The Ghost Writer Guild

Letter or Comment for News Sites re: Stimulus Bill

Dora from Mercer Island, WA — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 18:00:33 EST

Dear

Like many other Americans, I have watched in disbelief over the last two weeks as Republican leaders and their talk radio cohorts have attempted to block recovery measures. It is difficult to fathom this degree of self-centeredness. So let’s assume you speak in good faith and are just unaware of the crisis looming.

You need to be clear that the imminent catastrophe is your disturbing legacy. It is a direct result of the failure to regulate our financial institutions; the alarming disconnect between average Americans and your party (as evidenced by the millions of conservatives who voted Democratic); and the failure to monitor and repair infrastructure and the very fabric of our society, such as schools and hospitals.

It is now time to fix the mess you have wrought. This is not the time to be recalcitrant and blinkered. Consider the possibility that your views may be wrong, or at least that other views have validity. Please join the President in trying something else. Our future is at stake.

Yours truly,

Letter or Comment to Post on Stimulus Bill

Dora from Mercer Island, WA — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:57:39 EST

Dear

I was distressed to learn that part of Republicans’ objection to the stimulus package is its emphasis on education. Perhaps you are unaware that more and more jobs are being outsourced to places such as India and China because their workers have the needed education and skills. We all live in a global village, and to compete in everything from service industries to the development of new technologies, we must keep up in education.

Over the last eight years, we saw that trying to bypass, buy up, or shop our way out of debt only created an ephemeral bubble. That bubble has burst. Now it is absolutely essential that we wise up and do more to prepare our next generation to produce saleable items, original technology, and culturally sensitive services. For this, education is critical. To leave it out of any stimulus package is short-sighted.

I hope that, as a committed citizen of our great country, you will be able to reassess your outmoded ideology and truly “Put Our Country First.”

Yours truly,

The McCain Myth

Jeanine — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 23:22:29 EDT

Now that the election draws near, some people are saying John McCain would make a better commander-in-chief than Barack Obama because of his military service and his time on the national scene. Is that really the case?

Consider the facts. McCain graduated in the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy. He never had a command rank, and as he often points out, he spent much of his time as a prisoner of war. The fact that McCain has voted so often against benefits for veterans and against safety equipment for soldiers is a sign he does not fully appreciate the costs of war. He tends to see things in military terms; the surge, for example. He does not emphasize diplomacy. He is a gambler, in his professional life and as a hobby.

Lastly, McCain is weak on details. Remember, Joe Lieberman had to whisper in his ear about Iran's relationship with Iraq. Remember his misstatements about Spain, the Czech Republic, and Somalia.

Barack Obama does not have a military background, but many military veterans and soldiers in the field believe that he will be a strong leader. He has impressed world leaders. He has demonstrated his executive abilities and sound judgment, and his steady hand on the tiller during the campaign, when making his vice presidential choice, and during the financial crisis. The strengths of the McCain-Palin ticket are a myth. Let's choose Obama-Biden.

Lessons from the Silly Season

Jude — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:55:44 EDT

Republicans have objected that media coverage of Barack Obama during the campaign was more positive than coverage of John McCain. Wait a minute! Assuming this is so, there could be a rational reason, one with an important lesson for 21st century American politics.

In fact, a Pew Research Center study found it wasn’t so much that coverage of Obama was overly positive, but rather that coverage of McCain was overly negative. No wonder Republicans are unhappy. But they’ve missed a key sentence in the Pew report: “Much of the increased attention for McCain derived from actions by the senator himself, actions that, in the end, generated mostly negative assessments.”

There’s a saying for this: You reap what you sow. McCain/Palin ran one of the most negative campaigns in recent history. And that negativity boomeranged. If a campaign repeatedly lies, those lies eventually get called out, resulting in bad press. On the other hand, Obama ran a positive, effective grassroots campaign based on issues, not personal attacks. He denounced what he terms the “silly season” during elections. Perhaps his victory will signal not only how Americans want a president to lead, but the way they think campaigns should be run.

Joe the Iraqi

Rami Saffarini — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:22:41 EDT

In the midst of the economic turmoil, the Iraq war is taking a back seat in this presidential campaign. Not so for the 400,000 Iraqi Americans. With continued ties to Iraq, the single most important issue on their minds is the fate of their ancestral home. Whom they will cast their votes for on November 4th is not as clear.

Will Iraqi Americans vote for the candidate who wants to end the war or for the one who vows to continue fighting? Not an easy choice if your home country is the prize. Not surprisingly, the Iraqi community is split.

At the beginning of the campaign, an undecided Iraqi American friend of mine was leaning toward McCain, afraid that if Obama followed through with his promise to withdraw American troops, Iraq would fall into chaos. Now he is leaning toward Obama. Why? He says Obama will be more accepted by the Iraqi people, and thus more likely to make breakthroughs. Second, he hopes Obama’s continued pressure on the Iraqi government to take responsibility for their own country by setting a timetable for withdrawal will yield results.

I add that, of the two, Barack Obama is the more thoughtful, more patient candidate. John McCain is locked into the mindset that the military has the most potent answer to all international crises.

Experience? No, Competence!

The Kozmic Kid — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:27:02 EDT

Does experience count? Yes, of course it does, but this election is not about experience. If the person in the race with the most "executive experience" is the governor of a state with a population about the size of Columbus, Ohio, you can be sure that experience is not the deciding factor.

John McCain knows this. That's why, at his convention, he stopped talking about experience and started talking about change. Of course, it's just like McCain that he can't stick with that message either, judging from the TV ads I've seen. Which tells us something about what really counts - competence.

We have a perfect opportunity to compare the leadership abilities of these two men by looking at how they've run their campaigns. They manage finance, personnel, strategy, and operations. They have budgets of millions and staffs of thousands. And who wins this comparison? It's not even close. Obama's campaign is efficient, disciplined, and focused, while McCain's is haphazard, reactive, and scattered.

When it gets to crunch time, it's Obama I want running things. That other guy scares me.

The View on November 5th

Jude — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:34:15 EDT

First let me say, I am not being overconfident, complacent, or cocky. I know the election won’t be decided until voters go to the polls on November 4th. But it is time to start thinking seriously about what an Obama presidency will look like.

I see the calm hand of leadership beginning to steer us out of the economic mess. In place of inaction, I see deliberation and careful planning on the issues that matter: the economy, education, health care, climate change. In place of secrecy I see a new transparency. Instead of divisiveness, people are working together. I see our image abroad undergoing a huge makeover. Instead of viewing us with disgust and distain, many around the world will look toward us with fresh admiration for choosing the path of vision, hope, and change. At home, for the first time in decades, the younger generation will feel they have place in society.

I expect there to a huge collective sigh of relief come November 5th. Now, please, do your part to make that a reality.

Spending, taxes, opportunity

Jeanine — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 22:20:22 EDT

John McCain says he will mend the economy by cutting government spending. His main focus is on earmarks. But it was Barack Obama who actually made progress toward controlling earmarks with his first legislative success, the so-called Google for Government law, whereby people can use a website to learn where federal tax dollars go.

Cutting all earmarks (which would include cutting funds for many worthwhile local projects) would not make up for renewing the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy and would result in more debt for future taxpayers. So what else would McCain cut? He voted against safety equipment for the troops and against health care and education benefits for veterans. He voted against most initiatives for development of alternative sources of energy. It does not appear he will put money into rebuilding the nation's infrastructure.

By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, Obama is returning the country to the situation under the Clinton administration, when millions of jobs were created, new industries emerged, and there was prosperity for the rich, poor, and middle class. As Obama points out, we have done the experiment and it is clear: the trickle-down tax policies of the last 8 years did not produce new jobs, and problems such as crumbling bridges, climate change, health care costs, and access to energy were ignored. Obama recognizes that government spending can be used to solve problems and stimulate growth, providing opportunity to all Americans.

If he can't run a campaign, how can McCain lead the country?

Jeanine — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:39:10 EDT

The McCain campaign has had troubles. Advisors come and go. The message changes regularly. Often, McCain and his website do not put forth the same policies. It is okay to change your mind if you explain why, which McCain tends not to do. He has been against torture, for torture; against the Bush tax cuts, for the Bush tax cuts; for regulation and oversight, but mainly against it; voting against most of the bills supporting the development of alternative energy sources; now for alternative energy.

Apparently the well-dressed, well-groomed, speech-coached Sarah Palin is “going rogue,” departing from the directions of the campaign. The Republican’s media ads are almost all negative, so it isn't clear exactly how she is off-message. Perhaps more to the point, how would a President McCain manage a rogue VP? And what kind of distraction would that be for the nation?

The Obama campaign is a structured movement, powered by over 3 million donors and run by advisors, staff, and volunteers, using old-fashioned community organizing and up-to-date technology. Statements are issued in response to events, and are consistent with the positions taken by Barack Obama for his whole career. Obama is responsible for his campaign and responsible for the decision to choose Joe Biden. There is no need to make any apologies for Biden, who speaks independently to voters or the press. Of course, he can be misquoted: when he said the new president would be tested, he also said Obama would be a “man of steel.”

The Really Big CHANGE

Peach McD — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:02:56 EDT

Here's what's actually historic, and why I'm working hard for Obama even though I know he's not my dream progressive: for the first time, the dominant Caucasian folk are working with the dominated people of color as allies.

The black teenagers that pass my house wave at this middle-aged white lady and make a power-to-the-people fist cuz I have an Obama sign in my yard. They stop and we talk about how this country can begin to heal and turn in a better direction. They see an ally, and I see allies, where before we all saw 'threat'.

When I walk down the street and meet a man of color, my childhood-programmed response to 'threat' doesn't kick in right away, because Obama has changed my wiring at a deep level. Maybe that man's programming is shifting too. The old white lady at church told me today that she 'got' a person who assumed she had voted for 'the old man'. She said, "I told her, what makes you so sure? As a matter of fact, my husband and I both voted for Obama."

All this alliance among so-called enemies is so extremely threatening to the ruling class, they are pulling out all the stops to renew racial emnity and xenophobia. Even if the purists all vote for immediate perfection and the GOP derails democracy again and Obama loses, this new thing will not go away, because it is meant to be.

John McCain: you had a chance

Jeanine — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:12:37 EDT

John McCain, in 2003, you came out against the president when you said the Bush tax cuts were wrong because we were at war and because they heavily favored the very rich. But you changed your tune to get support from other Republicans. Now you promise to extend the tax cuts, with no regard for the debt mounting up for our children, and you call the tax proposals of Barack Obama socialism.

You could have chosen a running mate who’d spent time working for all Americans and taken an interest in the world, but you chose a hypocrite who raised the sales tax while claiming she cut taxes, who aggressively went after earmarks while claiming independence, and who abused power at the local and state levels. Sarah Palin obtained her first passport last year. With the help of over $150,000, she brought glamour to your campaign, as you chose politics over country.

You could have run a campaign on issues. Of course, making the case for trickle-down economics is challenging, and offering a $300 million prize for a better car battery is pretty hokey, but you could have tried. Perhaps you could have followed the model of Alan Greenspan, who admitted he was wrong about deregulation and the markets. Instead, you yell socialism, brag about being a maverick, and sponsor robo-calls claiming Obama pals around with terrorists. You know all Obama did was work with a man Republicans and Democrats in Chicago have accepted into society as a hard-working educator.

Everyone, McCain had a chance to do better. Vote for Obama-Biden.

Fruit flies and science

Jeanine — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:10:23 EDT

It may not be necessary for everyone to remember a substantial amount of high school biology, but one basic lesson pertains to the study of fruit flies. Scientists can’t breed and dissect humans, so they use a species such as fruit flies instead. Apparently Sarah Palin doesn’t remember this lesson. While proposing to fund research on autism, she mocked the scientific study of fruit flies.

Palin also has indicated that science, to her, is a point of view, not a process, and that school children should get to hear other points of view, such as intelligent design. This would be bad for science and bad for the economy. The Bush administration has muzzled scientists and other professionals and has ignored reports about climate change and environmental hazards. A McCain/Palin administration may be even worse. Vote for Obama/Biden.

Moment of truth: Real Americans vs. mud-bloods

Sine in KS — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:17:51 EDT

In a rare moment of truth for Republicans, the presidential election has come down to a simple choice: the “real” America versus the “other” America. Clashing world views about patriotism after 9/11, economic fairness, and social values finally have been distilled to an essence anybody can comprehend.

Maybe we needed a self-proclaimed Washington outsider, such as Sarah Palin, to tell us in simple terms. And if that weren’t enough, Michele Bachman (R-Minn) felt the need to call for an investigation of all members of Congress to determine who is pro-American and who is not, with the chilling implication that something needs to be done with the latter. A burning at the stake, perhaps?

All this is eerily reminiscent of the “pure-bloods” and “mud-bloods” in a bestselling series of books. Pure fiction, to be sure, but a powerful read. The denizens of what’s left of the Republican Party might want to read up on what happens to those who sew such legendary seeds of division. Then again, maybe this is why some “real” Americans have sought to have these particular books banned.

Who do you want in the oval office?

Jeanine — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:27:55 EDT

Who do you want in the oval office—John McCain, who often makes decisions too quickly? It appears the Palin pick was one such impulsive choice. It may have served the politics of the moment, but it wasn't a good choice for the country. Then, a few weeks ago, he either was making a grand-standing gesture or genuinely couldn't handle two things at once: the campaign and discussion about the bail-out bill. He also needed to be corrected on several occasions about the ethnic make-up of Iran and Iraq. He lied—or more politely, overstated—the security situation in Baghdad when he visited there. McCain has been described by friends as being erratic and hot-headed. To quote Thad Cochran, “the thought of [McCain] being President sends a cold chill down my spine."

Barack Obama has not been on the national scene as long as John McCain, but people who know him well attest to his judgment, compassion, and ability to make decisions and advance programs that address the needs and goals all Americans. He has demonstrated this in his work in the Senate, campaign, proposals, two books, and travels around the world. Obama exhibits his calm, deliberate nature in everything he does. His ideas are comprehensive and address near- and long-term challenges. There is a good chance that what would be a surprise to McCain would not be a surprise to Obama. For example, it was easier for Obama to handle the financial crisis because he’d been aware of the problems on Wall Street and Main Street for some time and did not have to change his stance on regulation. Obama has gathered around him a world-class group of advisors. The Obama/Biden administration will handle the mess inherited from the Bush administration and any new crisis that occurs.

Keep American safe

Jeanine — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:26:04 EDT

The Republicans claim Americans must vote Republican to keep America safe. But I disagree. Barack Obama understands the complex nature of the world. One of his first acts of legislation addressed proliferation of nuclear materials. His energy plans address the substantial security risks if we continue at the present levels of demand for oil: we are contributing to the income of nations that fund Islamic fundamentalism. He knows the war in Iraq hurts the ability of our military to fight in Afghanistan and elsewhere. He will devote effort to the peace process in the Mideast. His strategy concerning Russia includes helping to decrease the dependence of its neighbors on Russian energy, addressing tensions before they escalate into military confrontations, and engaging with the Russian government and Russian people.

All of Obama’s plans are comprehensive and based on an understanding of history as well as the current facts on the ground. We cannot be a strong nation militarily if we don't attend to rebuilding our bridges and roads and improving education for everyone.

John McCain and Sarah Palin indicate they will continue the erratic, alternately saber-rattling and do-nothing policies of the Bush administration, which ignored early warnings about Al Qaeda, proclaimed “mission accomplished” way too early, and instigated elections in Gaza even when they were told it would mean a victory for Hamas. Make America safe. Vote for Obama/Biden

The Issues, Neatly and Concisely

Karma1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:38:37 EDT

A comparison of the websites of Senators Barack Obama and John McCain makes clear which candidate has thoughtfully considered the issues of our times and is offering plausible solutions. One website has a well-defined 33-page plan; the other has a hunt-and-peck feature that leads to anecdotal paragraphs explaining some possible options.

We owe it to ourselves as voters to be educated and fact filled, to use logic and good sense in deciding this election. So, read, study, and learn. I promise you, the Republican Party is not the same as it was when grandpa was a Republican. Likewise, the Democratic Party is not the same as when you volunteered for it in high school. In 2008, the Republican Party stands steeped in and poised to continue its reckless behavior of deficit spending. The Democratic Party is ready to lead the way back to balanced budgets and treasury surpluses.

Maverick: Right Term, Wrong Definition.

Karma1 — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:33:49 EDT

The common definition of maverick in the U.S. and Canada is “an unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.” If indeed this definition is what Senator McCain and Governor Palin refer to in their use of the term, then we should most absolutely fear McCain. Although he astonishingly asserts the untrue notion that Senator Obama got his political start in the living room of a terrorist, we can say that McCain was branded early in his own career by none other than the American financial terrorist, Charles Keating. Unfortunately, I believe his inability to focus on current problems with our economy and the world economy as a whole is substantially due to two points: McCain has little to no conceptualization of economic forecasting or implementation, and I sadly guess that somewhere on his hide is branded CK, not meaning Calvin Klein.

Obama's Publicly funded Campaign

ZAZ — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:43:29 EDT

Obama called for independence from lobbyists and we—millions of donors who had never donated to any political campaign—responded with our hard-earned and much-needed money. This is a victory for public financing, based on the public’s confidence in the candidate. It is also testimony to the Obama team’s managerial and financial skills. In turn, the campaign’s fiscal responsibility gives individual donors confidence, knowing their contributions will be prudently spent.

The difference in fund raising between the McCain and Obama campaigns is a good reflection of the disparity between their effectiveness, administrative skills, and level of enthusiastic supporters. The Republicans are foundering now as they grapple with the power of a fed-up public ready to replace 8 years of failed economic and foreign affairs policies. McCain and the Republicans are crying foul because they are strapped by the limits of government public financing, at the same time as wealthy individuals and 527s raise millions from lobbyists. We have seen this movie before. However, this time we will not be hoodwinked. The Democrats wised up. Welcome to the era of smart grassroots campaigning, powered by the public in its true form.

Campaign Financing

Beth (Chicago) — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:18:27 EDT

Raising $150 million in September has been hailed by Obama’s supporters and decried by McCain’s.

McCain asserts that Obama changed his mind about federal financing, and accuses him of being the first candidate to not accept it since introduced in the 1970s. True. But here’s what’s also true: Obama’s ideal of a grassroots campaign, one not supported by special interests or big corporations, has been met by more than 3 million citizen contributions. The problem with McCain's complaints is that, in fact, Obama's campaign IS funded by public financing.

So don’t blame Obama for having supporters like me, with such a strong commitment to changing the direction of our country's policies that we are providing him with the resources to secure the presidency. Supporters like me who want our country partnering with the world community in conservation and peace, being admired rather than scorned. Supporters like me who believe access to the best healthcare is a right of all citizens, and that excellent affordable education guarantees our future. It isn’t Obama’s fault we are willing to publicly finance his election, making whatever sacrifices may be necessary.

This is market-based American economy at its best!

A pact with Satan

The Kozmic Kid — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:31:09 EDT

As we sink deeper into the morass of lies and smears that the McCain campaign has become, as McCain embraces ever more tightly the same forces of darkness of which he was once a target, and whom he once furiously denounced, as he strays further and further from his professed desire to run a decent, uplifting campaign, I'm inclined to wonder just how John McCain views himself in the wake of his scorched-earth campaign. Is he tormented by these choices, doubting that they are worthy of his principles? Is he accepting of what he knows to be shameful tactics in the context of grander ends that justify what would otherwise be unacceptable means? Or does he see himself engaged in a righteous struggle in which even the most vile action is virtuous?

McCain doesn't talk much about his faith, but his running mate does. Perhaps during their conversations, they discuss the Bible. I wonder if the Book of Mark, Chapter 8, Verse 36 has ever come up: "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"

I hope, for our sakes, that John McCain is defeated on November 4. And I hope, for John McCain's sake, that he gets right with his own conscience.

Socialism?

Jeanine — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:12:24 EDT

Barack Obama is a transformative figure, in the words of Colin Powell, because of his leadership skills and how his ideas address the big picture. His programs, however, are pragmatic. He is not calling for a big change in taxes, but a return to the tax policies of the Clinton years, when we saw outstanding growth in jobs and wealth.

He will make improvements in the delivery of health care, including lower-cost health insurance for the currently uninsured. This will be a substantial effort, but it is not instituting socialism in our country. Historically, the government has cleaned up oil spills and provided other, more subtle support for the oil industry. No one called it socialism.

Obama's plans provide incentives for wind, solar, bio-fuel, and other alternative energy sources, as well as advance policies to encourage reduction in use of fossil fuels, such as stricter standards for gas mileage. These measures are in line with what our government has done in other areas. They will achieve multiple goals: provide jobs here in the USA; reduce dependence on foreign oil; reduce total consumption of oil, thus reducing income to several unfriendly, non-democratic countries; and reduce effects causing climate change.

Obama is for reasonable regulation of the financial industry. The Bush administration, with strong support from McCain and his advisors, has promoted deregulation, encouraging a financial bubble on top of a housing bubble, leading to the current disastrous collapse. As a result, it has become necessary to make the largest investment ever of government funds into private firms. This bailout certainly comes closer to socialism than the programs in health care and energy Obama proposes.

Obama is the one to trust to reform the system, protect the taxpayer, and revert back to the non-corporate socialism, American way.

Health Care

Jeanine — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:09:00 EDT

Barack Obama and John McCain have different approaches to health care. The main feature of McCain's plan is to tax the value of the benefit people get from employers and balance that with a tax credit. People who do not have health insurance as an employee benefit will gain from the tax credit (assuming they owe taxes). Contrary to what McCain implied at the debate, the $5,000 will not cover a standard plan for a family, which currently is over $12,000. This is not a "gold-plated" plan that includes hair transplants!

The McCain tax credit probably will cover the taxes for most current employee health benefits. One concern is that the level of the tax credit may not keep up with increases in health insurance costs. A bigger worry is that this could mean the end of employer health benefits. Some people, perhaps the young and healthy, may opt out of employer plans, raising the costs of the plans. Some employers may stop offering a health insurance benefit altogether. This may be what McCain wants since he believes market forces and deregulation solve all problems.

Obama's approach is aimed at fixing problems. He will work to lower health care costs by negotiating with drug companies and applying technology to record keeping. He will provide tax credits to small businesses. He will require large businesses that don't provide health insurance to pay into a fund. Obama's approach will provide insurance to the uninsured by opening up the programs available for federal employees. He believes in an appropriate level of regulation to ensure that people are not denied benefits.

The details of any health plan will change under deliberations in Congress and with the new realities of the budget. Think about which candidate wants to take care of you and your family, and which candidate will trust the unregulated markets to do the job.

Voter fraud vs Voter suppression

Jeanine — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:06:02 EDT

There is no massive voter fraud. But there is a move for voter suppression.

The McCain/Palin campaign is claiming widespread voter fraud, but there is no evidence. The voter registration efforts of ACORN and other groups aren't perfect, but their problems are caught. Mickey Mouse will not be voting. Claiming voter fraud is a long-standing tactic of the Republicans, but it remains without proof.

In contrast, investigation does show that Republicans work hard to suppress turnout by making it difficult for new voters and others to cast a ballot.

There are many reasons to vote for Barack Obama: his comprehensive, detailed proposals; his attention to the needs of ordinary Americans; and the fact that many people, including long-time friends of John McCain, such as Colin Powell, believe Obama has superior judgment and temperament.

Here is another reason: do you want to vote for the side that is encouraging more people to register and vote, or are you on the side that wants to limit voting?

Powell, Al Jazeera and the McCain Rallies

Rami Saffarini — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:59:35 EDT

On the day Colin Powell announced his support for Barack Obama, he said to a reporter, “Those images going out on Al Jazeera are killing us around the world. And we have got to say to the world, it doesn't make any difference who you are or what you are, if you're an American, you're an American.” Powell was referring to an exchange between John McCain and a supporter at a rally, in which McCain corrected a woman who started to tell him she does not trust Obama because he is an "Arab." He said, "No, ma'am, he's a decent family man."

Indeed, Al Jazeera, like other news outlets across the Arab World, strongly denunciated the deafening silence that followed the incident. “McCain's crowds have displayed an ugly side of the American electorate – a group who are afraid of people who are different. Maybe it is entrenched racism mixed with fear mongering and a couple of decade’s worth of Arab-bashing,” posted Al Jazeera on its website the next day.

Powell’s comments are not only visionary, but they also are accurate. Al Jazeera has become a leading source of news and information across the world. Hours after Al Jazeera’s quoted article, dozens of comments about the incident appeared on its website, coming, literally, from the all corners of the globe, including the US, Canada, Afghanistan, Angola, Ireland, Argentina, UK, New Zealand, Pakistan, Brazil, and Australia. All expressed outrage and disaffection with the GOP and with America.

There is an opportunity in the horizon. On November 4th, we will decide to either continue on the righteous, ultra-patriotic path of the Bush administration or choose Barack Obama for President and give the American people the chance to portray to the world their true values of tolerance and inclusiveness.

Palin in the Oval Office

Rami Saffarini — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:41:46 EDT

I never believed Senator McCain’s age should be, as Ronald Reagan put it, “exploited for political purposes.” But his choice of running mate makes his age and health relevant. This choice was clearly political. Governor Palin, he thought, would excite his skeptical base and maybe win over Hillary Clinton supporters. Knowing she is an avid hunter, a conservative, a Washington outsider, and a maverick, McCain fell in love at first sight.

But where does this leave America?

Nine out of 43 American presidents did not complete their term in office. That’s more than one in five. Not a high probability, but not a remote possibility either. Should it happen in a McCain presidency, Palin would be making decisions on issues ranging from nuclear proliferation to double digit unemployment. Does anyone really believe she is the right leader to deal with two wars, a collapsed economy, an energy crisis, an unstable nuclear Pakistan, job migration to India, a rising China, or any other challenge thrown at us?

Barack Obama’s level of experience was questioned by some at the start of his campaign. But after 18 months of campaigning, the American people have come to know his background, his record, and his accomplishments. He has demonstrated intellect, judgment, calm, and leadership. The same cannot be said of Palin.

Flavor of the week: Socialism

Sine in KS — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:12:31 EDT

So now John McCain is calling Barack Obama a socialist. Perhaps this charge would stick better if he had employed it from the beginning of his campaign, not with two weeks to go and the panic amongst his advisors visible to everyone.

In a long line of such flavor-of-the-week attacks, it does not resonate with voters now. We were already told that Senator Obama was too elitist, too inexperienced, too famous, too risky, too fit, too eloquent, too unknown, too skinny, and too presumptuous. Too socialist? Add that to the list.

McCain may have finally succeeded in showing the American people just how meaningless such labels are. More and more Republicans and conservatives are flocking to Obama’s side. If they associate with a “socialist” or even a “liberal,” so can we. And perhaps McCain’s fake outrage over “spreading the wealth” would be more convincing if he himself had not announced a $300 billion taxpayer-financed bailout for homeowners just last week.

McCain/Palin and women's rights

Jeanine — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:20:35 EDT

John McCain describes Barack Obama as being part of the “Pro-Abortion Movement.” There is no such thing! Obama, with others, wants to put education and health programs in place to reduce the number of abortions. He offers to work with people of all political views. What do McCain and Palin propose to do? McCain says government isn't the answer, but he supports government intruding into the private lives of women. He makes fun of the “health of the woman” exception in laws governing late-term abortions. He voted against the Violence Against Women Act, championed by Joe Biden and supported by Democrats and Republicans, including President Bush. Palin, when mayor of Wasilla, made victims of sexual assault pay for rape kits. If you don't want a return to the days when coat hangers represented a choice for desperate women, if you want fewer abortions in this country, and if you want to protect victims of domestic violence, you need to support Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

I Don't Trust John McCain with My Health Care

Carolyn Carrier — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:15:08 EDT

No matter what he says, it is a matter of public record that John McCain has been an exponent of deregulation throughout his career. He has stated that the health care system would be better if it were deregulated like the banking industry. Events in recent weeks have shown what a folly that would be.

McCain has stated repeatedly he is against government control of health care, while he himself is the beneficiary of a government-run health care program. I am certain the health care afforded him as a US Senator has been a source of comfort with his many health issues.

It would be a disaster if McCain were allowed to direct our health care system—not only for seniors but for everyone. We already have folks choosing between food and medicine, and cutting their own prescribed dosages to save money.

We need a president who understands what Americans need. Barack Obama's own mother had to deal with a broken health care system and he is committed to fixing it. He will make health care affordable for all Americans. He is the only candidate I’ve heard talk about prevention as a way to stem the rising costs of health care. It's one thing to say you put America first; it's another to actually do it.

Obama wants us to be healthier, but if we do get sick and need care, he wants us to be able to afford it without losing our home or going bankrupt. He has a comprehensive plan to pull us out of this economic crisis as well as reform our health care system. His recovery plan puts us first, not Wall Street.

Obama is the right choice for me and all of America. He is the leader who will put all Americans first.

Robo-calls: John McCain, have you no decency?

Jeanine — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:01:50 EDT

Robo-calls paid for by the McCain campaign and his supporters claim Barack Obama is a close associate of Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist who killed Americans. People in Chicago, including Republicans, confirm Ayers and Obama only 'crossed paths' while working on an Annenberg project and as neighbors in Hyde Park. Obama did not know Ayers in the 60s.

Obama does not look to Ayers for advice. His advisors and supporters include Nobel Prize winners (62 scientists in a recent public letter); investors and business people, such as Warren Buffett; former SEC chairs; two-thirds of professional economists recently polled; admirals; generals; and the overwhelming majority of soldiers in Iraq who have made political donations.

The McCain/Palin campaign wants to 'turn the page' away from the issues that matter to people's lives. The guilt by association charge on Obama is without merit. Let's consider the associations of John McCain that are relevant to the current financial crisis and to character and honor. McCain was reprimanded by the Senate for poor judgment in asking government regulators to withdraw from examination of his friend and supporter Charles Keating, who went to jail for fraud in the savings and loan crisis. McCain did not associate with Keating 30 years after Keating's crimes; he was part of the crimes.

McCain is indifferent to the impropriety of having paid lobbyists on his campaign staff, including his campaign manager, who received money from a company hired by Fannie Mae until a few weeks ago. McCain has been silent on the decision by the Alaskan legislature that Sarah Palin abused her power. During the last debate, McCain repudiated the “fringe” calling Obama a terrorist. But he allows robo-calls to carry this same message. These charges against McCain are true and important. Voters, pay attention to what matters.

Want to be rich?

Jeanine — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:58:32 EDT

It is said Americans don't want to tax the rich because they hope to be rich themselves someday. But the financial plans of Barack Obama are not raging socialism. He does propose a return to the more balanced policies of the past, specifically of the Clinton years, when economic growth was strong. Generally, analysis shows the economy fares better under Democratic presidents than under Republicans: investments in the S&P 500 do better and incomes show greater improvement. The 'trickle-down' theory has been refuted by the historical record.

Of course, tax policy isn't the only issue here. The dismal performance of the Bush administration has many causes: deregulation and loose oversight; an energy policy in service of the oil companies, with no attention to the implications for the environment and the potential of green jobs; lack of respect for science; and an education policy that focuses on testing. Unfortunately, John McCain has embraced the policies of George Bush. He may be promising to change some of his positions, but why take the chance? Rich people, and people who want to do well and have your children do well: the Obama/Biden ticket is the one for you.

John McCain is Fundamentally Wrong on the Economy

Carolyn Carrier — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:46:31 EDT

John McCain is out of touch with regular Americans when it comes to the economy. Early on in this campaign he admitted that he did not know much about the economy. Considering that we are in the worst economic crisis of our time we cannot afford to allow him to try to muddle through this mess.

Remember the old "voodoo economics" of John McCain's favorite president, Ronald Reagan. It didn't work for families back then and it certainly won't work now decades later.

Barack Obama has a 21st century solution that will help to rebuild the middle class. He will pass a middle class tax cut that gives 95% of working Americans up to $1,000 more in their pockets. He will crack down on predatory lenders and punish corporations who send American jobs overseas. More importantly he will redirect our dependence on foreign oil by developing alternative sources of energy that will protect our environment and create thousands of jobs that cannot be sent overseas.

Joe Biden has said that this country needs more than a hero, we need a leader. What we need is the right kind of leader. Barack Obama has the vision and wisdom to lead as well as the brilliance to come up with real solutions, not gimmicks, which will result in a brighter future for us, our children and our grandchildren

Sounds like George Bush

Jeanine — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:44:35 EDT

John McCain says that Barack Obama is running against George Bush, and that he is not George Bush. It is up to McCain to prove he will be different, not just say it. After all, McCain is a Republican and has supported Bush practically all the time. Moreover, his trend has been toward Bush, not away.

Once, McCain was against the Bush tax program, saying it was immoral to have most of the benefits go to the very rich and it was wrong to cut taxes during war time. Now he embraces these policies and wants to extend them, even though they are slated to expire. On the stump, McCain talks about alternative energy sources, but he has voted against most of the legislation that would promote them. He did not speak out when the Bush administration muzzled scientists who tried to publicize findings on climate change and did not argue for environmental standards. He chose Sarah Palin for his running mate, and she is against stem cell research, does not believe in the causes of climate change, and thinks intelligent design should be taught in the schools.

One feature of the Bush administration is cronyism. McCain was reprimanded by the Senate for poor judgment in his dealings with his friend Keating in the savings and loan scandal. He does not object to having paid lobbyists on his staff. He appears indifferent to the fact that the Alaskan legislature ruled Palin abused her power for personal interests.

Altogether, this sounds a lot like the Bush administration. Maybe worse.

The Republican Toolkit

The Kozmic Kid — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:18:00 EDT

If you look inside the Republicans' economic tool kit, you'll find just one tool. It's not a Swiss Army Knife, with attachments for every job. No, what you'll find in there is a hatchet labeled "tax cuts."

Whether you believe your taxes are too high or not, you have to admit that having more than one approach to an issue is valuable. But that's not the way Republicans operate.

Times are bad? Cut taxes! The country is prosperous? Taxes are too high! Going to war? Keep taxes low! Peace reigns supreme? Time for another tax cut!

I don't object to lower taxes, but I do object to limiting our options, especially in complex, turbulent times. These are not times to start hacking away with the only tool in the kit. We need a thoughtful leader who can pursue a course based on the best thinking available. Barack Obama fits this description. John McCain does not.

However, I do have to grant the Bush administration one thing. They were determined to get rid of capital gains taxes. And they did -- by getting rid of all our capital gains.

John McCain and his campaign

Jeanine — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 07:57:13 EDT

Having the VP candidate make the negative attacks is considered standard practice. (Remember Spiro Agnew?) Then John McCain makes conciliatory remarks, and Barack Obama is gracious at accepting them. However, the attacks don't stop and the McCain ads are almost all negative.

McCain claims the media is against him. But most of the media appears to consider him to be as distinct from his campaign, and many writers say the real McCain is a better man than his campaign presents. Isn't McCain in charge of his campaign?

The McCain campaign has had troubles. It ran out of money during the primaries because of mismanaged spending and lack of contributions. Advisors come and go. The message changes regularly—either to make sound-bites or to react to events. For example, McCain now is for regulating greedy Wall Street. Often, McCain and his website do not put forth the same policies. The terms “lurching” and “erratic” are appropriate.

The Obama campaign is a well-organized movement, powered by over 3 million donors and run by advisors, staff and volunteers, using old-fashioned community organizing and up-to-date technology. Barack Obama is responsible for his campaign. The staff practices “no drama Obama.” Statements are issued in response to events, and are consistent with the positions taken for the whole campaign. There is no need to make any apologies for Joe Biden, who speaks independently to voters or the press.

If John McCain can't run his campaign, how is he going to run the country?

Why I'm Voting for Barack Obama

Maggie — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:20:20 EDT

Asked by someone who is what I used to be (a Republican) why I’m voting for Barack Obama, my instinct was to shoot back, “I recommend researching both presidential candidates as thoroughly as I did.” But how would that come across? What if he really wants to know and isn’t baiting me into an unwinnable argument? What if I could actually change his mind? I answered him honestly and simply, like this:

· I looked at the way the candidates have run their campaigns and, in addition to Obama’s great choice of staff, one small thing stood out: When paid Obama campaign workers take a taxi, they pay for it themselves, but when they take a bus, they are reimbursed. That’s the kind of common sense savings of interest to me. I think he would run the country the same prudent way.

· I liked that Obama’s contributions come largely from little people like me and not from the Democratic Party. McCain’s money comes largely from the Republican Party, not that there’s anything wrong with that. I just like the grassroots thing a whole lot.

· Obama inspires and unites.

· Iraq. Bring our people home and treat them like the stars they are.

· I liked the reception Obama received in other countries and think his election will give us a chance to reverse their bad feelings toward America. Obama said he was an American and a citizen of the world, a most positive attitude.

· It’s Washington Obama wants to change, not those old brown shoes he has worn for years. My shoes are old and worn, too.

· Obama is calm, reflective, and confident. His personality is presidential. He is the only candidate prepared for the 21st century.

He's got my confidence, my wholehearted support, and my vote.

A Steady Hand

Rami Saffarini — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:43:52 EDT

On October 16, 1962, President John F. Kennedy was having his breakfast when he was informed that a US reconnaissance plane had discovered a Soviet nuclear missiles site in Cuba. JFK spent the next five days in secret meetings with cabinet members and other civilian and military advisers, deliberating the appropriate response. Some members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff advocated military action. Others made the case for a sea blockade against Cuba. They had to consider all the possible Soviet responses. They also had to bring on board European allies and the American public. With US missiles staged in Turkey and the USSR threatening to invade Berlin, a lot was at stake. Careful but decisive action was imperative.

JFK was 45 years young, with less than two years in the White House. Yet, he was the only one with the power and awesome responsibility to make the momentous calls. He did. And history is a testimony to his wise judgment. Less than two weeks after the discovery of the missiles, the Soviet Union agreed to their dismantlement and the world was spared a disaster of unimaginable proportions.

What does this have to do with this year's presidential election? When we vote on Nov 4, we must choose the person who has the essential leadership qualities, like those of JFK—someone who is thoughtful, deliberate, calm, steady, and certainly not a maverick.

Why should I vote

Jeanine — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:06:37 EDT

“My one vote doesn't matter.” Well, what if everyone said that? The fact is that past elections have been close, so every vote is important.

“It isn't the popular vote; it’s the electoral college that decides.” The electoral vote is based on the popular vote. Every vote counts.

“I live in a Republican state.” Things have a way of changing. More people may be on your side than you think. Volunteer. Participate in a phone bank, make calls from home. Knock on doors. Check out the other Democrats on the ballot. Some may have a chance. Use all your tools—chat, text, networking, personal visits—to be sure everyone on your side actually votes.

“Obama is way ahead in my state.” As I said, things have a way of changing! Don't take anything for granted. Help out in the battleground states. Re-establish connections with family, friends, and acquaintances in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Indiana, and so on. You can go to a phone bank or call when your cell minutes are cheap or free. Check out the other candidates on the ballot in your state. Some may need help. Use everything you have to be sure everyone on your side actually votes. It would be best to rack up a huge majority.

It may sound corny, but this is a “historic election.” Don't let it be more of the same. Help Barack Obama change this country.

John McCain didn't know, didn't care, or gambled

Jeanine — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:05:37 EDT

The investigation initiated by the Republican majority Alaska State legislature has found Sarah Palin abused her power as governor in pushing for the firing of a state trooper. They found the public safety commissioner’s refusal to fire the trooper was a contributing factor to Palin's dismissal of the commissioner, and that Palin's husband acted inappropriately by using the governor's office to contact troopers. When he picked Palin, John McCain didn't know, didn't care, or was willing to gamble with the fate of the country.

This investigation already was underway when McCain selected Palin as his running mate. The only way he could not have known about it is if he ordered no screening. He put politics before country in the hope that Palin would help his campaign.

As governor, Palin did have the authority to fire the commissioner without giving a reason. Nevertheless, she broke the code of ethics, as the investigation found. The McCain/Palin campaign is claiming she didn't do this for financial gain. As with the debates, Palin may have cleared a very low bar.

Perhaps McCain does not care about ethical or professional standards. He may have figured they could get away with it. After all, he himself was reprimanded by the Senate in the savings and loan scandal, a crisis involving regulation and oversight, much like the disaster of today. The impropriety of having working lobbyists within his campaign has not generated much attention.

Right now, the real gamble for this country is how McCain would act as President, and how Palin would act if elected to VP. Are you willing to take that roll of the dice?

It's Time to Help the Middle Class

Sine in KS — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:24:38 EDT

Both Barack Obama and John McCain propose tax plans that will lower taxes, much to the surprise of many voters who still believe that only Republicans are capable of that.

However, a comparison of both plans conducted by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center shows a vast difference: While the bulk of McCain’s tax cuts are designed to benefit the wealthiest 1% of tax payers, based on a continued belief in trickle-down economics, Obama proposes to lower taxes for 95% of Americans in an effort to shore up the middle class.

For eight years we were told that helping the rich would help everybody by growing the overall economy. Since that clearly hasn’t worked, why not try the other approach?

The End Never Justifies the Means

Sine in KS — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:15:39 EDT

Senator McCain, in light of your continued insistence that America should not be obsessed with the economy but rather with the idea that one presidential candidate is really a terrorist, one can only assume two motives:

Either you do NOT put country first, as you are so fond of saying, and will do anything it takes to become president. Or you truly DO believe it is in the best interest of our country to use any means necessary to keep Barack Obama from becoming president.

Well, Sen. McCain, let me tell you something: The end never, ever justifies the means. It did not when witches were burned at the stake, it did not during the crusades, it did not when torturing prisoners in Vietnam, and it did not when torturing prisoners in Guantanamo.

No one blames you for wanting to be president, but stop using despicable means to achieve your end. It is neither honorable nor patriotic.

John McCain Now Targets the Middle Class

lilmiss Independent — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 20:32:37 EDT

John McCain’s economic advisers recently met to discuss new economic measures aimed at the middle class.

What? McCain is finally considering the middle class?

Unfortunately, this is just another attempt to try to save a poorly managed campaign in the final days before an election. McCain’s advisers believe this will give him something fresh to talk about and diminish the impression that his campaign relies solely on negative attacks.

It is appalling that the McCain campaign, realizing their smear tactics aren’t working, would now target the middle class. Throughout his entire campaign, he has been unwilling to present real solutions for the struggling middle class. McCain continues to change tactics week to week and never has had a strategy to move beyond the failed trickle down economics of the Bush administration.

Barack Obama’s focus has been on the middle class from day one. He has been a consistent and strong advocate for strengthening the middle class in order to help repair a broken economy. Obama understands we need a strategy for the country, not week-to-week tactics for a campaign.

Yes We Must!

Maggie — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 16:18:55 EDT

By land, sea and air, our military fought for freedom in World War II, the “good war,” while civilians at home joined together in a massive nationwide effort to do our part. Little girls sacrificed the rubber tires from their doll carriages, boys collected the foil from discarded cigarette wrappings, women went to work in factories building airplanes, and senior citizens knitted socks, collected scrap metal, rolled bandages, and read to the wounded in military hospitals. Never before or since were we so united. It's like that again.

Despite the high cost of gasoline, entire families are driving to nearby states, knocking on doors of strangers, and asking that their votes be cast for Barack Obama; often they are invited in for a cup of coffee. People are talking, and people are listening. Caravans are wending their way to battleground states to drum up more votes for Obama. Despite the cost of long-distance, seniors are calling battleground states asking for votes for Obama. Despite not knowing their neighbors, people are gathering in other living rooms to watch debates, make calls to get out the vote, and to raise funds. It seems there are as many Republicans as Democrats giving their money, their time, and their passion to get Barack Obama elected.

Obama has already united us into a common cause for the good of our nation. We began by shouting “Yes we can!” Now it is time to shout, “Yes we must!”

It's About Us

akmk — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 16:14:36 EDT

The 2008 election, as Sen. Obama has stated repeatedly, is about us. It is about our believing in ourselves. It is about our being willing to become involved and to work for the issues that are important to each of us. It is about our own personal integrity and capacity for empathy for others.

The 2008 election is about working people standing up and speaking out for themselves. It is about believing that our own health and welfare is as important as corporate health and welfare. It is believing that trickle-up economics is stronger than trickle-down economics. It is about demanding affordable and accessible health care for all, as a right.

The 2008 election is about a smarter and more diverse energy policy that will help create new American jobs, boost the national economy, and reduce world tensions. It is about hope, not fear. It is about the better America we know we can be when we work together for the common good. If America is to have the change we want, it is our votes that will lead the country in a new direction. We are the change we have been looking for. It is about us.

It's the Hypocrisy of the Right that Generates Distrust

Chuck — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 11:15:43 EDT

John McCain does not wear a flag pin, but there are no outcries as there were about Obama, who wears one now. It doesn't matter to me -- flag pin wearing is a silly issue. But this shows the hypocrisy of the right wing. Flag pins mattered when it was Obama, not when it's McCain. Having a rich heiress wife who hasn't released tax returns mattered when it was Kerry, not when it is McCain. Questionable military history is okay to attack when it's Kerry, not when it's McCain. Bill Clinton's marital indiscretions mattered, but McCain's affair does not. Being a strong Christian mattered for Bush over Kerry, but Obama's stronger Christianity than McCain's doesn't matter now. Experience matters when it's Obama, but not when it's Palin. See the pattern? This is why America does not trust the Republican Party anymore.

Republican Doctrine

The Kozmic Kid — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:05:36 EDT

Lately, John McCain has been making a lot of what could charitably be called "misleading statements." But one is misleading in a particularly significant way: "We [Republicans] came to change Washington, and Washington changed us."

In fact, Republicans haven’t changed. What we’re experiencing today is the full flower of Republican doctrine, carried to its logical conclusion.

When it comes to government and the economy, the GOP makes decisions based on unquestioned principles. Whether these decisions make sense in light of current circumstances or contradictory evidence is unimportant. These are articles of faith.

In this religion, The Market is God. It has mysterious powers to mend all ills, create great wealth and distribute it fairly, preserve freedom, and lift the downtrodden to their greatest potential. And if it appears The Market isn't doing its job, well, you don't question that. You might as well ask why God lets bad things happen to good people.

That's why Bush's response to any economic problem has been to do whatever he was doing before, only less. When the economy starts drifting off the road, he takes his hands off the wheel and steps on the gas. The Market will provide.

For all his talk about his maverick ways, McCain is a true believer. He may have deviated from the pure catechism from time to time, but basically he's one of the flock. He will tell you government interference will kill The Market. And it will—a little bit. But as recent events illustrate, we have a choice: kill the economy a little bit every day, or kill it all at once. And we have a choice on November 4th, as well. We can suffer the further consequences of the Republican doctrine. Or we can vote for Barack Obama and change this disastrous course.

From an Obama Contributor

The Kozmic Kid — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:00:44 EDT

John McCain has been pointing fingers at Barack Obama's contributors and past supporters. I guess he figures he can get some traction with voters by claiming there’s something funny going on there.

Let me lift a corner of that shroud of mystery. I'm an Obama contributor. I'm probably not the kind of contributor John McCain is used to. I didn't go to an exclusive fundraising event and write a check for the maximum amount. I'm not a "bundler" who corrals donations from my rich friends. I don't sit on a corporate PAC. I'm not a CEO who pressures his or her employees to contribute.

I am like a million other Obama contributors who give twenty-five, fifty, or when I can, a hundred dollars. I'm not a foreign national. I'm not a terrorist. I'm not mysterious. I'm just a guy. And I want something better for my country.

Barack Obama: The choice really is clear

lilmiss Independent — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 18:45:49 EDT

The response by Senator Obama to the divisive rhetoric of the Republican campaign tells us a lot about the character of the man. Recently, he said, “The times are too serious. The challenges are too great. The American people aren’t looking for someone who can divide this country – they’re looking for someone who will lead it.”

In Philadelphia, Obama acknowledged that McCain had attempted to calm his angry and enraged supporters. Their over-the-top behavior was, in part because of the McCain campaign’s negative rhetoric, but also because they know they are losing an election. Obama elevated the discussion. In Ohio he said, “This isn't about losing a campaign – this is about Americans who are losing their jobs, and their homes, and their life savings.”

Obama understands this country is facing great economic uncertainty that is affecting everyone from Main Street to Wall Street. He knows this is the time for solutions and unity, not division and fear tactics. We need to elect a President who will bring the country together.

Barack Obama has shown himself to be a leader who unites in common effort. McCain has only shown himself to be a divider. The choice really is clear.

When you have nothing to say

Jeanine — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:52:03 EDT

The McCain campaign claims Barack Obama is a pal of Bill Ayers, and therefore is himself a bomb-throwing radical. Sarah Palin points out she read this in the New York Times. Perhaps she is doing that to refute the perception she doesn't read newspapers. However, she did not read the article carefully because it demonstrates that Akers and Obama only “crossed paths” while working to bring money to Chicago schools and as neighbors in Hyde Park.

The truth is, Barack Obama does not look to Bill Ayers for advice. It is hard to imagine why would Obama consult Ayers when his advisors and supporters include Nobel Prize winners (62 scientists in a recent public letter), investors and business people (such as Warren Buffett), former SEC chairs, professional economists, admirals, generals, and an overwhelming majority of the soldiers in Iraq who have made political donations. About 4 million Americans have contributed financially to his presidential campaign. So why do McCain/Palin want to associate Obama and Ayers? Because they have nothing of more substance to say to the American people.

Attention: hunters and others

Jeanine — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:17:33 EDT

In past elections, Republican candidates have been more supportive of hunters than have Democratic candidates, or at least it appeared that way. Now those of us who enjoy hunting as a sport need to reconsider our voting habits and make a change. Barack Obama is a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. He knows constitutional law.

On the other side, we have someone who believes it is a sport to shoot animals from airplanes and helicopters. Sarah Palin also believes the mineral resources of Alaska should be exploited to the fullest extent, with no regard for the near-term and long-term effects on the environment. John McCain named her to the ticket for the momentary lift it gave his candidacy, not for the good of the country.

McCain/Palin is not the choice of hunters and people who love the outdoors. Obama/Biden is the team for us.

McCain's Last Trump: The Fear Card

Sine in KS — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 12:17:29 EDT

The new McCain/Palin campaign slogan of “Who is the real Barack Obama?” is absolutely despicable. Poll numbers for Obama are rising steadily, no doubt a reflection of American’s growing confidence he will deal best with the economic crisis. John McCain’s campaign planners are trying one last trump to reverse this trend. They are playing the fear card. It has worked well for Republicans in the past.

After nearly two years of campaigning and public vetting, they are pretending there is much about Senator Obama we don’t know. And what do they think that is? The worst dirt they could trump up was that Obama once served on the same board as William Ayers, who was a Weather Underground bomber four decades ago. If they could find more dirt, I’m sure we’d hear about it. But because there isn’t anything, McCain and Palin think stoking the fires at their rallies and getting angry mobs shouting “terrorist” will scare enough voters away from Obama.

We may not know everything about John McCain either, but there is one thing about his character that is becoming increasingly clear: He will stoop to unbelievably low levels just to become president.

Healthcare: Obama vs. McCain

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:36:53 EDT

If John McCain becomes President, 20 million Americans will have to pay taxes on the health insurance coverage they receive. I cringe at the further financial hardship this will create.

McCain has offered $5,000 for each family’s health care. However, what he does not tell us is that experts have estimated the true cost at $12,000 for families who want to take care of their health care needs themselves, as proposed by McCain. Essentially, he is trying to deregulate our health care system, as he did our economy. We already know the result of that—DISASTER!

These are the numbers under normal circumstances. Enter a serious illness, and these numbers will skyrocket under a McCain health care plan.

McCain recently announced his intention to cut $1.3 trillion from Medicare. That is not good news for our seniors.

Currently, millions of Americans do not have health insurance. Barack Obama will make health care available to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses. His health plan will save each family $2,500. Obama also will create a Small Business Tax Credit, amounting to 50% of premiums paid on behalf of employees.

The Obama plan will create a National Health Insurance Exchange for those who want to buy a private insurance plan. Insurers will be required to charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend on preexisting conditions.

Once again, McCain seems to be out of touch with the needs of the middle class. He cannot fix our broken health care system. Obama has a plan to fix it and to make it work for the majority.

Take John McCain's Promises with a Grain of Salt

Sine in KS — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:27:22 EDT

Long after the pundits were finished discussing who was more forceful and who scored the most points in the 2nd presidential debate, two statements by John McCain continued to ring in my mind: “I know how to find bin Laden” and “I know how to fix the economy.”

It has now been seven years since 9/11 and to my knowledge we have not yet found Osama bin Laden. Since it is unfathomable that John McCain would be so unpatriotic as to withhold such crucial information from our current leaders, I can only assume that he has no clue.

So when he makes the same bold promises about fixing our economy, I will take that with a substantial grain of salt.

Sarah Cries 'Wolf' v2

Peach McD — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 19:43:41 EDT

Making jokes about bombs in airports gets you arrested for good reason: joking about an actual threat can get people killed. Sarah Palin and the GOP use abysmal judgment when they make use of Ayers's history with the Weather Underground for political purposes.

If Ayers were still an outlaw, underground, or bombing things, it would be very appropriate to disclose a connection with a presidential candidate. But the guy's an English professor at an excellent university, for pity's sake. While Ayers was bombing things, Barack Obama was in grade school. Obama doesn't know the man well and has condemned his actions. Everyone knows this already. Including Palin.

So if Palin and the GOP raise the specter of terrorist connections when you and she and we all know it's a specious pile o' poo, what happens if they get into office and there’s a true impending threat? Who will believe them? The same 10% who still believe Bush?It's crucial that a leader in this time of uncertainty, anxiety, and insecurity think twice before stampeding the cattle. But now the terrorist threat is something the McCain campaign wants to play politics with. Bad idea. Very bad.

Obama Exemplifies Family Values

akmk — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:33:43 EDT

Senator Obama exemplifies family values. He honors his parents and his grandparents. He honors the stories of his extended family in Kenya. He has been married to one beautiful wife for sixteen years and he has two beautiful daughters. He honors his wife, works at his marriage, and supports his children. He respects women and works to uphold their rights. He's worked in communities to better the lives of children, teenagers, and families. He has his own Christian faith, but does not impose that faith on others. He values his own family and honors the families of others. His economic proposals are designed to help and lift up working families. He is working for a better health care system with an emphasis on prevention that is affordable and accessible to all--for families. He understands that families need clean air, clean water, healthy food, and adequate shelter. He leads his family and his country by example, with honesty and compassion.

No "Drill Baby Drill" Gimmick for Energy Policy

ZAZ — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:29:01 EDT

In 1977 President Carter warned we “must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us.” At the time, he laid out a path to do just that. Unfortunately, in the intervening years, Republican administrations killed any chance to take bold steps toward energy independence.

Yet, as if the nation has amnesia, Senator McCain and the Republicans are now promoting a “drill baby drill” energy policy, with Governor Palin in tow as an oil expert to sell the gimmick. And a gimmick it is. Even if we drilled all we wanted, irrespective of the environmental costs, we would potentially reap only 3% of our energy needs. Despite her winks, Palin is selling a defunct gimmick. McCain does give lip service to alternative energy, but his record speaks volumes in terms of his lack of commitment to comprehensive energy legislation.

Senator Obama provides a clear alternative to “drill baby drill. He has stated that “the US cannot drill its way to energy security.” The Obama/Biden plan will create 5 million new jobs to help develop renewable and clean energy, expand our system of mass transit, provide incentives for use of energy-efficient technologies at home, promote updating of technologies used in old coal power plants that pollute the air, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050, among other things. No, drill, baby drill will never make a dent in our dependence on foreign oil. Following Obama’s leadership, we will.

Dangerous Words

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:58:17 EDT

In her campaign rallies, Sarah Palin has been accusing Barack Obama of being a terrorist. She likes to incite people by saying Obama is different from “us”, and people do react to her incendiary attacks. The crowd at one rally yelled out, “Terrorist!!” and “Kill him!!”

If you aren’t shocked and concerned by the “kill him” response, let me remind you of what hatred can do. We as a nation have a history of assassinating our most brilliant leaders (Lincoln, JFK, RFK, MLK).

Palin's actions are reprehensible and should not be ignored as “just politics.” It is very dangerous for a campaign to slander the opponent to the extent ignorant people are incited to commit violent acts. If something bad happens to Obama, McCain and Palin must be held accountable. This tactic is not just an election smear; it breeds hatred, bigotry, prejudice. After 9/11, even people who were not Muslim (I am not justifying violence against Muslims either) were attacked just because they looked different. We must not forget that.

Both Democrats and Republicans must denounce the dangerous words of Palin and McCain for what they are: words that lead to violence. These tactics hold no benefit to the country or to their campaign. If McCain and Palin have any integrity, they will stop these attacks. If we do not learn from history, we might be doomed to repeat it.

A Risky Choice for President

Sine in KS — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:10:31 EDT

The McCain campaign claims they are now “turning a page on this financial crisis” by focusing on Senator Obama as “too risky for Americans.”

Too risky? Never mind that most Americans don’t have the luxury to turn the page on their own economic woes, and that passage of the bailout package hasn’t solved their immediate problems—if we are going to discuss risky choices, let’s take a closer look at Senator McCain’s past.

In the 1980s, after he was lobbied heavily by Charles Keating, the chairman of Lincoln Savings and Loan who later went to jail, McCain was instrumental in calling off federal regulators pushing for an investigation of Lincoln. This was the first time he sided with deregulation. The ensuing Savings and Loan collapse cost U.S. taxpayers $124 billion. At the time, McCain got away with a warning from the Senate Ethics Committee, but others involved in the scandal were not so lucky.

Not only does McCain’s involvement with Charles Keating show a serious lack of judgment and integrity, he also seems to have learned nothing from it. He has continued to vote for more deregulation over the years, leading us once again to a collapse in the financial sector. The only difference: in 2008 it is costing taxpayers $700 billion.

Why should we wait around to find out if McCain has learned the lesson this time? What will it cost us if he hasn’t? A risky choice indeed!

Are You Voting Against Your Pocketbook?

Sine in KS — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:15:22 EDT

Looking at the state of our economy, most people now realize that the philosophy of deregulation, so favored by the Republicans, did not deliver the promised results. On the contrary, we are facing the biggest financial crisis in 70 years and will all pay the price for the current administration’s limited foresight and failed policies for years to come.

However, many of us are still eager to believe another promise peddled by the Republicans: “We will lower your taxes, while the tax-and-spend liberal Democrats will take all your money away.” When John McCain and Sarah Palin announce Barack Obama voted 94 times to raise our taxes, we readily accept such a claim. We think, “That’s what liberal Democrats do.” It comes as a surprise, then, if we apply the same bogus counting method to McCain’s record and discover he voted to raise our taxes 477 times.

In truth, both candidates promise lower taxes. Here is the main difference: McCain offers the biggest break to the top 1% of wealthiest Americans, in hopes that will trickle down to the rest of us in a strong economy created by such tax cuts. On the other hand, Obama will cut taxes for 95% of Americans in order to strengthen the middle class. You judge whether you want to believe Republican promises of a strong resurgent economy, or whether you’d rather see those Obama tax cuts in your own paycheck.

McCain's Pro-Veteran Rhetoric!

Obama Donna — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:00:42 EDT

What is the reason for Barack Obama’s 80% overall rating from the Disabled Veterans of America, compared with John McCain’s 20%? And what is the reason for Obama receiving nearly six times more in contribution money from troops deployed overseas than has John McCain? And what is the reason McCain received a “D” grade from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America?

The reason is that troops and veterans agree a McCain presidency would be wrong for this country. And they base it on his voting record.

McCain voted 27 times against veterans' health care needs! First of all, he 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 voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion.

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.” McCain has misrepresented his own voting record with pro-veteran rhetoric!

Senator Obama believes America has a sacred obligation to our veterans. He is committed to creating a 21st century Department of Veterans Affairs that provides the care and benefits our nation’s veterans deserve, and he has a record of supporting initiatives to improve veterans’ care and benefits.

John McCain: Playing Games with voters

lilmiss Independent — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:14:04 EDT

Today, millions of people are struggling in an America that has big issues to address. Hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs this year alone. Many are losing their homes to foreclosure. Millions more have no healthcare. Families are being priced out of an education. And many have to choose between filling up the gas tank, buying groceries, or prescription medications.

Today, we also are nearing the end of a presidential election. The candidates have a final chance to present real solutions to the American people. Barack Obama is continuing to offer solutions that include lowering taxes for the middle class, investing in education, creating jobs through green technology, and fixing the health care system once and for all.

You’d think John McCain would be doing the same. But McCain apparently has decided we voters don’t deserve solutions, only distractions. Desperate to change the subject from the economy, he is playing games by making personal attacks against Obama. He has decided to gamble the future of this country instead of offering solutions. That’s not putting country first; that’s not being a maverick. That is old politics.

Enough of the game playing, John, this is too serious a time for games.

McCain does not deserve your vote

Jeanine — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:22:10 EDT

A man in Ohio said to me on the phone that, as a veteran, John McCain deserves his vote. I replied back, somewhat heatedly, that McCain does not support veterans. His voting record is horrible, and veterans groups give him much lower marks than they give Barack Obama.

McCain voted against giving the soldiers fighting in Iraq safety equipment. His remarks on the Iraq war do not suggest that he has bothered to study the situation, and he lied about personally wearing body armor and being protected by support troops and helicopters when he toured a Baghdad market.

Yes, McCain was a POW. My son says we should give McCain a gold watch for his service and then move on to the issues of the day.

People like us

Jeanine — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:20:24 EDT

A woman I talked to on the phone while I was canvassing asked me, "Where did Obama get all his money? How can he understand people like us?"

I answered that the Obamas are doing well, although they are not anywhere near as rich as the McCains. Barack Obama grew up without much and his mother sometimes used food stamps. He was a smart little boy, got into a good school in Hawaii, and eventually made it with scholarships and loans to Harvard. Along the way, he worked for church groups to help people in poor communities in Chicago. He wrote a best-selling book about his life, and that money enabled him and Michelle to pay off their student loans. His life story and his proposed programs and policies suggest that he understands the needs and the aspirations of all Americans. He has committed to making life better for working people.

Your vote is your own choice, of course. But don’t waste it on bad information.

The Bottom 95%

Jeanine — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:16:52 EDT

An elderly woman said to me she expected to vote Republican because her interests were not with the “bottom,” not with poor people. She assumed John McCain's tax plan would favor her and Barack Obama's tax plan would not.

I told her that, in this election, the so-called bottom was roughly all but the top 5% percent. She was surprised to hear that. She might not be poor, but she definitely is not in the top 5%.

I confirmed that, if she wanted to vote her interests with respect to taxes, her vote this year and that of the overwhelming majority of Americans, including poor people, should be for the Democrats. Of course, there are other considerations besides taxes—such as the health of the economy, creation of jobs, and development of renewable sources of energy—that are causing many people, even among the very wealthy, to support the Obama/Biden team.

Small Politics

lilmiss Independent — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 21:56:39 EDT

If the election were held today, Barack Obama would win. Who pointed this out? The grand master of dirty politics, Karl Rove himself. With this admission of a failing political strategy, you’d think the Republicans would be eager to draw a constructive contrast between a McCain and an Obama administration.

Instead, Sarah Palin accelerated her sly personal attacks against Obama. She is right in step with the character assassination strategy McCain started and shows every indication of pursuing. The Republicans offer no clear answers about how John McCain will address all the problems created by the Bush administration over the last eight years. None, period. Just small politics.

Really, their strategy defies logic. McCain wants to bring up the (tenuous-at-best) relationship between Obama and Ayers, when the Keating 5 are lurking in his own closet. Palin wants to bring up Rev. Wright when she has Pastor Muthee in her own closet. She questions Obama’s patriotism when she has ties with AIP, the group that wants to secede from the US.

McCain/Palin expect us to stomach this hypocrisy. Come November 5th, they are in for a rude awakening: Americans are hungry for the honesty, integrity and substantive solutions offered by Obama/Biden.

Twenty Years Out of Twenty Eight Years is Enough

ZAZ — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 17:32:53 EDT

The ability of the Republicans to change the political narrative to minutia instead of issues of substance is what led to the two terms of Bush presidency. Now, instead of remorse, they want to hoodwink the country again. This time around, they have outdone themselves by throwing into the ring of minutia a former beauty queen who is supposed to sell the “defective policies” of the Republican Party.

John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin, especially at a time when the country faces its greatest challenges, reveals his impulsivity. Rather than a maverick, he is a volatile even reckless man whose policies amount to tax cuts for corporations and deregulation of all sectors. He still worships the defunct philosophy of trickle-down economics, even in a globally intertwined world economy. Most importantly, he is a war monger and his divisive world view coupled with his impulsive behavior can lead our nation into more perils.

This time around, we must focus on the issues and not allow any politicized “marketing of the president” derail our nation. The president of the United States is not a Spearmint gum.

This time around, the right choice is Barack Obama and the policies of the Democratic Party. This time, let’s vote for the smart ticket. Let’s choose thoughtful analysis of the facts at hand over bluster in foreign policy. Let’s choose an even temper over impulsiveness and volatility. This time around let’s vote for genuine change. Obama provides the vision, leadership, temperament, and policies that will raise our nation out of the ditch into which the Republican Party has thrown us.

We Need a Higher Standard

Jeanine — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:23:53 EDT

Sarah Palin did a better job in the VP debate than many expected. She had done so poorly in her only interviews—not knowing about the Bush doctrine and Supreme Court decisions, often speaking gibberish, and being unable to name any newspaper she reads—that people expected her to fall apart on the stage with Joe Biden.

She didn't fall apart. No, she managed to be charming as she avoided answering many questions. Why is our standard so low? George Bush also exceeded expectations in debates and was deemed more charming than his opponents. Yet, under his watch this country suffered on all fronts: the economy, middle-class incomes, security, standing in the world, and the environment. His charm did not translate into care for most Americans.

Sarah Palin claimed for herself and John McCain the qualities of being a maverick, bi-partisan, and anti-Washington. It is not clear how anyone can be bi-partisan and against Washington at the same time. The maverick claim also is questionable. Palin says she and McCain will bring about big changes, yet McCain voted consistently with the Bush administration on most critical issues: fighting the Iraq war without a definition for victory; continuing tax policies that favor the very rich; and maintaining an energy policy that fails in terms of security, the environment, and creating new jobs.

We need more than charm in a president. Barack Obama and Joe Biden demonstrate the wisdom, knowledge, experience, and character to lead our country. Look at their work. Study their positions. They are the better team.

Obama will keep our jobs here

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 02:20:53 EDT

For many middle class Americans, wages have been either stagnant or down, while costs have gone up significantly. When Barack Obama spoke about the plight of the middle class, it hit home for me.

Senator Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support American jobs. Obama will invest in education and alternative energy, which will create new jobs for Americans from all age groups. Obama will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards.

Obama believes that companies should not get billions of dollars in tax deductions for moving overseas. Obama will fight to ensure that companies that are committed to American workers will be rewarded. As President, he will make improving our economy one of his top priorities.

What did the VP debate tell us?

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:46:44 EDT

I said all along that Sarah Palin would do well in the VP debate. This is the kind of forum in which she is comfortable. As a former beauty queen contestant, she is used to answering questions quickly, while looking very confident. The content of her answers did not matter in those competitions. Somehow, some people thought it would not matter here, either. They were wrong! The polls immediately following the debate proved that. I expected Palin to recite memorized answers, regardless of the question. At one point, Joe Biden made a statement about the clear difference between the two tickets, asserting “we will end this war in Iraq.” He looked confident and knowledgeable. Palin seemed to search for the answer she had prepared by glancing at her notes: "Your plan is a white flag of surrender..." She made her statement, but she looked clearly uncomfortable making it. There never was any doubt about Biden's expertise when it comes to foreign relations and debates. He made it clear that Obama will bring our troops home from Iraq within a set timeline, and make the middle class his priority.

Palin looked charming and attractive on TV. She did exactly as I expected her to do—as if she were answering questions in a beauty pageant. Her answers sounded a lot like Cheney's. I did not see an ability to think through an issue, and on issues and policy she was not in the same league as Biden. Palin did not embarrass herself, but she certainly did not convince me she is ready to take on the reins as VP. Joe Biden did.

Is the surge working?

Jeanine — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:07:14 EDT

The surge in Iraq was proposed as a military operation intended to produce the conditions necessary to achieve political benchmarks. These include political reconciliation, even-handed enforcement of laws, and plans for sharing of oil revenues. The level of violence is down in Iraq, but the discussion of the political benchmarks has been nonexistent.

When Sarah Palin or John McCain or George Bush talk about the surge “working,” they need to be reminded of its original purpose. To talk about winning in Iraq, we must know what winning means. Barack Obama and Joe Biden have made this clear: winning involves holding the Iraqi government accountable.

What Sarah Palin wants you to believe, by golly!

Jeanine — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:26:33 EDT

In the vice presidential debate, Sarah Palin claimed the McCain/Palin ticket will fight for the middle class, create jobs, stop greed on Wall Street, and achieve energy independence. But will it really? In fact, McCain's tax plan favors the very, very rich, just as did the Bush program, which produced few jobs and allowed the incomes of 90% of Americans to stagnate, or worse.

McCain's anger at Wall Street is about a week old. Before now, he was for deregulation. He wants to use the deregulation of the financial industry as a model for health insurance. Consider also that his campaign manager received money from a lobbying firm for Fannie Mae until that was revealed last month. Lobbyists still occupy many other positions on McCain’s staff.

Sarah Palin insisted her ticket is the party of change. Whenever Joe Biden pointed out connections between McCain and the current Republican administration, she did not and could not refute the connections. Instead, she accused him of looking backward. If you want to know what a McCain/Palin administration would do, consider what the Bush administration has meant for the country. McCain will be more of the same.

Big-Spending Liberal?

Jeanine — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:43:20 EDT

The Republicans like to slam Barack Obama for being a big-spending liberal. But is that really true? In fact, the amount of money that his financial plan would put toward getting more people health insurance is small compared with what has already been spent and what will be spent to stabilize the financial system.

Unfortunately, at this time, we don't get to choose between taking care of sick children and bailing out foolish and greedy bankers. The first is a moral responsibility, and over time it may even prove to be economical. The second, the bailout, is necessary because of the consequences to everyone's credit and savings. What we can do now is vote for Barack Obama, who will guide the country to recover from the disasters caused by the Bush administration.

As Obama has said, he may be called liberal because he always voted against the policies of George Bush. But don’t forget, John McCain backed Bush every step of the way as he led us into the economic disaster we now face.

The Hatter is Mad !

Stevie — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:16:42 EDT

The deepening financial crisis is worrying for all Americans. It certainly has revealed a Republican Party divided and befuddled as its most basic principles come crashing down. The seminal Republican tenets—that wildly free markets will somehow regulate themselves; that as the rich get richer they will suddenly develop a conscience and want to share their wealth; that down-home, anti-intellectual politicians can use common sense to unravel the complexities of imploding US and world financial institutions—have all been proved to be an alarmingly dangerous trip down Alice’s rabbit hole.

To top it all, it is now clear George W. has zero clout left within his own party, and it is his arch enemy Democrats who are trying to help him out of his self-inflicted quagmire.As for John McCain, the most unlikely of Economic White Knights… he seems bent on moving his erratic behavior to amazing new heights.

First we had his most senior economic adviser, Phil Gramm, telling us that it (the imminent recession) was all in our heads, and that we were a nation of whiners…exit stage left, pursued by a bear!?

Then as Fannie and Freddy folded, he assured us our economy was strong, only to tell us the next day that in fact we were in crisis. His “inspired” solution was to fire Christopher Cox, as if this beleaguered chair of the SEC had somehow wrought the mess single handed.

Next we learn that the lobbying firm owned by McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, received $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac from late 2005 until last month.

Finally, it all became too much for him and he suspended his campaign, though he didn’t close any offices or pull any ads or surrogates off the air, and off he went to Washington to put “country first.”

When it looked as if a bailout plan had been hammered out, he claimed credit for “bringing everyone to the table.” In fact, at the very moment when the deal was made, the only people at his sumptuous table were the Liebermans, while Paulson and Pelosi ate pizza on paper plates.

This is not the time to apportion blame, so says McCain, yet he says this crisis is the fault of Obama and the Democrats, for not being nice enough to the Republicans in the House and daring to mention that it is the Republicans’ runaway deregulation that has brought us to this sorry pass.

Does anyone else feel as though they are in a hall of mirrors? Alice’s Rabbit Hole is beginning to look better and better. At least in Wonderland we are warned that the Hatter is Mad!

A President's First Decision

Rami Saffarini — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:49:34 EDT

The selection of a Vice Presidential running mate is arguably the first major decision made by each candidate for President. It is important not so much because of the role the Vice President plays during and after the election, but because it gives a preview of how the presidential candidate will govern.

There is no need to make the case that Barack Obama’s decision was far superior to his opponent’s because this is undeniable. Palin’s rationalization that she possesses foreign policy experience because Alaska is readily visible from the Russian President’s plane is just one example of her naiveté. The case I do want to make is that the contrast between Obama’s and McCain’s choices speaks volumes about how each candidate will conduct his presidential responsibilities.

There is no mystery behind McCain’s choice: he was seeking to salvage his faltering campaign. Unlike his slogan "Country First,” McCain’s intentions in selecting Palin were purely political and self-serving. But did he salvage his campaign? In other words, did McCain achieve his intended goal, noble or not? In the few days following the Republican Convention, as Palin was introduced to the general public, it appeared he did. Two weeks later, however, it became increasingly obvious she lacked the basic knowledge and substance to be Vice President. So much for McCain’s foresightedness. If this decision was the first major test of his ability to govern this nation, we must conclude he failed.

John McCain's neglect of our veterans

Sine in KS — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:12:00 EDT

Actions speak louder than words. John McCain, who has fashioned experience versus just words into a major theme of his campaign, should know this. So, when he promised at the end of the first presidential debate that he would “take care of our veterans,” he must have known that some voters might go looking for his record.

They didn’t even have to dig deep. Just this spring, Senator McCain opposed the biggest expansion of the GI bill in a quarter century, a bill that enjoyed widespread bipartisan support in both the House and Senate. McCain found it too generous to veterans returning from Iraq, a place he seems determined to keep them indefinitely, and was afraid it would entice them to leave the military early. He opposed the bill and did not even attend the vote. Fortunately, others did, including Senator Obama, and the GI Bill of 2008 has been signed into law.

Sen. McCain’s actions do not support taking care of veterans. It’s time for voters to peel back his “support our troops” label and look underneath. There is not much there.

“You were wrong, John!”

Sine in KS — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:19:11 EDT

The closer we get to November 4th, the more evident it is that John McCain’s much-touted experience has become a burden for him. His ideology and poor judgment have brought about too many disastrous developments for voters to have much confidence in his leadership.

Although he tried for much of the first presidential debate to portray Barack Obama as naïve and inexperienced, with his arrogant repetition “my opponent does not seem to understand,” the most memorable and compelling words were Senator Obama’s “You were wrong, John!” Obama’s performance showed the American people that he understands the issues very well, and McCain cannot escape the fact that he was wrong too many times. He was wrong to authorize the Iraq war. He was wrong to brush away the risks of the ensuing Iraq invasion. He was wrong to vote against renewable energy more than 20 times. He was wrong to side with the S&L industry against federal regulators in the 1980s, and he was wrong to champion deregulation since then.

We are now engaged in two wars, we are more dependent on foreign oil than ever, and we are facing the most catastrophic economic collapse in recent history. John McCain’s experience and his adherence to a philosophy of laissez-faire, of neglecting the middle class, and of picking fights with our enemies helped get us here. His is not the kind of experience we need in our foremost leader.

This letter was also published in the Chapel Hill News in North Carolina: http://www.chapelhillnews.com/opinion/story/19871.html

John McCain is [still] a bomber pilot; Barack Obama is a Leader

Jeanine — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:44:04 EDT

John McCain brags that he makes quick decisions. His solutions to problems are simple and direct: "drill, drill, drill,” fire the chair of the SEC, set up a $300 million dollar prize for a better car battery, cut taxes. When you are a naval aviator on a bombing campaign, with a defined target, speedy thinking and simple answers are to be prized.

The job of being president of the United States is something else. These are complex times: economic turmoil, global terrorism, climate change. The president must have the skills, talents, and personality of a true leader. McCain may have had tactical reasons to suspend his campaign during the budget crisis, but he seemed oblivious to the fact that the president must be prepared to multitask.

Barack Obama has demonstrated that he has the wisdom to consider all aspects of a problem, to look back and forward in time to know how and why a situation developed, to consider both immediate and long-term solutions, and to consult with others. For example, he appreciates the American people's concern about gas prices and the rising costs of home heating. His energy plan includes immediate help for the consumer as well as the long-range development of alternative sources of energy, higher standards for cars, and negotiating with newly developed nations on carbon emissions. His energy plans address security, jobs, the environment, and costs.

Barack Obama has spoken about the dangers of deregulation in the finance industry. He knew we were heading toward a financial crisis, and was aware people were in danger of losing their homes as well as savings. These economic problems will not be resolved before the next president is sworn in. Barack Obama—supported by leading economists and by a notable collection of investors, veterans of previous administrations, and ordinary people—is the leader we want.

Why Obama?

Maggie — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:25:00 EDT

If they have to walk, limp, or be pushed in a wheelchair to the polls in November, every man, woman, and eligible child must vote in this presidential election. We have a national emergency that goes even beyond the economic meltdown. We’re globally disliked. And that doesn’t fit us because we're used to being the good guys. We’re used to lending money, not borrowing. We’re used to fighting to help other countries, not invading them based on false premises.

The Republicans are giving new meaning to the phrase "dirty politics." Their strategy is so obvious, it's insulting. It goes something like this: Obama appears before hundreds of thousands of American-flag-waving expatriates and Europeans in Germany, more than 80,000 in Portland, and more than 75,000 in Denver. McCain makes fun of this, calling Obama a "rock star." So what's McCain then, a "mock star?"

When Obama speaks, his words are sensible, smart, and solid. McCain mocks that, but then begins repeating the same things. This tells me even he knows Obama is correct in what he is saying. Obama is a decent man and has run a clean campaign. He has taken the high road and avoided mentioning, for example, McCain's connection with the Keating Five. Obama knows he doesn’t have to stoop to that kind of politics. He has integrity, and he will bring that integrity back into the White House. He will bring it back to our international image.

With a McCain presidency, the United States will slide back to the 19th century. With Obama, we can raise our heads again and look the 21st century right in the eyes without blinking.

McCain is a gambler

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:45:40 EDT

John McCain was seen gambling at a Casino in Connecticut recently, at $100 a chip. It is his money, and I have no right to question how he spends his money. However, when he gambles with the future of our country, I have to question it.

His most recent gambit, trying to postpone the first debate with Obama failed. McCain announced that he was suspending his campaign to work in Washington on the recent economic crisis. Some called this the longest of the Hail Mary’s.

However, his choice of his running mate may have been the biggest gamble of this election. He chose an unknown, inexperienced candidate (Palin) whose qualifications have been questioned by many pundits. Considering McCain's advanced age and his recurring melanoma- a deadly form of cancer, there is a high probability that his VP may have to step in as the President before McCain's first term ends. Can a country afford to have someone as inexperienced Palin (less than two years as governor of a remote state, and no foreign policy or national experience) as President of a country that is facing its toughest challenges on many fronts? The real gamble is that McCain seems to not have vetted his VP candidate adequately.

Some described McCain's VP choice as 'a gutsy move', but how many Hail Mary's actually result in game winning touchdowns? When the stakes are high (the future of our country), we need a steady hand like Obama’s, who can think calmly, and not go for a big gamble, which seems to have become a habit with John McCain. What Pete Rose did or that NBA referee Tim Donaghy did in sports was illegal. They were punished for it, and their stakes were much lower than what McCain is playing with. He could be playing Russian Roulette with our country. We cannot afford to have a gambler in the white house.

LTE: McCain’s Anti-Terror Position is Weaker than Obama’s - 138 words

Chuck — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:26:32 EDT

In the first presidential debate, John McCain once again criticized Barack Obama for saying he’d send troops into Pakistan to “take out” bin Laden or other al-Qaeda leadership even if the Pakistani government did not approve. He called Obama "naive."

However, McCain previously said that, if elected, “I will follow bin Laden to the gates of Hell and I will get him. I promise you that." Apparently he’d follow him to the “gates of Hell,” but not into Pakistan.

Obama clearly has our safety in sight on this issue, and not political posturing. If McCain must first seek permission from whatever government is running Pakistan at the time in order to get bin Laden, then our security will be compromised by his presidency. I’m voting Obama as the candidate who would truly fight terrorism, not just give lip service to doing it.

Re-post: John McCain claims he will take care of veterans

Jeanine — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 13:52:26 EDT

In the first debate, and at other times, John McCain has presented himself as a strong supporter of veterans. This claim is false. McCain has voted multiple times against increasing funding for veterans’ health care. He spoke out against Jim Webb's new GI bill, arguing incorrectly that it was too generous and would reduce retention. Barack Obama was a co-sponsor of this bill, along with many other senators.

The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a “D.” The Disabled Veterans of America rated him at 20%, while Obama was rated 80%. The Vietnam Veterans of America said he "voted against us" on 15 key votes. McCain also has voted against funding for safety equipment for troops. He doesn't take care of the active military, either.

John McCain's POW experience neither qualifies him nor disqualifies him to be president. Lying about his support for veterans is another matter. It demonstrates that he is not an honorable man, and not a straight talker, and is someone who will hide the true costs of war from the American people.

Temperament and the First Presidential Debate

Rich from FLA — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:51:25 EDT

In the first presidential debate, the most dramatic difference between the two candidates was in their temperament and communication style. Barack Obama was steady and under control in his delivery, even in instances of strong disagreement. When common ground was uncovered, Obama complimented his opponent, despite being engaged in a high-stakes dialogue that would cause most individuals to act in a less cordial manner. In stark contrast, John McCain appeared irritated and quick to anger, often sneering when challenged. On several occasions when exasperated by the weakness of his position, McCain was dismissive and stated that “Senator Obama just doesn’t understand.”

“You don't understand,” was McCain’s refrain. But in each case, Obama was able to document very clearly that he did indeed understand.

The challenges and opportunities of this century will be great. Now more than ever, the success of the American people is linked to the success of the larger world. Going it alone might have sounded good at one point, but in this complex interconnected world, it is no longer an option. Perhaps the most damning evidence of McCain’s inability to build the necessary relationships to regain our global leadership position was his failure to look his senate colleague in the eye. From this debate, it is clear that one presidential candidate is suited to reestablish the standing of the United States. Only one candidate has the temperament to repair our leadership position in this world, and that man is Barack Obama.

The first debate

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:09:00 EDT

After watching the two candidates debate on economy and foreign policy, I became even more convinced that Obama is the right president for our country at this time.

John McCain sounded like George W. Bush on tax cuts, foreign policy, and the Iraq war. Barack Obama gave detailed responses about why we need to end the Iraq war and focus on Afghanistan instead, about how we can make our country safer, and about how his tax plan and health plan will help the middle class.

The contrast in the styles of the two candidates was glaring. Obama appeared relaxed, confident, and courteous toward McCain. By contrast, McCain appeared almost discourteous. He avoided looking at Obama. His frequent use of “Obama does not understand” sounded condescending. McCain appeared tense, although he tried to sound convincing. He made his case by telling stories from the past and using frequent references to Ronald Reagan. Obama looked to the future, and he made a strong case for why he represents real change. Obama represents the kind of judgment and leadership needed to take our country in the right direction. My conclusion is that Obama was the most presidential and clearly won this debate.

Why take a chance on McCain?

Jeanine — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:25:54 EDT

John McCain has been on alternate sides on so many important issues that it is easy to refute any interpretation of his positions.

At times, for example, McCain has supported stem cell research. But he also has been against it. Moreover, his selection of Sarah Palin, a staunch opponent of stem cell research who also questions the threat of climate change, cannot be ignored.

John McCain called Social Security “a disgrace,” referring to the basic mechanism of workers paying for benefits of retirees. He has called for personal retirement accounts, the approach championed by the Bush administration. It appears that McCain's words on this issue contradict the position that appears on his Web site.

McCain's speeches now mention alternative energy. However, he has not troubled to vote for important legislation on renewable energy. Instead of proposing funds for research, he is the one chanting, “drill, drill, drill.” The McCain plan includes a $300 million prize for an improved car battery, and his ads blame Barack Obama (who has put forth a comprehensive new energy plan) for high gas prices.

You can take a chance on McCain/Palin, believing that McCain was okay on an issue at some point and hoping he has the needed wisdom, skills, and executive ability (something not supported by his impulsive behavior) OR you can back Obama/Biden, the team with the consistent history, judgment, and composure to lead our country.

Why I will vote for Barack Obama on November 4th

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 03:15:10 EDT

Why I will vote for Obama on November 4th:

After eight years of a president who has repeatedly demonstrated that he can be neither respected nor trusted, it will be a refreshing change to have an intelligent and wise president in Barack Obama. However, I am not voting for Obama just because he will be a “nice change.” I am doing so because he will be the “right change.” He will restore respect for America abroad and at home. He has demonstrated that he has a cool head and dignity in the face of crisis. The latest financial crisis has highlighted the difference between the candidates—the cool-headed Obama versus the volatile McCain. I feel much more comfortable having someone with a cool head making decisions in crisis situations. Obama understands what the average American faces, and he displays empathy. Obama will not solve ALL of our problems; nobody can. However, he will show us the way so that we can do the walking, with our eyes open. With Obama as our leader, we can make this country truly great again. That is why I am going to vote for Obama on November 4th, and I hope you will join me.

Obama vs. McCain

Nashfan for Obama in Phoenix, who has had "ENOUGH!" — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 03:12:24 EDT

In his first term as a U.S. senator, John McCain faced the ignominy of being a member of the Keating 5 in the savings and loan scandal that was eerily similar to the current financial crisis. He escaped with a slap on his hand. In his first term as a U.S. senator, Barack Obama became the first black presidential nominee of a major political party, after defeating one of the most powerful political machines (the Clintons). At the Naval academy, McCain finished in the bottom 5 percent of his graduating class. At Harvard Law School, Barack Obama graduated magna cum laude, after serving as the first black president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. McCain versus Obama? Wouldn’t you agree, the contrast is clear just from these two examples?

SHORT VERSION: "Why True Conservatives need to Vote for the Liberal Democrat"

Sine in KS — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:45:39 EDT

This letter is a 350 word version of the longer article with the same title further down on my blog. It might be better suited for submission as letter to the editor.

“I am a conservative. I could never vote for the most liberal Democrat in Congress.” I’ve heard this said over and again. Let me show you why it is precisely the liberal Democrat you need to vote for if you truly espouse conservative principles.

Let’s take the idea of small government and free markets, a truly conservative value. Free markets consistently outperform centrally planned economies, and everybody ends up better off. The problem is that the “conservatives” running Washington for the last 8 years mistook “little intervention” for “no intervention” and successfully pushed for deregulation and less government oversight of our financial markets. Where has that gotten us? To a world in which the federal government now essentially owns four of our largest financial institutions.

The thing is, with prudent foresight and well-managed regulation, the current crisis could have been avoided. But what has the “conservative” candidate, who is now pledging to “clean up Wall Street,” done in the last 26 years? He has consistently sided with his party in pushing for deregulation.

If years ago we had listened to “liberal” calls for caution, we would now live in a world where the markets were regulated AND working. If you are in favor of free markets and little government intervention, you need to wake up to the fact that “liberal” and “conservative” are misleading labels created as smokescreens by the political parties. Nowadays “conservatives” are not pro-market. They are pro-business and have allowed special interests to lobby them for measures that imperil the very foundation of our free markets.

Why put a person in the White House just because he calls himself a “conservative”? If you’re voting for free markets, you need to vote for the man who has plans for their survival, no matter what label anyone tries to stick on him.

A Reminder to Register to Vote

CMartinez — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:14:45 EDT

The presidential election on November 4th is a very important election. Even if you feel some of the issues (e.g., economy, healthcare, defense) up for debate this year do not affect you, they most likely affect others whom you know. The last few weeks prior to the election will feature three nationally televised debates. During this time, voters will receive much needed information regarding both candidates. Many people are still undecided and will use the last month, even the last day prior to the election, to make their decision. Many undecided voters will not realize until the last minute that they have decided on a candidate. Unfortunately, however, some of these people will not have registered to vote ahead of time, and therefore will be unable to cast their ballot on election day. Don't let this be you! Keep in mind that each vote counts. Our forefathers did not write The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States of America for you to believe that your one vote doesn't count. If you have been led to believe that your elected officials haven't been listening to you, then it is time for you to vote for the person you think will listen to you on November 5, 2008.

Your vote does count, and your voice will be heard when you cast your ballot on November 4, 2008. Just make sure you have registered to vote by your state's deadline. Please don't hesitate, register NOW!

Milking Our Students Dry: The Cash Cow of College Tuition

Rich from FLA — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:09:10 EDT

The cost of college outpaced the rate of inflation this year, as it has for 10 years. The average cost of a 4-year private college is now $29,000 a year. Public institutions average about $12,000. These numbers have serious repercussions to new graduates and to the U.S. economy. Over 60% of 2008 graduates will be shackled with student loans. They can’t afford to take jobs in government or nonprofit organizations that typically pay far less than corporations do. Take a teaching job? Only if you want to eat mac and cheese until you’re 40. For many, the dream of a house and a family must wait.

Perhaps the most distressing consequence of increased tuition is that many students will not go to college. In a global economy that requires an educated workforce to be competitive, we lose people because they simply cannot afford college. As a nation, we are stacking the deck against ourselves.

Senator Barack Obama offers solutions to these problems. His education plan includes a $4,000 tax credit per year for students to attend college, in exchange for volunteering in some form of national service. In addition, Obama supports an increase in sponsored research to solve pressing issues facing our planet: energy, global warming, disease control, and an ever-increasingly challenged economy. This increase translates into funding for students who will be the scientists and economists of the future.It is time to quit viewing our college system as a cash cow, and start looking at it as an investment. Obama’s vision of education and service will improve the quality of life for many young professionals and allow us to keep up in the global economic race.

The First and Last Effect:

Beth from Albany Oregon — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:44:18 EDT

There is a psychological concept known as the primacy and recency effect. In layman’s terms, it is the "first and last" effect. Basically, messages we hear first are stored in our long-term memory. And messages we hear later go into short-term memory and can be accessed shortly after their occurrence. Clearly, this effect will be of special importance as we get closer to Election Day.

When Senator Obama announced his candidacy, that defining moment was burned into everyone's long-term memory. His message, who he is, and where he started from were so refreshing that people stood up and noticed—not just Democrats, but Independents and Republicans too. This impression is now stored in their long-term memory; it is the primacy effect, whether they like it or not. It has helped him go from a virtual unknown to a household name in this country. Of course, Senator McCain also announced his candidacy. But how memorable was that moment, really?

Much of what was said or has occurred since the beginning of the campaign, even if it is in our long-term memory, has faded over time. It will not have much effect on persuading voters in the voting booth, especially not those who are still undecided.
.
For that, the recency effect comes into play. The media always operates largely on short-term memory; in fact, media seems to have the shortest term memory in America. But the significance of the regency effect really kicks in toward the end of the campaign.
.

So, what will get those undecideds voting for Obama? It will all hang on the last week or two before the election. This is when Obama needs to shine, shine like he has never shined before. If he does, that message will be what the media captures, and what voters will take with them into the voting booth. If his message of hope and change comes through strongly at that time, the first and last effect will come together, and as he says, “turn the page” for this country.

Re-posting: Who do you want in charge

Jeanine — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:17:33 EDT

Who Do You Want in Charge?

The crisis in the financial industry that has taken over the headlines is viewed as serious, far-reaching, and complex. The next president of the United States will need to address these issues when he takes office next year. Who do you want for the job?

John McCain is talking loudly now, but comes late to the subject. McCain has said that he always is on the side of less regulation. One of his advisors, Phil Gramm, who’s been pushed to the back for calling Americans whiners, is the author of legislation that removed or forbade oversight for much of the practices now viewed as dangerous. Carly Fiorina, a failed executive who, in addition to losing money, was involved in wire-tapping her board, is another key advisor, but she is less on the scene after saying that none of the candidates would be capable of running a large company. It is true that McCain has very little experience in the private sector and has said he is computer illiterate. Involvement with the last major financial scandal nearly ended McCain's career during his first term as senator. He was one of the Keating 5 and officially reprimanded by the Senate for having exercised poor judgment. His attention to campaign finance reform may have served to make up for this, but lobbyists, including many from the finance industry, still dominate his team. McCain has downplayed his prior admission that he needs to be schooled on economics, but he does tend to have simple solutions to everything: "drill, drill, drill" and fire the head of the SEC. He has confessed to favoring making decisions in haste.

In contrast, Barack Obama has focused on the economy, especially as it relates to ordinary Americans, as a presidential candidate, U.S. Senator, and Illinois State senator. He spoke about the impending problems with mortgages and the need for better regulation more than a year ago. His advisors, in the words of Alan Blinder, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, are "mainstream with a dash of creativity." They include Warren Buffett, Paul O'Neill, and Paul Voelcker, along with young, well-respected economists such as Austan Goolsbee of the University of Chicago. Obama is known to reach out to others to test ideas and report on actual experience (for example, successful programs in education). The Obama campaign, a large enterprise started from nothing with over 2.5 million investors, is a showcase for the use of new technology. Obama's proposals demonstrate that he understands how issues are interconnected and his plans address immediate problems as well as long-term challenges. In contrast with drill, drill, drill, Obama realizes people need immediate help with high gas prices. For the long term, his detailed proposals include removing the subsidies and advantages given to Big Oil and stimulating the development and use of alternative energy sources. This will generate new jobs as well as improve security and lessen the effects of climate change. Obama also has plans to improve mathematics and science education, which will aid innovation and industry in the United States.

By any measures of judgment, temperament, advisors, and executive competence, John McCain is not the person to put in charge of solving the complex problems of Wall Street and Main Street. Barack Obama is.

Republicans' poor record on energy independence

Sine in KS — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:55:55 EDT

In a recent effort to bolster running mate Sarah Palin's credentials on national security beyond the fact that she can "see Russia from Alaska," John McCain pointed out that she "understands energy." She herself emphasized in her ABC interview that "energy is a foundation of national security."

Really? Has she told this to her own party, the Republicans, the ones who have been running this country for the last decade? This is the party that, for the last 20 years, has vehemently opposed raising fuel efficiency standards, a measure that could have reduced domestic oil consumption by millions of barrels a day. And how can John McCain make this claim for the Republican ticket? He himself voted against renewable energy 25 times in the Senate. He missed all three critical clean energy votes in 2007, while at the same time accepting huge contributions from the oil industry. He voted against a plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil in 2005. And now he claims to be the champion of a new energy policy?

Yes, energy is a foundation of our national security, as Barack Obama laid out so well in his National Security address of July 15th. We absolutely have to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But for the Republicans to write this on their banners when they did absolutely nothing while they had the chance is merely a cheap ploy for votes. I hope the American public is not buying.

Wasting no time to change Washington

Sine in KS — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:32:12 EDT

In light of the financial market breakdown, John McCain promised us that he is “not going to waste a moment in changing the way Washington does business” and further called for reforms to expose and end the “reckless conduct, corruption and greed” on Wall Street.

He is right to blame Wall Street companies for taking excessive risks at taxpayers’ expense and for building up a bubble that had no foundation in reality. But who was the champion of deregulating our financial institutions, of reducing already scant government responsibility for oversight, of believing the markets were best at policing themselves? If you have any doubts, please check Senator McCain’s record. He even promoted a moratorium on federal regulations of all kinds in 1995.

Yes, we should not waste a moment to change Washington, but we also should not waste our vote on November 4th by throwing it away on the candidate who has wasted 25-years worth of opportunities to make true change happen in Washington.

Who Do You Want in Charge?

Jeanine — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:49:07 EDT

Why True Conservatives need to Vote for the Liberal Democrat

Sine in KS — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:26:32 EDT

Let’s take the idea of small government, with little interference in and self-regulation of markets. We can all agree this is a truly conservative value. Free markets consistently outperform centrally planned economies, and everybody ends up better off. The problem is that the “conservatives” running Washington for the last 8 years mistook “little intervention” for “no intervention.” So they successfully pushed for deregulation and less government oversight of our financial markets, leaving the markets to their own free-wheeling and increasingly non-transparent devices. Where has that gotten us? To a world in which the federal government now essentially owns four of our largest financial institutions.

Should the federal government be in the business of running Wall Street? Is that a conservative value? The answer is no. Overnight, we dramatically jumped from no regulation to government control. We now have the very government intervention that would have Milton Friedman turn in his grave. And what is free about a market in which companies and their executives reap enormous profits when times are good and get bailed out when times are bad? Does that teach prudent investment and good decision making, also conservative values?

The thing is, with prudent foresight and well-managed regulation, the current crisis could have been avoided. With a little well-placed oversight, our markets would have run pretty smoothly, largely unassisted, and with the public’s trust. Easy to say now, but we needed that a year ago.

So let’s take a look at what happened over the last few years. In February 2006, the so-called liberal candidate introduced the STOP FRAUD act in the Senate to address “deteriorating mortgage lending practices and rising foreclosures.” In March 2008, the same “liberal” candidate outlined 6 detailed principles to “correct failures in financial market oversight and move forwards to restore accountability, transparency, and trust,” warning of precisely the kind of problems we now face. Meanwhile, the so-called conservative candidate, who throughout his career consistently embraced his party’s mantra of deregulation, repeatedly failed to recognize the growing housing crisis as a problem and continued to call for less regulation in March, May, and July of 2008. And the economic adviser of this “conservative” candidate authored the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 to “protect financial institution from overregulation,” paving the way for the explosion of complex financial instruments that are at the root of our current credit crisis.

I dare say, if years ago we had listened to those “liberal” proposals instead of enacting the “conservative” ones, we would now live in a world where the markets were regulated AND working. If you are in favor of free markets and little government intervention, you need to wake up to the fact that “liberal” and “conservative” are misleading labels created as smokescreens by the political parties. Nowadays “conservatives” are not pro-market. They are pro-business and have allowed special interests to lobby them for measures that imperil the very foundation of our free markets. Look at what the candidates stand for, and whether it is smart policy or simply blind repetition of party dogma. If the liberal candidate’s plan states, “Free markets are the engine of American progress; but the government’s role as umpire and steward is critical to the function of the free market,” you should give that plan a serious look.

Too bad it had to come this far. No matter who ends up in the White House, he will have to deal with this financial mess for a long time. But why put a person there just because he calls himself a “conservative”? Because that happens to be what you think you are? If you’re voting for free markets, you need to vote for the man who has plans for their survival, no matter what label anyone tries to stick on him.

There IS a Difference

Obama Donna — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:25:26 EDT

When I hear Senator John McCain say, "The fundamentals of our economy are strong," I have to speak out. It is so important in this campaign for Americans—whether Democrat, Republican, or Independent—to think long and hard about the state our country is in. Regardless of party, we should study the issues, and when we go into the booth to vote on November 4th, we should make our decision based on knowledge of the facts and not on campaign rhetoric. Too often, voters stubbornly vote along party lines instead of what is the best for America. This year has to be different. We must be informed and then vote our conscience.

Non-partisan websites (e.g., Snopes.com and Truthorfiction.com) can tell you what is the truth and what is a rumor, lie, or misinformation. The following information can be verified at sites such as these. The unemployment rate is up to 6.1%, a 5-year high, this quarter. More than 10% of Americans are unemployed or underemployed, a nearly 25% increase from one year earlier. More than a half million Americans (530,000) have been subject to mass layoffs in the last year.

Real estate foreclosures in the U.S. were up 75% in 2007; the overall rate in the U.S. was 10.3 per 1,000 households. Eight states ended the year with foreclosure rates of more than 15 per 1,000 households, yet Exxon-Mobil smashed the record for highest profits ever made by a public U.S. company by posting a net profit of $40.6 billion in 2007. To put this in perspective, Exxon made $77,245 per minute in 2007—that’s more money generated per minute than 70% of Americans earned all year.

Over the past 9 months, global food prices soared 40%, while food reserves were at 30-year lows. Energy prices were up 6.6% in the month, led by a 10.1% jump in gas prices. That left gasoline prices up nearly a third from a year earlier.

Many people, tired of politics as usual, think nothing will be done any differently when one of our candidates becomes president in 2008. I urge everyone to think carefully about how the past 8 years have affected 95% of Americans. John McCain has the same economic policies as President Bush. McCain thinks multimillionaires are members of the middle class, homeowners are to blame for the housing crisis, and Big Oil needs more tax breaks. Barack Obama will put the middle class first. He’ll pass a middle class tax cut that gives 95% of working Americans a tax cut of up to $1,000—and he’ll give families an emergency energy rebate to help folks cope with rising gas prices.

For example, in the $38 to $66 thousand salary bracket, McCain's plan gives a tax break of $31. Obama's plan gives a break of $1,042. In the $603 thousand to 2.8 million brackets, McCain's plan gives a tax break of $45,361, while Obama's plan will tax them $119,574 more. Obama will tax the big oil companies on their record profits, and put that money to use for the middle class. He’ll offer students a $4,000 tax break to pay for tuition in exchange for doing 100 hours of community service. And he’ll raise the minimum wage and index it to inflation. He will eliminate income tax for seniors making less than $50,000 per year. He will eliminate oil and gas loopholes. And there is so much more.

Check out the Major Tax Revisions Chart at Tax Policy Center.org (a non-partisan research firm that reports factual, proven information to the consumer) and view the chart comparing the two candidates’ economic policies. Barack Obama is the clear choice for American families. He has been working for the poor and the middle class all his adult life. When he spoke on Labor Day, I heard and will forever remember these words: “If there’s a poor child out there, that’s my child. If there’s a man out there who lost his job, that’s my brother. If there’s a senior out there in trouble, that’s my grandparent. If there’s a woman out there without health care, that’s my sister.” Vote your conscience for the largest majority of the American people. You really can make a difference!

When a $1 is only worth $0.77: John McCain and The Fair Pay Act

Andr�a- (You've called him everything else- now call him Mr. President!) — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:20:55 EDT

I came to know the Lilly Ledbetter story after reading her profile on Senator Obama’s website earlier this year. Her story both intrigued and angered me. She had spent 20 years working at the Goodyear Tire company in Gadsden AL. She had heard whispers that something wasn’t right with the salary she was making. It was only after someone left a piece of paper in her mailbox that her suspicions had been confirmed: during those 20 years she was paid a lot less than several men who had the exact same job.

When she did find out about the pay disparity, she filed a lawsuit and was initially victorious. Goodyear, not wanting to admit disparity and defeat, appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court. The court ruled 5-4 that Ms. Ledbetter’s suit had no merit. She had waited too long to file the complaint. The court stated that she should have filed her grievance within 180 days after the first payroll discrepancy appeared. Kind of hard to do when you find out 20 years later that you had been discriminated against.

Nevertheless, the Democratic-controlled Congress introduced into legislation The Fair Pay Act of 2007. This bill sought to close the loophole that resulted in the ruling against Ms. Ledbetter. The bill passed the House and was sent to the Senate. On April 22, 2008, Senate Democrats fell 4 votes shy of stopping a Republican filibuster against the bill. Thus The Fair Pay Act of 2007 never got a fair debate on the Senate floor.

Senator Barack Obama took a break from the campaign trail to vote against the filibuster along with other Senators, including Democrat Hilary Clinton (NY) and Republican Arlen Specter (PA). Senator John McCain never made it to the Senate floor. He chose to stump in Louisiana.

When asked why he did not support the legislation, John McCain is quoted as saying the following: “I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.... .This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system.”

He continued by saying women need "education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households.…"

It appears that Senator McCain believes that women only need education and the 23% pay gap will magically disappear. Never mind the fact that women still face sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace as they make their way through the good ‘ole boys’ network. Forget the fact many top female CEOs (with advanced degrees) are still making noticeably less than their male counterparts do. There are many educated and trained women out there who are simply being thrown under the bus when it comes to compensation parity.

It makes me wonder, if Senator McCain is elected as our next president, would he be okay with having his running mate, Governor Sarah Palin, make $0.77 for every $1.00 Dick Cheney made during his eight years as vice president?

Cleaning up Wall Street

Sine in KS — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:13:52 EDT

Well, it's official now. Wall Street is in a BIG mess.

By agreeing to the bailout of A.I.G., the Federal Reserve is staging the most radical intervention in private business in its entire history. The fact that this unprecedented action was deemed necessary should convince the most ardent optimists that our economy is in serious trouble. Even John McCain, who just days ago was still calling the economy “fundamentally sound,” has now realized the foolishness of such remarks. His campaign is frantically backpedalling by launching myriad press releases that decry the financial crisis and blame “the greed and corruption of Wall Street.”

Where, I ask, is the leadership in such behavior from the man who consistently gets high leadership marks from voters? Senator McCain seems to think that calling himself a maverick and an agent of change will gloss over his poor record. But the fact is that this crisis was caused by a severe lack of government oversight of financial institutions. And for years, in keeping with the Republican majority, Senator McCain has called for less regulation, not more, and even promoted a moratorium on federal regulations of all kinds in 1995.

The tumble of the Wall Street house of cards is proof that a whole new approach toward regulating financial markets is in order. Why trust the candidate whose economic policies helped create the bubble in the first place, allowing these companies to take excessive risks at taxpayers’ expense? Why should we put our trust in John McCain to “clean up Wall Street” when he did absolutely nothing when he had the chance?

John McCain and the Shell Game - It's All About the Economy

Rich from FLA — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:23:27 EDT

This election season, John McCain would like you to spend your time arguing about whether or not Barack Obama is an empty celebrity. He’d love it if you spent your time arguing about community organizers’ level of responsibility. The McCain campaign will do anything to distract you from the pressing issue of the 2008 election: the economy. If John McCain had to give himself a wedgie to keep the American people from noticing our faltering economy, he would reach behind his back with both hands.

This fall the McCain campaign will bait you into big arguments over small things, and they will try to keep that shell game running until November 4th. His campaign has decided that no political stunt is too foolish; no lie is too big, if it can keep your eyes off the crumbling U.S. economy.

Alas, the economy refuses to be ignored, and this week it made so much noise that no squealing pig with lipstick smears could drown it out. In the space of 48 hours, the global investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy; Bank of America took over Merrill Lynch; and the Federal Reserve Board took over AIG, the world's largest insurer, in an $85 billion rescue plan. Oh yeah, did I mention the Dow Jones industrial average fell over 800 points? In one week, we have seen the biggest financial disaster in the 80 years following the market crash of 1929. Alan Greenspan called the crisis a “once-in-a-century type of event," the worst "by far" in his career.

In a statement almost as stunning as the magnitude of this financial crash, John McCain declared that the economy was just fine. At a rally in Jacksonville Florida, he claimed, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong.” Needless to say, his timing for an economic gaffe was poor. However, this was no gaffe. John McCain has repeated the exact same line 22 times on the campaign trail since January.

By no measure is the U.S. economy strong. Over 650,000 jobs have been lost so far this year, and the current unemployment rate stands at 6.1% and growing. The federal budget deficit is over $357 billion, and our national debt is $9.7 trillion. Both these factors have led to a weak dollar, which in turn contributes to rising consumer prices. There are over 10,000 home foreclosures every day in the United States, contributing to a loss of the leading source of wealth for the middle class, and to a steady reduction in the value of homes not at risk for foreclosure. Just today, the Federal Reserve said it expects the economy to grow far more slowly in 2008 than previously thought, and predicted further increases in unemployment.

Gas is $4 a gallon, and John McCain says our economy is strong. Seniors lost roughly 5% of their retirement income in one day due to falling stock prices, and John McCain says the economy is strong. Students now routinely assume $100 thousand in debt to pay for a college education, and John McCain says the economy is strong. We are borrowing $10 billion a month to fight a war with no end in sight, and John McCain says the economy is strong. Is McCain talking about the same economy as the rest of us?

So, we can expect big distractions from the McCain campaign in the coming days. Today the McCain campaign was pushing the “troopergate” scandal to the media to try to keep them from talking about the economy. They would rather have the news dominated by an ethical scandal involving their vice presidential candidate than discuss their lack of plans to fix the economic legacy of the Bush administration. I wouldn’t venture to guess what crazy story they will push tomorrow, but I bet it’s a doozy.

This election season, do the smart thing. Don’t be distracted by large flaps over small issues. Don’t let McCain substitute phony controversies, or righteous indignation, for the facts. Pick up your money and walk away from the shell game. We don’t have time for small talk.

Balance in coverage

Jeanine — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:41:35 EDT

For the last few days, there has been light rain, generally during the night, in my town. It has had little effect on our lives, and I did not even bother with an umbrella when I went out. Down in Houston and Galveston, there have been hurricanes, with considerable damage to homes, roads, buildings, and infrastructure; the total cost is still unknown, and millions are without power. It is, then, technically correct to say, "Precipitation has occurred both here and in Houston." However, the statement is highly misleading.

A similar situation has occurred regarding media coverage of the presidential race. The terms “low road,” “deceptive,” “over-stating the facts,” and “lying” have been applied to both campaigns. This is equally misleading. Perhaps one can attempt to make the case the Obama campaign is exaggerating when they say McCain said he is a computer illiterate, or that he defines rich at the level of $5 million, or that he doesn't know how many houses he owns. McCain actually made these statements, just as he used the “lipstick on a pig” saying. But perhaps we weren't meant to take them seriously.

In contrast, McCain is outright lying when he says Obama will raise “your” taxes, and points to everyone in the hall when it is a surety that these people make less than $250,000 a year. Independent analysis indicates Obama's plan will NOT raise taxes for the vast majority, and in fact taxes most people at a lower level than does McCain's plan.

McCain is outright lying when his ad says Obama's one legislative achievement was a bill for comprehensive sex education for kindergarteners. Senator Obama has sponsored and championed legislation for a variety of significant issues, including non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, ethics, transparency in government concerning earmarks, and equal pay for equal work. The 'sex education' bill in question actually focused on age-appropriate lessons so young children could avoid predators.

So, yes, ads and political speech often take dramatic license. But lies are lies. And one side, the McCain/Palin side, is guilty of lies of hurricane strength.

Battling the myth that Obama will raise our taxes

Sine in KS — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:05:34 EDT

Amidst all the outrage over lipstick—and which animal it is politically correct to put it on—we seem to have forgotten something important. We have forgotten that one of the most blatant misrepresentations put forth during this campaign is still readily believed by a majority of Americans. I am talking about the claim that, as President, Barack Obama will raise our taxes. This is completely false. In reality, four out of five American households will see reduced taxes under the Obama tax plan. The non-partisan Tax Policy Center reports that anyone earning under $120K (the vast majority of Americans) will see substantially lower taxes under his proposal, compared with that of John McCain. And even people with incomes up to $600K will see their tax burden essentially stay the same under the Obama plan.

Both candidates have to answer for how they will finance their proposals. But if everyone votes purely based on his or her pocketbook, Barack Obama should receive 80% of the vote.