Election Day starts today.
You can One-Stop Early Vote now.
It's the easiest and surest way to make sure your vote counts.
You can even register and vote all at the same time. It's easy, even if you have never voted before.
Visit voteforchange.com to find a polling location in your county.
An open letter to Senators Obama and Biden:
First, let me commend both Senator Obama and Senator Biden on the terrific campaign that they are running and their successful debates. They both are behaving in a way that is polished, tasteful and above board. This is the kind of campaign EVERYONE should be running, rather than attacking people for what their middle name is, or with whom they may have served on the board of a charity. I serve on several boards of non-profit groups, and I have never once asked the other board members what they were doing in 1969 while I was 8 years old. Good for Senators Obama and Biden for not bowing to use those kinds of tactics!
Secondly, I am a former Republican who is now 100% in favor of Barack Obama. I have donated to his campaign and have volunteered when I have been able. One issue that has popped up a couple of times in the debates makes my blood boil. The Republican candidates have raised the issue of drilling for oil now in the US as if it is some kind of magic bullet that will fix things overnight. We all know that is not the case and they know it too. This drilling to prosperity idea is a lie.
I want to make it clear that I have no associations whatsoever to the energy industry or to Mr. Pickens. I am a concerned citizen and I have common sense. Who says that the government lifting bans on drilling will cause any actual drilling? The oil companies are only going to drill if it is in their best interests to do it. It costs millions of dollars to drill for oil. The oil companies aren't going to do that unless they are convinced that the oil is there. Anything else would be stupid. I have yet to see any conclusive proof of significant, US reserves of oil that can be tapped which will change the status quo now or in the future.
The politicizing of the cost of gasoline is just that—politics as usual. No one wants to pay more for anything than we used to pay for it. Especially something we use a lot of. But consider this--gasoline costs about three times what it did in the early 1990's per gallon. Ironically, milk has had a comparable increase in price per gallon. Both used to be about $1.30 per gallon back then, and they are at or near $4.00 per gallon now. So why is there no outcry over the cost of Milk? Why is there no chant for farmers to beat their cows over the head for that one more drop of milk that could (at least theoretically) lower the price? This is all politics, and mindless politics at that. McCain and Palin are pandering to people who have jumped on a bandwagon that is on the "road to nowhere."
The only concrete, long-term solution to the US energy problem is to change completely over time from oil-based fuel to alternative fuels. I endorse real solutions over bandwagon solutions that really do not get to the bottom of anything but make a group of uninformed citizens feel better. I think it is time that the Obama campaign unmasks this kind of pandering for what it is. At the same time, I would encourage Senators Obama and Biden to think through the proposals of T. Boone Pickens. The propositions offered by Mr. Pickens possess the potential to put our country on the road to an enduring oil-free solution, while at the same time offering a significant interim overhaul to our energy problems by converting significant portions of our current oil-based energy uses over to other types of energy such as wind, solar and clean natural gas—all of which we have an abundance of here in the US.
So, the next time Senator McCain or Governor Palin raise this issue of "drill baby drill," why not unveil this for what it is--pandering to a group of people who have not taken the time to examine the facts that “drill here, drill now” incontrovertibly solves nothing; and then offer a tangible solution. I genuinely maintain that the “Pickens Plan” can furnish this solution. I do not know Mr. Pickens, or what his motives might be for having presented his plan. But I have studied his plan and I believe it will work. I am convinced that Senator Obama and Senator Biden are mindful individuals, and I am positive they can discern that the plan is a much better solution than the phony baloney offered by their opponents.
Again, I thank Senators Obama and Biden for the extraordinary campaign that they are running. I am so enthusiastic about real change. And I honestly trust in their candidacy to bring that kind of change. I just detest seeing this one issue go unanswered or partially answered since I think it is on the forefront to the future of our nation. We don’t just need change for change’ sake, we need changes that are real solutions to real problems facing our country. We need Barack Obama and Joe Biden in the White House!
Very Sincerely, your friend and avid devotee,
Mark Daniel Merritt
Mount Airy, NC
Traditions can be broken, and traditions will be broken !!! Those voices that say that our votes won't matter better hash. North Carlina has been a red states since the 60's, but maybe the fact that people believed that their votes wouldn't matter contributed significantly to the fact that North Carolina remained republican for so long.
However, CNN's latest poll differed from most polls, but when you look at CNN's history you will see that they were the ones that noticed significant changes before anybody else did. CNN's latest polls indidated that NORTH CAROLINA WILL BE A BATTLEGROUND STATE FOR THIS YEAR'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. The poll showed McCain leading with 48%, Obama had 47%.
Good job everybody that contributed in any way to this change. This should keep us even more motivated here in NC. We need to talk to our neighbors, we need to talk to our friends, we need to be aware of the issues so that we can be persuasive and convincing. This year, every vote in North Carolina will matter. And if we can win this state, I don't see how McCain will be able to make up for this. Spread the news !!!
The republican convention last weekend in St. Paul was a phenomenon. We saw thousands of people cheering to politicians that really did not reveal any points of their agenda, but based their entire strategy on patriotism, old values, and attacks on the democratic nominee for President. After watching most of the GOP convention, I came to the conclusion that this event was indeed a “bridge to nowhere.”
The slogan of the convention was “country first,” a slogan that implies that someone else does not put his country first and a very hypocritical statement. Is McCain arguing that Obama does not put his country first? Is he saying that the only reason Obama is running for President is for his own personal benefit? Well, it sure seems that he does, but even if not, Sarah Palin definitely did explicitly say that “there is only one candidate in this race that puts in country first, and that is Senator John McCain.” Not only is this an insult to a man that went into community service after graduating from Harvard and having a lot of opportunities to make ten times as much money somewhere else, it is also controversial. If anybody in this race does put himself over his country it would have to be John McCain. First of all, he changed a dozen of his personal agendas to fit those of the Republican Party in order to get support from traditional republican voters. He used to be against offshore drilling, he used to favor the Hurricane Katrina Investigations, and he changed his position on social security privatization. On almost every major issue he now stands with the republican strategies, which is a clear indicator that he puts his career first.
Furthermore, McCain’s campaign used to base all of their arguments on the theory that Obama is just too inexperienced to lead. McCain also said that he would pick a Vice President that is most capable of leading in case of his death. He picked a two year governor, who is younger and has less experience than Obama does. Either McCain was wrong about Obama being too inexperienced, or he did not pick the most capable leader for his VP ticket. Republicans are now arguing that Palin has more experience than Obama because she is a governor. Palin, however, has been dealing only with issues of the state of Alaska, and she has done so only for the last two years. Obama has been dealing with nationwide and international issues for the last twelve years. The republicans are trying to escape this logical fallacy in a very cheap manner.
Every speaker at the convention was talking about change. The idea to bring change to Washington by electing the Republicans is not only ridiculous, the slogan is simply stolen. Obama’s campaign slogan has been “Change” ever since he started campaigning in the primaries. So now the Republicans bring about change? Repeatedly it has been said that the liberal government is responsible of the mistakes made in the past years. Well, the Executive has been conservative since 2000, our Supreme Court has a conservative majority, and until 2006 Congress was conservative as well. Who are those liberals in the government? Seriously, bringing change to Washington by electing the party that has been running Washington for the last eight years is as ridiculous as using the wrong size wrench on a car and refusing to change the wrench. “If I try long enough, it might just change and fit.”
“It’s not that Obama doesn’t care, he doesn’t get it” was another stolen slogan from republican speakers at the convention. Word by word this is exactly what Obama said about McCain at the democratic convention in Denver. Every college would consider such an act plagiarism and reward it with an “F.” Untrue statements about Obama wanting to raise taxes for most Americans, never reaching across the aisle to work with republicans, and giving oil companies social welfare benefits are supposed to attract voters? It is very easy to research these issues and find out that they are sheerly not true.
Change will only come if we elect a new government. How can McCain’s campaign expect people to believe in them bringing change to the White House when they started lying now already? How can we think anything will change if we pursue the same old policies and the same old agenda? How can we believe McCain’s slogan “country first”, which to me is a self evident requirement for any politician, when he changes his position to comply more with republican strategies in order to get their support? Whereas Sarah Palin was using her refusal to have the federal government build a bridge to a local community in Alaska in order to advertise her strength to the American Public, she was actually supporting that bridge when she was running for Governor. She simply ‘changed’ her position after she was elected. So with this considered her only “bridge to nowhere” would have to be her appearances in public as well as the entire republican national convention.
I could not believe what I heard when I read today’s newspapers and listened to the media. I was convinced that Sarah Palin’s speech last night would be ripped into pieces by everyone: the media, democrats, and indecisive and independent voters. For some reason today’s headlines are filled with comments of a “great speech of the republican nominee for Vice President.”
Sarah Palin has previously and unfairly been attacked by the media with statements that questioned her ability to rule the country due to having five children, one of whom has a disability. The media was on her for having a pregnant teenage daughter. All these accusations have nothing to do with politics and I was convinced she would use the opportunity last night to introduce herself to the nation, counter those mean media attacks, and introduce her agenda more in detail to eliminate the notion that she was too inexperienced. However, Palin’s speech consisted mainly of accusations and mocking of presidential candidate Barack Obama, half of which were sheer untrue statements designed to create misconceptions.
Palin made fun of Barack Obama for serving the Chicago community after graduating from Harvard University. Obama had all the opportunities in the world after he graduated but he decided to work for what he believes in: he helped the less fortunate community and earned only 12,000 Dollars a year. Whereas this service should earn the deepest respect for the democratic nominee even among Republicans, the Alaskan governor decided that Obama’s dedication is worth just a mock.
Palin said that the republican strategy to become independent of foreign oils by drilling offshore might not be the best one, but it is by far better than no strategy at all. Well I agree with her there, but did she even listen to Obama’s plan for energy independence? Is she not aware of the vast investments that Obama wants to put into alternative energies? Does she not know that there are other methods of producing energy such as hydrogen cars that are just too expensive to afford? And does she not acknowledge that every energy expert in the country including the U.S. Energy Department says that energy independence is more likely to be reached by using alternative energies than by offshore drilling? She forgot to mention that the U.S. has an approximate 18 billion barrels of oil beneath its surface but uses about 9 billion a year. Her only agenda is to lead Americans into a misconception, nothing else.
Palin argued that the liberal government is the reason why terrorists in Guantanamo Bay now have to be read their rights. Again, she is trying to lead Americans into a misconception. The reason why prisoners in Guantanamo Bay now have the right to be represented by in court and actually start having rights is because we like to separate the guilty from the innocent. Just like in our society, we have to prove people guilty before we can take actions against them. So far, all it took to imprison a person in Guantanamo Bay was a suspicion. We did not need “proof beyond reasonable doubt”, somebody points a finger at a person in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Iraq and we imprison them in Guantanamo, expose them to interrogation methods that are considered torture by the Geneva convention and the International Community, and if they turn out to be innocent (which happened a lot in the past), we just say “Sorry, my bad.” Terrorists should face a tough agenda in prison and should be punished for their deeds, but exposing innocent people to our punishments without any rights will only create more anti-Americanism and will lead to less national security. On top of that, Palin’s indication that Guantanamo detainees should not have those rights is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and of our value of equality.
There are tons of examples I could take from her speech, but keeping it brief this is the conclusion we can draw from her appearance. Instead of letting the American people know more about herself and her agenda, almost everything Palin said at the Republican Convention was aimed to attack Barack Obama. Whereas I believe that this strategy itself is not a very good one in the first place, the fact that she is bending the truth and in some cases telling straight lies makes matters much worse. Not only is she trying to lead Americans into misconceptions on every major issue, she is mocking Barack Obama and telling Americans that Obama is only running for President for his personal benefit. Yesterday night, Sarah Palin has proven to me that she is far from being ready to lead: her agenda is entirely based on misleading statements and offenses against her counterparts, and her character is rather radical, offensive, and exhibits no leadership skill whatsoever.
At the beginning of the interview, Pastor Rick Warren told the audience that they had flipped a coin to determine which one of the candidates would be interviewed first, and since Barack Obama was to go first, Senator John McCain would be placed in a “cone of silence” where he would not be able to hear any of the questions that he would later be exposed to. After a great interview between Obama and Warren, John McCain appeared on the stage, the two candidates shook hands, and Warren asked McCain if the “cone of silence” had been comfortable, to which McCain responded “I was trying to hear through the wall.”
As it turns out now, John McCain was not even in the building at the time Warren was interviewing Obama. He was on his way to the church. He was in a car during the interview with Barack Obama which was broadcasted live on several TV channels and radio stations. I have a lot of respect for John McCain as a veteran and a U.S. Senator. He has done a lot for this country and I will not accuse him of cheating. But isn’t it fair to ask why Rick Warren told the audience that John McCain was placed in a “cone of silence” when indeed he was not? Isn’t it fair to ask why he mentioned flipping a coin to determine which candidate would go first when indeed only one candidate was there to choose from? Doesn’t it make you wonder why John McCain was asking if they would get back to the Supreme Court Justices when that question was not yet asked?
This video shows CNN’s Rick Sanchez interviewing Rick Warren and asking him about the issue: http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2008/08/video-pastor-rick-confirms-mccain-not.html
This link takes you to an article of today’s issue of New York Times talking about this issue: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/politics/18mccain.html?ref=politics
A spokeswomen for John McCain said “the insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrages.” Again, without accusing anybody of anything, I think it is only fair to ask those questions. After all, the rules were clearly stated but not adhered to. But of course a Republican politician would never lie to the public.
The ultimate source of this John McCain ad was Senator Obama’s appearance in Berlin during his trip to Europe and the Middle East. More than 200,000 people showed up too see him speak and cheered as they waved American flags. I would like to share my point of view in regard to why Barack Obama enjoys so much popularity among Europeans.
First, let me briefly introduce myself. I am a German citizen and legal resident of North Carolina. I moved to this great country because I believe in its values as I believe in the opportunities it gives to its residents. I am a college student and I am trying to receive a Masters degree in International Relations and Foreign Affairs. I do not intend on moving back to Europe, and I hope to become a naturalized American citizen.
Anybody that has traveled to Europe within the last two decades will agree that American popularity has suffered substantially throughout the entire continent (with the few exceptions of some Eastern European countries that recently joined the European Union and had to U.S. to thank for its support). Whereas America used to be considered a respected global companion, many Germans now strongly resent America’s policy shift from “protector” to “aggressor.” This is what happened to me. Before I immigrated to the U.S. in 2007, I vigorously defended American policies. I trusted the intelligence and optic of this great nation. Unfortunately, I too, was let down as recently released U.S. intelligence and Senate reports revealed. We now know that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction, and we know that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and the perpetrators of 9/11.
However, what I also realized through these discussions with my German friends is that, despite their aversions to President Bush’s foreign policy, they still like Americans. The positive feelings that developed after World War II, where Americans were seen as liberators and as an optimistic simple people with good morals and well intentions, still exists. Indeed, Americans are known for their generosity and their courtesy. Where I grew up, several major American military bases meant we shared our habitat with many Americans. Restaurants, guest houses, and pubs used to be filled with countrymen from both nations, who enthusiastically bonded with one another. These feelings of camaraderie culminated after 9/11 when Europeans expressed their empathy for the American people by willingly sending troops to Afghanistan to support the U.S.
However, this empathy was quickly transformed into disappointment. In fact, the shift in European perception towards the United States is simply the result of a desecration of what we think of as American values. Americans are supposed to be the good guys, the protectors. They are not supposed to wage war against a country without the legitimacy of the U.N. Security Council. They are not supposed to have wrong intelligence about a country, and they are not supposed to wage war on it for the wrong reason. Americans are not supposed to use interrogation methods that are considered torture by the Geneva Conventions which the U.S. usually enforces in any other country that violates them. And Americans are not supposed to imprison people indefinitely without either representation or allowing the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) to access the prisons as is demanded by international law for prisoners of war.
When Europeans see Barack Obama, they see old American values come back to life. Obama’s promise for change includes a change in respect towards the European allies of the United States, and change in how America will fight the global war on terrorism. Obama’s popularity then has a reason. As Europeans and Americans have the same global interests in terms of stability, security, and economical progress, Barack Obama appears to be the bond to reunite Europeans and Americans. Europeans cherish American values, but disagree with recent policies that have violated human rights and the Geneva Convention, and disregarded the U.N. Security Council as well as most of its allies. Europeans see the effort of creating a better world as a combined endeavor of all Western nations. Furthermore, they want the United States to lead this global effort, but they do not want a single nation to run this endeavor by itself and they definitely do not want a nation to break the rules that it once established and enforced in a global effort to create a better world.
The reason why Obama enjoys such extreme popularity is simply because he is a great candidate. He promises the change this country needs so direly whether it is in terms of the U.S. economy, in terms of the global war on terror, or in terms of environmental issues and oil dependency. The presidential elections 2008 are by far more than the election of a national leader. The outcome of this election will have a substantial effect on the rest of the world as the U.S. Economy and American foreign policies significantly impact the global market and international politics. As citizens of this great country, we have the responsibility not only to make a good decision, but also to go to the polls in November and make that decision count.
It is just like Barack Obama has stated it in one of his speeches: the only working republican strategy right now is to spread fear among Americans. Fear that Obama's change will make things worse, fear that his inexperience will cost us defeat in the war on terror, and fear the Obama will raise taxes which would have severe economical implications. McCain's reaction to Obama's speech were accusations of playing the "race card". The entire McCain campaign is absolutely rediculous right now. Not only does he have no clue how to change our foreign policies to a better or turn the regressing economy around, he also has no clue how to counter Barack Obama's statements. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of people out there who actually believe McCain's words. I strongly believe that a President McCain in 2009 would have severe implications for this country.
Here's an interesting factor: The Sunni Awakening
John McCain claimed that if the United States would have acted according to Barack Obama's agenda in regard to the surge in Iraq, the progression we are seing today would not have occured. He sees the Sunni Awakening in the Anbar province as a result of the reenforcement of U.S. troops in the spring of 2007. Here is where it does not add up: the Sunni awakening in the Anbar province started in the summer of 2006; almost a year before the surge.
But it gets even more interesting: the Sunni awakening is the commonly known name for the turn of the Sunni tribal leaders in Iraq against Al Qaida. After the Iraqi invasion by U.S. troops and after Al Qaida militants streamed into the country, the Sunnis saw the United States as well as Al Qaida as enemies occupying their home country. They then became allies of Al Qaida in order to get rid of the more unpopular non-Muslim occupant force. However, after Al Qaida started imposing their fundamentalist social norms onto Iraq, interfering with smuggeling revenues of the Sunnis and declaring the establishment of an Islamic state of Iraq in 2006, the Sunni realized that Al Qaida might not be the perfect ally. Then a very significant event occured: the message of the Democratic Party taking over congress and the United States presumably leaving Iraq soon made its round among the Sunnis in Iraq. The idea that the U.S. occupation was not to be open ended but might come to an end soon led many more Sunnis to turn against Al Qaida and rather work with a temporary occupation force than terrorists. The fear of being helpless against the terror group also encouraged Sunni tribes to achieve fast progress.
Here's what Colonel Sean MacFarland (Commander of the U.S. forces in Ramadi at the time) said: "A growing concern that the U.S. would leave Iraq and leave the Sunnis defenseless against Al Qaida and Iranian supported militias made these younger leaders open to our overtures."
In short: not only had the surge not much to do with the Sunni Awakening, it was rather the message of democrats taking over congress that led to the progress in Iraq than any republican strategy !!!
Sources: CNN, BBC, Foreign Affairs (July/August edition - was printed before McCain's claims). Research it !!!
Well, the Mighty Mississippi is beginning to recede in the Northwestern section of the state of Illinois. Finally the curb near the building where I run my dog in agility can be seen. As I drive into the parking lot I can actually see some grass, covered in mud, but you can make out the fact that there is ground!
The Red Cross has said that they may use more money on the 2008 floods of the Midwest than they did for Katrina. The Red Cross is definitely hurting. I have decided that with the profits of my garage sale this weekend I will donate the money to the Flood Relief Effort. I am sure Barack would understand, after all, he is from Illinois and was back here to assist with sand bagging efforts over the weekend.
Next donation is to you my man!
