Most of us who are bi-racial, tri-racial and heaven knows what else are grateful to be seen as individuals on the basis of character.
The victory of Sen. Obama as our new President-Elect has set a new milestone in that direction.
As a Christian from a spiritual perspective, I think that the Bible gives us wise counsel about "digging pits for others that we may eventually fall into ourselves." The definition of who is "white" is so narrowly defined in this country that the White people who came up with this stuff have unwittingly defined themselves into the minority of the future and it was a pit they dug for themselves. Their own children with slaves were categorically treated as slaves and segregated for economic gain and not allowed to learn or live with their own parent in a loving manner except for very few. After all miscegenation was against the law but it went on anyway although on an illegimate basis. In order to be considered "white" you had to be eighth generation white washed or 1/16 "black". Now what if that definition had been just the opposite. We would not have a race problem in this country. We all would be "white" just like Arabs are white, Hispanics are now white.. by the capricious definition of a government. Well what does the Creator think? Probably that we have a lot of grandiose, vain imaginations about our own superiority and inferiority.
If we all had a DNA test to truly see what percentage of each race on the planet we have inherited from it would truly be amazing. A lot of people who appear "white" might not be even 50% white, and a lot of people who appear "black" might might actually be 60-70% white. So other than one gene of skin color determining the future potentiality of a human's contribution to mankind and neglecting to appreciate their genius and character, we as Americans have truly shortchanged ourselves of so much progress and advancement because of this retarded attitude of racism. And now we outsource jobs to people of other nations with less DNA in common than each of us, who never lived in this nation and never fought a war side by side with us regardless of race, who never lived here period and yet we expect them to have our best interests at heart because they sell us oil and keep our Dollar stores full of goods.
Universal health care and many other so-called "socialistic" programs are much easier to adopt in nations where racism is very minimal because you are caring for your extended family.. your nation. You respect that when they get sick that's your problem, that the fence is as strong as the weakest link and your nation's identity is measured by the weakest individuals in terms of its overall status economically, culturally and ultimately spiritually. If we have a nation where only 2% live well and the other 98% are just struggling to get by with a middle class that is shrinking than what does that say about America? I believe Sen. Obama sees the big picture and gets it. I believe he will do a lot to restore America's standing-- not as a shallow veneer of prosperity showcased by a few--, but a real prosperity that strengthens all Americans and is solid and more lasting. If you don't have a stake in this nation, why would you sacrifice your life for it? Is it any surprise that African-American participation in the Armed Forces has dropped from 25% to less than 10% in spite of the difficult economic times.
If college students at campuses as prestigious as Purdue University want to write racist graffiti on November 5, 2008, about President-Elect Obama and about niggers and lynching, well why would any person of color want to put their life on the line for these type of people except for the love of God that you love your enemies. What FOX news and others neglect to report about Rev. Wright is that although he exposes the hypocrisies, the immoral behavior of government which Rev. Graham and others have done as well, he also encourages his flock to love, forgive, pray, repent and reconcile and not return evil with evil, but to return evil with good, to develop the fruits of the spirit in one's character in having to be subjected to the persecuting ways of the world. If we weren't filtering his sermons through race-baited fear, we might be able to hear what the "Spirit of the Lord" is saying to exhort us to become better people. All the prophetic teachers in the Bible never sugar coated anything and they got stoned, drowned, locked in dungeons, heads cut off because they spoke the "truth". God sees everything. Nathan spoke to David about his adultery.. he didn't get the insight from the 6:00 pm news. We nowadays rely more on the media and our circle of friends to inform us, however, some of us dig a little deeper and through prayer see clearer. God does not need the CIA, NSA, FBI to show us reality or to inform us. People do and can manipulate and cherry pick the data they receive from these entities and turn it into what they want... misinformation, disinformation, manipulation... short of lying. What God sees and what we know is vastly different... God's ways are not our ways and therefore God's sermons through His servants may offend us, but that is par for the course. What use is "salt" if it has lost its saltiness and no longer disinfects and preserves the meat? That goes for Pastor Hagee, Pastor Tarpley who McCain eventually distanced himself from and the many others who faithfully teach every Sunday ... and for that matter the Pope as well who admonished us against the War in Iraq and all people of faith and non-faith who seek honesty, integrity, fairness and justice for all.
Thank goodness something bigger than us is pushing us to evolve past this. That something bigger lives inside each of us regardless of race, religion and socio-economic status and other superficial differences. This election victory is a victory for those higher angels guiding us all.
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.
God Bless you, Barack Obama, and be with you, right with you, in the days ahead.
The Moral Equivalent of Stealing
The loud complaint from the Republican camp in this Presidential race is that Republican-branded “socialist” Obama wants to “spread the wealth” around by funneling rich people’s dollars to people who do not pay taxes. Let’s look at that socialism claim realistically. People with a family of four who earn above $250,000 have all of their basic needs covered: generally speaking, they own comfortable houses; can afford good medical care, food, cars, insurance policies, vacations, private education, books, thus less need for library, park, school, health, public transit systems.
The people earning from $100,000 to $250,000 have to plan a bit more and actually can’t afford to send their children to private schools (certainly, not without scholarship assistance, as some schools now charge up to $36,000 a year in the Washington area). These otherwise middle class workers might not be able to vacation in as elegant a style as they wish, but they can still get away, probably can own a house.
People earning less than $100,000 are called on actually to sacrifice and make tough choices on what they do, and those making less than $50,000 are struggling in this economy to put food on the table, keep roofs over their heads, and God forbid they get sick, because most of them cannot afford health insurance. ALL of them are paying taxes.
Those families earning less than $50,000 are called the working poor now, and they pay taxes, which even Warren Buffet has acknowledged place a greater burden on them than the taxes he is asked to pay. Even those who have lost their jobs and are collecting unemployment insurance, pay taxes, such that the State giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other. The elite Republicans, who broad-brush paint most of them as welfare cheats, almost universally condemn those citizens on welfare. Public Assistance recipients often find no road out of welfare; surely, a few are gaming the system, and the State goes after cheats and prosecutes them soundly. A criminal is a criminal whatever the income, but it is usually the littlest guy who is labeled first and actually pays a price.
Yet the cry goes up from the likes of Senators Phil Graham and John McCain that this country is a “nation of whiners.” I agree that some in this country are whining, but it’s generally not the working poor. Those on welfare have not even found their voices yet, so they aren’t saying a thing. The gaming of the system is less done by the poor on welfare than the rich, who don’t want to call it welfare but still want their farm subsidies in spite of the fact they are not farmers (don’t mind real farmers in need getting help to keep their farms), and the myriad corporations and individuals taking advantage of tax loopholes, and paying NO taxes. Some of these are even getting government grants and subsidies. I’d like to see some of them locked up too—they are the real criminals here.
So let us see just who is benefiting most from the systems set up in this country? How is it possible for someone to earn $250,000 and does he/she do it single handedly? The bones of this democracy that support all our actions, our individual pursuits of life, liberty, and happiness are made up of the rule of law, the administration of justice, an infrastructure of roads/bridges/electrical grids/pipelines, police/fire/military protections of our freedoms. We the People flesh out those infrastructure bones with the building of enterprises that support the structure, keeping ourselves healthy, and carrying out our civic duties, like voting, keeping ourselves informed/educated, and paying our taxes, as a necessary element of survival. We do that because there is no other way to keep the system healthy and alive.
Those who insist that they are not willing to share for the common good their incomes over $250,000 are committing the ultimate in “White Collar Crime.” If you have your basics covered and think this democracy can thrive without all of its people being able to live minimally decent, healthy lives, able to educate their children, and keep order in their communities, you just haven’t had a look around these United States lately. The pain HAS “trickled up” as Obama has said many times. The top 3-10 percent, however, their basics remaining covered, clinging to unrealistic, unfounded economics, wallow in self-centeredness. They have yet to see the light.
If you are in that privileged set, let me make a suggestion: while you are still in control of your life, you might change your attitude and start thinking of the addition to your taxes as taking out an insurance policy, so that this country can continue to stand and YOU can continue to have the opportunity for advancement to keep earning. If you continue to cheat this system, you are undermining this democracy, eating away at its foundations. All of us have the responsibilities that come with citizenship in this great enterprise to keep the country healthy, and none of us can do it alone. Even Adam Smith, the touchstone of capitalism acknowledged this in his celebrated work, The Wealth of Nations.
McCain and Palin, I mean, they really are, aren't they? Do they honestly think anyone but their precious base cares about the smears coming out of their camp?
I really don't think someone who just lost their job and is struggling in this job market to find another one before their family is put out on the street cares about this crap.
I really don't think those Americans that have already been put out on the street care about it, either.
Or those who are going bankrupt due to outrageous health care expenses. Or those that have no insurance. Or those who have sons and daughters in Iraq.
We need anwers, and they don't have them, so this is what they are left with. Someone says the unemployment rate is up, and what do they say? Ayers. How sad for us all. No help there.
How decidedly unpatriotic of them to disregard the welfare of Americans this way.
Thank goodness we have two people running who do have answers!
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)
As a former lifelong Republican, I am outraged, embarrassed and angered by the campaign of John McCain and Sarah Palin.The Republican party, once stood for ideals of limited government, individual freedoms and state rights. The roots of its planks fostering balanced budgets, strong economy and sound money.It is obvious to me that the supply side economics theory of the 1980's did not produce the same outcomes in the last eight years. And due to the speculative bubbles produced by unsupervised and unchecked deregulation created the latest financial meltdown and subsequent bailouts. So now we bail out the Billionaires, and print more money, we nationalize insurance and real estate while fear mongering health care. You are hypocrites, you leave us slaves to debt, with worthless paper. George Bush has failed our country with unwise tax cutting during war time, fiscal irresponsib ility, and politicizing war and national security, all the while eroding the constitution and civil liberties. Perpetuating his policies in these critical times is criminal. I am 34 years old, and I am angry about the state of our country. My generation has been swindled out of pensions for 401k's, forced to buy into the inflated real estate markets and then blamed for unwisely choosing financial products marketed to us. We have been left holding the bag on unfunded mandates like social security, medicare and medicaid. And although we have been conditioned not to expect entitlements to be there for us, we are the generation that will renege the promise to our parents. The middle class is eroding, and the populous is too ignorant to vote their economic self interest instead choosing a culture war against minorities, a false choice on guns, or a false choice on abortion.The Zeitgeist is "change", but the operative word in the Obama campaign is "Believe". I wan t to believe that our country can do better. I want to believe that things will improve. And most importantly, I want to believe that this country will not validate the worst our countries history has to offer; sexism and racism.Regards,Dennis
Senator Biden has met with the leaders of nearly 60 countries, territories and international organizations (such as the United Nations and NATO.) The list of names runs to about 150 people --including nine Israeli prime ministers (ten if you including primeminister designate Tzipi Livni), four Soviet leaders and two Russian presidents, a few kings and a queen (of England), Pope John Paul II andthe Dalai Lama, and even a few tough guys like Libyan leader MoammarGaddafi and Serbian president Sloban Milosevic. He has been in the Senate for 36 years. A Vice President should be experienced.
partial list:
Iraq Allawi, al-Jaafari, al-Maliki, Talabani, Massoud Barzani, Nechirvan Barzani
Israel Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni
Palestinian Territories Yasser Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas, Salam Fayyad, Ahmed Qurei
Jordan King Hussein, King Abdullah
Egypt Hosni Mubarak, Anwar Sadat
Libya Muammar Qaddafi Lebanon Prime Minister Rafiq Haririm, Najib Mikati
Bahrain Crown Prince Shaikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa
Syria President Bashar al-Assad
Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Ahmet Sezer, Abdullah Gul, Bulent Ecevit, Demirel
Greece Kostis Stephanopoulos, Kostas Karamanlis, Kostantinos Mitsotakis, Andreas PapandreouCyprus George Vassiliou, Glafcos Clerides
Afghanistan Hamid Karzai
Pakistan Asaf Ali Zardari, Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani, Pervez Musharraf, Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif
India Manmohan Singh, Atal Bihari Vajpayee
Sri Lanka Ranil Wickremasinghe
Russia Vladimir Putin, Boris Yeltsin, Mikhail Gorbachev, Andrei Gromyko, Alexey Kosygin, Leonid Brezhnev
France Jacques Chirac, Dominique de Villepin, Fracois Mitterrand
U.K. Queen Elizabeth. Tony Blair, John Major, Margaret Thatcher
Ireland Bertie Ahern, John Bruton, Albert Reynolds, Charles Haughey
Germany Angela Merkel, Gerhard Schroeder, Helmut Kohl, Helmut Schmidt
Italy Silvio Berlusconi, Romani Prodi, Cossiga Serbia Boris Tadic, Vojislav Kostunica, Zoran Djindjic, Slobodan Milosevic
Yugoslavia Josip Broz Tito
Croatia Franjo Tudjman Slovenia Janez Drnovsek, Ibrahim Rugova, Milan Kucan
Bosnia and Herzegovina Haris Silajdzic, Sulejman Tihiae, Alija Izetbegovic
Kosovo (as an independent nation) Fatmir Sejdiu, Hashim Thaci
Poland Lech Walesa, Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz
Czech Republic Vaclav Havel
Hungary Gyula Horn, Arpad Goncz, Viktor Orban
Finland Paavo Lipponen
Romania Ion Iliescu
Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili, Eduard Shevardnadze
Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev
Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko
Canada Paul Martin, Brian Mulroney
NATO George Robertson, Javier Solana, Manfred Woerner, Peter Carrington
China Jiang Zemin, Zhu Rongji Hong Kong Tung Chee Hwa Taiwan Chen Shui-Bian Korea Kim Dae Jung Singapore Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Chok Tong, Lee Hsien Loong
Indonesia Megawati Sukarnoputri, Bambang Yudhoyono
Australia John Howard, Paul Keating Philippines Gloria Arroyo, Fidel Ramos
Vietnam Phan Van Kai
East Timor Ramos Horta Tibet The Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso Colombia Alvaro Uribe, Andres Pastrana, Cesar Gaviria
Mexico Vincente Fox, Ernesto Zedillo
Bolivia Jaime Paz Zamora
South Africa Thabo Mbeki, Nelson Mandela
Liberia Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf
Lesotho Leabua Jonathan
United Nations Ban Ki-moon, Kofi Annan, Boutros Boutros Ghali
Vatican City Pope John Paul II
Slovakia Rudolf Schuster
Turkmenistan Saparmurat Niyazov
(courtesy: Office of Senator Joe Biden)
You have made a killing in the stock market, make millions playing football, etc., have a good salary as a CEO and don't want to pay taxes on your income, and don't want your company to pay taxes on it's earnings, and don't want to pay taxes on your profits from investing...
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON'T WANT ANY MONEY/PROFITS TRICKLING DOWN OUT OF YOUR POCKET via paying taxes to the government, aka the general public good,
then Vote for McCain but....
YOU REALLY SHOULDN'T BE ASKING TAXPAYERS TO BAIL YOU OUT!!!
We know you donate a lot to charity to lower what taxes you do have to pay, and that those charities and foundations do a lot of good, but they barely do enough to really make a dent in improving the overall welfare of citizens of the USA. Charities incomes fluctuate at whims of private donors.
And if you do get taxpayers help, then do your patriotic duty after our sons and daughters who make a whole lot less money as soldiers put their lives on the line for the capitalistic system to have safe markets, transfer of goods and resources and pay some TAXES for our soldiers to get decent health care and the citizens who work for your companies, and build the roads, and teach in the schools can make enough money to save and maybe buy some of your products or invest in your company. Don't ask taxpayers to subsidize building fancy football stadiums either and your players don't want to pay taxes and say so on national television.
Don't call it socialism, liberalism and communism when you are asked to pay taxes and give back something to the government (all the people of the USA) and call it free enterprise capitalism when you rip off the public at the gas pump and usurious interest rates, get in a financial bind when the fraud backfires and ask the government to help and do not want to pay taxes on top of that by sending your corporate offices overseas in the Middle East or Cayman Islands!!!! .. The same government which you despise its oversight and monitoring .. as McCain said "too much alphabet soup - SEC, FDA, FICA, SPIC. Yet the current complaint in reality is there has not been enough monitoring of all the fancy new products - derivatives and mortgage backed securities packaged by hedge funds, or usurious interest rates and fraudulent practices causing foreclosures on millions of homeowners. You don't want taxpayers aka "the Government" to protect taxpayers aka "the general public and citizenry of the USA" by passing legislation to create oversight on business dealings like it will cramp your style - you won't be able to make money. Yet Exxon Mobil has made the largest profit of any company in corporate history, billions, but don't ask them to pay any windfall taxes, that would just hurt their ability to do research and development and weather the lean years. But taxpayers have to clean up their oil spills and rescue their crews at sea and fight wars to protect their economic interests with their "taxpayers" blood and treasure.
Our government on George Bush's watch with only a 50/50 Congress has been gridlocked and has done nothing to prevent this financial meltdown even though the President was warned on many accounts this was going to happen years ago. It started with his best friend Kenneth Lay, ENRON, was making energy policy for the USA secretly behind closed doors with Dick Cheney. The discussions have been under Executive Order banned from scrutiny for perpetuity. So the FOI Act, won't apply to find out how they hammered out ripping off Americans for charging electricity at exorbitant rates and monopolizing the energy grid. AIG has been in trouble for years for scandalous practices, but no real oversight kicked in under this Republican Administration. We need to get a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress to turn this mess around and get to the bottom of it. All investigations have been stonewalled by the Republican Congress, Senate and Courts.
Gov. Scwarzenegger, a Republican governor, over the 8th largest economy in the world, the state of California, refuses to increase taxes and has a bankrupt state. Electing McCain would be more of the same mindset. This attitude of Bush/Cheney, and many republicans all over the nation who need the government to bail out their states who are flooding, and destroyed by hurricanes, and need infrastructure to their state like Alaska, but don't want to pay taxes, but have their hands out for earmarks and pork... well, put something in the pot so you can get something back and stop taking, taking, taking, taking. Rebuilding burnt down cities, towns, asking firefighters to volunteer from different cities and states... that is funded by taxpayers money. Using prisoners in CA as firefighters that is an efficient use of taxpayers money, as taxpayers pay for these people to be housed in jail at the tune of avg $40,000/year.
And definitely don't ask the general public to PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY WHICH IS PAID DIRECTLY BY TAXPAYERS OUT OF THEIR PAYCHECKS when you can't even run companies without getting bailed out by the very government you put down; can't run a business, can't make a good healthcare system, even the auto industry got bailed out remember - Chrysler and Lee Iaccoca.
I guess the government could take its hand at universal health care and probably do a better job than the private sector - looking at the private sector's track record leaving 47 million uninsured, medicare/medicaid rip-offs and turning down people who need life saving operations. If you haven't seen SICKO, by Michael Moore, we as Americans can really do a lot better with our tax money to do something directly for us like giving us decent healthcare as in other civilized nations like France, Canada, Britain, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, etc., etc.. as well as decent infrastructure, etc. Today the news was cost for gas heat is going up 125% this winter. How has technology been used to keep the cost of anything down recently? It's a dog eat dog economic world we live in. The pigs and the dogs have taken over the Animal Farm. And if we elect a pig that wears lipstick, it still is what it is.
A vote for Sen. Obama is a vote for a common sense, and fair policy which can be hammered out with the best minds in government on both sides of the aisle and in the business community. Sen. Obama can comprehend the details and talk to people with the expertise in these fields coherently and make changes in our economic system that will propel this nation forward to stability with integrity. Yes, he will ask for taxes to be paid for by the top 5% which have had tax cuts the last eight years. Did the Bush tax cuts really work? No.
So a vote for Sen. Obama makes sense and paying taxes is patriotic and makes sense for the overall prosperity of America for all Americans.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/08/war_honor_and_john_mccain?s_campaign=8315
This is a must-read seems to me. Those who seem to think McCain should be rewarded with the Presidency because he suffered are so off base they are AWOL. I know a lot of people who have suffered, perhaps even more than 5.5 years in a Vietnamese cell, under the policies of this country and right on its shores, and you don't hear they need any rewards for their pains. I think the reward McCain needs and deserves is our respect and a good retirement. God bless us all and save us from the mistakes of the past, McCain's included.
For an interesting take on Mike Huckabee's speech last night, check out this insightful blog by Kenneth Traugott:
http://theenlightenedpatriot.blogspot.com/2008/09/great-veteran-exploitation-of-2008.html
For the record, I don't believe that Senator McCain thinks he is owed the presidency because of his military service. But there is a very fine line between highlighting one's honorable service to country and implying that it makes one uniquely capable of running it. The former shows a well-deserved pride in the military. The latter just sounds militaristic
Tonight's acceptance speech was VERY, VERY impressive - I feel REALLY good about my choice at this point...
It's L A N D S L I D E time, folks!!!
To those Hilary supporters who are petulantly declaring that they are going to vote for McCain, I offer an important lesson that my Mom taught me early on...."Don't cut off your nose to spite your face!"
I found this posting about McCain's military and political service record on an internet message board, and it captures EXACTLY what I feel about "my" party's 2008 presumptive Presidential candidate:
"With all due respect to a true American hero (*), it appears to me that the bulk of the much vaunted experience of which McCain is so proud has been in losing (I would characterize it more as FAILING):
1. Graduated fifth from the bottom in his Naval Academy class (of almost 900 people); 2. Got himself shot down and captured in the war; 3. Served a full career in the Navy but never matched either his grandfather or father who both achieved the rank of admiral; 4. Survived a failed marriage caused by his own cheating; 5. According to his official congressional listing has had only one private sector job, that of "beer distributor; 6. Lost to George Bush in the Republican primaries during which, when asked why he wanted to be president, could only respond, "It's always been my ambition."
My guess is that this list could easily be extend to a much longer one. But already, I think it is longer than his list of achievements. In 26 years,one can have two kinds of experiences. One is 26 years of learning and achieving. The other is one year, repeated 26 times. It seems to me, Mr. McCain has had the latter career path and that it has been one of achieving failure."
The only thing that the author neglected to mention was that McCaine probably played a significant role in the Forrestal carrier tragedy, which probably was caused by his "maverick-ness", when he "wet started" his jet on the carrier deck....do a Google search on that term and McCain....(**)
The man's a loser, plain and simple, and I believe that he will be BURIED in a landslide this November...
(*) Author's term, NOT mine!!! Audie Murphy was a true "war hero"...Dwight Eisenhower was a true "war hero"... Norman Schwarzkopf was a true "war hero"...Colin Powell was a true "war hero"... John McCain is a MAJOR-LEAGUE SCREWUP!!! (My opinion...but hey, this is my blog, so THERE!!!)
(**) "November 20, 2007 -- More details emerge on McCain carrier incident. WMR has learned additional details regarding the deadly fire aboard the Navy aircraft carrier, the USS Forrestal, on July 19, 1967 in the Gulf of Tonkin. The additional details point to then-Lieut. Commander John McCain playing more of a role in triggering the fire and explosions than previously reported. On January 16, 2006, WMR reported that according to a U.S. Navy sailor who was aboard the Forrestal on the fateful day of the fire, 'McCain and the Forrestal's skipper, Capt. John K. Beling, were warned about the danger of using M-65 1000-lb. bombs manufactured in 1935, which were deemed too dangerous to use during World War II and, later, on B-52 bombers. The fire from the Zuni misfire resulted in the heavy 1000 pounders being knocked loose from the pylons of McCain's A-4, which were only designed to hold 500-pound bombs.' WMR further reported, 'The unstable bombs had a 60-second cook-off threshold in a fire situation and this warning was known to both Beling and McCain prior to the disaster.' WMR also cited the potential that McCain's Navy records were used against him by the neocons in control of the Pentagon, 'The neo-cons, who have had five years to examine every file within the Department of Defense, have likely accessed documents that could prove embarrassing to McCain, who was on board the USS Forrestal on July 29, 1967, and whose A-4 Skyhawk was struck by an air-to-ground Zuni missile that had misfired from an F-4 Phantom.' WMR has been informed that crewmen aboard the Forrestal have provided additional information about the Forrestal incident. It is believed by many crewmen and those who have investigated the case that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E to shake up the guy in the plane behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts', done either deliberately or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft. In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' apparently 'cooked off' and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions and massive fire. The F-4 pilot was reportedly killed in the conflagration. 'Wet starting' was apparently a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots. McCain was quickly transferred to the USS Oriskany (the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred). After the disaster, McCain was shot down over North Vietnam on October 26, 1967. As WMR previously reported, at the time of the Forrestal disaster, McCain's father, Admiral John McCain, Jr., was Commander-in-Chief of US Naval Forces Europe (CINCUSNAVEUR) and was busy covering up the details of the deadly and pre-meditated June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on the NSA spy ship, the USS Liberty. The fact that both McCains were involved in two incidents just weeks apart that resulted in a total death count of 168 on the Forrestal and the Liberty, with an additional injury count of 234 on both ships (with a number of them later dying from their wounds) with an accompanying classified paper trail inside the Pentagon, may be all that was needed to hold a Sword of Damocles over the head of the 'family honor'-oriented McCain by the neocons. WMR has also been informed by knowledgeable sources, including an ex-Navy A-4 pilot, the 'wet-start game' was a common occurrence. However, it is between 'very unlikely' and 'impossible' for the Forrestal 'wet start' to have been accidental. 'Wet starts' were later rendered impossible by automated engine controls." (Sorry...that's not a "war hero" - that's a frat-boy military hijink gone awry, and shoes the same POOR JUDGMENT that McCain has exemplified THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE! (My opinion again...)
As the time draws nearer for Barack to announce his Vice-President, I find myself compelled to read the talking (and writing) heads' opinions about who should be selected and why, and in the process, I stumbled across this article at WorldNetDaily about Colin Powell's influence when/should he announces his support for Barack's candidacy.
The author, Ellis Washington, establishes several points that I feel comelled to rebut:
"Barack Obama, as a liberal Democrat with neo-Marxist tendencies, wouldn't in any way feel obligated to adhere to any of these points in the Powell Doctrine as part of his foreign policy or his war policy, for in most cases, current Democrat talking points on whether or not America should go to war is dependent primarily on the last point of the Powell Doctrine: Do we have genuine broad international support?
I cite this point because the rhetoric of Obama and the Democrats is obsessively concerned with how America is viewed by the world – a dangerous way to conduct one's foreign (or domestic) policy indeed."
My rebuttal: I do not believe that it is a non-conservative ideal or bad policy to consider the international ramifications of declaring war on a country that has not threatened U.S. interests directly. Furthermore, the author CONVENIENTLY overlooks the point that this evaluation filter is THE LAST ONE in a long list of other evaluation filters. The author also introduces his bias by conveniently dropping in an obligatory "neo-Marxist tendencies" description.
One could probably extrapolate that General Powell designed his "doctrine" in descending order of importance and, for the record, here is the "Powell Doctrine" list in its entireity: Is a vital national security interest threatened? (Only if IRAQI OIL is now considered a "vital national security interest - sorry, I couldn't resist...but this is one of the BIGGEST reasons why I am supporting Obama - ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES IS THE ISSUE OF OUR TIME, and Obama's position is SPOT ON)
One could probably extrapolate that General Powell designed his "doctrine" in descending order of importance and, for the record, here is the "Powell Doctrine" list in its entireity:
Now that the list is there in it's complete state, it becomes much more difficulty to fault Barack Obama's position on the occupation to take possession of oil interests war in Iraq, doesn't it? The first three points of "the doctrine" rule out our actions in Iraq, in my opinion.
The author further goes on to state (almost apoplecticly, I might add):
"I am convinced that Powell is willing to back Obama simply because he is black, that Powell longingly sees his own aborted political aspirations in Obama and also that Powell over the past 20 years has taken increasing pleasure at sticking it to the conservatives – whom I believed he quietly despised for all of those years but now feels no hesitation to openly disrespect at every opportunity since leaving public office. Powell's likely support of Obama is racialist politics at its worst. It is a vulgar form of identity politics where one is willing to throw all of one's core moral, ethical and political principles to the wind for the sake of racial unity (here, race transcends morality, virtue, truth, common sense and patriotism)."
"I am convinced that Powell is willing to back Obama simply because he is black, that Powell longingly sees his own aborted political aspirations in Obama and also that Powell over the past 20 years has taken increasing pleasure at sticking it to the conservatives – whom I believed he quietly despised for all of those years but now feels no hesitation to openly disrespect at every opportunity since leaving public office.
Powell's likely support of Obama is racialist politics at its worst. It is a vulgar form of identity politics where one is willing to throw all of one's core moral, ethical and political principles to the wind for the sake of racial unity (here, race transcends morality, virtue, truth, common sense and patriotism)."
My rebuttal: These two paragraphs carry so much INFERRED PERSONAL BAGGAGE that it is difficult to tease apart all of the vitriol, but I'll do the best that I can.
Powell has no REASON to "longingly see his own aborted political aspirations in Obama"...if Powell wanted to pursue his own political aspirations, he has the personal gravitas, experience and intelligence resources to pursue them, should he want to!
Furthermore, the author's assertion that "Powell over the past 20 years has taken increasing pleasure at sticking it to the conservatives".
My rebuttal: Maybe if "the conservatives" actually BEHAVED as "conservatives" instead of NEO-CONSERVATIVES, General Powell would not feel compelled to "stick it" to them...
The author rants goes on to state: "It is a vulgar form of identity politics where one is willing to throw all of one's core moral, ethical and political principles to the wind for the sake of racial unity..."
My rebuttal: General Powell has not even formally stated his support yet!!! And yet this adjective-laden screed is issued, condemning General Powell's "core moral, ethical and political principles"? It would seem to me that Obama's stated positions on MANY issues are VERY MUCH ALIGNED with General Powell's formerly stated "core moral, ethical and political principles"!
The author then jumps away from his personal attack on General Powell's personal integrity to state:
"How could Powell in good faith support Obama for president of the U.S.? Think of the core values of modern conservatism: small, less intrusive government, government based on the Judeo-Christian traditions of intellectual thought, freedom, liberty, lower taxes, freedom of the individual to go as far as his talent can take him. In the words of Dr. Walter Williams: "More government equals less freedom"; therefore less government equals more freedom. Who could rationally be against that? Now compare those core values of conservatism with modern liberalism as practiced by today's Democrats: large, ever more intrusive leviathan government, government that methodically seeks to turn back the clock on America's unique Christian heritage in society and culture, enslaving black people (and others) in the Faustian bargain of amorality, comprehensive welfare, higher taxes to support an ever-bloated government that is bankrupting the country."
Now compare those core values of conservatism with modern liberalism as practiced by today's Democrats: large, ever more intrusive leviathan government, government that methodically seeks to turn back the clock on America's unique Christian heritage in society and culture, enslaving black people (and others) in the Faustian bargain of amorality, comprehensive welfare, higher taxes to support an ever-bloated government that is bankrupting the country."
My rebuttal: Here's where I will probably deviate from traditional "conservative" ideology - I believe that until executives and other cultural leaders actually USE "Judeo-Christian traditions of ethical thought", which basically means behaving in an ETHICAL, COMPASSIONATE and FAIR manner, they will need to have their greedy, self-serving interests kept in check by "big government" intervention.
This lack of self-governance has been the hallmark of what I consider a distressing shift in American culture during the Bush years of the early milennium. Unfettered greed, avarice and abuse of power by those who hold it, from the Vice-President to CEO's of major corporations ( especially in the oil industry ) has necessitated a change in power requiring greater regulation until the moral compass returns to one guided by moral and ethical principles.
The author's vitriol reaches a fever-pitch when he closes with this gem:
"Has Powell forsaken his own Powell Doctrine? If he gives his support to Barack Obama, I truly believe that he has. Furthermore, just to consider supporting a man like Obama for president with all we know about his radical ideas borders on treason."
Furthermore, just to consider supporting a man like Obama for president with all we know about his radical ideas borders on treason."
My rebuttal: My sincere hope and prayer is that General Powell is Obama's choice for Vice President. I know that is a TOTAL long shot, but General Powell's military and foreign policy experience would be a HUGE asset to Obama's core leadership team.
I realize that others (Biden or Bayh) will probably get the VP nod, but I sincerely hope that General Powell is offered a high-ranking Cabinet position, such as Secretary of State. General Powell was hung out to dry by the SOB Bush VP, Dick Cheney, and it would be sweet revenge indeed to see General Powell PROUDLY re-instated as Secretary of State in President Obama's cabinet.
Stick THAT in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. Washingon!!! Your article is a CROCK!!!
