~ BIDEN '08!

Gave me a chuckle

Melissa — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:01:26 EDT

ACORN to McCain: Have You Lost That Loving Feeling?

Melissa — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:40:31 EDT

ACORN to McCain: Have You Lost That Loving Feeling?

Senator Allied with ACORN as Recently as 2006, Now Turns Cold Shoulder

Senator McCain and his campaign have recently launched a series of coordinated attacks on ACORN, the nation’s largest community organization of low-and moderate-income families.

Apparently we should thank Sarah Palin for being so inept...

Melissa — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 14:03:13 EDT

An Unwitting Assist From the Hockey Mom

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, October 14, 2008; A03

PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 13 The Hillary voter has come home.

It wasn't primarily the work of Hillary Clinton, though by her count she has made more than 50 public appearances for Barack Obama. Nor was it the work of Obama, who has kept Clinton and her advisers at arm's length. No, the one who put the Hillary Clinton voters in Obama's column was John McCain -- with his choice of a running mate.

"Palin -- God forbid! Where did they find her?" Evelyn Fruman exclaimed Monday before a Clinton speech at a Jewish community center here.

"God forbid!" Gail Silverberg chimed in. "Hockey moms and lipstick on a pig and six-packs? I don't want that stuff."

Nearby, Rina Jampolsky was wearing a "Hillary Sent Me" button next to a pin saying "Barack Obama" in Hebrew. "I thought I wouldn't vote at all when Hillary left the race," she said. "But as soon as McCain selected Sarah Palin, my decision was made."

They were the quintessential Hillary supporters waiting for their heroine at the hall in northeast Philly: virtually all white, mostly women, and mostly old. Of the minority who weren't Jewish, most were Catholic. In the local state Senate district, primary voters went for Clinton over Obama by 3 to 1.

But something has happened in recent weeks among the Clinton faithful. Fear of the right-wing Palin, coupled with the economic collapse, has caused them to quietly swallow their Obama misgivings. "It's amazing," said Brendan Doyle, who has been knocking on doors here for the Democratic candidate for state Senate. "The last four weeks I've seen a big turn."

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds the same thing. Fully 81 percent of Democrats and like-minded independents who favored Clinton said they now back Obama. If Obama gets the 90 percent of Democrats who tell the pollsters they support him, he will do better than any other Democratic candidate in nearly 40 years.

Of course, there are still some tender feelings -- most publicly those of Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who gave a most unusual introduction to Clinton at her rally for Obama on Monday in Horsham, near Philadelphia.

"The proudest accomplishment I'll look back on is the seven-week campaign we ran for Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania," Rendell said. About half of the several hundred people at the outdoor rally applauded.

"I have never seen a seven-week campaign catch fire the way that campaign did," Rendell went on. A smaller number of people clapped.

"It was wonderful to see people who would tell me, 'I'm never voting for Hillary Clinton,' by the end of that seven weeks were avid Hillary Clinton supporters," Rendell continued. This time nobody applauded.

Rendell was not quite done. "In Washington, D.C., if we lose all of our supporters, all the people who look out for us, there will be one man left standing," he said, "but that man will be a woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton."

Clinton tried to take over the microphone, uttering a "Whoa!" to admire the crowd -- but Rendell reclaimed the floor. "One last time!" he shouted, leading the crowd in a chant of "Hillary! Hillary!"

And this would be an Obama rally?

The sentiment was much the same in Scranton on Sunday, when Bill and Hillary Clinton joined Joe Biden and his wife at an Obama rally. Bill Clinton got nearly two-thirds of the way through his speech before speaking the words "Barack Obama," and he mentioned his wife more often than the presidential nominee.

"I expect to spend the rest of my natural life trying to show people how grateful I am [to those] who supported Hillary in her long quest this last year," the former president said. "I knew 37 years ago when I first met her that I'd never met anybody like her before and I might not ever meet anybody like her again."

Hillary Clinton, up next, had a modest proposal: "Go out and make the case, because Barack and Joe are not asking you to marry them. They are asking you to vote for them -- and vote for yourselves."

In truth, Clinton has been a loyal soldier for Obama on the stump -- no small matter for a woman who, if Obama prevails, will have her own presidential ambitions postponed for eight years, if not indefinitely.

Though she offers little in the way of a personal endorsement of Obama, she combines a cerebral defense of Obama with a visceral denunciation of McCain.

The closest she got to personal praise was describing Biden and Obama as "two leaders with the intelligence and the determination and the good ideas and the savvy to get the job done."

But she, and the crowd, were far more passionate in denunciation of McCain and President Bush. "We are in a financial crisis born and bred by the failed Republican policies of George Bush and John McCain," she told the retirees in Philadelphia. The very mention of Palin's name caused the crowd to erupt in boos and hisses.

It was a long way to come for Clinton, who during the primary denounced Obama with a refrain of "That's not change" and once said that his experience was nothing more than "a speech he gave in 2002."

Memories of that campaign were still fresh in the minds of those supporters who spoke before her, including the local congresswoman, Allyson Schwartz ("Boy, we did a good job for her!"), and the mayor of Philadelphia, Michael Nutter ("We still support her and we still love her").

The crowd in Horsham was stirred to a nostalgic chant of "Hillary!" and the former candidate responded. "I know that there are many of you in this crowd who supported me, and I will be forever grateful," she said.

"We love you!" somebody called out.

"I love you, too," Clinton said, but she then returned to the business at hand. "There is only one choice," she said. "Barack Obama and Joe Biden will fight for you."

Cindy McCain's Attack On Obama's Record Offends Military Spouses

Melissa — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:49:40 EDT

Posted October 13, 2008 | 12:58 AM (EST) Cindy McCain's Attack On Obama's Record Offends Military SpousesBy: Diane Tucker At a rally in Bethlehem, Pa. last week, Cindy McCain spoke about having two sons serving on active duty: "I'm proud of my sons, but let me tell you, the day that Senator Obama cast a vote not to fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body. I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day, and see what it means."

Never mind how many drinks are needed to erase the mental image of Barack Obama wearing Cindy McCain's stiletto heels. The fact is -- many military spouses support Obama-Biden, and they were deeply offended by Mrs. McCain's outburst.

Let's fact-check her remark, shall we?

Cindy McCain was referring to a single 2007 Senate vote: Obama voted for a war-spending bill that included language calling for withdrawing troops from Iraq; but later he voted against a version of the same bill because it no longer included the withdrawal language. "We must fund our troops, but we owe them something more," Obama said at the time. "We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else's civil war."

In other words, Sen. Obama wanted to fund the troops, he just didn't support the flawed military strategy this particular bill would enable. (Previously, Obama had voted YES on at least 10 other war funding bills. For a lengthy list of John McCain's NO votes on military funding, click here.)

"It ruffles our feathers when someone claims that Barack Obama doesn't support the troops, because the Obamas have gone out of their way to understand the military, its families, and its veterans," Stephanie Himel-Nelson, deputy director of outreach for Blue Star Families for Obama, told OffTheBus. "In fact, Michelle Obama has adopted military families as one of her causes."

Would Cindy McCain "Change Shoes" With These Military Wives?

"When millionaires such as Cindy McCain act as if they understand our lives, and the lives of everyday military families and veterans, we get upset," said Himel-Nelson.

Today the number of service men and women forced to deploy over and over again is unprecedented. Loneliness is leading to frayed marriages. Toddlers are just getting to know their parents when -- poof! -- mommy and daddy disappear to serve overseas again. Career paths are falling off track. Household budgets are in disarray.

Imagine what parenting must be like when one spouse keeps bouncing in and out of the picture. "It's a delicate dance," Heidi Goeman, Beaufort, SC told OffTheBus. "Kids change, rules change, and perspectives change while my husband is away. When he returns home, the lay of the land isn't the same." Goeman and her husband have endured four deployments together.

Many children are too young to articulate their response to repeated separations. "Our seven-year-old thought he was at fault for his dad's going away, despite our best efforts to prepare him," said Goeman.

Deployments Are Lasting Longer, Coming Closer Together

Casey Spurr's husband has been deployed three times. "Mostly I find myself saying 'I wish your daddy was here' when I really, really need to take a break, or when our son lets out a big belly laugh -- he has the best laugh," said the Virginia Beach, Va. resident. Spurr told OffTheBus, "Obama proposes a Military Family Advisory Board, which I think is long overdue."

The number of Navy and Air Force vets re-deployed to fill gaps in Army units on a one-off basis -- with just a few weeks of combat training -- continues to grow. "The Navy is providing manpower because the Army doesn't have enough troop strength for our front lines," said Vivian Walker, a Navy veteran and military spouse who is using her GI Bill benefits to earn a Ph.D. in public administration and urban policy.

Walker confesses she forgot her wedding anniversary amid the chaos of managing work and family by herself. "A big paper was due, I was trying to find a Halloween costume for our four-year old, my mother was visiting...the list goes on, but I'm not complaining. The only time I get upset is when I feel I have to defend my patriotism if I vote for Obama. I live this war daily. My support for the troops is all-consuming."

Maria Arwitz's husband is a Navy dentist who was onboard the USS Comstock when it delivered a marine corps unit to Afghanistan in 2002. Three years later he was sent to Iceland for 11 months, something that "probably would not have happened if Navy Medicine wasn't stretched so thin," Arwitz told OffTheBus. "He left right after one of our 10-month-old twins underwent heart surgery. It taught me a lot about how strong a military mom has to be with no family around."

Arwitz likes that Obama believes all Americans are entitled to quality health care. "The conditions at Walter Reed Hospital really infuriate me. I feel connected to these troops when they return home -- I shop with their wives at the commissary, my kids play with their kids on the playground. You wouldn't believe what some families are going through," said the Beaufort, SC resident.

The Rub: A Lack Of Honesty From The Bush Administration

Obviously there is a need for some level of military secrecy. But to what degree should families allow themselves to be kept in the dark?

"We want to know that the sacrifices we make are for a reason. That when our family members are in harm's way, they are protected as much as possible. That the leaders who deploy them will bring them home as soon as possible," said Bella Harris, Chesapeake, Va. She is married to a nuclear power officer on board the USS George Washington, an aircraft carrier based in Japan. Harris told OffTheBus she admires McCain, but is voting for Obama because "he has a better plan for health care reform, and a more experienced running mate."

Kathy Roth-Douquet, Beaufort, S.C. has lived in six places on three continents since she married a marine corps officer 11 years ago. "Our fourth-grader has attended six schools because of all the moves, but it's a source of pride that we were asked to do something difficult and found the resources to do it," she told OffTheBus. Roth-Douquet is the author of AWOL, a book about the unexcused absence of America's upper classes from military service and how it hurts the country. Recently she co-produced a video featuring military wives for Obama, after co-founding (with Laura Dempsey) a grassroots organization of military families called Blue Star Families for Obama.

All of these women respect McCain for his Vietnam-era service, but they believe Obama has the temperament to safely lead the United States out of the quagmire in the Middle East. "One doesn't have to join the military to serve their country -- nor does serving in the military necessarily qualify one to be president," said Walker. They trust Obama to use diplomacy, not just military might.

For The Record, Mrs. McCain...

The non-partisan group Disabled American Veterans gives John McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans' issues. (It gives Barack Obama an 80 percent rating.)

The non-partisan group Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gives McCain a "D" grade for his voting record on issues such as additional funding for combat body armor, and additional funding for post-traumatic stress disorder and other medical treatment. (Obama earned a B +.)

Again for the trolls....

Melissa — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:41:16 EDT

McCain Walks It Back: Obama Is Decent, Nothing To Be Scared Of

John McCain sought to walk back some of the hostility that he and his crowds have projected towards Barack Obama in recent days, saying he wanted to run a respectful campaign and urging his supporters to think of Obama as a decent person.

After an attendee at his town hall said he was concerned about bringing up a child under a president who "cohorts with domestic terrorists such as [Bill] Ayers," McCain didn't take the bait. Rather, he sought to calm the questioner's obviously emotional tone.

"[Senator Obama] is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared about as President of the United States," he said, before adding: "If I didn't think I would be one heck of a better president I wouldn't be running."

McCain was subsequently booed.

Later in the townhall McCain was pressed again about Obama's "other-ness" and again he refused to take the bait.

"He is a decent family man and citizen that I just have disagreements with on fundamental issues," he said.

Earlier in the campaign stop in Lakeville, Minnesota, he told the crowd that while he was "going to take the gloves off" when it came to bringing up Obama's voting record and past associations, the campaign would remain "respectful."

There are two possible interpretations to the somewhat conciliatory tone. McCain could be sensing a political backlash to the vitriol of his crowds, which have labeled Obama a terrorist and traitor, accused him of treason, and called for his death. Certainly, polling suggests raising the Ayers issue has done relatively little to advance McCain's electoral cause. Or he could be playing a classic political game, in which he leaves the mudslinging to his campaign and vice president while he himself stays clean and above the fray.

After all, just hours before McCain spoke, his aide Brian Rogers sent a statement to reporters defending the McCain-Palin audiences as everyday Americans.

For the trolls

Melissa — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:36:55 EDT

John McCain and the Lying GameBy Joe Klein Wednesday, Sep. 17, 2008Illustration by Stephen Kroninger for TIME; McCain: Alfredo Estrella / AFP / GettyENLARGE +

Politics has always been lousy with blather and chicanery. But there are rules and traditions too. In the early weeks of the general-election campaign, a consensus has grown in the political community — a consensus that ranges from practitioners like Karl Rove to commentators like, well, me — that John McCain has allowed his campaign to slip the normal bounds of political propriety. The situation has gotten so intense that we in the media have slipped our normal rules as well. Usually when a candidate tells something less than the truth, we mince words. We use euphemisms like mendacity and inaccuracy ... or, as the Associated Press put it, "McCain's claims skirt facts." But increasing numbers of otherwise sober observers, even such august institutions as the New York Times editorial board, are calling John McCain a liar. You might well ask, What has McCain done to deserve this? What unwritten rules did he break? Are his transgressions of degree or of kind?

Almost every politician stretches the truth. We journalists try to point out the exaggerations and criticize them, then let the voters decide. When McCain says, for example, that Barack Obama favors a government-run health-care system, he's not telling the truth — Obama wants a market-based system subsidized by the government — but McCain's untruth illuminates a general policy direction, which is sketchy but sort of within the bounds. (Obama's plan would increase government regulation of the drug and insurance industries.) Obama has done this sort of thing too. In July, he accused McCain of supporting the foreign buyout of an American company that could lead to the loss of about 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio. McCain did support the deal, but the job loss comes many years later and was not anticipated at the time. That, however, is where the moral equivalency between these two campaigns ends.

McCain's lies have ranged from the annoying to the sleazy, and the problem is in both degree and kind. His campaign has been a ceaseless assault on his opponent's character and policies, featuring a consistent—and witting—disdain for the truth. Even after 38 million Americans heard Obama say in his speech at the Democratic National Convention that he was open to offshore oil-drilling and building new nuclear-power plants, McCain flatly said in his acceptance speech that Obama opposed both. Normal political practice would be for McCain to say, "Obama says he's 'open to' offshore drilling, but he's always opposed it. How can we believe him?" This persistence in repeating demonstrably false charges is something new in presidential politics.

Worse than the lies have been the smears. McCain ran a television ad claiming that Obama favored "comprehensive" sex education for kindergartners. (Obama favored a bill that would have warned kindergartners about sexual predators and improper touching.) The accusation that Obama was referring to Sarah Palin when he said McCain's effort to remarket his economic policies was putting "lipstick on a pig" was another clearly misleading attack — an obnoxious attempt to divert attention from Palin's lack of fitness for the job and the recklessness with which McCain chose her. McCain's assault on the "élite media" for spreading rumors about Palin's personal life — actually, the culprits were a few bloggers and the tabloid press — was more of the same. And that gets us close to the real problem here. The McCain camp has decided that its candidate can't win honorably, on the issues, so it has resorted to transparent and phony diversions.

This new strategy emerged during the first week of Obama's overseas trip in late July. McCain had been intending to contrast his alleged foreign policy expertise and toughness with Obama's inexperience and alleged weakness. McCain wanted to "win" the Iraq war and face down the Iranians. But those issues became moot when the Iraqis said they favored Obama's withdrawal plan and the Bush Administration started talking to the Iranians. At that point, McCain committed his original sin — out of pique, I believe — questioning Obama's patriotism, saying the Democrat would rather lose a war than lose an election. Ever since, McCain's campaign has been a series of snide and demeaning ads accompanied by the daily gush of untruths that have now been widely documented and exposed. The strategy is an obvious attempt to camouflage the current unpopularity of his Republican brand, the insubstantiality of his vice-presidential choice, and his agreement on most issues — especially economic matters — with an exceedingly unpopular President.

The good news is that the vile times may be ending. The coming debates will decide this race, and it isn't easy to tell lies when your opponent is standing right next to you. The Wall Street collapse demands a more sober campaign as well. But these dreadful weeks should not be forgotten. John McCain has raised serious questions about whether he has the character to lead the nation. He has defaced his beloved military code of honor. He has run a dirty campaign.

BTW, I VOTED FOR OBAMA :)

Melissa — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:22:14 EDT

LOVE, NOT HATE IN '08!!!!!

OBAMA ~ BIDEN

Comparison of Tax Plans....Which one will help you more? For the majority of Americans its Obama, hands down.

Melissa — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 18:26:33 EDT

Repost of McCain's Record on Troop and Veterans' Issues

Melissa — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 18:24:39 EDT

Senator John McCain’s Record on Troop and Veterans’ Issues

Voting Against Veterans

Lack of Support for the Troops

· McCain said it’s "not too important" when U.S. troops leave Iraq. This exchange occurred on NBC’s Today Show with Matt Lauer:

LAUER: If it's working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that's not too important.

(NBC, Today Show, 6/11/08)

Cheerleading for War with Iraq--While Afghanistan was Unfinished

· "But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators." (NBC, 3/20/03)

· March 2003: "I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short." (NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03)

Staunch Defense of the Iraq Invasion

· Senator McCain: "The war, the invasion was not a mistake. (Meet the Press, 1/6/08)

Dangerous Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge

· McCain stated that Sunni al Qaeda was "supported" by the Shia Iranians. (2/2008)

(Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, 4/8/08)

‘I would not do that unless Gen. (David) Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,’ McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

· McCain credited the "surge" for the "Anbar Awakening"--even though the Anbar Awakening preceded the surge by nearly a year. (7/22/08)

· John McCain has also recently demonstrated either serious knowledge gaps in terms of foreign policy, or mounting confusion, when discussing an array of other countries:

Venezuela: McCain said that Venezuela was a Middle Eastern country. (9/30/08)

Military Wives in Support of Barack Obama

Melissa — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:25:23 EDT

The following is a link to the viral ad about military wives supporting Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwk4LL5-Mpo

I too am a military wife and I have voted for Obama. He supports our troops. He supports our veterans. He supports our military families.

Here's the full story from what I posted earlier.

Melissa — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:21:29 EDT

McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd

By PHILIP ELLIOTT and BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writers 27 minutes ago

The anger is getting raw at Republican rallies and John McCain is acting to tamp it down. McCain was booed by his own supporters Friday when, in an abrupt switch from raising questions about Barack Obama's character, he described the Democrat as a "decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

A sense of grievance spilling into rage has gripped some GOP events this week as McCain supporters see his presidential campaign lag against Obama. Some in the audience are making it personal, against the Democrat. Shouts of "traitor," "terrorist," "treason," "liar," and even "off with his head" have rung from the crowd at McCain and Sarah Palin rallies, and gone unchallenged by them.

McCain changed his tone Friday when supporters at a town hall pressed him to be rougher on Obama. A voter said, "The people here in Minnesota want to see a real fight." Another said Obama would lead the U.S. into socialism. Another said he did not want his unborn child raised in a country led by Obama.

"If you want a fight, we will fight," McCain said. "But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments." When people booed, he cut them off.

"I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity," he said. "I just mean to say you have to be respectful."

Presidential candidates are accustomed to raucous rallies this close to Election Day and welcome the enthusiasm. But they are also traditionally monitors of sorts from the stage. Part of their job is to leaven proceedings if tempers run ragged and to rein in an out-of-bounds comment from the crowd.

Not so much this week, at GOP rallies in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and other states.

When a visibly angry McCain supporter in Waukesha, Wis., on Thursday told the candidate "I'm really mad" because of "socialists taking over the country," McCain stoked the sentiment. "I think I got the message," he said. "The gentleman is right." He went on to talk about Democrats in control of Congress.

On Friday, McCain rejected the bait.

"I don't trust Obama," a woman said. "I have read about him. He's an Arab."

McCain shook his head in disagreement, and said:

"No, ma'am. He's a decent, family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign is all about."

He had drawn boos with his comment: "I have to tell you, he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

The anti-Obama taunts and jeers are noticeably louder when McCain appears with Palin, a big draw for GOP social conservatives. She accused Obama this week of "palling around with terrorists" because of his past, loose association with a 1960s radical. If less directly, McCain, too, has sought to exploit Obama's Chicago neighborhood ties to William Ayers, while trying simultaneously to steer voters' attention to his plans for the financial crisis.

The Alaska governor did not campaign with McCain on Friday, and his rally in La Crosse, Wis., earlier Friday was much more subdued than those when the two campaigned together. Still, one woman shouted "traitor" when McCain told voters Obama would raise their taxes.

Volunteers worked up chants from the crowd of "U.S.A." and "John McCain, John McCain," in an apparent attempt to drown out boos and other displays of negative energy.

The Secret Service confirmed Friday that it had investigated an episode reported in The Washington Post in which someone in Palin's crowd in Clearwater, Fla., shouted "kill him," on Monday, meaning Obama. There was "no indication that there was anything directed at Obama," Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren told AP. "We looked into it because we always operate in an atmosphere of an abundance of caution."

Palin, at a fundraiser in Ohio on Friday, told supporters "it's not negative and it's not mean-spirited" to scrutinize Obama's iffy associations.

But Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania an author of 15 books on politics, says the vitriol has been encouraged by inflammatory words from the stage.

"Red-meat rhetoric elicits emotional responses in those already disposed by ads using words such as 'dangerous' 'dishonorable' and 'risky' to believe that the country would be endangered by election of the opposing candidate," she said.

___

Beth Fouhy reported from New York. Associated Press writer Joe Milicia contributed to this story from Cleveland.

Prayers must be working....

Melissa — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:19:15 EDT

I wouldn't have believed it unless I heard it with my own ears....McCain shot down a claim of Obama being Arab from a woman at a townhall meeting. He actually called Obama a decent human being. PTL! He does have a conscience after all. I think McCain finally realized the remarks coming out of his campaign were going to do more than change numbers, they were sparking hatred and dividing our country. Let's get back to talking about the issues. With our economy tanking, our country at war and a failing healthcare system.....we've got plenty of real issues to deal with. We know our candidate has the best plans for leading our country forward. Less than a month to go.

YES WE CAN!!!!!

The truth about John McCain's support of our military and veterans.

Melissa — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:44:44 EDT

McCain's Miserable Record of Not Supporting America's Troops and Veterans by: Brandon Friedman Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:13:26 AM EDT

(To view the entire article complete with supporting video, please click on the following link)
http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1973

On Friday, September September 26, 2008, John McCain said the following:

"I know the veterans, I know them well, and I know that they know that I'll take care of them, and I have been proud of their support and their recognition of my service to the veterans, and I love them, and I'll take care of them, and they know that I'll take care of them."

This statement--made near the end of Friday's debate--immediately infuriated veterans across America and overseas. In fact, Senator John McCain has a very clear, long, and illustrious history of not supporting troops and veterans one bit.

Now, I've seen legislative examples, I've watched the YouTubes, and I've lived this lack of support in more ways than one. But now, for the first time, I've tried to compile as much of this non-support as possible into a single document--from a variety of sources--complete with links, quotes, and video clips. It's something that readers often ask me about, so I hope this helps. I'm sure there's a lot missing, so feel free to add more in the comments. But for now, I think this should give us a good start in exposing John McCain's abysmal of record of supporting troops and veterans. Here we go:

Senator John McCain's Record on Troop and Veterans' Issues

Voting Against Veterans
Veterans Groups Give McCain Failing Grades. In its most recent legislative ratings, the non-partisan Disabled American Veterans gave Sen. McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans' issues. Similarly, the non-partisan Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a "D" grade for his poor voting record on veterans' issues, including McCain's votes against additional body armor for troops in combat and additional funding for PTSD and TBI screening and treatment.

McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans' Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans' health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans' health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

McCain Voted At Least 28 Times Against Veterans' Benefits, Including Healthcare. Since arriving in the U.S. Senate in 1987, McCain has voted at least 28 times against ensuring important benefits for America's veterans, including providing adequate healthcare. (2006 Senate Vote #7, 41, 63, 67, 98, 222; 2005 Senate Votes #55, 89, 90, 251, 343; 2004 Senate Votes #40, 48, 145; 2003 Senate Votes #74, 81, 83; 1999 Senate Vote #328; 1998 Senate Vote #175; 1997 Senate Vote #168; 1996 Senate Votes #115, 275; 1995 Senate Votes #76, 226, 466; 1994 Senate Vote #306; 1992 Senate Vote #194; 1991 Senate Vote #259)

McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments for certain veterans' benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)
McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

McCain opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans' Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans' health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans' population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans' Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

McCain Opposed the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Was Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would "encourage more people to leave the military." (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

Disabled American Veterans Legislative Director Said That McCain's Proposal Would Increase Costs For Veterans Because His Plan Relies On Private Hospitals Which Are More Expensive and Which Could Also Lead To Further Rationing Of Care. "To help veterans who live far from VA hospitals or need specialized care the VA can't provide, McCain proposed giving low-income veterans and those who incurred injury during their service a card they could use at private hospitals. The proposal is not an attempt to privatize the VA, as critics have alleged, but rather, an effort to improve care and access to it, he said. Joe Violanti, legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, a nonpartisan organization, said the proposal would increase costs because private hospitals are more expensive. The increased cost could lead to further rationing of care, he said." (Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/08)

Lack of Support for the Troops
McCain co-sponsored the Use of Force Authorization. McCain supported the bill that gave President George W. Bush the green light--and a blank check--for going to war with Iraq. (SJ Res 46, 10/3/02)

McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

McCain voted against holding Bush accountable for his actions in the war. McCain opposed the creation of an independent commission to investigate the development and use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. (S.Amdt. 1275 to H.R. 2658, Vote 284, 7/16/03)

McCain voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

Senator McCain opposed efforts to end the overextension of the military--a policy that is having a devastating impact on our troops. McCain voted against requiring mandatory minimum downtime between tours of duty for troops serving in Iraq. (S.Amdt.. 2909 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 341, 9/19/07; S.Amdt. 2012 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 241, 7/11/07)

McCain announced his willingness to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for decades--a statement sure to inflame Iraqis and endanger American troops. McCain: "Make it a hundred" years in Iraq and "that would be fine with me." (Derry, New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, 1/3/08)

McCain voted against a ban on waterboarding--a form of torture--in a move that could eventually endanger American troops. According to ThinkProgress, "the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding." McCain voted against the bill. (H.R. 2082, Vote 22, 2/13/08)

McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center--outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a "disgrace." (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

Senator McCain has consistently opposed any plan to withdraw troops from Iraq--a policy that has directly weakened American efforts in Afghanistan. Senator McCain repeatedly voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. (S.Amdt. 3876 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #438, 12/18/07; S.Amdt. 3875 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #437, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.3164 to H.R. 3222, Vote #362, 10/3/07; S.Amdt. 2898 to S. Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #346, 9/21/07; S. Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R.1585, Vote #345, 9/21/07; S.Amdt.2 087 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #252, 7/18/07; S.Amdt. 643 to H.R. 1591, Vote #116, 3/27/07; S.Amdt. 4320 to S. 2766, Vote #182, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766, Vote #181, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 2519 to S.1042, Vote #322, 11/15/05)

McCain said it's "not too important" when U.S. troops leave Iraq. This exchange occurred on NBC's Today Show with Matt Lauer:
LAUER: If it's working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that's not too important.
(6/11/08)

Cheerleading for War with Iraq--While Afghanistan was Unfinished
McCain suggested that the war in Iraq could be won with a "smaller" force. "But the fact is I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past. But I don't believe it's going to be nearly the size and scope that it was in 1991." (CBS News, Face the Nation, 9/15/02)

McCain said winning the war would be "easy." "I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women." (CNN, 9/24/02)

McCain also said the actual fighting in Iraq would be easy. "We're not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we're not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies." (CNN, 9/29/02)

Continuing his pattern, McCain also said on MSNBC that we would win the war in Iraq "easily." "But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily." (MSNBC, 1/22/03)

McCain argued Saddam was "a threat of the first order." Senator McCain said that a policy of containing Iraq to blunt its weapons of mass destruction program is "unsustainable, ineffective, unworkable and dangerous." McCain: "I believe Iraq is a threat of the first order, and only a change of regime will make Iraq a state that does not threaten us and others, and where liberated people assume the rights and responsibilities of freedom." (Speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2/13/03)

McCain echoed Bush and Cheney's rationale for going to war. McCain: "We're going to win this victory. Tragically, we will lose American lives. But it will be brief. We're going to find massive evidence of weapons of mass destruction . . . It's going to send the message throughout the Middle East that democracy can take hold in the Middle East." (Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03)

"But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators." (NBC, 3/20/03)

March 2003: "I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short." (NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03)

McCain echoed Bush and Cheney's talking points that the U.S. would only be in Iraq for a short time. McCain: "It's clear that the end is very much in sight . . . It won't be long . . . it'll be a fairly short period of time." (ABC, 4/9/03)

Staunch Defense of the Iraq Invasion
McCain maintained that the war was a good idea and that George W. Bush deserved "admiration." At the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain, focusing on the war in Iraq, said that while weapons of mass destruction were not found, Saddam once had them and "he would have acquired them again." McCain said the mission in Iraq "gave hope to people long oppressed" and it was "necessary, achievable and noble." McCain: "For his determination to undertake it, and for his unflagging resolve to see it through to a just end, President Bush deserves not only our support, but our admiration." (Speech, Republican National Convention, 8/31/04)

Senator McCain: "The war, the invasion was not a mistake. (Meet the Press, 1/6/08)

McCain said the war in Iraq was "worth" it. Asked if the war was a good idea worth the price in blood and treasure, McCain: "It was worth getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He had used weapons of mass destruction, and it's clear that he was hell-bent on acquiring them." (Republican Debate, 1/24/08)

Dangerous Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge
When questioned about Osama bin Laden after the 1998 U.S. missile strikes in Afghanistan, McCain surmised that the terrorist leader wasn't as "bad" as "depicted." "You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before." (Interview with Mother Jones magazine, 11/1998)

McCain was unaware of previous Sunni-Shia violence before the Iraq War. "There's not a history of clashes that are violent between Sunnis and Shias. So I think they can probably get along." (MSNBC, Hardball, 4/23/03)

McCain said our military could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan. While giving a speech, McCain was asked about Afghanistan and replied, "I am concerned about it, but I'm not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I'd be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan." (Speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, 11/5/03)

McCain stated that Sunni al Qaeda was "supported" by the Shia Iranians. (2/2008)

McCain again confused Sunni Muslim al Qaeda operatives with Shi'a Muslim insurgents. The Washington Post reported of McCain: "He said several times that Iran, a predominately Shiite country, was supplying the mostly Sunni militant group, al-Qaeda. In fact, officials have said they believe Iran is helping Shiite extremists in Iraq.
"Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives 'taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.'
"Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was 'common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate.'" (Press conference, Amman, Jordan, 3/18/2008)

Yet again, McCain demonstrated that he didn't know whether al Qaeda was a Sunni or Shiite organization. While questioning General David Petraeus during a Senate hearing, the following exchange occurred:
MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.
MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi'ites overall?
PETREAUS: No.
MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else. (Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, 4/8/08)

McCain incorrectly thought General David Petraeus was in charge of Afghanistan. The Army Times reported: "Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
'I would not do that unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,' McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.
"Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq." (Annual meeting of the Associated Press, 4/14/08)

McCain credited the "surge" for the "Anbar Awakening"--even though the Anbar Awakening preceded the surge by nearly a year. (7/22/08)

John McCain has also recently demonstrated either serious knowledge gaps in terms of foreign policy, or mounting confusion, when discussing an array of other countries:
Spain: McCain refused to commit to meeting with the president of Spain, a NATO ally, after becoming confused about America's relationship with Spain, its leader, and, possibly, exactly where Spain is located. (9/17/08)

Czech Republic and Slovakia: McCain referred to the two countries using the name "Czechoslovakia" several times--despite the fact that Czechoslakia split apart and hasn't existed since 1993. (7/15/08; (7/14/08))

Venezuela: McCain said that Venezuela was a Middle Eastern country. (9/30/08)

I found this article quite interesting.

Melissa — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:23:41 EDT

Don't mess with scientists

Thu Oct 9, 2:55 PM ET

If there's one rule in election-year politics, it's this: Don't mess with the science crowd. OK, labor unions and the NRA matter too, but John McCain may want to brush up on his stars and planets after Tuesday night's debate.

In the debate, McCain portrayed Barack Obama as an excessive spender, and he punctuated his attack (twice) with this example:

"[Obama] voted for nearly a billion dollars in pork barrel earmark projects, including, by the way, $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?"

Turns out, a lot of people think we do. This is no ordinary overhead projector from your 5th grade classroom. The blog Cosmic Variance sums it up:

"If you've ever had the pleasure of visiting the Adler Planetarium, you'd probably guess that the 'overhead projector' he's talking about is the spectacular 'Sky Theater' -- one of the most engrossing, gorgeous venues for displaying visuals about space."

The science community is notoriously tight-knit, especially when rallying to a cause, and boy are they are rallying to this one. Alan Boyle's Cosmic Log has a great summary of the uproar:

-"For McCain to use this as a political zinger is insulting..." (Bad Astronomy)

-"Planetariums are Bridges to the Future, and America would be a much better place if all the congressional earmarks went to projects like them." (The Perfect Silence)

-"The logo for Senator John McCain's campaign has a star in the middle. I wonder what his guide star is? It can't be the same one that ten million children have seen at the Adler Planetarium. Why should anyone want their star to dim?" (Discovery Space)

The Adler Planetarium even issued a statement, noting that the request, ironically, was not even funded:

"To clarify, the Adler Planetarium requested federal support -- which was not funded -- to replace the projector in its historic Sky Theater, the first planetarium theater in the Western Hemisphere.... To remain competitive and ensure national security, it is vital that we educate and inspire the next generation of explorers to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math."

Linking a planetarium to national security may be a bit of a stretch, but the point is clear: McCain probably shouldn't count on the "science vote" this year.

Gave me a chuckle

Melissa — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:37:53 EDT

Courtesy of The Washington Post: Fact Checking the Debate

Melissa — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:13:58 EDT

Second Presidential Debate: Nashville

Computers
10:01 p.m.
Obama claimed that the government had invented the computer in order to encourage scientists to communicate. He probably meant the Internet. The personal computer was invented by Apple and other private companies. IBM pioneered the mechanical punch card tabulating machines which formed the basis for the large mainframe computers.
--Michael Dobbs

Taxes
9:57 p.m.
Once again, McCain said that Obama raised taxes 94 times. This came up in the vice presidential debate, and it is a bogus charge.

Fact check.org, a non-partisan watchdog, has analyzed the charge.

Of the 94, 23 of those votes were indeed votes against proposed tax cuts. Eleven of them were increases on families earning over $1 million to help fund programs such as Head Start and school nutrition. And 53 were on non-binding budget resolutions that foresaw allowing tax cuts to expire as scheduled. Such out-year projections are meaningless, since non-binding budgets are passed each year.
Fact.check.org ruled the claim misleading.
--Glenn Kessler

Health Care
9:46 p.m.
In outlining his tax policy, John McCain boasted that he would give all American families a $5,000 tax credit to allow them to go out and buy their own health insurance. This is true but it is only part of the story. The other part, which McCain rarely mentions on the campaign trail, is that the Republican candidate has also proposed taxing employer-provided health benefits, which will wipe out most of extra income from the tax credit.
--Michael Dobbs

Oil
9:43 p.m.
Sen. McCain talked about the U.S sending "$700 billion, some of it to countries that don't like us very much." And he said, "My friends, some of this $700 billion ends up in the hands of terrorists organizations." He's talking about the U.S. imports of oil, for which the U.S. consumers send money to the countries that produce the oil.

In fact, according to the Energy Information Administration, which bills itself as offering the "official energy statistics from the U.S. government," the top producer of crude oil for import into the U.S. is Canada, not exactly a country that doesn't like us. The second largest is Saudia Arabia, another ally. And then Mexico, also a key ally.

But McCain is right that the list also includes countries like Venezuela, whose leader, Hugo Chavez, can accurately be proclaimed to be "no friend" of the U.S. And the list includes Nigeria, Iraq, Angola, Brazil, Algeria, Ecuador, Russa, Colombia, Azerbaijan, Kuwait and Chad.

It is not possible to know how much of the money that flows into some of those countries ends up in the hands of terrorists organizations.
--Michael D. Shear

Boeing Contract
9:33 p.m.
McCain took credit for his crusade to block a new contract for Boeing for a new fleet of midair refueling tankers. He said he saved taxpayers more than $6 billion while launching a Senate probe that found cozy relations between Pentagon officials and Boeing executives.

But the GAO found significant problems in the rebidding of the new contract, which had awarded the contract to a partnership between Northrup Grumman and the European firm EADS.

"This shows how a sort of naive crusade for good government can actually backfire," Loren Thompson, of the Lexington Institute, a defense think tank, told Newsweek.
--Glenn Kessler

Earmarks
9:28 p.m.
McCain continues to make an issue out of earmarks, which are only a small part of the overall federal budget. The big ticket items are entitlement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and defense spending, which together represent much of the federal budget; earmarks are just $16 billion out of a more than a $2 trillion budget.
--Glenn Kessler

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
9:24 p.m.
Sen. McCain claimed that Sen. Obama was the second-highest recipient of money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "in history." In fact, according to the OpenSecrets.Org site, which tracks political contributions, Obama was third among senators in receiving contributions from the two mortgage giants during the period of 1989 to 2008.

Having received $105,849, he falls behind Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Sen. Christoper Dodd (D-Conn.) in third place, not second. And it's unclear where McCain bases his claim that Obama is second "in history" since the sites that track these contributions don't use that kind of duration.
--Michael D. Shear

Corsi has lied about Obama, McCain, Kerry, Gore...the list is endless.

Melissa — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:02:34 EDT

Kenya deporting US author of anti-Obama book

By TOM ODULA, Associated Press WriterTue Oct 7, 10:10 AM ET

The American author of a best-selling book attacking Barack Obama as unfit for the presidency was being deported from Kenya on Tuesday, a criminal investigations official said.

Jerome Corsi, who wrote "The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality," was picked up by police Tuesday for not having a work permit, said Carlos Maluta, a senior immigration official in charge of investigations.

He was briefly detained at immigration headquarters before being brought to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport for deportation, said Joseph Mumira, head of criminal investigations at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.

It was not immediately clear when he would fly out. A message left on Corsi's mobile phone was not returned.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the campaign had no comment.

Corsi had been scheduled to launch his book Tuesday in Kenya, where the Democratic U.S. presidential candidate is wildly popular. Obama's late father, whom he barely knew, was a Kenyan economist and the candidate is considered by many Kenyans as a native son. Minibuses are emblazoned with his picture and vendors sell T-shirts bearing his image.

Obama was born in Hawaii, where he spent most of his childhood raised by his mother, a white American from Kansas.

Corsi's book claims the Illinois senator is a dangerous, radical candidate for president and includes innuendoes and false rumors — that he was raised a Muslim and attended a radical black church.

Obama is a Christian who attended Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, and his campaign picks apart the book's claims on the Obama campaign's rumor-fighting Web site, FightTheSmears.com.

According to a statement announcing Corsi's visit, he arrived last week at the invitation of Christian missionaries concerned about the rise of Islam. Corsi was planning to file daily dispatches all week, the statement said.

Obama's Kenyan uncle, Said Obama, said he was unaware of Corsi's detention and had no comment. A government spokesman did not return calls for comment.

___

Associated Press writer Elizabeth A. Kennedy contributed to this report.

He brought this on himself....

Melissa — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:50:40 EDT

McCain linked to private group in Iran-Contra case

By PETE YOST, Associated Press WriterTue Oct 7, 5:58 AM ET

GOP presidential nominee John McCain has past connections to a private group that supplied aid to guerrillas seeking to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua in the Iran-Contra affair.

McCain's ties are facing renewed scrutiny after his campaign criticized Barack Obama for his link to a former radical who engaged in violent acts 40 years ago.

The U.S. Council for World Freedom was part of an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. The group was dedicated to stamping out communism around the globe.

The council's founder, retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub, said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain was launching his political career in Arizona. Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member in the group.

"McCain was a new guy on the block learning the ropes," Singlaub told The Associated Press in an interview. "I think I met him in the Washington area when he was just a new congressman. We had McCain on the board to make him feel like he wasn't left out. It looks good to have names on a letterhead who are well-known and appreciated.

"I don't recall talking to McCain at all on the work of the group," Singlaub said.

The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as McCain's campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with William Ayers, a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground and years later worked on education reform in Chicago alongside Obama. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

Obama was roughly 8 years old when Ayers, now at the University of Illinois at Chicago, was working with the Weather Underground, which took responsibility for bombings that included nonfatal blasts at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. McCain's vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, has said that Obama "pals around with terrorists."

In McCain's case, Singlaub knew McCain's father, a Navy admiral who had sought Singlaub's counsel when McCain, a Navy pilot, became a prisoner of war and spent 5 1/2 years in North Vietnamese hands.

"John's father asked me for advice about what he ought to do now that his son had been shot down and captured," Singlaub recalled in one of two recent interviews. "I said, 'As long as you don't give any impression that you care more about him than you care about any of the other prisoners, he won't be treated any differently.'"

Covert arms shipments to the rebels called Contras, financed in part by secret arms sales to Iran, became known as the Iran-Contra affair. They proved to be the undoing of Singlaub's council.

In 1987, the Internal Revenue Service withdrew the tax-exempt status of Singlaub's group because of its activities on behalf of the Contras.

Elected to the House in 1982 and at a time when he was on the board of Singlaub's council, McCain was among Republicans on Capitol Hill expressing support for the Contras, a CIA-organized guerrilla force in Central America. In 1984, Congress cut off CIA funds for the Contras.

Months before the cutoff, top Reagan administration officials ramped up a secret White House-directed supply network and put National Security Council aide Oliver North in charge of running it. The goal was to keep the Contras operational until Congress could be persuaded to resume CIA funding.

Singlaub's private group became the public cover for the White House operation.

Secretly, Singlaub worked with North in an effort to raise millions of dollars from foreign governments.

McCain has said previously he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group's letterhead.

"I didn't know whether (the group's activity) was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a newspaper interview in 1986.

Singlaub does not recall any McCain resignation in 1984 or May 1986. Nor does Joyce Downey, who oversaw the group's day-to-day activities.

"That's a surprise to me," Singlaub said. "This is the first time I've ever heard that. There may have been someone in his office communicating with our office."

Courtesy of The Washington Times.....

Melissa — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:45:58 EDT

McCain to seek Medicare cuts

Sen. John McCain today will call for partially rolling back President Bush's Medicare prescription drug program and for a freeze on discretionary spending in order to get the federal budget in better shape, his advisers said yesterday evening.

Mr. McCain, who voted against the Medicare drug program in 2003, would make wealthier seniors pay more to remain in the drug program, just as they do for some other parts of Medicare coverage. His advisers said Mr. Bush's program ended up covering people who are capable of paying their own way.

"That reform alone saves billions of dollars that can be returned to taxpayers or put to better use," said Carly Fiorina, who is Mr. McCain's liaison to the Republican National Committee.

But the Democrats disagreed.

"John McCain can shift his rhetoric all he wants, but it's his policies that are outdated and out of touch with the values and priorities of America's working families," said Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera.

Mr. McCain plans to lay out his economic plans in Pennsylvania, which holds its primary next Tuesday. The Arizona senator has already wrapped up the Republican presidential nomination and is focusing on the general election while his two potential Democratic opponents battle for their party's nod.

Mr. McCain's advisers briefed reporters in advance of the speech. They said he will call for a "one-year pause" in discretionary spending — exempting defense and veterans spending. Those exemptions mean the freeze applies to a small part of the annual budget — defense spending accounts for half of all discretionary spending, which is just a fraction of annual spending anyway.

But the advisers said the real purpose is to make agencies do a full review and justify all of their programs.

"It is sending a message that you do not get more money until you have undergone the oversight and review," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Mr. McCain's policy adviser, who added the one-year savings might total $10 billion to $15 billion.

The drug program was one of Mr. Bush's signature accomplishments, and one that helped him win re-election in 2004, although it angered conservatives who said they didn't want to add new entitlement programs to the government budget.

Mr. McCain was one of just two Republican senators to vote against the drug bill on the key procedural vote that ushered the bill to passage in 2003. During the primary campaign, he made it clear that he wanted to roll back the program to save money and target it toward those who can't afford their drugs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/15/mccain-to-seek-medicare-cuts/

Must read from the New Yorker!

Melissa — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 05:27:11 EDT

[I was browsing through blogs and came across this story. I absolutely had to repost this.] My Galby George Saunders September 22, 2008

Explaining how she felt when John McCain offered her the Vice-Presidential spot, my Vice-Presidential candidate, Governor Sarah Palin, said something very profound: “I answered him ‘Yes’ because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can’t blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we’re on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can’t blink. So I didn’t blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.”

Isn’t that so true? I know that many times, in my life, while living it, someone would come up and, because of I had good readiness, in terms of how I was wired, when they asked that—whatever they asked—I would just not blink, because, knowing that, if I did blink, or even wink, that is weakness, therefore you can’t, you just don’t. You could, but no—you aren’t.

That is just how I am.

Do you know the difference between me and a Hockey Mom who has forgot her lipstick?

A dog collar.

Do you know the difference between me and a dog collar smeared with lipstick?

Not a damn thing.

We are essentially wired identical.

So, when Barack Obama says he will put some lipstick on my pig, I am, like, Are you calling me a pig? If so, thanks! Pigs are the most non-Élite of all barnyard animals. And also, if you put lipstick on my pig, do you know what the difference will be between that pig and a pit bull? I’ll tell you: a pit bull can easily kill a pig. And, as the pig dies, guess what the Hockey Mom is doing? Going to her car, putting on more lipstick, so that, upon returning, finding that pig dead, she once again looks identical to that pit bull, which, staying on mission, the two of them step over the dead pig, looking exactly like twins, except the pit bull is scratching his lower ass with one frantic leg, whereas the Hockey Mom is carrying an extra hockey stick in case Todd breaks his again. But both are going, like, Ha ha, where’s that dumb pig now? Dead, that’s who, and also: not a smidge of lipstick.

A lose-lose for the pig.

There’s a lesson in that, I think.

Who does that pig represent, and that collar, and that Hockey Mom, and that pit bull?

You figure it out. Then give me a call.

Seriously, give me a call.

Now, let us discuss the Élites. There are two kinds of folks: Élites and Regulars. Why people love Sarah Palin is, she is a Regular. That is also why they love me. She did not go to some Élite Ivy League college, which I also did not. Her and me, actually, did not go to the very same Ivy League school. Although she is younger than me, so therefore she didn’t go there slightly earlier than I didn’t go there. But, had I been younger, we possibly could have not graduated in the exact same class. That would have been fun. Sarah Palin is hot. Hot for a politician. Or someone you just see in a store. But, happily, I did not go to college at all, having not finished high school, due to I killed a man. But had I gone to college, trust me, it would not have been some Ivy League Élite-breeding factory but, rather, a community college in danger of losing its accreditation, built right on a fault zone, riddled with asbestos, and also, the crack-addicted professors are all dyslexic.

Sarah Palin was also the mayor of a very small town. To tell the truth, this is where my qualifications begin to outstrip even hers. I have never been the mayor of anything. I can’t even spell right. I had help with the above, but now— Murray, note to Murray: do not correct what follows. Lets shoe the people how I rilly spel Mooray and punshuate so thay can c how reglar I am, and ther 4 fit to leed the nashun, do to: not sum mistir fansy pans.

OK Mooray. Get corecting agin!

Thanks, Murray, you’re fabulous. Very good at what you do. Actually, Murray, come to think of it, you are so good, I suspect you are some kind of Élite. You are fired, Murray, as soon as this article is done. I’m going to hire someone Regular, who is not so excellent, and lives off the salt of the land and the fat of his brow and the sweat of his earth. Although I hope he’s not a screw-up.

I’m finding it hard to concentrate, as my eyes are killing me, due to I have not blinked since I started writing this. And, me being Regular, it takes a long time for me to write something this long.

Where was I? Ah, yes: I hate Élites. Which is why, whenever I am having brain surgery, or eye surgery, which is sometimes necessary due to all my non-blinking, I always hire some random Regular guy, with shaking hands if possible, who is also a drunk, scared of the sight of blood, and harbors a secret dislike for me.

Now, let’s talk about slogans. Ours is: Country First. Think about it. When you think of what should come first, what does? Us ourselves? No. That would be selfish. Our personal families? Selfish. God? God is good, I love Him, but, as our slogan suggests, no, sorry, God, You are not First. No, you don’t, Lord! How about: the common good of all mankind! Is that First? Don’t make me laugh with your weak blinking! No! Mercy is not First and wisdom is not First and love is super but way near the back, and ditto with patience and discernment and compassion and all that happy crap, they are all back behind Country, in the back of my S.U.V., which— Here is an example! Say I am about to run over a nun or orphan, or an orphan who grew up to become a nun—which I admire that, that is cool, good bootstrapping there, Sister—but then God or whomever goes, “It is My will that you hit that orphaned nun, do not ask Me why, don’t you dare, and I say unto thee, if you do not hit that nun, via a skillful swerve, your Country is going to suffer, and don’t ask Me how, specifically, as I have not decided that yet!” Well, I am going to do my best to get that nun in one felt swope, because, at the Convention, at which my Vice-Presidential candidate kicked mucho butt, what did the signs there say? Did they say “Orphaned Nuns First” and then there is a picture of a sad little nun with a hobo pack?

Not in my purview.

Sarah Palin knows a little something about God’s will, knowing God quite well, from their work together on that natural-gas pipeline, and what God wills is: Country First. And not just any country! There was a slight error on our signage. Other countries, such as that one they have in France, reading our slogan, if they can even read real words, might be all, like, “Hey, bonjour, they are saying we can put our country, France, first!” Non, non, non, France! What we are saying is, you’d better put our country first, you merde-heads, or soon there will be so much lipstick on your pit bulls it will make your berets spin!

In summary: Because my candidate, unlike your winking/blinking Vice-Presidential candidate, who, though, yes, he did run as the running mate when the one asking him to run did ask him to run, which that I admire, one thing he did not do, with his bare hands or otherwise, is, did he ever kill a moose? No, but ours did. And I would. Please bring a moose to me, over by me, and down that moose will go, and, if I had a kid, I would take a picture of me showing my kid that dead moose, going, like, Uh, sweetie, no, he is not resting, he is dead, due to I shot him, and now I am going to eat him, and so are you, oh yes you are, which is responsible, as God put this moose here for us to shoot and eat and take a photo of, although I did not, at that time, know why God did, but in years to come, God’s will was revealed, which is: Hey, that is a cool photo for hunters about to vote to see, plus what an honor for that moose, to be on the Internet.

How does the moose feel about it? Who knows? Probably not great. But do you know what the difference is between a dead moose with lipstick on and a dead moose without lipstick?

Lipstick.

Think about it.

Moose are, truth be told, Élites. They are big and fast and sort of rule the forest. Sarah took that one down a notch. Who’s Élite now, Bullwinkle?

Not Sarah.

She’s just Regular as heck. ♦

McNocchio

Melissa — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:22:23 EDT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26984481#26984481

Rachel and David set the record straight.

Proof Positive: Bush in Heels...

Melissa — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:11:42 EDT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677#27015517

Watch through until the end; the comparison is eerie.

'There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance' and its name is Sarah Palin.

Melissa — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:35:51 EDT

I have been talking all day about Palin's comment regarding her desire to seek more power . I pray that comment (along with the arsenal of other horrible gaffes) moves people to really take notice of her...not as a pretty face in politics, but her lack of qualifications. There are plenty of women on the Republican side that are on the level of Condi Rice, yet McCain recklessly chose Palin. She has shown her lack of knowledge, or perhaps interest, in Supreme Court decisions, in our Constitution, in our news media (Couric's question of what newspapers she reads). McCain's desperation to become president has severely impacted his ability to make rational decisions.

David Letterman's Top 10 for VP Debate

Melissa — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:11:14 EDT

10. First question for Palin: "Why in the hell do you keep agreeing to talk to Katie Couric?"
9. As a welcome to the candidates, St. Louis constructed a special "arch to nowhere"
8. To even the playing field, Biden wore stilettos
7. A confused John McCain kept stumbling onstage asking where he was
6. Most of discussion was what to do about the Mets

5. Palin bore a striking resemblance to Mitt Romney in a wig
4. Only thing the candidates agreed on? The Late Show Fun Facts book: 240 pages of jam-packed hilarity!
3. Biden's insistence that from his house in Delaware he can see Russia
2. You could hear Hillary's muffled screams from the parking lot
1. Palin mentioned bombing Iran, Pakistan and Tina Fey

What Palin got wrong:

Melissa — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:25:20 EDT

PALIN: Said of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama: "94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction."

THE FACTS: The dubious count includes repetitive votes as well as votes to cut taxes for the middle class while raising them on the rich. An analysis by factcheck.org found that 23 of the votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all, seven were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, 11 would have increased taxes on only those making more than $1 million a year.

PALIN: Criticized Obama's "plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program" for health care, and added: "I don't think it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the Feds."

THE FACTS: Wrong on several counts. Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers - with one option being a government-run plan.

PALIN: "Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures. He sounded that warning bell."

THE FACTS: Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska led an effort in 2005 to tighten regulation on the mortgage underwriters - McCain joined as a co-sponsor a year later. The legislation was never taken up by the full Senate, then under Republican control.

PALIN: Said the United States has reduced its troop level in Iraq to a number below where it was when the troop increase began in early 2007.

THE FACTS: Not correct. The Pentagon says there are currently 152,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, about 17,000 more than there were before the 2007 military buildup began.

PALIN: Said Alaska is "building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets."

THE FACTS: Not quite. Construction is at least six years away. So far the state has only awarded a license to Trans Canada Corp., that comes with $500 million in seed money in exchange for commitments toward a lengthy and costly process to getting a federal certificate. At an August news conference after the state Legislature approved the license, Palin said, "It's not a done deal."

---

PALIN: "Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year."

BIDEN: "The charge is absolutely not true. Barack Obama did not vote to raise taxes.

THE FACTS: The vote was on a nonbinding budget resolution that assumed that President Bush's tax cuts would expire, as scheduled, in 2011. If that actually happened, it could mean higher taxes for people making as little as about $42,000. But Obama is proposing tax increases only on the wealthy, and would cut taxes for most others. In the March 14 budget resolution supported by Obama and Biden, McCain actually did not vote.

---

PALIN: Said a McCain-Palin administration "will support Israel," including "building our embassy ... in Jerusalem."

THE FACTS: Moving the U.S. Embassy from its present location in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is a perennial promise of presidential candidates courting the Jewish-American vote. In fact, moving the embassy is actually required by U.S. law. But successive administrations of both parties, including George W. Bush's, have made the same pledge only to find that the realities of Middle East peacemaking have forced them to invoke a waiver to delay it. Jerusalem is claimed as a capital by both Israel and the Palestinians and Israel's occupation of east Jerusalem is not internationally recognized. The city's status is one of the key issues of disagreement in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

Worth your time

Melissa — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:57:59 EDT

Please visit this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brandon-friedman/mccains-non-support-for-t_b_131046.htmlMcCain talks big in debate, but when it comes down to it.....its words with little action on the behalf of our military and veterans.

McCain pulls out of Michigan.....dare I get excited? Will there be more to come?

Melissa — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:06:01 EDT

McCain pulling out of Michigan

Jonathan MartinThu Oct 2, 2:44 PM ET

John McCain is pulling out of Michigan, according to two Republicans, a stunning move a month away from Election Day that indicates the difficulty Republicans are having in finding blue states to put in play.

McCain will go off TV in Michigan, stop dropping mail there and send most of his staff to more competitive states, including Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. Wisconsin went for Kerry in 2004, Ohio and Florida for Bush.

A McCain aide confirmed the move and chalked it up to the state's Democratic tilt and the resources Obama had put in place there.

"It was always a long shot for us to win," said the aide.

McCain will now turn his attention to bolstering his defenses in Ohio and Florida while putting more resources into Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and the second congressional district of Maine, where there is a sole electoral vote available.

Obama's campaign offered a muted response to McCain's decision to abandon Michigan, only promising to keep it in the Democratic column.

"We will continue to fight for every vote in Michigan because middle class families there just cannot afford more of the same," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

The Illionis Democrat was in Michigan today but didn't mention McCain's move.

Republicans had been bullish on Michigan, hopeful that McCain's past success in the state in the 2000 primary combined with voter dissatisfaction with Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm and skepticism among blue-collar voters about Barack Obama could make it competitive.

McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin spent the first night after the GOP convention at a large rally in Macomb County, just outside Detroit. The two returned later last month for another sizable event in Grand Rapids.

But recent polls there have shown Obama extending what had been a small lead, with the economic crisis damaging an already sagging GOP brand in a state whose economy is in tatters.

A McCain event planned for next week in Plymouth, Mich., has been canceled.

I say this with tears in my eyes...

Melissa — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:10:24 EDT

I say this with tears in my eyes.....

I AM HONORED TO BE A PART OF THIS CAMPAIGN, A CAMPAIGN FULL OF SUCH COMPASSIONATE, WONDERFUL PEOPLE.

Never before have I felt so moved to action. Never before have I been so emotionally and physically involved. I lose my breath at times and often sleep so little.....because all I can think about is: WE MUST HAVE CHANGE.

We are at war, our country is in financial crisis, and we are undergoing a major shift due to globalization. We need a leader able to adapt to all of these issues and to make clear, intelligent decisions. I believe Obama is that leader.

With the Obama campaign, we are not fuel for rhetoric or an afterthought. We are his campaign.

My husband is currently serving in Iraq. By the time he gets home, he'll have been gone 15 months (his deployment, unfortunately, was not reduced to 12 months). I want a leader that will not only voice support for our military and veterans, but will take action on their behalf. Obama has done this. McCain has only offered his support vocally. His voting record on military and veterans affairs is shameful. He is a veteran that abandoned his people for politics.

I have been and will continue to be in support of Obama. I did at one point respect McCain, even if I didn't agree with his politics. That was, at least, until I really looked into his record, and until his dishonest campaign was up and running. His actions speak so much louder than his words.

McCain supporters can throw dirt and lies hoping they stick. We have truth on our side....and the truth shall set you free. I have the utmost respect for Obama and pray with every fiber in my being that he becomes our commander-in-chief. His task is difficult, but I know he will rise to the challenge.

I BELIEVE IN BARACK OBAMA!!

Offered as encouragement

Melissa — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 22:04:18 EDT

This, in part, is why I am as passionate as I am.

Here is a portion of the speech Senator Obama made from Nashua:

But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been
anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible
odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't
try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a
simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people.

Yes we can.

It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the
destiny of a nation.

Yes we can.

It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail
toward freedom through the darkest of nights.

Yes we can.

It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and
pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.

Yes we can.

It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the
ballot; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.

Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and
prosperity. Yes we can heal this nation. Yes we can repair this
world. Yes we can.

Just a note

Melissa — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:54:50 EDT

The ghostwriters for McCain's campaign have been posting on this site. Please be aware and alert. If nothing else we can use them to sharpen our debating skills. :)

It's as if she knew McCain was coming....

Melissa — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:30:13 EDT

TELL ALL THE TRUTH BUT

TELL IT SLANT

By Emily Dickinson Tell all the Truth but tell it slant−Success in Circuit liesToo bright for our infirm DelightThe Truth’s superb surpriseAs Lightning to the Children easedWith explanation kindThe Truth must dazzle graduallyOr every man be blind−

No more down time for troops between deployments?

Melissa — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:45:31 EDT

Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active ArmyBy Gina Cavallaro - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Sep 8, 2008 6:15:06 EDT

The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.

Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.

It is not the first time an active-duty unit has been tapped to help at home. In August 2005, for example, when Hurricane Katrina unleashed hell in Mississippi and Louisiana, several active-duty units were pulled from various posts and mobilized to those areas.

But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.

After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one.

“Right now, the response force requirement will be an enduring mission. How the [Defense Department] chooses to source that and whether or not they continue to assign them to NorthCom, that could change in the future,” said Army Col. Louis Vogler, chief of NorthCom future operations. “Now, the plan is to assign a force every year.”

The command is at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colo., but the soldiers with 1st BCT, who returned in April after 15 months in Iraq, will operate out of their home post at Fort Stewart, Ga., where they’ll be able to go to school, spend time with their families and train for their new homeland mission as well as the counterinsurgency mission in the war zones.

Stop-loss will not be in effect, so soldiers will be able to leave the Army or move to new assignments during the mission, and the operational tempo will be variable.

Don’t look for any extra time off, though. The at-home mission does not take the place of scheduled combat-zone deployments and will take place during the so-called dwell time a unit gets to reset and regenerate after a deployment.

The 1st of the 3rd is still scheduled to deploy to either Iraq or Afghanistan in early 2010, which means the soldiers will have been home a minimum of 20 months by the time they ship out.

In the meantime, they’ll learn new skills, use some of the ones they acquired in the war zone and more than likely will not be shot at while doing any of it.

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

Training for homeland scenarios has already begun at Fort Stewart and includes specialty tasks such as knowing how to use the “jaws of life” to extract a person from a mangled vehicle; extra medical training for a CBRNE incident; and working with U.S. Forestry Service experts on how to go in with chainsaws and cut and clear trees to clear a road or area.

The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

“It’s a new modular package of nonlethal capabilities that they’re fielding. They’ve been using pieces of it in Iraq, but this is the first time that these modules were consolidated and this package fielded, and because of this mission we’re undertaking we were the first to get it.”

The package includes equipment to stand up a hasty road block; spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic; shields and batons; and, beanbag bullets.

“I was the first guy in the brigade to get Tasered,” said Cloutier, describing the experience as “your worst muscle cramp ever — times 10 throughout your whole body.

“I’m not a small guy, I weigh 230 pounds ... it put me on my knees in seconds.”

The brigade will not change its name, but the force will be known for the next year as a CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF (pronounced “sea-smurf”).

“I can’t think of a more noble mission than this,” said Cloutier, who took command in July. “We’ve been all over the world during this time of conflict, but now our mission is to take care of citizens at home ... and depending on where an event occurred, you’re going home to take care of your home town, your loved ones.”

While soldiers’ combat training is applicable, he said, some nuances don’t apply.

“If we go in, we’re going in to help American citizens on American soil, to save lives, provide critical life support, help clear debris, restore normalcy and support whatever local agencies need us to do, so it’s kind of a different role,” said Cloutier, who, as the division operations officer on the last rotation, learned of the homeland mission a few months ago while they were still in Iraq.

Some brigade elements will be on call around the clock, during which time they’ll do their regular marksmanship, gunnery and other deployment training. That’s because the unit will continue to train and reset for the next deployment, even as it serves in its CCMRF mission.

Should personnel be needed at an earthquake in California, for example, all or part of the brigade could be scrambled there, depending on the extent of the need and the specialties involved.

Other branches included

The active Army’s new dwell-time mission is part of a NorthCom and DOD response package.

Active-duty soldiers will be part of a force that includes elements from other military branches and dedicated National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams.

A final mission rehearsal exercise is scheduled for mid-September at Fort Stewart and will be run by Joint Task Force Civil Support, a unit based out of Fort Monroe, Va., that will coordinate and evaluate the interservice event.

In addition to 1st BCT, other Army units will take part in the two-week training exercise, including elements of the 1st Medical Brigade out of Fort Hood, Texas, and the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade from Fort Bragg, N.C.

There also will be Air Force engineer and medical units, the Marine Corps Chemical, Biological Initial Reaction Force, a Navy weather team and members of the Defense Logistics Agency and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

One of the things Vogler said they’ll be looking at is communications capabilities between the services.

“It is a concern, and we’re trying to check that and one of the ways we do that is by having these sorts of exercises. Leading up to this, we are going to rehearse and set up some of the communications systems to make sure we have interoperability,” he said.

“I don’t know what America’s overall plan is — I just know that 24 hours a day, seven days a week, there are soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines that are standing by to come and help if they’re called,” Cloutier said. “It makes me feel good as an American to know that my country has dedicated a force to come in and help the people at home.”

Words of encouragement

Melissa — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:33:42 EDT

I was reading blogs yesterday and stumbled upon two that were inflammatory. Racists...on the Obama website! I was disheartened and angry. I prayed last night that God would help me with my anger and help me find the words to say to these people. I believe God led me to these bible verses and I wanted to share them with all of you:Gal. 6:7-10

Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction: the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

I pray they uplift and encourage you as they have me.

Thanks Blue Stars!

Melissa — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 21:11:51 EDT

McCain Misstates Record on Veterans Issues

Friday night, John McCain said “I know the veterans, I know them well, and I know that they know that I'll take care of them, and I have been proud of their support and their recognition of my service to the veterans, and I love them, and I'll take care of them, and they know that I'll take care of them.”

However, McCain’s record in the Senate contradicts this statement. And America ’s veterans know this – which is why groups like the Disabled American Veterans and Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America have given McCain failing grades for his voting record on issues facing veterans and military families.

· McCain Opposes the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Is Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

· McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. ( Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

· Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

· McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

· Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

· McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

· McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

· McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (www.johnmccain.com/Informing/ Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm; S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

· McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

· McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center —outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City , Mo. , 4/4/08)

· McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

· McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

· McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

· McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

· McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

· McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)

Please read....this is a call to action

Melissa — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 17:00:39 EDT

I want to make sure that all of you are aware of some of the ideas being posted on here. This is one example that was quite disturbing:

"Will there be unity?

By Darlene from Lakeland, FL - Sep 28th, 2008 at 3:46 pm EDT

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

my concern is the arrogance of many black americans who will ruder than ever once Obama is elected."

Here was my response:

'Stereotyping is a large problem in this country that you have chosen to participate in. There are groups of uneducated white people that spew racist views and promulgate lies about Obama. McCain has also engaged in the promulgation of lies. Should I then believe that the majority of Americans feel this way? I have engaged in conversations with many people of various ethnic groups in support of Obama and I have found them all to be quite educated, polite, and insightful. There are people of all colors, creeds and ethnicities that do not behave in respectful ways, whites included. That does not mean that all people in those respective groups behave the same. My question to you is how do you approach people that are not white? Your deep seeded hatred for that which you do not understand could be projected on people you meet without realizing it. I feel so sad for you that you are missing out on an opportunity to know all of God's creations, not just a select few. Instead of being hateful towards people, why not be a positive influence in their lives? God loves each and every one of us because He made each and every one of us. He knows our hearts and intentions. Yours are quite disturbing and I encourage you to pray and seek spiritual guidance from your pastor, priest, or spiritual leader. Know that I will be praying for you daily....that God will remove the blinders and open your heart. Martin Luther King Jr, along with many other great civil rights leaders, made great strides towards equality. Your comments prove that we still have a long way to go. Your post only motivates me to become that much more active in promoting awareness and unity between all of God's people.'

It is incredibly frustrating and appalling that these viewpoints still exist today. I wanted at first to report this as objectionable material, but chose instead to speak to all of you. I encourage all of you to send her messages and/or leave her comments. Martin Luther King Jr said that there is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance. She is just one of the sincerely ignorant. We need to use our voices, not in anger....although difficult when you read some of these posts...to help educate and deprogram those with these views.

72 year old tantrum = presidential material?

Melissa — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:50:13 EDT

Senator McCain appears to be throwing the equivalent of a political tantrum. I have heard him mention several times that his behavior is reflective of Obama not engaging in town hall meetings. My question is what happens when foreign leaders do not perform the way he desires, or even political figures here in the US? Should we expect more tantrums in the future?

Americans should see McCain's actions for what they are: political ploys influenced by Karl Rove to distract voters from the issues.

Senator Obama has been calm and collected throughout this campaign. His platform better reflects my beliefs and I will vote for Obama. I will not be bullied or tricked into voting for a short tempered man with antiquated ideas.

Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity. With Obama, YES WE CAN.

March to the Debate on October 7 in Nashville

Melissa — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:40:45 EDT

I will be attending the March to the Debate October 7th in Nashville. I am unfamiliar with Nashville and am looking for supporters to carpool with from the Clarksville area. My car fits 3 + myself. Or if I could ride with someone else that would be fantastic too. Here are the event details:Obama Supporters March To The Debate! (Organizing)We will gather for an easy and high-profile march from the trendy Hillsboro Village district to the debate site at Belmont University on October 7th. COME BE VISIBLE WITH US!!! Bring your signs, gear, noisemakers, etc. and prepare to show the national and local media your support for Barack Obama! Spread the word to all your friends, and related groups. This will be HUGE! We will begin with a rally in front of Fido, and then march in unison to terminate at or near the debate site. All media will be notified, and with the nation's eyes on us, it will be our chance to make Nashville PROUD for Obama!Time:Tuesday, October 7 at 4:30 PMDuration:2 hours Location:Fido on 21st Ave. (Nashville, TN) 1812 21st Ave S
Nashville, TN 37212

Wow, really Mitt Romney?

Melissa — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:26:18 EDT

According to Mitt Romney, John McCain votes not to align himself with his party but votes how he believes. John McCain has consistently either voted against or failed to vote period regarding the troops and Veterans Affairs. Says a lot about him then, doesn’t it…. He voted down the GI Bill, which thankfully passed without his support. He voted against money for veterans. He voted down funding …for a war he supports, to give our troops needed armor and equipment. If he really votes how he feels, then he feels very little for the men and women that have served and currently serve our country. Either way, the troops lose. Our veterans lose. That's the bottom line.

YES WE CAN! Create a world of equality, opportunity and prosperity

Melissa — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:13:45 EDT

I just viewed the Yes We Can video by Will.i.am. For those that have not seen it, please follow this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fZHou18Cdk It is unbelievablly powerful and overwhelmingly moving. I had tears streaming down my face and have since added the video to my myspace page as a video, as a song, as a bulletin, and now singing its praises here. I'm sure I'll be emailing the video out as well. I pray that all of our knowledge, emotion and efforts transform into votes for Obama. I cannot fathom what our country will be like in the hands of Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin. With Obama....YES WE CAN!

A call for journalistic integrity. (My letter written to area newspapers.)

Melissa — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:46:29 EDT

To whom it may concern, My conscience dictates that I write regarding a particular matter. Any time extremists are given a platform to lie to the American people, the American people should ensure that justice is served by way of corrections and fact checking. I am asking all of you to make absolute sure that each claim is, beyond a reasonable doubt, true before going to print. When Jerome Corsi is given a platform to mislead the American people, a great disservice is being performed and the credibility of journalism is somewhat tarnished. I love our country for our freedoms and diversity. Mr. Corsi has a right to his freedom of speech. That freedom is not protected against slander, libel or defamation of character. These are activities that Mr. Corsi engages in quite frequently. His claims range from McCain being linked to Al-Qaeda (and the Mob) through presidential campaign support and financing, to Obama being Muslim liked to terrorists. I am shocked that people actually believe these untrue, unsubstantiated claims. I am more shocked that some members of the media have chosen to print these claims as if they were facts. For those of you that have been exposing Mr. Corsi for what he truly is, I commend and applaud your efforts. For those that continue to recklessly mislead your readers, I am saddened and disheartened. True journalism is based upon truth. As journalists the purpose is to report, inform and seek the truth. I appeal to your sense of right and reason in an attempt to guide you back to the basics. Americans deserve journalists who have their best interest at heart. That best interest can only be served when the truth is told.

Disturbing Article...

Melissa — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:42:57 EDT

http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race

I assure you that the Ohioan quoted in the article does not represent the rest us. He certainly does not represent my views. I pray that the rest of our voices will be heard in Ohio, so much so that we drowned out John Clouse and the like. I want to see Obama take Ohio. What a message that would send!

Congratulations Republicans you have moved me to action:)

Melissa — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:57:39 EDT

Tonight I attended my first political rally ever. It was of course for Barack Obama. I find myself growing increasingly more political as the campaign progresses. Attending this rally allowed me to touch base with other supporters and to find out about more events where I could lend my services. I can honestly say that I have never been more excited about a candidate in my life and I’m happy to be a part of Senator Obama’s campaign. I don’t have a lot of money, but I am definitely willing to find other ways in which to lend support. I cannot sit idly by with this presidential race. I have this overwhelming feeling of urgency. The Republican Party has been reckless and dishonest. I refuse to let them speak for me.

No recession by technicality, that's comforting.....

Melissa — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 02:38:12 EDT

Economic analysts claim that we are not in a recession. If you go by the definition of recession requiring 2 consecutive quarters of GDP shrinkage, we technically are not in a recession. There is a projected growth of 1.8 % for the year. I hardly feel that we should be called a nation of whiners when we are only growing at a rate of 1.8%, a rate which is projected that high because of our country's net exports. The majority of Americans are not going to reap the rewards of this 1.8%. The revenues go to the companies that exported their products. The companies will then dump that money back into their respective companies. There may not be a national recession (by technicality), but there are individual states who are in recessions and their citizens are definitely feeling the effects. (Just ask Michigan.) Our unemployment rate hit a four year high in July at 5.7%. Need I mention the housing crisis.....Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, The Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch.... There will be many more to follow. McCain calls for deregulation and a laissez-faire style government. Those are the last things our country needs. If we do not plan for government involvement, but our government has to get involved anyway....our country will be in dire straits. If we do not regulate to some degree, we will see more of the same....or worse. I'm frustrated by all of this because I know that if we could rally the voters, Obama will win. I have friends that refuse to get involved and then complain about the current state of affairs. Our current state of affairs would not be so dire if more people got involved. Our votes matter, our opinions count....at least with the Obama campaign. If McCain is elected, he will essentially attempt to silence the 85% of us not in the top earnings bracket. I refuse to be silenced. I matter. We matter. No how. No way. NO McCain. NO Palin.

Article quoting Greenspan on the economy.....

Melissa — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:18:40 EDT

US in 'once-in-a-century' financial crisis : Greenspan

Sun Sep 14, 2:18 PM ET

The United States is mired in a "once-in-a century" financial crisis which is now more than likely to spark a recession, former Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan said Sunday.

The talismanic ex-central banker said that the crisis was the worst he had seen in his career, still had a long way to go and would continue to effect home prices in the United States.

"First of all, let's recognize that this is a once-in-a-half-century, probably once-in-a-century type of event," Greenspan said on ABC's "This Week."

Asked whether the crisis, which has seen the US government step in to bail out mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, was the worst of his career, Greenspan replied "Oh, by far."

"There's no question that this is in the process of outstripping anything I've seen, and it still is not resolved and it still has a way to go," Greenspan said.

"And indeed, it will continue to be a corrosive force until the price of homes in the United States stabilizes.

"That will induce a series of events around the globe which will stabilize the system."

Greenspan was also asked whether the United States had a greater-than 50 percent chance of escaping a recession.

"No, I think it's less than 50 percent.

"I can't believe we could have a once-in-a-century type of financial crisis without a significant impact on the real economy globally, and I think that indeed is what is in the process of occurring."

The former Federal Reserve chairman also predicted that the financial crisis would see the failure of more major financial institutions, even as embattled Wall Street investment giant Lehman Brothers scrambled to find a buyer.

"In and of itself that does not need to be a problem.

"It depends on how it is handled and how the liquidations take place. And indeed we shouldn't try to protect every single institution."

On Saturday, Democrat Barack Obama's campaign seized on a warning from Greenspan about John McCain's tax plans to portray the Republican as economically reckless.

In an interview with Bloomberg Television Friday, Greenspan said the nation could not afford 3.3 trillion dollars of tax cuts proposed by McCain without matching cuts in spending.

Greenspan, a long-time friend of McCain and a Republican, said about the Arizona senator's plans to extend massive tax cuts imposed by President George W. Bush: "I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money."

McCain has said he would pay for his cuts by ending pet funding projects for US lawmakers' districts known as "earmarks."

Keep in mind which administration led our country into this financial state....

Melissa — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:05:28 EDT

Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the stock market...we have reason to be concerned with the state of our economy. Our economy is weakening. McCain stated that our economy is strong and has aligned himself with Bush to continue tax cuts for the rich. Greenspan disagrees with McCain's unbalanced plan. Who knows more about the economy than Greenspan?

I am eagerly awaiting both camps' strategies for dealing with our current crisis.

Karl Rove has publicly commented on McCain's negative campaign. You know it's bad when Karl Rove is saying you've gone too far. Taken from CNN.com: "McCain has gone in some of his ads -- similarly gone one step too far," he told Fox News, "and sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know, beyond the '100 percent truth' test."

I know even the most sheltered Republicans heard that message because Karl Rove said it on Fox News. I wonder what Rove's motive for saying this was. Is he sending McCain a message? Obviously McCain has gone too negative. I just wonder why someone so strong in his corner would chastise him publicly for this behavior. I'm quite pleased that he did, its just with Rove, there are always alterior motives attached. Perhaps he did this to get McCain to back off the negative campaigning.

McCain's reasoning behind the attack adds....."If he had done what I asked Sen. Obama to do, I don't think you'd see the same tenor of this campaign," he said. "Why don't you ask Obama the next time he's on this show why won't he be in town meetings with me?"

So, what I take from this is.......Obama didn't do what John McCain wanted him to do so he lashed out in anger and basically threw a political tantrum.

A New Way Forward....

Melissa — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:51:08 EDT

In our new globalized society, we must adapt our government accordingly. The policies and ideals of the past may not be a proper fit any longer. We need forward thinking, innovative ideas and a willingness to change. Our country has witnessed a substantial shift in the job market. The jobs we could once rely on to put food on the table and provide healthcare coverage are rapidly disappearing. The job focus now shifts to healthcare professions, education, service industries and engineering. Our government must adapt accordingly. The days of laissez-faire government can be no more. Americans are increasingly unable to afford healthcare, the social security system needs an overhaul and Fannie and Freddie have failed. I’m not saying that our government should control every aspect of our lives, but I do think a healthy medium needs to be achieved.Our government chose to bail out Fannie and Freddie, and I believe we will see many more situations where our government will need to get involved. Wouldn’t we be better suited to be prepared for this, than to continue to pretend that our economy is thriving as it should? The trade off to more government involvement is taxes. Obama’s plan will not increase taxes if you make under $250,000. Many of us fall in the under category and will not see increases. McCain has aligned himself with Bush policies and will continue to decrease taxes for the wealthy if elected president. Again, I state that we are now a globalized world. Giving tax cuts to large companies will not keep them from moving to foreign soil. We cannot pull back the reins on globalization, we can only prepare for the future and adapt to the present. When I lived in Germany, often I would be approached to discuss President Bush by local nationals and by those from other countries visiting Germany. The world has taken notice and is dumbfounded that we could elect President Bush in the first place and then keep him in office. The world can see his fallacy, why can’t we? McCain follows Bush’s policies and ideals. He has chosen a VP that considers living close to Russia, foreign policy experience. Are you serious? In that line of thinking, I am qualified to be a veterinarian because I live close to an animal hospital. I also live close to an Army base, does that then make me qualified to become an Army General? The answer obviously is no.Why are Americans falling for the inconsistencies, inaccuracies and blatant lies coming out of Palin’s mouth? I can’t figure it out. Why is there a double standard put in place for this woman? Hillary Clinton was attacked from every angle, but Palin is off limits? Why? I have never been more frustrated in my life, as I am with this campaign. Biden needs to hit hard and fast. If he doesn’t, I fear the worst…….

Silence heard all the way from Ohio

Melissa — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:42:22 EDT

{This was an email sent to my step-mother back in my home state of Ohio in regards to an on-going political debate between she and I. She is ultra right wing conservative and I am left wing conservative. This debate began when she sent me an email regarding Obama removing the American flag from his plane. I received word today that I will not be receiving anymore debate emails. I won! I, to my recollection, have never been able to render my step-mom speechless. I consider this a great triumph. Today I sent her an email of a page taken from this website proving once and for all that the email was in fact false. Here is the email that could not be refuted:Let the debating begin.......Torie Clark, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs appointed by President Bush wrote a book called: Lipstick on a Pig. This book explains what that phrase means and teaches the readers how to use it. The meaning refers to cutting through spin. Senator McCain himself has used this phrase twice that I am aware of in regards to Democratic health care plans. Several members of the Republican party have used this phrase on numerous occasions including Dick Cheney. Now McCain has paid for an add that claims that Senator Obama's use of the phrase is in regards to Gov. Palin, that he is actually calling her a pig. Also I viewed an add that McCain paid for stating that Obama wants to subject very young children to sex education before these children even learn how to read. That is absolutely disgusting and its completely false. Are you kidding me? I'm sure the uneducated members of your party will eat that up hook, line and sinker, but they were never going to vote for a black Democrat anyway so what are we out? I was surprised that the Republicans thought so little of the intelligence of its members until I witnessed someone as smart as you believing in the lies and failing to substantiate the claims. How about your party stops skirting the issues by creating false scenarios and blatantly lying about Sen. Obama and Biden? This should be fought on the issues. The Republicans, however, are worried that the majority of Americans are sick of the current administration and have the weakening economy to back it up. No this is not Clinton's fault. George Bush has had 8 years to prove himself as a "uniter not a divider". Wow, that statement couldn't be more untrue. The current sad state of our country is due to poor economic policies put in place by the current administration, a long, expensive, drawn out war and a failing housing market. They are attempting to distract people from the real issues like the fact that we are no longer the top exporter, our GDP is no longer the highest in the world (we're now behind several countries), our social security is in serious trouble (I better have a great retirement), Americans have trouble paying for and obtaining health care, our housing market is in crisis, etc, etc. Here's and excellent question: If Republicans really are "God's party", why the lies to win? God, btw, is not political. He is neither Republican nor Democrat. Give to God what is God's, give to Caesar what is Caesar's. God cares about His people and His creation, not our politics. That's why are forefathers created our govt the way they did....that and to protect their rights ie our Bill of Rights. I have been receiving emails for sometime about the campaign, but beyond discussions, I have not really been involved in the process with the exception of voting. Thanks to the current adds I've been moved to act and will now (hopefully) become a small vital part of this campaign, I'm waiting to be contacted. I've even thrown my name in to intern for Senator Obama. I doubt that I am chosen from the masses, but I will do what I can to ensure that the political process is honored as it should be. I will happily debate the issues, but this is getting ridiculous. Voting records, policies, ideas, issues. These are things to debate, not lipstick.