Posts with the tag George W. Bush

Health Care Reform: The Bottom Line

Larry Gordon — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:17:46 EST

In the final stretch for Health Care Reform, the American people have been blindsided by the arrogance of two senators: Joe Lieberman, an Independent from Connecticut, and Ben Nelson, a Democrat from Nebraska.

It seems these two senators are acting on their own to fulfill their own agendas at the expense of the American people and their own constituents. This is unacceptable any time, anywhere.

It was enough that the Public Option was thrown aside when so many Americans are hurting in so many ways without it. And the irony of it all is this: all these Congressmen who will make and vote on this critical issue have some of the best health insurance this country offers. Where is equality for all?

As watered down as the Health Care Reform currently stands, it needs to be voted into law because there are good qualities to it. Other issues can be taken up at a later time. Not to be passed into law will for sure strip many senators of their senate seats in the next elections — and rightly so.

Howard Dean has every right to express his opinion that if he were a senator he would not vote for this Health Care Reform. This attitude, too, is selfish and uncaring for the desperately needy in this country. There comes a time when politics have to be given a rest. Now is one of them.

The bottom line: Suffering Americans will not tolerate their elected officials not passing this Health Care Reform after coming so far. If Lieberman and Nelson want to be as scorned, cursed, and mentally spit on by the American people as America's previous president, George W. Bush, then hinder this Health Care Reform to the point of being null and void. The American people will make sure these senators pay for it with their votes cast against them.

Civil & Equal Rights in the Obama-Biden Administration

Freethinker — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:13:54 EST

As you will see, both equal rights and civil rights are of great importance to the Obama-Biden Administration and to the Democratic Party, as opposed to the George W. Bush eight year long Administration from hell, full of hate, bigotry, holier-than-thouism, discrimination, intolerance, dogma, doctrine, ignorance and "tradition". - Freethinker

Three Facts about Barack Obama and Civil Rights

Barack Obama will combat employment discrimination:
Obama and Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court's recent ruling that curtails women’s and racial minorities' ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.
Strengthen civil rights enforcement:
Obama and Biden will reverse the politicization that has occurred in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice. They will put an end to the ideological litmus tests used to fill positions within the Civil Rights Division.
Expand hate crime statutes:
Obama and Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal Section.

In this Section

Strengthen Civil Rights Enforcement
Combat Employment Discrimination
Expand Hate Crimes Statutes
End Deceptive Voting Practices
End Racial Profiling
Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support
Eliminate Sentencing Disparities
Expand Use of Drug Courts

Let's Call It "Idiocracy!"

Patricia McGahan — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:08:56 EDT

I've been watching, with amusement and downright disbelief, the recent outpouring of emotion and self-righteous theatrics by the most uninformed, fanatical element in this country, aka "The Tea-Baggers." Let's just say it, shall we? They have decided they really don't want a person of color in their "White" House, and they're using the anti-health-care-reform pulpit as an avenue for their outrage. Let's get real here. Thank God that it actually happened -- that we finally have a President with genuine integrity. But, he happens to be both a person of integrity and a person of color; his ideas and leadership are sound; and the majority of the American people voted him into office. Now, if that's not something to get all riled up about, I don't know what is. What is this, some kind of democracy?!

As their premise, the Tea-Baggers state that the government, with President Obama at the helm, is trying to take over their lives and take away their personal freedom. That really was the case during the Bush administration; but back then they reacted by buying "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers (still for sale at the U.S. Postal Service, made in China) and duct-taping American flags (also made in China) to their SUV antennas (I won't say it). And, as their Commander-In-Chief had instructed them to do, after 9/11, they went shopping, and bought duct-tape by the case. That's right, duct-tape, not teabags. They proudly joined the “Let's Go Shopping and Buy Duct-Tape Movement,” to show their leader and their critics that they were indeed “real” Americans. What better way to prepare for another, inevitable attack by the ever-increasing ranks of the world's “evildoers”? (I am in no way minimizing the loss of life and terror of 9/11, only expressing an observation about reactions thereto.)

If these ranting, raving, self-proclaimed patriots are that upset about the projected cost of health-care reform (the numbers aren't in yet, because there are at least eight different pieces of pending legislation) and its effect on the national debt, shouldn't they have been shouting from the rooftops during the lead-up to the war in Iraq, six long years ago – a war which has cost us trillions of dollars? That's “trillion,” with a “t.” And let's not forget the incalculable, ongoing human costs of that war as well.

Why weren't the Tea-Baggers swarming Capitol Hill when billions upon billions of taxpayers' money was appropriated, often in the form of "emergency" budget resolutions, to perpetuate the unfinished business of the first Bush administration? Where were they when George and Dick and Donald and Karl and Colin and General Myers* were giving this nation, and our allies, false information about weapons of mass destruction, and leading us into a non-constitutional, preemptive war, one for which no exit strategy was planned? *(Note of interest: General Richard Myers, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under George W. Bush, is now on the Board of Directors of Northrop Grumman, the third-largest arms manufacturer in the world.)

Have the Tea-Baggers been shouting and waving placards on the tarmacs in Iraq and Afghanistan, while thousands of red, white and blue, flag-draped caskets are loaded onto cargo planes for the long, lonely flight home; or while the children of Baghdad have been losing life and limb? Are they shouting and waving signs in the hallways of under-funded and under-staffed VA hospitals (like the one my father died in) and clinics, or in psychiatric hospitals all over this country, where the traumas of war are robbing countless veterans and their families of a healthy future?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. And when you feed it with self-righteous, myopic and misleading misinformation, it evolves into a malformed, political amoeba. It's appalling.

So, here's my idea: Round up the "Tea-Baggers," and give them one-way tickets to Alaska. There, they can join up with Sarah Palin and a camera crew and board a fishing vessel, and set sail for the Bering Straits. It will be a new reality TV series -- we'll call it "Deadliest Catch-Me-If-You-Can." Let's give the boat a name: “The Misguided.”

Make sure that they have plenty of reading material on board, like....... hmmmmm....... what type of reading material would that be, anyway, seeing as how they don't read..... and, heck, they get all their news anyway from Fox TV. Is there cable in the Bering Straits? I know, maybe pack some copies of the Constitution in their luggage. Is that out in paperback yet? And, of course, some dictionaries. Judging by their signs, they need some help with their spelling and grammar. And, how about back issues of the Congressional Record from, say, the last nine years? There should be a copy of The Patriot Act in there somewhere.

As we all know, no matter where they are, as long as the cameras are rolling, they'll be happy. And, "ya know," Sarah, you'll be able to see Russia from the front deck of your boat! And you and your friends can throw as many tea bags as you like overboard, and make yourself some real nice, “American” iced tea. And maybe you all can construct a new form of government while you're out there bobbing in the waves: Let's call it "Idiocracy."

And, one more thing, as a suggestion to the Discovery Channel or National Geographic, please keep them out at sea until at least 2013. I'm sure their show will be a hit on cable TV with their counterparts back home.

----------

Patricia McGahan

Wilmington, North Carolina

August 18, 2009

Stephen Views the News June 24, 2009

Stephen from Elkins Park, PA — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:53:15 EDT

Stephen Views the News June 24, 2009

http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/

Some Disappointments in Obama

Readers of this blog may find this heading surprising in light of my support of Barack Obama as a candidate in the Democratic primary contest, in the presidential election and in the early days of his presidency. I have no doubt that his election over John McCain was to the American advantage. There is much that I approve of since Obama has taken occupancy of the oval office. Previous blogs have praised a number of his decisions including that the U.S. will no longer allow torture, closing Guantanamo Bay prison, making healthcare reform a major priority, upgrading consumer product safety, reigning in the abusive tactics of credit card companies, returning the concept of “protection” to the Environmental Protection Agency and bringing back diplomacy to America’s international relations.

I never expected that I would agree with everything that the Obama administration does. There is a full understanding that most of what Obama attempts will be strongly opposed by Republican congressmen from the viewpoint of ideology, appeal to their hardcore base or attempts to simply save their political derrieres by re-writing history and blaming every ill on the Democrats and Obama. Joining Republican obstructionism is a considerable number of Democrats who, regardless of the state they come from, reside in the pockets of special interests. Obama faces formidable foes and the circumstances of an economy and financial structure in crisis, war on two fronts and countries such as Pakistan, Iran and North Korea that present daunting challenges. Has a President ever taken office in the U.S. inheriting so many challenges?

My problem with Obama involves policies and decisions that did not have to be so weak. There have been decisions that have gone against campaign promises, that have contradicted positions previously taken and in some cases have mirrored George W. Bush’s egregious policies. The vast bulk of Obama’s presidency is yet to unfold. Some areas of improvement that I would like to see:

* Transparency – Open government was a mainstay of the Obama candidacy. “Transparency” was a signature issue on the campaign trail. There have been a number of instances where the Obama Justice Department argued in federal courts to block the release of information about torture and other issues and, like the Bush administration, blocked public access to the White House visitors’ log – especially when it came to secreting the names of the coal industry’s representative visitors, not unlike Secret Dick Cheney’s meetings with oil and gas interests. The downside to secretive government was made evident in the last administration. Public trust can only be established through consistent and responsible behavior by its elected representatives. Only a fool would blindly trust a politician or anyone else for that matter. A democracy best functions in the daylight. When Bush secreted his activities behind opposition to the Freedom of Information Act and the bleat of “state secrets” I had had enough. For Obama to do the same is appalling. McClatchy news services offers examples of Obama emulating Bush. Michael Isikoff of Newsweek authors an article, “Obama Closes Doors on Openness.” During his second day in office Obama promised "a new era of openness in our country." One can only hope that the “new era” will still be in the early stages of his presidency.

* Wiretapping-Spying on American citizens – Many wise legal and constitutional minds cautioned against the provisions of the Patriot Act in spite of government assurances that there are safeguards in place to protect the rights and privacy of citizens. As it became evident under Bush and as it is playing out under Obama, these safeguards are as effective as the Abstinence Only program to protect against teen pregnancies. A recent NY Times article titled “E-Mail Surveillance Renews Concerns in Congress” demonstrates that individuals working in these eavesdropping programs regularly spy on citizens without legal justification and even former president Bill Clinton was illegally spied on. There once was a game show titled “Who Do You Trust?” Today’s answer would be, “No one.” When Obama was a senator he said that warrantless wiretapping was illegal. Does the lofty view from the White House change one’s principles and beliefs? Recall in the first days of his presidency George W. Bush gushed about the importance of following the rule of law. We all saw how that played out.

* Gays in the military – Returning to the Obama campaign trail, his comments and positions on gay rights matters would belie what has taken place since Obama took office. He has not stopped the military’s dismissal of gay service people under the policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” At a time when their services are more needed than ever gays in the military are being fired. Obama has the authority to suspend such activity until congress changes the law. He has remained silent.

* Gays not in the military – There has been a rising tide of anger and frustration by the gay community with Obama “slights and deferred promises.” First his Justice Department argued in a legal brief, “The brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.” Conclusion, gay marriages are equivalent to incest! During his candidacy Obama declared he would work to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). During his presidency his legal office is defending a law that deprives a segment of our population their equal rights.

* Shadow Army – When the Bush administration realized that it could not fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with the existing size of the U.S. military it began hiring contractors to perform traditional military responsibilities. The waste, abuse and illegal activity that ensued is well-documented. And the paramilitary presence of Department of Defense (DOD) contractors continues to grow. In a recent report by Commission on Wartime Contracting (CWC) there are now over 240,000 DOD contractors in Southeast Asia – including 132,000 in Iraq and 68,000 in Afghanistan. The report also raises concerns about the poor or inadequate training some of the (contractor personnel) receive, particularly Third Country Nationals hired to guard US bases and facilities: “Poorly trained and ill-equipped contractor employees providing security for our operating bases put American forces at increased risk of harm.” Some fresh thinking is required and old habits changed. Recall that there have been too many instances of these contractors committing rape and murder, building shoddy military facilities that have resulted in the electrocution of U.S. military personnel, and supplying our troops with tainted food and water.

This is not change we can believe in.

* Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

Barack Obama speech, February 5, 2008

Stephen Views the News June 7, 2009

Stephen from Elkins Park, PA — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 13:57:17 EDT

Stephen Views the News June 7, 2009

http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/

Diplomacy, Hegemony and Terrorism

During President Barack Obama’s historic 55 minute speech in Cairo he received a standing ovation one dozen times. It seems to me impossible for one to shoot a rifle while forcibly bringing one’s hands together in applause. Unlike the trigger-happy Neocon derriere’s who had beat the drum for invading Iraq and, most recently, called for the U.S. to bomb North Korea and Iran (hello Bill Kristol and Brit Hume of FOX News) intelligent diplomacy gives America at least a chance to bring about a better situation while reducing the threat to American military personnel and civilians. If a time would come when military action is required it is also more likely that having first taken the diplomatic route America would garner meaningful international support – not what George W. Bush had in Iraq. For the sophomoric Neocon tough guys such as Cheney and Kristol who always want to go to war as long as they can continue to avoid serving in the military themselves, I suggest masturbation. It will relieve the pressure generated by overactive male hormones. Like most men walking around with a missile silo between their legs being macho leads to more harm than good.

And let us not forget that the United States was responsible for the overthrow of the elected government in Iran in the 1950’s that inserted the Shah of Iran into power – a puppet of American foreign “policy.” He ruled with a despotic heavy hand that was supported by a secretive and brutal police force. Two decades later the Iranian people rebelled and the result was the U.S. Iranian embassy hostage situation. And who can forget the unprovoked U.S. invasion of Iraq. America’s hands in the Middle East are far from clean (and covered in oil) yet few in America readily accept this reality and its effect on current political relations. It is refreshing and encouraging to have an adult in the White House.

Some voices in America, especially the conservative choir, bemoan Obama’s approach to a new diplomacy that they conclude is an apology. Perhaps standing up and taking responsibility for previous action is an anathema to conservatives since it was their approach that contributed to so much damage in the world. In a cowardly fashion they try to rewrite history rather than acknowledge their culpability. This past week, across the cable news networks, we saw Dick Cheney and daughter Liz making appearances and lying through their gritted teeth about Bush’s justification to invade Iraq and the illegal and immoral use of torture. I have never been waterboarded but I can relate to being tortured while watching these apologists for failed policy try to re-make their brand. Adding to my extreme discomfort is the general failure of interviewers to confront the Cheney family and like-minded phonies with the hard facts of recent history. The media proved to be complete failures in the lead up to the Iraq invasion and they continue to demonstrate their inadequacy today.

There are forces in America that want to demonize all Muslims because of the actions of murderers who call themselves Muslims. There are 1.5 billion people in the world who embrace the Muslim religion. Yes, there are some who claim to be Muslims and who have bastardized the teaching of Muhammad for their own political agenda. This does not justify the condemnation of the entire Muslim world. This past week we saw the murder of George Tiller, a doctor in Kansas who performed legal abortions, being justified in Christian religious terms. At Tiller’s funeral on Saturday anti-abortionists demonstrated with signs saying, “God Sent the Killer.” These are the actions of terrorists and murderers who call themselves Christians. What would Jesus say? Probably, “Oy vey.” It is this short-circuiting of a connection to the Almighty that demeans all that is holy. The bombers of abortion clinics and shooters of physicians are the immoral equivalent of the al Qaeda terrorists who struck the World Trade Center. The long history of man on planet Earth is wrought with acts of inhumanity premised on religious canards. It is a lesson that man is apparently not fated to learn.

* “Four things support the world: the learning of the wise, the justice of the great, the prayers of the good, and the valor of the brave.”

Muhammad (570 – 632), Prophet of Islam

Torture Apologists Demolition Derby

signsSansSignifieds — Sun, 03 May 2009 21:31:53 EDT

The most recent post on my personal blog takes apart the arguments used by torture apologists. You can find it here.

Stephen Views the News April 15, 2009

Stephen from Elkins Park, PA — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 07:06:04 EDT

Stephen Views the News April 15, 2009

http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/

* Derriere Orifice of the Week - Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) announced that he has compiled a secret list of 17 members of the House of Representatives who are SOCIALISTS. He would not reveal their names because, “they are a secret.” Responding to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request I admit that I also have compiled a secret list of members of Congress. It is made up of those legislators entitled to be called ASSHOLES. Through threat of waterboarding I have reluctantly agreed to admit that Mr. Bachus is on the list.

* Speaking of secrets – “The CIA no longer operates any secret overseas prisons, Director Leon Panetta said yesterday, and has not detained anyone since he became chief in February.” Under Bush the claim was made that the prisons or “black ops sites” as they were called, did not exist and even if they did exist the torture of detainees in these non-existent prisons did not take place. The apparent existential contradiction can be easily explained by, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.” It also makes a joke of any oversight Congress pretends to have over the spy agencies and the Executive branch of our government.

* Speaking of more secrets ~ The Hypocrite Oath - “Medical professionals working for the CIA played a central role in the "ill-treatment" of terror suspects in U.S. custody overseas, according to a previously confidential report by the International Committee of the Red Cross” (conducted in 2007). One may ask why a person trained and sworn to protect life would willingly participate in the torture of another human being. The Nazis were infamous for their medical experimentation on concentration camp prisoners and eventually answered for their despicable inhumanity at the Nuremberg trials. But here we are talking about Americans – the good guys in war movies, the standard for international behavior. We are accustomed to instances of having scumbag politicians, spies, businessmen, religious leaders, teachers, police and bloggers. Scumbag medical professionals assisting in torture breaks new ground in the demise of the American dream that has led to this American nightmare.

* No secret – To be a Republican politician requires having the common sense of overcooked white rice. Texas State Rep. Betty Brown (R) said that Asian-Americans should change their names because they’re too hard to pronounce. “Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here?” I have an idea! Asian Americans males should begin changing their names to George Bush 1, George Bush 2, George Bush 3 and so on. Females can be Betty Brown 1, Betty Brown 2 and so on. I cannot wait to pick up my Chinese takeout tonight and greet the young lady behind the counter with “Hello Betty Brown 324,119.” I intend to convince Ms. Brown 324,119 to change the name of Chow Mein to Texas Chile and Sumei Dumplings to Turd Blossoms.

* Feel better about yourself ~ you are worth more than you think – The company Innovative Research’s website says it provides the research community with quality biomedical products. I was stunned at the breadth and price of their products. For example, 50 ml of Human Saliva is priced at $275, Human Breast Milk $275, Human Semen $375 and Human Urine $75. This will certainly bring about a change in my behavior. No more will I sell a pint of my blood for a mere $25 and a jelly donut.

* The wrong defense – On FOX News last Sunday Brit Hume attempted to defend former president George W. Bush. Hume said that Bush did indeed believe in Global Warming. If that is the truth, how much more egregious is the Bush administration’s complete lack of action relative to Global Warming? It opposed higher gas mileage standards, did little to nothing to encourage green technology and ignored the Kyoto agreement of world powers to address warming. I had concluded that President Bush just did not get it – remember, science was involved. If Hume is correct, Bush is even more culpable than previously thought. We lost eight years in addressing potential disasters that may result from the warming of our planet - world-wide flooding and famine that could lead to world-wide war.

* The wrong war ~ a time to mourn – James Dobson is stepping down as leader of the religious right organization Focus on the Family. “Dobson conceded that evangelical conservatives had lost most of the recent so-called “culture war” battles… Humanly speaking, we can say that we have lost… the nation is now “absolutely awash in evil.”

On what is a rare occasion I agree with Mr. Dobson that the culture wars of the religious right are being lost and evil permeates our society. I would suggest, however, that the wrong battles were being fought and to some extent contributed to the greed that is at the core of our current economic travails. In an attempt to foist their “religious” agenda on our non-sectarian society the religious right forged an alliance with the Republican Party. In convincing their members to support Republicans, Dobson, Jerry Falwell and their brethren helped elect Republican legislators that were pro-business and anti-regulation, pro-deficit spending while reducing taxes for the wealthy. The Republican allies of the religious right, Bush and company, swept us into an unprovoked war leading to the loss of over 100,000 lives and the displacement of millions of Iraqis. Imagine if their broad influence had been directed to the business and political segments of our society to promote integrity, fairness, workers rights and protection of the environment. The religious right lost a generation of meaningful influence while being used as pawns by the GOP. It is indeed a sad eulogy.

* Love is a Many Splendored Thing – “A Saudi judge has refused for a second time to annul a marriage between an 8-year-old girl and a 47-year-old man.” Anyone in our culture would be appalled at this nuptial pedophilia. However, the judge was not as radical as it would appear on the surface. He granted that the child could apply for a divorce when she reaches puberty. And isn’t it almost always about money? “The girl's father, according to the attorney, arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with the man, who is ‘a close friend’ of his.” On a social note, the wedding festivities will be held at Chucky Cheese and then the newlyweds will leave immediately for Disney World.

* On the lighter side ~ of heavy – All is “normal” in the land of Governor Sarah Palin. Her pick for Alaska Attorney General, Anthony Ross, is a racist, a writer of several manifestoes attacking Martin Luther King, Jr. as a communist subversive, a homophobe and anti-environmentalist. And to think that we almost had the opportunity to call her Madam Vice-President. The backlash to this nomination may result in Palin withdrawing the Ross nomination. As if Sarah did not have enough on her plate with the backbiting between her and former almost son-in-law Levi Johnston, her sister-in-law Diana Palin was arrested for twice burglarizing a house, during which she was accompanied by her 4-year old daughter. They will not be going to Disney World any time soon.

* Today is U.S. Tax Day – two views:

“I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.” Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

“What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue.” Thomas Paine

Stephen Views the News 1/30/09

Stephen from Elkins Park, PA — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 21:24:57 EST

Stephen Views the News 1/30/09

http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/

* Joke of the Week ~ A pig in a $3000 suit is still a pig – President Obama, members of congress, cable news pundits and editorials across America bemoaned what Wall Street has done or not done with the $350 billion they received in a financial bailout several months ago. My local newspaper, the Philadelphia Inquirer, said in an editorial titled Rewarding the Bad Guys, “Wall Street still doesn’t get it” as it was learned that these financial firms handed out $18.4 billion in bonuses this past year as their firms were reaching economic critical mass.

I am surprised and shocked that everyone is shocked and surprised. The financial collapse resulted from greed on steroids by financial institutions and head-up-their-butt government oversight. And the financial collapse changed nothing. Congress gave Bush and his Treasury Secretary $350 billion to bail out the Appalling Street of Financiers. These two geniuses then handed over the cash to the guys in fancy suits like drunks lusting for a lap dance at a gentlemen’s club - no enforceable guidelines, no strings attached, no oversight and the salacious alcohol-induced fantasy that the cash recipients will perform as desired. Now everyone is stunned that the money was not used intelligently, as intended, as naively hoped for. Like drunks with empty pockets and lust unfulfilled we gird for the morning-after hangover. Wall Street has given prostitutes a bad name and our government has once again proven to be hapless schmucks.

* Quotes of the week - The following two quotes are from the same article:

PBS Journalist Bill Moyers – “So here's the lens through which I see things. From my days in President Johnson's White House onward, I have defended Israel's right to defend itself, and still do. But killing innocent people is wrong, whether in Vietnam, Israel, Iraq or Gaza. Sometimes a candid critic is a country's best friend.”

Former Israeli soldier turned journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg, wrote in the NY Times this week – “Hamas cannot be bombed, nor cajoled, into moderation. Tanks cannot defeat deeply held beliefs. No. Waging war on an entire population guarantees one thing: the radicals get what they want, and the innocents, on both sides, suffer.”

The lessons identified above have been hard learned but remain elusive as the errors are repeated over many decades and in many locations. The loss of innocent lives is but one of the tragedies that taint the past 50 years.

The same noted article includes an exchange between Moyer and Abraham Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League. It is a read I highly recommend for anyone attempting to seek clarity or a moral footing relative to Israel’s recent invasion of Gaza. To take a position that our own government or an ally can do no wrong is naïve and belies the evidence. I recall the pushback to protestors who were against the Viet Nam War being told, “America, love it or leave it.” This same mentality is exhibited by orators on the Fourth of July recognizing the brave men and women who gave their lives defending American democracy but then too often want to deny democratic expression when it does not suit their politics. How quickly we have forgotten the era of McCarthyism and the lives destroyed as Congress looked for Communists behind every curtain and every word spoken. Was this same political ploy not used by Bush and Republicans in the lead up to and execution of the Iraq war? Opposition was labeled as unpatriotic. Opposition was tainted as un-American. I would suggest that if the citizens who loved America enough to criticize their own country did not stand up we would indeed have a country and political system worth leaving.

* Derriere Orifice of the Week ~ ta da, Rush Limbaugh – This is not the first time the blunderbuss of talk radio has received this ignominious “award.” His recent exploits are so well documented that I will forgo the usual quote or explanation that usually accompanies this segment. I will simply say that this airwaves sewage pump is the Derriere Orifice of the Week because he is an unmitigated asshole. And, most fitting, he is now the spokes model for the Republican Party.

* Good News of the Week ~ hurray for less frequent mail – The Postmaster General has said it may be necessary to reduce the number of days that mail is delivered from 6 to 5 days. Personally, I could use an extra day of not receiving all the ad and solicitation mail that I did not request and do not want. The last time that there was a postal increase I had the thought to keep the rates lower by delivering the mail every other day. I will get over the disappointment of delaying for one day the receipt of the menu at the local Chinese restaurant, the next mattress sale or the discount coupon to have my chimney swept.

While on the subject of mail I suggest that the postal service be barred from increasing the cost of sending a letter by only one or two cents. I have a drawer full of odd stamps and I do not know what they are worth any more. I have to believe that when the cost increases by such insignificant amounts the post office winds up losing money given the cost of the transition and the millions of inquiries it must address relative to new postage rates. Like many departments in our government administration an upgrade in management skills would be a blessing.

* Comment of the Week – In an interview this week Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said that Bush was a burden on the Republican Party. McConnel failed to note that he and the other Senate GOPers marched lock-step for eight years supporting George W. Bush and his failed policies. Republicans are full shareholders in the disastrous Bush years. Now they are rat-like abandoning the ship of fools. The American people have not been fooled as they have voted Republicans into minority status and given the White House to the Democrats. Unfortunately, it took a crushed economy, devastating foreign policy and further debilitating of the federal government by Bush and Republicans for the American people to fully grasp this failed leadership. Fortunately, you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

* Election of the Week ~ meet Michael Steele – The former lieutenant governor of Maryland and long-time conservative commentator on FOX News has been elected the Chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC). What do we know about the man selected to lead the Republican Party out of purgatory? When Steele ran for the Maryland senate seat two years ago he ran a campaign “worthy” of his party. His backers went to Philadelphia and hired 300 poor, mostly unemployed African Americans and put them on Trailways busses bound for Maryland. They were deployed to African American communities and given fliers to hand out to residents. “They spent Election Day handing out glossy fliers headlined "Democratic Sample Ballot" or "Official Voter Guide." The fliers employed the phrase "Ehrlich-Steele Democrats." And they featured images of prominent African Americans, such as former Democratic congressman and NAACP leader Kweisi Mfume, above the words: "These are our choices."

Mfume was not supporting Steele and Steele was running on the Republican ticket. The group Progressive Maryland described Steele’s campaign as one of "Lies, Dirty Tricks, and Fraudulent Fliers Designed to Deceive African American Voters." Steele lost the election but apparently shored up his Republican credentials. Yes, Michael Steele meets most of the qualifications to be the leader of the Republican Party – the one exception being that he is an African American. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the almost last stronghold of the Republican Party – the Land of Dixie.

* This is the 100th post of Stephen Views the News. What began as a brief email to 15 friends in June 2007 soon became a forum to address issues I deemed of national concern and to publicize the machinations and failures of the Bush administration that I came across, often in less than mainstream media. By almost any standard this blog is narrow in influence and yet it has enabled me to feel I have made a small contribution to readers’ awareness on a broad range of subjects. The writing of SVN has resulted in making new relationships across our country and the resulting dialogue and feedback has contributed to shaping my views and opinions. In addition to my own web page SVN is posted at barackobama.com and the national website of Democracy for America where it is made available to hundreds of local DFA affiliates. It is impossible to know how many people read my work at these other sites. I do know that several thousand individuals have visited SVN, coming from 42 countries and nearly 1000 cities. The internet is truly an amazing gift and the newest tool for shining a bright light on our leaders.

* “It may well be that our means are fairly limited and our possibilities restricted when it comes to applying pressure on our government. But is this a reason to do nothing? Despair is nor an answer. Neither is resignation. Resignation only leads to indifference, which is not merely a sin but a punishment.”

Elie Wiesel (born 1928) Holocaust survivor, Jewish writer, professor, political activist and Nobel Laureate

What Bush Was Really Doing After the Inauguration...

Christian from San Francisco, CA — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:14:35 EST

Wondering what George W. Bush was doing after Inauguration? After all, it was George W. Bush's last day in office. He decided to launch an aerial loafer attack against the Iraqi journalist who threw a shoe at him. Check out this game that explains it all.

http://bushstrikesback.games.eplay.com/

You can also play it on Facebook:

http://apps.facebook.com/bushstrikesback

WHERE Were the tough questions?

l.t. Dravis — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:00:47 EST

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Monday, January 12, 2009 – George W. Bush held his final news conference today, played fast and loose with the truth as he defended his eight year record, and no one in the room had guts enough to challenge him.

George W. Bush opened the door wide several times for tough questions, but reporters didn’t dare rush in.

Why, I’ll never know . . . it’s not like any of these reporters had to worry about being barred from the next Bush Press Conference for having committed the mortal sin of asking a tough question.

Bush was aggressive, arrogant, and even joked about the incredible mess he’s left this country in.

And the White House Press Corps laughed with him.

Not one professional journalist had the courage to challenge Bush when he commented on his presidency’s record by saying, “I think it’s a good, strong record. You know, presidents can try to avoid hard decisions and therefore controversy. That’s just not my nature.”

With America mired in two wars, with our military nearing the breaking point, with our infrastructure falling down, with unprecedented deficit spending adding up to a $10+ trillion national debt, with unprecedented mismanagement of American resources in Iraq, with our economy in shambles, with millions of Americans facing foreclosure, with millions more out of work, with our banking system on the edge of failure, and with our manufacturing base nearly destroyed, why wouldn’t at least one journalist challenge that statement?

Who in the room, who in the nation, who in the world sincerely believes George W. Bush’s record, is ‘good and strong’?

When asked about America’s image around the world, Bush said, “I disagree with this assessment that, you know, that people view America in a dim light. It may be damaged amongst some of the elite. But people still understand America stands for freedom.”

Of course, eight years of George W. Bush’s arrogant, detached, incompetence has damaged America’s image around the world.

Did the reporters at Bush’s final press conference truly believe that our image around the world has been strengthened by his mismanagement of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Did those reporters believe our image has been helped by Bush’s lack of leadership in coping with the ongoing nuclear threat in Iran? Did any of those reporters seriously believe that the Bush administration strengthened America’s image by ‘rendering’ and ‘torturing’ suspected terrorists in secret prisons in foreign countries and at ‘Gitmo’?

Yet not one reporter challenged him.

George W. Bush then defended his record in the Middle East by justifying his failure. “It’s been a long time since they’ve had peace in the Middle East,” Bush said. “The challenge, of course, has been to lay out the conditions so that a peaceful state can emerge. Will this ever happen? I think it will. And I know we’ve advanced the process.”

No reporter pointed out the fallacy of his argument or asked Bush to explain how his administration had ‘advanced the process’.

Bush then said he’d “thought long and hard about Katrina. You know could I have done something differently, like land Air Force One either in New Orleans or Baton Rouge.”

Bush was revealing that the most important thing on his mind when Katrina hit was where to have a photo op . . . in New Orleans or Baton Rouge . . . yet no one in the room pointed out that he was talking about something completely unrelated to the question of his administration’s abysmal response to a national tragedy.

Bush then said something absurd . . . even for him. He said, “Don’t tell me the federal response was slow when there were 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed. Could things have been done better? Absolutely. But when I hear people say the federal response was slow, what are they going to say to those chopper drivers or the 30,000 who got pulled off the roof?”

That Bush could get away with making a statement like that . . . in front of experienced journalists was unbelievable.

It is well documented that George W. Bush failed to take charge; that he failed to make certain that every federal resource was utilized to quickly and effectively save lives and property throughout the Gulf Coast after Katrina. His failure cost lives and seriously delayed the rebuilding effort. George W. Bush and his minions failed to anticipate the scope of the disaster (despite very clear warnings from the national weather service) and they failed to react and they failed to follow-through.

Three and a half years after the fact, damage done by Katrina is still impacting the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans on the Gulf Coast.

Yet not one reporter pointed out that the Coast Guard’s valiant efforts to save 30,000 Katrina victims had absolutely nothing to do with Bush’s leadership or with his administration’s response to the tragedy.

Not one reporter asked George W. Bush to explain or justify why his Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson, threw the first $350 billion of the financial bailout at banks with no accountability.

The outgoing president stood at that podium in front of the White House Press Corps for three-quarters of an hour so it wasn’t like reporters didn’t have time enough to ask the tough questions.

If the media exists only to serve as a conduit for truth between us and them, why didn’t reporters hold George W. Bush accountable for his failures today?

Were those reporters more concerned about playing by the unspoken rules of presidential press conferences, which are designed, first and foremost, to protect the president’s image or were they more concerned about honoring their obligation to report the truth?

After today, we know the answer to that question.

Don’t we?

If you have questions, comments, or concerns, Email me at ltdassociates@msn.com (goes right to my desk) and since I personally answer every Email, I look forward to hearing from you soon.

The Best Bush Shoe Throwing Game on the Web

Christian from San Francisco, CA — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:55:06 EST

On Sunday, December 14, 2008 an Iraqi journalist changed history. Muntadar al-Zaidi hurled a shoe at U.S. President George W. Bush and called him a dog. Think you can do better? Can you heel the nation? Show Bush your shoe-throwing skills. Now, you can give Bush the boot with Heel 2 the Chief: The Game. Enjoy this game brought to you by www.eplay.com.

http://heel2thechief.games.eplay.com/

Bush Still Lying, Still Allowed To Lie

John Lewis-Dickerson, Atlanta — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:46:20 EST

Still Lying, Still Allowed To Lie

by David Michael Green @ commondreams.org

I'm sorry, but there are moments when I just feel like a total alien who stumbled onto some planet full of bizarre life forms. They call this place America, and it sure is weird. And, lemme tell ya, I know what I'm talking about here. I've visited some pretty weird places in this part of the universe.

Try this on for size as an example. You might think that a president who is widely known for lying, who leads a party also known for the same, who is at the end of his term and virtually without any punitive power worth speaking of, and who is widely despised at home and abroad - you might think such a president would get a serious grilling when sitting down with the American media for an exit interview. And, even if that might seem like a giant leap for some, perhaps you'd at least be surprised if such an individual was allowed to continue to tell revisionist historical lies without being called to account in the slightest for doing so.

Yeah, well, different galaxy, I guess. On Planet America it seems a lot more like it's still 2002, and a frightened, compliant press is still learning how to embarrass itself by becoming a tool of a massively deceitful White House. Now that it's almost 2009, they've got it down to a science. Only today they don't even have the pathetic and shamefully flimsy excuse they did back then, in the wake of the 9/11 scare...........

ENTIRE ARTICLE - http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/15-5

Lies and Deception George Bush Style

John Lewis-Dickerson, Atlanta — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:09:01 EST

Lies and Deception George Bush Style

by Christopher Brauchli @commondreams.org

He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual.
- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr

It is with a sense of loss that the columnist begins cleaning out files filled with examples of a corrupt administration that beg to be exposed to the light of day. After all, there will be little sense in demonstrating the corruptness of George Bush and Dick Cheney when they have been converted from constitutional terrorists to pathetic footnotes. However, a few weeks remain to take advantage of the saved clippings and this week we examine two examples of how lying was used in ways not heretofore widely noted. (Lying, of course, will be as much a legacy of George W. Bush as the use of torture on people and the English language.) No description of Bush lies would be complete without at least one reference to Iraq.

Two days before the day on which the entire country was to give thanks that George Bush had less than two months left in the White House, we learned about the lie we were told as to which countries were in the group that Mr. Bush baptized "the coalition of the willing." The list of coalition members that he presented to the country was, we have now learned, faked, not once, but repeatedly. The disclosure was the result of the work of two University of Illinois researchers whose findings were reported in the New York Times. Scott Althaus and Kalev Leetaru of the Cline Center for Democracy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign made the discovery when trying to figure out what countries the "Coalition of the Willing" comprised. Here is what they found..........

ENTIRE ARTICLE - http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/06-5

Stephen Views the News 11/22/08

Stephen from Elkins Park, PA — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:29:31 EST

Stephen Views the News 11/22/08

http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/

* The Stench of Torture ~ will not dissipate with Bush’s exit – Barack Obama has stated emphatically that he will end any use of torture by the USA. Human rights groups, constitutional scholars and citizens have called for the next administration to prosecute those who authorized or used harsh interrogation techniques. “But two Obama advisers said there's little — if any — chance that the incoming president's Justice Department will go after anyone involved in authorizing or carrying out interrogations that provoked worldwide outrage.” Having closely followed the actions by the Bush administration and the use of torture, actions contrary to national and international law, I would like to see those who authorized and then lied about it come under scrutiny. Many believe that the US should not look back as Obama changes policy. What about after Obama? If Bush could authorize the use of torture so could a future president. It is obvious that safeguards are not in place to prevent the use of torture. It should not be an option for ANY administration. At the least, America should enact laws that unequivocally prevent any president or U.S. agency from utilizing a policy of torture. That being said, regardless of how the Obama administration decides to deal with abuses by George W. Bush or, should Bush grant broad immunity to perpetrators of abuse before he leaves office, the international community still could address the subject.

It remains to be seen whether there will be an effort to bring war crimes charges against Americans responsible for and involved in torture in Iraq, Guantanamo and secret prisons the U.S. government sanctioned around the world. There is a just-released report by the Human Rights Center/Center for Constitutional Rights report titled “Guantanamo and Its Aftermath.” Former DC Appellate Judge Patricia Wald, a judge at the international trial for Serbians accused of committing war crimes against Bosnian Muslims, compared the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody to the treatment Bosnians received at the hands of their Serbian captors. And from the web site ThinkProgress.org: “Last June, Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba (ret.), the Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison, also accused the Bush administration of committing “war crimes” and called for those responsible to be held to account.”

The report noted above is 136 pages in length. Even if one only reads the Forward and Executive Summary one will find a chilling condemnation of the policies invoked by the Bush administration to deal with the aftermath of 9/11 attacks. It is a vision that no sentient American in my lifetime could have envisioned. I was especially struck with the innocent lives destroyed. I would hope that Americans are struck with a sense of the loss of innocence. The Forward concludes, “We, as a nation, must not only remember our past but strive not to repeat it. This report makes an invaluable start in that direction.”

* In Case of Emergency 1 ~ a simple yet very intelligent idea – A reader sent me notice of an idea conceived by a paramedic that is growing in popularity. Most of us have cell phones. If we were to be injured in an accident or unexpectedly taken ill, emergency personnel would want to alert someone to our situation. To avoid the need to search through a large number of entries in the phone’s address book there is an alternative. Add to the address file “ICE” (In Case of Emergency) and the telephone number of the person you want to be contacted. If there is more than one person or phone number, enter ICE 1, ICE 2, and so on. This is an idea you may want to share with friends and family.

* In Case of Emergency 2 – If you just accidentally swallowed poison and need to regurgitate, watch this video of the members of the U.S. Senate giving a standing ovation to Alaskan Republican Senator Ted Stevens. Stevens is not returning to the Senate because he lost his re-election bid. Even if Stevens had won the election he very probably would have been expelled from the Senate because he recently was convicted in a federal court on 7 felony counts. This is the man who porked huge amounts of federal money for Alaska and he was the legislative architect for the Bridge to Nowhere, while using his legislative power for financial gain for himself, members of his family and friends and associates. And our illustrious Senators gave him a standing ovation, which happens to be against their own Senate rules. Applauding a low-life power abuser and convicted felon is not the message that I want to hear from legislators. It does not bode well for ethics reform or the responsible leadership that the American people crave. Republican losses over the last two election cycles have made this very clear. The Good Ol’ Boy Club has gotten very old. More need to be replaced, including a covey of Democrats.

* Derriere Orifice of the Week ~ say hello to Newt Gingrich – Appearing on FOX News (of course) Gingrich was criticizing those individuals protesting the loss of the right of gay couples in California to marry. Gingrich said, "I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion." I find Gingrich’s comments disingenuous, hypocritical and misleading.

Recall that it was Gingrich and his Republican Party that consummated a marriage with religious-right fundamentalists attempting to tell Americans how to conduct their lives. I see no evidence of people with a gay lifestyle either attempting to or, by example, influencing anyone to be gay. The gay community does not proselytize. It is seeking its own civil rights, in opposition to the likes of Mike Huckabee who pronounce that gay rights and civil rights are totally different. What is Fascist are Gingrich and his tight-assed brown shirts spewing untruthful propaganda and misinformation. Has anyone seen evidence of gay violence or harassment? More than half of the American people are aware of Gingrich and company’s dangerous band of blowhards. Once a few million more Americans wake up to the uncivil attacks on and the denial of civil rights to the gay community, people like Gingrich will find limited access to mainstream media and be relegated to the increasingly irrelevant Pat Robertson’s Holier than Thou TV infomercials.

* Knowing your limitations – “Congratulations” to Fred Thompson. Following the failure of his somnambulant presidential bid he has decided to again leave politics and return to acting. I suggest that his best chance to earn an Oscar or Emmy would be playing the role of Rip Van Winkle.

* Goodbye and good riddance – Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott is retiring in February. Under his management the largest retailer in this country honed the business model for low wages and low benefits, resulting in many Wal-Mart employees requiring public assistance. Wal-Mart is one of the models for sourcing goods and services overseas that has contributed to the weakness of our economy. Recall that Wal-Mart opposed more diligent inspection of containers as they enter our borders. A container destined for Wal-Mart enters the U.S. every 45 seconds. U.S. national security does not stand in the way of the Wal Mart bottom line. The bottom line is that under Mr. Scott, Wal Mart was a winner on Wall Street but quite damaging to Main Street.

* Is the Bush administration getting in touch with the needs of Americans? ~ Nah! – In an exceptional move the administration has agreed to support the extension of unemployment benefits as unemployment claims reach a 16-year high and unemployment reaches a 25-year high. Otherwise, it is nasty business as usual. The Bush presidency continues to undermine environmental safety, broaden the destruction of public lands and national parks, and further endanger endangered species as it pimps for business interests that are not in the interest of the American people. President George W. and co-conspirators in his administration are making every effort to reduce regulation and constrictions on oil, gas, mining, fishing, timber and financial industries while promoting the development of shale oil, the dirtiest fuel on the planet. America does not need enemies from afar. Our hands are full with the enemies from within.

The situation was best summed up by Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee when he told the Wall Street Journal, “This administration will stop at nothing to jam through as many reckless proposals as they can before the clock runs out.” A glimmer of hope for the health of planet Earth is Barack Obama’s promise to make a decisive break with George Bush on the environment … promising a "new chapter in America's leadership on climate change.” These developments bring to mind a question I have often asked over the last seven years. “Why does George W. Bush hate America? I do not accept the conventional wisdom alibi that he is well-intentioned but ill-advised. The damage he has rendered is too widespread, too deep and well beyond the pale of mere incompetence.

* What have we learned in two millennia? A reader asked this question, accompanied by the following quote:

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

Cicero, 55 BC

HEY, HANK . . . What are you doing?

l.t. Dravis — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:41:59 EST

LOS ANGELES, CA – Friday, November 14, 2008 – HEY, TREASURY SECRETARY HANK PAULSON . . . what the heck’s going on?

Less than a month ago you said government purchases of stock in banks stuck with so-called ‘toxic assets’ (talk about an oxymoron), represented a good investment for taxpayers. You said the government (nee taxpayers) would own shares in the form of warrants issued by banks. “This is an investment,” you said, “not an expenditure, and there is no reason to expect this program will cost taxpayers anything.”

Your immediate plan was to spend $250 billion in direct stock purchases; half of those dollars would go to the nine largest banks in the country and the other half would go to buy stock in thousands of other banks. Though the big nine banks would be receiving nearly $14 billion each, you didn’t require them or any of the other thousands of banks and other financial institutions to lend any portion of any of those taxpayer billions to business and/or consumers.

You said that taxpayer cash handed out by the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), would increase banks’ confidence so they will “deploy, not hoard, their capital,”

TRANSLATION: If we give banks billions of dollars, they’ll lend it!

Okay . . .

Given everything you said up to October 20, thinking taxpayers would think your plan was working . . . that business and consumer lending would begin to ‘free-up’; that the hemorrhaging of jobs would slow or even stop; that the rate of foreclosures would begin to decline; that some of us might even be able to sleep the whole night through.

Then, on Wednesday, November 12, you suddenly announced that you were abandoning the idea of purchasing bank stocks (aka ‘toxic assets’); you said, however, that you were going to continue to use (the balance of) $250 billion (36% of the $700 billion) to buy stock in banks to ‘encourage them to resume more ‘normal lending’.

And, if I was confused before Wednesday (and I was), I’m really confused now, Hank.

Does your turnabout mean the original plan, your plan, was the wrong plan?

If so, why did you present it in the first place and why did the House and Senate go along with it?

You told CNBC today that the ‘facts had changed’ which caused you to abandon your original plan.

Okay . . . does that mean the banking system that was in such bad shape less than a month ago is now in good shape?

If that’s the case, why not put our checkbook away, finish your work with the transition team, and finalize your post-January 20 vacation plans?

But, wait a minute, you are still Secretary of the Treasury and, despite the quarter of a trillion dollars you’ve doled out to banks, the economy is still in the tank (not for you, not for the big shot Wall Streeters who’ll run like rats with million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes, not for George W. Bush or Dick Cheney or any of the rest of the Bush bunch who will ride off into the Washington, D.C. sunset with cushy pensions, book deals, and lives of privilege and ease) for the millions of hard working Americans and their children who are paying and will continue to pay with lost jobs, savings, retirement accounts, homes, and dignity for Wall Street greed and Washington incompetence.

So, what will you do with the remaining 64% of the $700 billion to protect millions more businesses, jobs, families, and homeowners who’ve been put at risk by greedy financiers and inept politicians?

At this point, Hank, you may be wondering (as I’m sure you’ve wondered thousands of times in the past several months), how did you become responsible for saving the entire economy of the United States of America?

In other words, who died and made you the big economic Sheriff of America?

Well, Sheriff Paulson, you got yourself in this spot by accepting a job with an administration too stupid, too incompetent, and too short-sighted, for too many years to build a strong, vibrant, flexible economy.

And, while we all understand that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzalez, et al, were stupid, we can’t ignore the fact that the House and Senate were even stupider.

The House and Senate allowed all those stupid people, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez and the rest of the Bush bunch, to run the country into the ground . . . for nearly eight very long years.

So, here we are . . . relying on you and the best and the brightest in the Department of the Treasury to save the nation and what have you done?

You’ve spent more than a third of the $700 billion and the credit crisis is still in crisis, hundreds of thousands of people are losing their jobs each week, foreclosures continue to climb, bankruptcy filings continue to increase, and there is no reason to believe anything will change any time soon.

Doesn’t sound like we’re getting much for our money, does it?

Mind if I ask a question?

If I worked for you at Goldman Sachs and I handled my job like you and your group have handled this bailout mess, would I still have a job?

And, if not, why not?

If you have questions, comments, or concerns, Email me at ltdassociates@msn.com (goes right to my desk) and since I personally answer every Email, I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Want to go to a Blog that listens to you and speaks for you as well?

GO TO bothsidesnowbiz.blogspot.com/ AND SPEAK UP . . .

43 & 44 Meet

Cindy in Salt Lake — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:00:18 EST

Bush & Obama met in the Oval Office today. Just 71 days to go!

RE: Cafferty File - Most Important Issue For American Election

Marcus Cyganiak — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:11:50 EST

RE: Cafferty File - Most Important Issue For American Election CNN.com - Cafferty File question: What single issue was most important to you?

As a Canadian I don’t have to care, but I do. Just as I care for my next door neighbours, I care for America too.

I want to see that America I once loved during the 90’s. President Bill Clinton was commander and chief and riding high with an economical surplus. Times were certainly good, up until George W. Bush took control in 2001.

For the past 8 years, President Bush has managed to plunder a country down from the greatest economical surplus to the greatest economical deficit in history. As a result, we are now in what we call an "economic crisis," or we can blatantly call it a recession bordering another Great Depression.

So Jack Cafferty, you ask what the single most important issue is for the 2008 US Presidential Election. Well I’m no bandwagon jumper but I will go with the majority this time in saying that the economy is the number one issue that America has to aid right now.

One of the big contributors to this problem is the fact that the US government is predominately being fed US dollars by the middle-class citizens. Some of these citizens are people that have troubles maintaining their own way of life financially, much less paying taxes. The upper-class and big corporations are sitting comfortably with their money free as can be, and that’s the big reason in why America is plundering to a Great Depression.

During President Clinton’s term, he mandated a leveled taxation plan that saw classes of all kinds in America contributing their fair share with regard to their level of income. What Barack Obama plans to do now is once again tax the big corporations and upper-class to the level they were paying in the 90’s. The middle-class, those with incomes less than a quarter of a million dollars, will see their taxes reduced and that accounts for 95% of Americans.

As I said earlier, I care for my neighbours and when I see my neighbour unhappy, I feel unhappy because it’s an atmosphere around me that begs for help. Big corporations and the upper-class of America should share those same feelings. This new taxation plan set force by Barack Obama will feed those feelings and put the economy back on track to another eventual surplus.

Source:
1) http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/04/what-issue-is-most-important-to-you/http://marcuscyganiak.blogspot.com/2008/11/re-cafferty-file-most-important-issue.html

Absentee Ballot Controversy Already Reported Today

Marcus Cyganiak — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:08:15 EST

Absentee Ballot Controversy Already Reported Today

CNN has reported today that there are as many as 4,000 absentee ballots missing and unaccounted for today in the state of New Mexico. That is just flat out atrocious and it make me wonder how many other absentee ballots are missing in other states.

If the Republicans want to provide a good America, then why not win the Election within a good manner of fairness and not just dirty tricks?

In the 2000 Presidential Election between Al Gore and George W. Bush, the Republicans stole it for Bush due to the many absentee ballots casted for Gore that mysteriously went missing. That of course was corrupt, and that corruptness continued throughout Bush's entire 8-year term as President. This has to change, and it begins with Barack Obma of the Democrats.

Canada wants Obama, and America should want Obama too, if they too want a good America. A good America will result in a revival of that original American Dream, a dream that has been missing since the 90's with President Bill Clinton.

Choose “REAL CHANGE” with your "VOTE" and not the same “Empty Republican Promises” and dirty tricks. Please America, do not back down on this Election. Make sure your vote counts, and make sure your vote makes an impact with Barack Obama!

Sources:
1) http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/04/some-absentee-ballots-mia-in-nm-county/#more-28343
2) http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/261974

http://marcuscyganiak.blogspot.com/2008/11/absentee-ballots-already-reported-today.html

Former (London) Times Editor Harold Evans Smears the US Media in an Article in the UK Guardian

mathpol — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:22:33 EST

“Mad about The One. The US media have been captivated by Obama, at the expense of their curiosity and scepticism.”

This is the title of an article by Harold Evans in The Guardian on November 1, 2008. He resorts to the bias he decries in his one-sided column. I have reproduced it below in its entirety, along with my annotations {…} . Phrases that I comment upon are in boldface.

It's fitting that the cynicism "vote early and vote often" is commonly attributed to Chicago's Democratic boss, mayor Richard Daley, who famously voted the graveyards in 1960 to help put John Kennedy in the White House. In this 2008 race, it's the American media that have voted very early and often. They long ago elected the star graduate of Chicago's Democratic machine, Barack Obama. {Obama is a hardly a “graduate“ of the machine. What about Harvard Law, Columbia, etc.?}

I am not talking of editorials in newspapers, though Obama has the preponderance of the endorsements over John McCain. Obama certainly deserves the credit for recruiting impressive advisers and running a more efficient campaign machine than any one in the US's political history.

What's troubling to anyone old-fashioned enough to care about standards in journalism is the news coverage in mainstream media. Forget the old notions of objectivity, fairness, thoroughness, and so on. The nastiest rumours on both sides haven't been published, but the coverage has been slavishly on the side of "the one". {“Slavish”? Evans’s description.}

SHOULDN’T Bush and company just go away next Wednesday?

l.t. Dravis — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:55:13 EST

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sunday, November 2, 2008 – WHO WANTS GEORGE W. BUSH, DICK CHENEY, OR THE BUSH CABINET TO HANG AROUND AFTER TUESDAY? Bush has been a complete bust as President; his level of incompetence is unprecedented, his total lack of commitment to serving the real needs of real Americans is well-known, and his complete inability to communicate with the American people makes him complete useless.

Dick Cheney, by any standard, has been a total waste. He has no credibility, no public support, and has not, in any way, done anything in eight years to improve the lives of Americans. A more useless human being has probably never existed within the Washington beltway.

Let’s face it; George W. Bush (who gets $400,000.00 a year) and his puppet master, Dick Cheney ($221,100.00 a year), offer nothing, except an eight year history of deceit, incompetence, lack of direction, and abject failure, to the people of this country.

So, why would we want either of these boobs to hang around after Tuesday?

Okay . . . so what about anyone else in the Bush administration?

Any help there?

Not hardly.

Not one of Bush’s cabinet secretaries (each of whom costs taxpayers $191,300.00 each and every year), except for Treasury Secretary Paulson, has done anything to help the nation cope with the current economic crisis.

Because Secretary of the Treasury Paulson is actually doing something to help the economy, he can stay after Tuesday. Whether you agree – or not – with the government ‘bailout’ of financial institutions, Congress authorized the ‘bailout’ and Paulson’s actually working at it . . . something Bush, Cheney, and their people are not known for.

Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman hasn’t said anything about how he plans to use any portion of the $25 billion taxpayer dollars he got in 2008 to reduce exorbitant fuel costs that have crippled our economy and killed so many small businesses and cost thousands upon thousands of jobs. This is a man who said, “Under President Bush’s leadership, this budget” (the 2008 budget) “builds on our commitment to strengthen our nation’s energy security by diversifying our energy resources and reducing our reliance on foreign sources of energy.” Bodman made that statement a year and a half ago – after he spent $49 billion in 2007 and 2008 – and, yet the nation can’t see where he’s done anything to diversify energy resources or reduce our reliance on foreign sources of energy. So, why would anyone believe Bodman could or would direct his department to make any effort whatsoever to help turn our economy around? In any case, if Secretary Bodman actually cared about helping to revitalize the economy, one would think he would have already made an effort to do so.

Where has Department of Labor Secretary Elaine Chao been since the economic collapse? In 2008, she spent 50 billion taxpayer dollars this year and used 17,000 employees to run her department, a department that is supposed to “foster and promote the welfare of the job seekers, wage earners, and retirees of the United States by improving their working conditions, advancing their opportunities for profitable employment, protecting their retirement and health care benefits, and helping employers find workers” . . . yet, we know absolutely nothing about what she’s doing with the $50 billion to help Americans stay in their jobs, get new jobs, and maintain health care coverage for themselves or their families. If Secretary Chao cared about the American worker, wouldn’t she use her economic and political power to help more people hang on to more jobs?

What has Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff done to streamline his department’s $46.4 billion dollar budget and help reduce the federal deficit? What has Chertoff done to improve economic opportunities for Homeland Security contractors and employees? What is Secretary Chertoff’s plan to utilize his department’s human, financial, and infrastructure resources to help rebuild and revitalize our economy? We don’t know . . . because we haven’t heard anything from him.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates hasn’t said a word about where his department stands on the economic crisis. Has Secretary Gates considered how the economy might improve if he directed National Guard and Reserve units to expedite rebuilding in New Orleans and other areas of the country that have been devastated by natural disasters? If Secretary Gates is truly interested in supporting our gallant troops serving around the world, why hasn’t he announced a plan to work with the Department of Veterans Affairs to come up with innovative ways to transition returning veterans into good-paying jobs in the public and private sectors?

Where has Secretary of Commerce, Carlos Gutierrez been? His department employs 41,000 people and will take $6.5 billion out of the pockets of taxpayers this year. According to it’s Mission Statement, the Commerce Department is supposed to work with other Government agencies to create national policy, through the President’s Cabinet to increase international trade, strengthen the international economic position of the United States, promote progressive domestic business policies and growth, and assist communities, individuals, and states with economic progress. So, why hasn’t Secretary Gutierrez made a public commitment to use every resource at his disposal to create more economic opportunity for small, medium, and large businesses throughout the country? Doesn’t Secretary Gutierrez care? Or is he just incompetent?

With a budget of $707 billion and 64,000 employees, Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt spends more money than even the Defense Department ($647 billion) . . . in fact he controls nearly one-fourth of all the money spent by the Federal Government. What has Secretary Leavitt done with any of the $700 billion he received from the taxpayers this year to help Americans who’ve lost their jobs to retain health insurance? If Secretary Leavitt has done anything at all to reduce his operating budget to help reduce our $500 billion deficit this year, he hasn’t bothered to tell us about it. Has Leavitt made every effort to make sure that Americans who’ve lost their jobs and are about to lose their jobs in the most serious economic crisis to hit the nation since the Great Depression have access to continuing health care for themselves and their families? If so, why don’t we know about his efforts?

How about Attorney General Michael Mukasey? The Department of Justice cost taxpayers $26 Billion in 2008 and employs multiple thousands of people in all sorts of jobs all across the nation. So, where does the Attorney General stand on the economic crisis? Why hasn’t he stepped up to reassure us that the Department of Justice will protect our investments in Wall Street and in Main Street as well? Why hasn’t Mukasey come up with any initiatives to introduce, implement, and enforce new and more effective oversight regulations for the financial services industry?

Dr. James Peake, Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, spent $84 billion in taxpayer money this year and we have no idea whether he has any interest cutting his department’s operating costs to help reduce the federal deficit. There’s also been no word from Dr. Peake about what he intends to do to make sure returning veterans can find good jobs in a declining economy. If he has a plan to provide good-paying, secure jobs with health and retirement benefits to returning veterans in this economy, why hasn’t he told us about it?

Where does Department of Transportation Secretary Mary Peters stand on the economic recovery? Is she for or against using the resources the taxpayers have given her to help improve economic conditions? She has 55,000 employees who work for 14 separate departments (from the Federal Aviation Administration to the Federal Railroad Administration to the Office of the Secretary) and she spent $67 billion this year alone. What has Secretary Peters done to invest in the transportation infrastructure to create new jobs? What has Secretary Peters done to streamline her 14 agencies to cut expenditures and return taxpayer dollars to the treasury? We don’t know . . . because we haven’t heard anything from her.

Secretary Condoleeza Rice has demonstrated a level of incompetence that leaves her completely out of any solution-making process, foreign or domestic. She has failed to make any progress in the war of terrorism. She has failed to make any meaningful progress in the Middle East. In terms of assisting the nation to recover from the current economic emergency, Secretary Rice has consistently failed to build or strengthen relationships with our allies around the world, thereby failing to create or develop bilateral import/export economic protections for our economy. Her record proves she would be of no use whatsoever . . . especially when it comes to managing the international implications behind our current economic crisis.

What has Education Secretary Margaret Sellings done to mobilize her department to help the people of America get through the current economic crisis? Out of the $66 billion she spent in 2008, she received $447 million for administrative support alone. How many of those taxpayer dollars has Secretary Sellings directed to create new investments to stimulate the economy? Why hasn’t Secretary Sellings been a leader in introducing initiatives to rebuild and revitalize schools across the nation . . . from inner cities to rural communities to the suburbs . . . to not only improve educational opportunities for our children but to also create new, good-paying jobs for Americans who need them?

Given the dismal history of these Cabinet Secretaries, why would we want to waste another taxpayer dollar on any of them?

There isn’t a winner in the bunch and Americans have no reason to limp along for more than two and a half months between Election Day and inauguration day with Bush, Cheney, and the rest of their incompetents.

We’ll want to rely on the President-Elect, the Vice-President-Elect, and their advisors for the critical leadership (guidance and reassurance) the nation so desperately needs . . . starting Wednesday morning.

Won’t we?

If you have questions, comments, or concerns, Email me at ltdassociates@msn.com (goes right to my desk) and since I personally answer every Email, I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Want to go to a Blog that listens to you and speaks for you as well?

GO TO bothsidesnowbiz.blogspot.com/ AND SPEAK UP . . .

Good Or Bad Presidential Motives – What Inspires Your Vote?

Marcus Cyganiak — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 04:03:25 EST

Good Or Bad Presidential Motives – What Inspires Your Vote? With anything, there has to be a captivating subjectivity that lures an individual into any given matter in order to prompt an invested action. When you look at Barack Obama and John McCain campaigning for President today with Election Day drawing near, you realize their inspired emotional connection they’re extracting on all of us. They’re living their lives to inspire you to vote for them, which in turn will allocate them the control over your country.

How do they do it?

They instill fear in you, sometimes for legitimate reasons or other times to dictate. Once you’re scared you scramble for a new direction and you’re likely to turn to your elected President or Prime Minister because that person has the biggest title in the country. The reason you turn to the commander and chief is because you were inspired to do so during a crucial time early on – the campaign trail. Depending on if that commander and chief stays true to his or her word during their time in office will determine whether or not you will remain inspired on following their word.

Bill Clinton inspired us all during the 1990’s when he took a country in great deficits and overturned the economy into one of the richest and most stable economies in the world, with its biggest surplus in history. Clinton stayed true to his word from words spoken on his campaign trail in 1992 and that’s why we followed him, and in most cases we still do today.

Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 and brought into the oval office in 1993 because the United States was entering a recession at the time under George H. W. Bush, and there were fears of that transcending into another Great Depression. Bill Clinton was able to use that fear and use proceeding Bush’s track record of some of the greatest deficits in US history as a way to inspire Americans for their vote, and it worked despite Clinton being “young” in comparison and “inexperienced.”

Fast forward to 2001, George W. Bush was elected into the oval office and he sure did not fall short from his father’s footsteps. He took America’s largest grossing era and detracted the economy down to its now largest deficit in history. Both George Bush’s have set records during their Presidential terms, and they’re both gutter performances. The United States are trillions of dollars in debt and are in a current recession, which brinks yet another Great Depression during a time of “economic crisis,” that is now spreading worldwide.

I don’t know how Bush, Jr. was able to do it, but he beat out his daddy on this one!

So who can fix this next round of recessionary times in America? Do we stick with the Republicans and pick John McCain because he wants to tax the middle class and keep rich families and corporations on top as they are? Or do we want to once again turn to the Democrats, the quintessential saviors of the 1990’s, and elect Barack Obama because he wants to reform America and cut taxes for 95% of Americans, while implementing standard taxation rules for the rich?

In 1992, George H. W. Bush was planning to enforce further military use in the Middle Eastern regions upon re-election, in continuing a Gulf War during recessionary time; however, the Americans said no by electing a new face in Bill Clinton to repair the economy.

Americans can basically copy and paste the history of 1992 and insert it into 2008, because now John McCain wants to continue George W. Bush’s plan in the Middle East by attacking Iran. Furthermore main staple countries like Russia, China, and Korea are on McCain’s target list while Barack Obama rather set his attentions on the fast sinking economy.

This is an example of history never being so important like it is right now folks. You can say no to John McCain today, just like you said no to George H. W. Bush in 1992, by electing the “young” Barack Obama, who has often been deemed “inexperienced.” Obama definitely cannot overturn the deficits into greens across the board during a 4-year term, but he can set America on the right track of surplus with the help of Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden, a man with over thirty years of involvement in politics. After the first term, the second term would be the time of economical surplus once again for America.

I have warned you all already that if you do choose to vote John McCain as your next US President, you will have to be prepared for the absolute worst. McCain would be continuing off the Bush path, essentially serving a 4-year extension of George W. Bush.

President Bush has already started the preliminary stages of a potential World War III by invading Iraq in 2003, and that war is still on-going. Bush has also in recent weeks invaded Pakistan and Syria. Let us not forget that a tie in with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has also been brought to forefront in regards to Georgia’s attack on Russia in August 2008 that prompted the Russian invasion in Georgia. Apparently President George W. Bush wanted to antagonize Russia into another war, and that immediately brought up fears of a new Cold War.

With all these future wars in sight during a John McCain Presidential run, why would you in your right mind vote for him and the Republican Party? McCain takes great pride in fighting a war, it’s what inspires him into thinking he’s a great patriot of America when really he would be sending more young men and women down to the depths of hell.

You have to ask yourself this question. Whose motives inspire you more? John McCain, who will continue to tax you in large scales while fighting countries around the world with the use of military force, or Barack Obama, who looks to change the financial direction of America through democracy as Bill Clinton did during the 1990’s?

Barack Obama delivers that captivating subjectivity that should surely lure your vote, because your vote should be one subjected towards a better America and a better world. History is on Barack Obama’s side for this one.

Terrorist Antics Played By USA – Future World War Or World Peace?

Marcus Cyganiak — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 17:21:49 EDT

Terrorist Antics Played By USA – Future World War Or World Peace? Yesterday on October 26, 2008, two of four US helicopters landed in Syria with eight soldiers embarking on the first ever US-led attack on Syrian soil.

Israel claims to have no connection to such attacks, as they are only focused on Iran and Russia at the moment. Syria has never been part of the equation for them, much less the United States, and this is why this attack seems puzzling at first glance.

The death toll is now up to 9, with at least 4 of them being children. Reports are also surfacing that 14 more Syrian civilians are wounded by the US-led attack. After the impromptu invasion, US helicopters left the scene with all their soldiers aboard. So why the sudden attack out of nowhere yesterday?

It’s rather simple folks. President George W. Bush is trying to amend a constitutional right to suspend the 2008 US Presidential Election, and he can do so in a time where the US is actively combating in three wars with military force. If President Bush can secure a third war next to Iraq and Afghanistan, we won’t see Barack Obama or John McCain next Tuesday on Election Day – we’ll see Bush declaring a suspension till further notice.

Last week alone, the US invaded Pakistan with two attacks, killing 20 innocent civilians. No adequate reasoning for these attacks were been made besides the usual label of ‘war on terror’. What did Pakistan do to the United States that prompted these attacks?

The answer is nothing, and that applies to Syria too. Despite being attacked though, Syria has decided against using military force to attain revenge for the sole reason of these attacks taking place far to close to Election Day.

Though it does seem rather unlikely, the possible suspending of the election is factual truth. This can happen and you can sure bet that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are on the drawing board trying to work their magic as promptly as they ever have for this one. The last thing they want is a Democratic nominee like Barack Obama coming in and getting a hold of all their book keeping records, the largely stretched records of falsehood I might add. These are records that when exposed will have some criminal justice consequences appointed for towards the respective men and women in charge, and there’s no doubt in my mind about that one.

If President Bush cannot suspend the Election in time, then his last bet is to try and stir enough social unrest in the world with hopes of that giving John McCain the nod as being the next President. This would be his last hope because Republicans believe that during a time of war, John McCain is best suited to take charge proceeding George W. Bush.

I tend to disagree, and while Republicans are entitled to believe whatever they may, everyone must realize the facts of the matter:

Voting for McCain means you’re voting for a quintessential World War III.
Voting for Obama means you’re voting for World Peace.

Election Day on November 4, 2008 will arguably be the most important date in US history and it’s because the world’s fate is in the hands of the next United States President. We've already been punctured with the global economic crisis, so take your pick if you want to further that wound with World War III or preferably repair it with World Peace.

It's time for change

Louie from Canton, NC — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:37:50 EDT

I'm sure I'm not the only one out there who is tired of Politicians whose agenda is run by Corporate Lobbyists. Who are more concerned for granting exorbitant interest rates, fuel prices that are crippling our economy and devastating our personal ability to survive much less attempt to get ahead.

I do believe in making a profit but Never at the expense of the Citizens of this great country. I love our country and it really gets me when we see over and over again that the people put in office to serve and protect us put Lobbyists and Corporations first and foremost.

I know that we as a people and a Nation can achieve greatness and set an example for the world. An example built on greatness not by sucking the life out of everything and everyone so that only a few will experience the economic gains that greatness can achieve.

Fear keeps us from growing to a healthy and prosperous America that unfortunately the current administration has done and exactly that. Knowing that we can achieve greatness is one thing but putting that into action is the way as that grows corn. What do I mean by that?

Well Native Americans and most Indigenous cultures understand that we on this little planet we call home are Caretakers on not only the planet but for the future generations to come.

There is nothing wrong in taking action by doing things with the future generations in mind in fact it's the responsible thing to do. Responsibility for the future of this planet and our children and their children is ours and now not later or yesterday for yesterday is past and we should learn from the actions of the past to change to correct things for the future.

It's when we do now for only ourselves not taking into account what effects it may have on the future that we live and perpetuate a fallacy. It is when we look into our hearts and realize that the Divine the Sacred is first with us so that we can recognize it without that we can learn to love ourselves and our fellow humanity. For what greater gift is there than love unconditional so that we heal and be healed and to take the steps needed to grow as a people and a Nation into the Greatness that we can achieve.

It's not by being independent but dependant on the Source of life, each other and the future of our children and theirs. In fact to do things with 7 generations in mind is a good thing.

So in my humble thoughts of life for the betterment of mankind do actions that grow corn. That feed the people that insure growth and through all this we will be a strong economic America to be proud of for we do have the ability to set the standard. But do we have the commitment and the stamina to do so? I think we do.

Well enough of my ramblings. Personally I'm looking forward to our New President of the United States one that I feel has the ability and the commitment to do Greatness. The fact that Obama has done all of this without Lobbyist or Government Funding, the fact that you can hear Truth in his voice and see it in his eyes tells me that we as a Nation have the ability to achieve Greatness and it's exciting.

Of course the lies are out there as is the misinformation. But that's due to fear that loss of control, loss of a few filling their pockets on the expenses of the people know their golden parachute has holes in it. A thief strikes out when cornered, and always blames others for their action. I believe Obama to be a man of action and seeing what's been achieved makes my heart sing and now it's time to make the polls sing.

I look forward to addressing Senator Obama as Mr. President and look forward to the America he represents.

The Failed Policies of George W. Bush

Steven from Norman, OK — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:54:23 EDT

According to almost every news source in America, the Democratic Party will win big on November 4. Presidential candidate Barack Obama is far from the only Democrat who will ride into Washington on the coattails of bad feelings for President George W. Bush. Almost every Democratic candidate for office in America, fairly or not, has enjoyed a bounce in popularity by campaigning on a platform of being anti-Bush, or by linking his/her opponent to the "failed policies of the Bush administration". Indeed, George W. Bush has never had a lower approval rating than right now, partly because of the recent financial crisis. But what these Democratic candidates are not doing is reminding people what it is that is so bad about the "failed policies of George W. Bush" in the first place. If the American public remembers that it can't stand that Bush guy but can't remember why, then the "failed policies" will surely be repeated by elected members of the Government. So to serve as a reminder mostly to myself, I've jotted down 33 "failed policies" that I think have made our country worse off thanks to the 43rd President of the United States of America.

1) "The United States doesn't torture." Except when it does. George W. Bush vetoed anti-torture bills, watered down water-boarding by referring to it as an interrogation technique (like how rape is just a sexual technique), and flauted the Geneva Conventions time after time when confronted in interviews or press conferences.

2) Unfounded wars on sovereign nations. Bad intelligence that should have been ignored about WMD and yellow cake fissile material led to a war against Iraq. The previous sentence was the best-case, most P.C. explanations for George W. Bush's intentions in the Middle East. Speculation abounds as to his real reasons for war with Iraq, most of which would be inconceivable if you told it to anyone eight years ago.

3) Secrecy. Over-classification of classified documents.

4) The Patriot Act

5) Bullying. Bullying of foreign nations for support for the above unjust Iraq war. Bullying of congressional leaders for support. Bullying of the U.N. to pass the war resolution, or else. It's called negotiating when there's a give and a take, and it's called persuasion when there's a well-explained and well-grounded rationale for action. It's called bullying if threats are made and fear is induced in entities that should be our allies.

6) Over-simplification of foreign viewpoints. You don't have to be either "for us or against us".

7) "Axis of evil". Well so much for negotiation.

8) Isolating North Korea to the point that they needed to build an atomic weapon to get any bilateral negotiation with the U.S.

9) War on terror. How does one win a war against extremism? You can't kill 'em all. There are always fringe elements in even the most tightly regulated societies, like gay people in Iran, bloggers in China, and terrorists in America.

10) Pre-emptive wars. The "Bush Doctrine", I think. Even police *should* have to wait until a crime is committed to detain people. And speaking of detaining people...

11) Guantanamo Bay. And more importantly, the lack of trials for prisoners there. (I hesitate to call them "detainees".)

12) Oh wait, not "prisoners" or "detainees". "Unlawful Combatants".

13) "Extraordinary renditions". They lead to "erroneous renditions" in the absence of the law.

14) Over-reaching of executive power to facilitate illegal wiretapping. FISA courts are just not necessary anymore.

15) The Alberto Gonzales Department of Justice. Attorney firings for partisan reasons, mealymouthed testimony by most Department of Justice officials including the Attorney General himself on several occasions, the approval of warrantless wiretapping, and the attempted repeal of Habeas Corpus.

16) Incompetent "loyal Bushies" like "heckuva job" Brownie.

17) Highly competent yet highly evil "loyal Bushies" like Dick "Overlord" Cheney.

18) Anti-choice-ism

19) Anti-intellectualism

20) Anti-Europeanism.

21) Right-wing judicial nominees. I'm not talking about Roberts or Alito, which almost any other Republican president would have nominated. I mean all the other judicial appointments to lower courts that add unfounded legitimacy to an extreme right-wing judicial viewpoint by giving high-level careers to cronies. This will lead to future right-wing judicial nominees to the Supreme Court who should have gotten rejected long ago for their lack of objectivity being seen as legitimate. These juditial nominees also nearly tore up the rules of the Senate.

22) Federal Marriage Amendment. So glad that one didn't get anywhere.

23) Stem cell research. Not so much for the position (federal funds only for "existing" stem cell lines) but for the process of letting the church's viewpoint into a science decision.

24) Not signing the Kyoto protocol for anti-UN reasons.

25) While we're at it, John Bolton.

26) Sabotaging the EPA to the point where entities are now suing the EPA because it's not strict enough in regulating emissions.

27) Trying to privatize social security. How's that stock market idea looking now?

28) Increasing the national debt from about $5 trillion to about $10 trillion. This riles me up so much, I'm going to need some more bullet points about the budget.

29) Tax cuts benefitting the wealthiest of our society at a time when we were finally getting Reagan's debt under control.

30) Massive non-mandatory spending increases primarily benefitting the military industrial complex. We've got loads of money for super advanced fighter jets, but we're losing wars against people who make explosives out of pvc pipe and wire.

31) Making war spending separate from the budget. This would make sense only if the expenses were unforseeable.

32) Not addressing health care at all. Seriously, during a decade in which health care spending rose faster than any other industry, how was health care almost completely ignored by the Bush administration?

33) Well, he did address one thing. He vetoed SCHIP.

I'm sure there are plenty more policies I dislike, and I know there are plenty more policies that others dislike (No Child Left Behind, immigration). But none of this stuff gets specifically talked about by any of the Democratic candidates. We need to remember this so that we can hold future administrations accountable.

(cross-posted at quibblingpotatoes.blogspot.com)

Why I Am Voting for Barack Obama

Emily Lehr-Anning — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:36:43 EDT

I am voting for Barack Obama because I undoubtedly believe in his ability to bring about change in a time when we so desperately need it. He is authentic and compassionate, intelligent and honest. I admire him for many reasons, one of them being the way he remains calm, cool, and collected, even in times of challenge, frustration, and untruthful smears on his character. I admire him for remaining confident and reasonable. I admire him for standing up for what he believes in, for standing up for the American people, and for standing up to those who don’t. He is the candidate who deeply cares about us, and unlike McCain, has articulately explained how he will deal with the enormous issues we face, such as our plummeting economy, failing education system, housing crisis, climate change and the disgraceful war. While Obama and Biden support civil rights, women’s rights, students’ rights, and human rights, McCain and Palin wish to make abortion illegal under every circumstance (even rape and incest), deny rights to LGBT people, and continue the failed Bush policies of the past 8 years. McCain has voted with Bush over 90% of the time. It’s time for a change.

We cannot afford to lose this election, and I cannot stress that enough. We have survived 8 years under a terrible administration, and it is almost, almost over. We cannot let this opportunity slip through our fingers. A leader as intelligent, progressive, charismatic, and inspiring as Barack Obama, rarely comes around, and even more rarely, gets this close to becoming the President of the United States. If we don’t do everything in our power in the next few weeks to get him elected, it will be too late. This is not the time to procrastinate.

The Ratchet Effect

Vanessa Edwards from Houston, TX — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 12:50:05 EDT

“Recession means that people's incomes, at the employer level, are going down, basically, relative to costs, people are getting laid off." —George W. Bush

Corporate America always wins. That’s the bottom line, and that’s their entire focus: the bottom line.

A couple days ago, the Senate voted for cloture on a windfall profits tax for the obscene, record levels of profit being raked in by Big Oil. Predictably, it fell to defeat on party lines: Democrats voting for it, Republicans voting against it (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,364846,00.html)

As the story began “Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response” to the record profits on record oil and gasoline prices. What was likely overlooked in the clutter was this little tidbit: Republicans voted against it saying that this would “raise the costs” of oil and gasoline.

Did ya get that? They are raking in the largest quarterly profits ever in American history, and any windfall tax would require them to raise prices in order to make up the loss. Even with eleven-figure quarterly profits (that’s three months … tens of billions).

Bush's speech a few mins. ago

teengirl4obama — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:22:32 EDT

OMG! Did anyone watch President Bush's speech a few minutes ago? Well, if you didn't, don't worry. He really didn't say anything that any cognizant pperson didn't already know, and that is really the basis of my frustration. He NEVER says anything new! He is also repeating and readiing the same things over and over again (and that also goes for his buddies John McCain and Sarah Palin!) All the man said is that the Dow was down, we need to reduce forelosures, the state of our economy is having a global effect, blah, blah, blah. Now let me ask you, is any of this any different than what our local news media has been reporting for the past week? No! I think that Bush might just be finding out about what we already know because he is so out-of-touch. I really don't believe that he knows what is going on with the people of the nation. I think that a editorial cartoon in my local newspaper illustrated it best (sorry, I can't put it on here right now because I don't know when it was in the newspaper.) It had Bush inside of the white house looking out of a window saying "What's going on out there?"

Sweet revenge for the Democrats

Daniel Baker — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:49:31 EDT

In 2004, George W. Bush did not run against John Kerry. He ran against Michael Moore. That would be the guy who looked at the pro-Saddam Iraqi insurgents who slaughter unemployed Iraqis and their children wholesale and saw Minutemen. The guy who openly entertained the idea that 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy, and who was and is unable to understand the U.S. economy in any other terms than a vast conspiracy of the rich, who somehow all work together harmoniously against the rest of us. John Kerry, who for all his faults was clearly the better candidate, didn't dare denounce Moore and his faction for fear of splitting the Democratic party, and that cost him the election.

The Democrats couldn't have dreamed up a better revenge scenario. For now, Barack Obama is not running against John McCain, but against that far weaker and more vulnerable candidate, George W. Bush. Obama's policy is complex and well thought-out, but his campaign is brutally simple: "McCain = Bush." Two nouns and one verb; that's as simple as it gets, and extremely effective when Bush has a 25% approval rating.

JOHN MCCAIN'S DISASTEROUS PLAN TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY

Juli Norwood — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:52:02 EDT

Wake up and smell the coffee my friends before it is too late. Never has it been more important for voters to become well informed about the political issues and candidates in this 2008 presidential election. Don't simply vote based on party lines or based on other biases.

Take the time to learn about the politicians voting records.

John McCain Voting Record -

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270

Barack Obama Voting Record -

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

Cut through all of the BS that is being falsely promoted by both parties by visiting and boning up on the presidential candidates at FactCheck.org - It is a real eye opener!

http://www.factcheck.org/

And if you have never voted before there has never been a better time for you to take advantage of your precious right to vote!

John McCain has voted 90 percent of the time with George W. Bush on issues!

McCain Voted FOR Bush’s 2006 Social Security Privatization Plan. However in June 2008 at a pre-screened Town Hall Meeting he blatantly lies to those present stating...

Quote

"But I'm not for quote privatizing Social Security, I never have been, I never will be."

Unquote

His own political records and statements including his voting records PROVE he was and still is in favor of Privatizing Social Security.

McCain Quotes...

"Without privatization, I don't see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits." [C-Span Road to the White House, 11/18/2004]

“As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it — along the lines that President Bush proposed.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/3/2008]

We’ve got a ticking time bomb out there. And it’s called the Social Security Trust Fund. And starting in 2014 there’ll be more money going out than in. There’s a $5 trillion unfunded liability out there in the form of the Social Security Trust Fund. If we can put the money in quick, then we will be able to allow people to invest their payroll taxes into investments of their choosing and make a huge amount of difference in the solvency of their retirement fund.
Source: GOP Debate in Manchester NH Jan 26, 2000

McCain today called for allowing workers for the first time to invest a portion of their Social Security in private accounts.McCain called for “bold, genuine reform that allows workers to invest some of their Social Security savings, privately, in higher yielding accounts.” “Promoting investment in America by every American worker would give lower-income Americans the ownership they deserve in the country we share, as well as grow their Social Security more rapidly,” said McCain.

Can you imagine how much worse things would be for Americans had President Bush's plan to Privatize Social Security passed. Can you imagine anyone in their right mind promoting the Privatization of Social Security during a severe time of economic crisis (Ex:Wallstreet Crisis, Mortgage Crisis, Un-regulated Speculation Abuse).

McCain in 2008 denies that he is in favor of Privatization of Social Security - BUT still talks in favor of private accounts for young workers. Ahem this is the hallmark of Privatization of Social Security! Apparently he thinks the American citizens are fools and can get away with this.

His horrible voting record AGAINST Social Security speaks volumes about the future of Social Security for you and I. It looks bleak and YOU should be MORE THAN CONCERNED! McCain is thinking of raising the age of retirement to 68!

McCain is also thinking of reducing the cost of living adjustments in Social Security!

1998 McCain voted twice to replace Social Security’s guaranteed benefits with income from risk-based private investments.

In 2000 McCain Wanted to Divert Social Security Money to Private Accounts.

2001 McCain opposed reducing tax cuts for the wealthy to create a strategic reserve for Social Security.

2001 McCain voted against a proposal to create “lockboxes” to protect Social Security and Medicare.

2003 McCain voted to use Social Security funds to pay off federal debt

2005 McCain voted against prioritizing Social Security solvency over tax cuts for the wealthy.

His Medicare record is TERRIBLE!

NEWSFLASH!!! John McCain wants to slash Medicare by 1.3 trillion dollars! This is simply outrageous! It is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!

2005 McCain voted for the budget reconciliation bill that reduced spending on Medicare by $6.4 billion.

2005 McCain voted against protecting seniors from steep increases in their Medicare Part B premiums.

1997 McCain voted to support provisions that would increase the age for Medicare eligibility from age 65 to age 67.

2007 McCain missed a vote to amend Medicare Part D - so Medicare could negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs same as the Department of Veterans Affairs does. Prices for prescription drugs under Medicare Part D are 50 percent higher than those for veterans.

Yes John McCain is a Maverick... While the majority of Republicans are scrambling to distance themselves from George W. Bush, McCain is being a Maverick by embracing the Bush Administrations policies. And one of those adopted Bush policies is to Privatize Social Security! Maverick Smaverick sounds like the same ole same ole to me!

Our Country CAN'T take another 4 years of George W. Bush! McCain aka McBush is clearly just a mini-me of George W. Bush!

Barack Obama's Social Security Plan is to...

Protect Social Security - by working with members of Congress from both parties to strengthen Social Security and prevent privatization while protecting middle class families from tax increases or benefit cuts. A bipartisan plan would be implemented which would be phased in over many years, where he would ask those making over $250,000 to contribute a bit more to Social Security to keep it sound. (range of 2 to 4 percent more in total, combined employer and employee).

Reform Corporate Bankruptcy Laws to Protect Workers and Retirees

Require Full Disclosure of Company Pension Investments

Eliminate Income Taxes for Seniors Making Less Than $50,000

Create Automatic Workplace Pensions

Expand Retirement Savings Incentives for Working Families

Prevent Age Discrimination

Provide Cheaper Prescription Drugs

Protect and Strengthen Medicare

Provide Transparency to Medicare Prescription Drug Plans

Strengthen Long-Term Care Options

Ensure Heating Assistance

Support Senior Volunteer Efforts

To Learn MORE about Barack Obama's Social Security Plan please click link below...

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/socialsecurity/

Juli Norwood

With Us or Agin' Us

Emily from El Cerrito, CA — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:30:58 EDT

Cross Posted at <a href="http://emilyduffyart.blogspot.com/">Elephant in the Room</a> (Go there for larger views of images if you wish.)

I'm an artist first and a political blogger second. Sometimes, especially in the past eight years (youknowwhy) I've had to put my art second, behind my activism, which I don't like to do. Other times having art-making as an expressive outlet has probably kept my head from exploding. Like you poll wonks, and policy writers I'm using my personal skills to help win our country back. Art is a less represented method of activism here on DailyKos but there are many artists among our community.

I'd like to share with you the first in a series of sculptures I've been working on since 2003. The actual artwork will be on <a href="http://www.artofdemocracy.org/galleries/west/gallery_joshua_tree.html">exhibit</a> in October (near one of the nation's largest Marine bases) but since most of you won't be able to get to Joshua Tree, CA to see it, I'm sharing it online now. I'm hoping it will help change votes, minds, hearts, and inspire progressive action and CHANGE/HOPE/PROGRESS!

A Call For Plain English. PLEASE.

Robin Z — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:07:19 EDT

I don't know about everyone else, but I actually prefer our President and Vice President not only to BE highly educated, but to SOUND highly educated.

For eight long years we've listened to tough-talking cowboy George W. Bush struggling to string coherent sentences together, not to mention his purposeful mispronunciation of NUKE-ULAR.

Now we've got the Governor of Alaska, whose speech is rife with gollies, gotchas, and gee whizzes, sounding more like she is campaigning for FIRST CHEERLEADER than Vice President of the United States of America. Oh, and energy expert that you are, Governor, you are, of course, aware that you too mispronounce NUKE-ULAR.

What's the problem? To me it's not cute or folksy, but rather gives a poor impression of the American people, both within our country, and to the rest of the world.

I think the President and the Vice President should represent the BEST that we can be, and not the oppoaite.

With all due respect.

Why Joe Biden Won Tonight's Debate

Robin Z — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 23:39:25 EDT

Governor Palin was not able to distinguish the McCain/Palin ticket from George W. Bush's disastrous eight years in the White House.

You can dish out all the jabs and barbs you like, Governor, but you weren't able to tell us anything we didn't already know.

JOHN MCCAIN = GEORGE W. BUSH = JOHN MCCAIN

It's that simple.

THE Bailout bill goes down . . . so who's got the power?

l.t. Dravis — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:03:42 EDT

By l.t. Dravis

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Monday, September 29, 2008 – The House of Representatives voted down the $700 billion bailout bill by a vote of 228 to 205, taking the wind out of the Bush administration’s sails and seriously questioning the power and authority of the House of Representatives.

The democracy we’ve known and loved for more than two centuries has been forever changed.

Why?

Because the power of the people has finally been felt.

Too many voters sent too many very clear messages to too many representatives to not be heard.

And the lesson is?

The people have the power to set not only the direction of legislation but also the tone of the debate in this country.

Don’t believe it?

Look at the political weight that was thrown behind the bailout bill.

The entire leadership of the Democratic Party has been promoting the bailout to anyone and everyone who would listen for the past ten days . . . yet it failed.

The Bush administration has put more time and energy into warning us about the dire consequences of the failure of this bill than they ever did with those yellow-orange-red alerts they used to throw around for whatever reason . . . yet it failed.

Democratic and Republican leaders argued before the public that the bailout was essential to the very survival of the American economy . . . yet it failed.

Before the vote today, the White House, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Josh Bolton were on the phone, twisting arms, trying to convince representatives on both sides of the aisle to support the bill . . . yet it failed.

During the 40 minute long roll call, several representatives on the House floor were shouting warnings about how the Dow Jones Average was dropping precipitously . . . yet it failed.

The American people let their representatives know that they didn’t trust their government, especially President Bush and Vice-President Cheney, enough to support the bailout.

And their representatives listened.

Talk about the power of the people.

Let’s hope we never forget today . . . the day the democracy we’ve known and loved for more than two centuries has been forever changed.

How about that?

If you have questions, comments, or concerns, Email me at LTDAssociates@msn.com (goes right to my desk) and since I personally answer every Email, I look forward to hearing from you soon.

McCain Gambling Interests & Gaming the Families of POWs/MIAs Top the News

Brian M Ross — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:20:55 EDT

You always save the the most obvious for last, I suppose, in the political news game during the waning days of an election cycle. As some of the media outlets smell blood in the water, it is safer to start dropping a few of John McCain's political skeletons into the news stream.

While McCain may not have created the Internet, he is the father of modern gambling in America...

Political Theater

Zoee2102 — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:05:46 EDT

John McCain has hijacked the headlines for political gain yet again. He has learned from the best, the very same people who ruined his chance for the White House in 2000.

Karl Rove is working in the shadows to make sure a Republican wins again, this time it's McCain. He's using every trick in his play book. One tactic that seems to be working well is to use every opportunity, whether politically correct or not, to gain poll numbers. After the Democratic Convention, Obama was riding high on a wave of hope and positive polling, so McCain announced his running mate. The choice of Sarah Palin was clearly a political maneuver. She has no experience, and as proven lately, is as dumb as a doornail. The choice wasn't based upon who was the most experienced and qualified, it was a play to the so-called "Hilary voters". Sadly, McCain thinks that the voters who wanted Hilary will also want Palin, who is the antithesis of Hilary Clinton. The only "Hilary voters" who would vote for the McCain ticket instead of Obama, are the rednecks who will never vote for a black man for President. Anyone who likes her for what she actually believes in, are true Democrats, and will vote for the Obama ticket. McCain succeeded in shaking things up, and has actually been enjoying a "surge" in popularity since announcing the Palin/McCain ticket. However, the bloom is definitely coming off the rose, as evident from Palin's interview with Couric yesterday. No wonder they try to keep her away from reporters, she's clueless.

The Republican convention, through some cosmic twist of fate, coincided with the unhappy anniversary of Katrina, and hurricane Gustav was rearing it's head. I can just see Rove, who is working on the McCain campaign, smiling ear to ear and sneering "I've got an awful, wonderful idea". And so, the headlines were all about McCain putting on his "American" hat, and putting the country first. More like putting the Campaign first. It was an obvious political maneuver, since months before he was nowhere to be found during the fires in California, or Hurricane Fay in Florida. Then, a week after Gustav hit, thankfully with less fury than anticipated, Ike rose up to strike Texas. Where was McCain then? Where was Pitbull Palin? Where are their "American" hats? I guess they put them away until another "rainy" day.

Enter the financial crisis which is affecting millions of people. We've known the economy was in crisis for some time now, while McCain touted the strength of the economy's fundamentals. Then Wall Street tumbled, and like a deer in headlights he tried to backtrack by saying the fundamentals are people...poor McCain, he's so desperate. This week he decided to take his "American" hat out of the closet and suspend his campaign. I would hope that someone who wants to be President would be able to do more than one thing at a time. Isn't that on the list of requisites? If not, it should be. Even Bush can read "My pet goat" to children while ignoring a terrorist attack, or celebrate his good buddy John McCain's birthday while Katrina blew out the lights in New Orleans.

The American people don't want the Presidential candidates to suspend their campaigns or cancel Friday's debate. The American people want to watch Obama kick McSame's wrinkled old ass. John's afraid, understandably, he knows he's no match for the much younger, more charismatic and eloquent Barack. He panicked and stooped so low as to politicize the very real financial crisis. He even dissed Letterman, telling him that he had to rush to Washington, ala Mighty Mouse, to save the day. Turned out he was next door taping with Katie Couric. Letterman is pissed, as I am. Even the ladies on The View see McCain's campaign ads for the fiction they are; pointing out that Obama never called Sarah a pig. The lies and obfuscation are piling up, Mr. McCain, and the American people are on to you...you better be afraid.

Giant Wall Street Bailout or Fascist Coup d'Etat?

Ugly Sister — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 10:15:59 EDT

The recent fusion of state and financial interests that culminated in the federal bailout of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and AIG will eventually cost taxpayers over a trillion dollars. While some may see the financial slowdown as evidence of the decline of the American Empire, others view recent developments in the giant government bailout as steps toward fascism.

Continue reading at: http://locationofcontestation.wordpress.com/

The "L" and the old "N" Word

Robert Jay from Harpursville, NY — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 23:22:08 EDT

Liberals -- defined as those who believe in a humanistic education, the earned rights of people, and the inalienable pursuit of the facts about and the meaning of life -- have the intellectual handle on what's wrong with society. In spite of a superior knowledge of what's wrong, how things got that way and how they can be equitably repaired, Liberals lose in American society. And they have lost since long before Hofstader pointed out that there is an abundance of "Anti-intellectualism in American Life." Just visit the grave of Adlai Stevenson -- the wonderfully smart and kind Obama of his day -- and contemplate the current race.

If we're so smart, how come McBush is headed towards a win even after picking the Barbie Doll from Hell to rule the country shortly after his handlers tell us about John's unfortunate losing battle with Alzheimer's Disease in '09? The answer is simple. The Neocons have ruled so long and so successfully by studying how to control and manipulate the masses from the undisputed experts: the National Socialists of three-quarters of a century ago. Karl Rove, aka "McBush's working brain," has been a student and admirer of Dr. Joesph Goebbels since his salad days. The results are obvious: strong words, gesture-punctuated certitude, and the Big Lie works every time, even if the GOP's talking head has all the appeal of a pasty, bloated Ghost of Christmas Past.

You cannot beat Neocons or Nazis with reasoned discourse. And on that tragic truth, Liberals will always lose. We are just too darn nice to cast even a harsh, complicated truth about an opponent, let alone a Big Lie. Well, I've studied Goebbels' diaries just as Rove has. And I am not afraid to shout: "John McBush is a failed war vet, his policies are anti-constitutional and even anti-military. McBush is dumb as a post, he lies opportunistically and chronically, he changes his opinions as often as he covered up his failed war record, and his misogyny and racism are just one temper tantrum away from a public, finger-on-the-nuclear-trigger display. John McCain is the only candidate that ever made George Bush look good." There, I've said it. And he's just a few dozen more Big Lies away from the White House.

If the Obama campaign doesn't recognize the value of making very loud, very bold statements about their opponent, come November 5th they'll likely join the distinguished (and forgotten) ranks of Henry A. Wallace, Adlai E. Stevenson, Hubert H. Humphrey, and all of us Liberals who hoped the American electorate would reward intelligent leadership over fear-mongering piracy. They didn't then; they probably won't now. I hope I'm wrong.

McCain and Palin: a Bridge to Nowhere

Michael from Arlington Heights, IL — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:52:30 EDT

Voiceover:

"Palin keeps lying and denying her support for a bridge for 50 people that would cost $398 million dollars. And McCain's plans, the same as Bush's, are a bridge to nowhere for the middle class. He'll sell out America--again. You want a fourteen-trillion dollar national debt? Another stupid war? Seven dollar a gallon gas? Tax cuts for billionaires--again--when we just can't afford it? Wise up, middle class. Don't be fooled again by McCain and Palin and George W. Bush's Republican Party. McCain and Palin are a Bridge to Nowhere. I'm Barack Obama and I support this message."

Visuals: Open with a depressing picture of some little-known suspension bridge. "Bridge to nowhere" should be flashed in red across image of McCain and Palin. "$398 million" should flash across Palin. The Debt amount should be flashed in red across an image of McCain. Palin should get the $7.00 gas amount. "Tax cuts for billionaires" should show a couple of creepy-looking, sycophantic lawyers and accountants in suits congratulating an evil-looking rich man smoking a cigar [I'm not kidding] fading into a pic of McCain and Bush for the text "George W. Bush's Republican Party." "Wise up middle class" should show a middle-class couple looking worried, blonde wife, two cute kids. "McCain and Palin are a Bridge to nowhere" should superimpose their earlier pic over the pic of the ugly bridge.

Dennis Ross Supports Obama

Tal from NPR/Trinity — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:42:03 EDT

Dennis Ross stumps for Obama

Published: 09/12/2008

Dennis Ross launched a public appeal to American Jews to vote for Barack Obama. A former diplomat and Middle East specialist who held top policy-planning positions in the Clinton and first Bush administrations, Ross told an overflow crowd at a suburban Philadelphia synagogue on Thursday night that he was embracing partisan politics because "the United States can't afford and Israel can't afford" a continuation of the Bush policies over the past eight years.

Ross said he had remained neutral during the primary season because of his relationship with the Clintons. Now that he has signed on as a Middle East adviser to Obama and a surrogate to help elect him, the Obama campaign is deploying Ross to appear before Jewish audiences in key swing states, including Ohio, Nevada and Florida, according to Daniel Shapiro, director of Jewish outreach for Obama.

Ross told JTA that while he didn't expect to be asked to be secretary of state in an Obama administration, "If I could play a role in an Obama administration and I could make a difference, I'd be happy to do so."

Ross said he signed onto the Obama campaign after accompanying the Democratic nominee for president on his trip to Israel and Europe this summer and coming away impressed with Obama's leadership style, grasp of the issues and ability to dialogue with all the world leaders with whom he met. The trip, he said, focused heavily on the threat of a nuclear Iran. So did Ross' remarks Thursday.

Calling Iran's nuclear ambitions the "most important issue we are facing in terms of national security," Ross said that Iran is "already a nuclear power" and has increased its ability to produce nuclear arms dramatically over the past several years under the failed policies of the Bush administration.

He defended Obama's willingness to engage Iran, suggesting it was foolish to eliminate one of the tools that could help change "unacceptable behavior."

He sidestepped a question on whether Obama would support an Israeli strike against Iran, saying the United States needs to work toward a "third way" that avoids just two alternatives: a nuclear-armed Iran or military action against Iran. Ross reiterated Obama's position that "when it comes to Israel's security, they are the ultimate arbiter."

Question: Who is John McCain?

Robin Z — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:19:03 EDT

Answer: A man who will say ANYTHING to win. No ideals, no integrity, no policies on behalf of the American people. A puppet on a string. If ever he had ideals, they're gone now. The Republicans are running this deceitful campaign in his name, and he allows them to do so. That's not leadership, that's George W. Bush all over again.

First Blog - First Rant

George from Riverside, CA — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:34:48 EDT

I am writing this because once again I am afraid that the Republican machine is framing the discussion in ways that help them. Is John McCain that unpopular among Republicans that all we hear about is Sarah Palin? And if we have to hear about her, let's hear some things that haven't been discussed.

So she cancelled the "Bridge to Nowhere"...but progressive talk show hosts are mentioning that she kept the money for her state. Is this true, and if so, why hasn't someone asked her about it? Oh, that's right, she's not doing interviews just yet, just giving prepared speeches. Is she really that unprepared for the public that she needs some study time to prepare?

And if that is the case, isn't that another example of how she is just like G. W.? (or is she more like Dan Quayle?) I hope we all remember how, on national television, prior to the 2000 election, G.W. couldn't name a number of foreign leaders. Another unprepared backwoods governor, another four years of the same.

The press is reporting that every Alaskan resident of at least one year gets an annual check of $2000 from the royalties that the oil companies pay. And that this "maverick" governor forced those oil companies to pay an additional $1300 to each person out of their "windfall profits".

Windfall Profits? Wasn't that what Democrats in Washington were trying to tax on a national basis, but it was held up by Republicans? Instead, the oil companies got tax breaks, so that they could make record profits, thereby allowing Ms. Palin to buy her constituents votes.

So with about 600,000 Alaskan residents, this extra $1300 each amounts to $780 million in expenses to the oil companies. And where do we think they got the money? By charging everyone more for their product. So in reality, those of us in the lower 48 states (plus Hawaii) paid the bill on this.

Isn't this just a wonderful governor? She keeps bilking the voters in other states so that she can buy votes in her own? This sounds a lot like what has been going on nationally for the last eight years.

The last eight years were not just about incompetence, although it has been about a lot of that. It has been about lying to the American public: about wars, about the economy, about the threat posed by other countries. It has been about name calling, about not being patriotic if you disagree with the President. It has been about secrecy, about hiding things from the public. It has been about abuse of power. It has been about not standing up and taking the blame when the blame is well deserved. It has been about mortgaging our children's future by running up huge deficits. In the week and a half that we have heard from Sarah Palin, I have not heard anything about changing these problems with the government.

If this "war" (occupation) is as important as the President (and John McCain) have said it is, then why haven't they asked the American people to sacrifice for it? Why is every penny of the cost being borrowed, instead of taxes being raised? Why hasn't a draft been proposed by the Republicans? The short answer is that it is not as popular as they would have you believe, and any new taxes or draft would put the resulting uproar in the national news.

And about taxes... We keep hearing about cutting taxes. How John McCain will cut your taxes, how Sarah Palin will cut your taxes. But don't bills have to be paid? I hate to break this to you all, but after paying for the defense appropriation, AND THE WAR, which this government is keeping off the books, and the interest on the National Debt, we're already in the hole. So our government borrows the money. Now the dollar is worth less, and everything costs more. So G.W. sends us checks to keep us happy, and the economy moving. Three times in his eight years he has resorted to this tactic. But gas is more expensive (twice as much as when he took office), energy of every sort is more expensive. Food is more expensive. Everything that relies on oil for production or transportation is more expensive. We try to save money and look for the best deals, which are usually items imported from China and third world countries. So now our trade balance is further out of whack, and the dollar is worth less, as countries can't spend them or dump them fast enough.

But back to Sarah Palin before I finish today's rant. President Bush has made a point of only speaking to hand-picked supportive crowds over the last eight years. He hasn't had the guts to stand up in an open crowd and listen to the jeers. Now we get Sarah Palin, who will do an interview only if she is shown "deference". She wants to run for national office, she needs to get the tough questions. We should settle for nothing less. Thanks for reading.

Who is going to answer the phone at 3:00 in the morning McCain or Palin?

LaSharon from Irving, TX — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:44:15 EDT

The McCain campaign was running ads that stated that Barack Obama is not experienced enough to answer the red phone at 3:00 in the morning. Well, the way their campaign has allowed Sarah Palin to take center stage as though she is the top of the ticket, will she have a rollaway bed placed in McCain's bedroom so she can answer the red phone at 3:00 in the morning? John McCain clearly picked this woman, with little or questionable experience, to get media attention and try to pitifully win over former Hillary Clinton supporters. I think that this was a desperate and petty move on his part. I don't believe that Hillary Clinton supporters are going to fall for this obvious farce. She has nothing even close to Hillary Clinton when it comes to experience or strength. How dare she get up there and let the George W. Bush speech writing team write her into a corner by making fun of Barack Obama's experience and record as a community organizer. How does she think grass roots began? This never done before grass roots success that his campaign has become is a result of his experience as a community organizer. Her remarks at the RNC were offensive, sarcastic, and totally useless in letting people know where their party stands on issues. How convenient because she had no new ideas to speak of. Women, Republicans, and undecided voters are supposed to be impressed because she can play the dozens, because she can hurl insults that she read from a teleprompter? The surrogates who are defending her can only point to the fact that she is a soccer mom, that she put a plane up for auction on Ebay, and that she was mayor of a small town. Oh, and lets not forget one of the most popular governor's in the United States. Big surprise, since most of the state is comprised of men looking at an ex-beauty queen. If I were these ladies, I would be very embarrassed to only have these attributes to speak of on national media outlets such as CNN. They talk as if they know her personally. I hope they don't end up eating crow for breakfast after Palin actually starts talking to the media and more information comes out on her. Remember, she is still under investigation. After awhile, McCain may start to wonder how much of a Maverick he truly was in picking her. He better hope that his party does not come up with new rules and make him the Vice Presidential nominee instead of the Presidential nominee! Now wouldn't that be something for the history books or in her case the she-story books!

"No Maverick" Ad on the Air

jgabriel — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:37:21 EDT

Obama-Biden has a new ad up refuting McCain's "Original Mavericks" ad. This ad is called "No Maverick", and goes into why John McCain and Sarah Palin are just more of the same.

Original Maverick: The Fact Check

jgabriel — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:25:08 EDT

Obama campaign distributes a fact-check on the new McCain ad "Original Mavericks":

“Despite being discredited over and over again by numerous news organizations, the McCain campaign continues to repeat the lie that Sarah Palin stopped the Bridge to Nowhere. John McCain has voted with George Bush 90% of the time and he and Sarah Palin will continue Bush’s economic policies, his health care policy, his education policy, his energy policy, and his foreign policy. McCain and Palin will say or do anything to make people believe that they will change something besides the person sitting in the Oval Office. That’s the kind of politics people are tired of, and it’s anything but change,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

AD WATCH FOR “ORIGINAL MAVERICKS”
9/8/08

VO: The original maverick.

Reality: McCain Has Been A Reliable Vote For George Bush And THE Republican Party

McCain Has Voted With Bush 90 Percent Of The Time In The Senate. According to Congressional Quarterly, McCain has voted in support of President Bush’s position 90 percent of the time since the beginning of his administration. [Congressional Quarterly, 8/15/08, http://www.cqpolitics.com/cq-assets/cqmultimedia/flash/votestudy/index.html]

Arizona Republic Headline: “In Tight Senate Votes, McCain Not A Maverick. When It Matters The Most, He Seldom Bucks His Own Party.” “Over the years, Sen. John McCain has publicly condemned Republican Party leaders and occasionally voted against the GOP on selected issues. But an Arizona Republic analysis of his Senate votes on the most divided issues in the past decade shows that McCain almost never thwarted his party’s objectives.” [Arizona Republic, 5/7/08]

McCain: On The “Most Important Issues Of Our Day, I Have Been Totally In Agreement And Support Of President Bush.” In a June 2005 interview on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” John McCain stated that he was a strong supporter of President Bush: “I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I have been totally in agreement and support of President Bush.” [NBC, “Meet The Press,” 6/19/05]

VO: He fights pork barrel spending.

CG: San Jose Mercery News: “McCain Faults Bush for Pork Barrel Spending” – 12/1/03

REALITY: MCCAIN HAS VOTED FOR PORK BARREL SPENDING

McCain Has Voted For 12,673 Earmarks Totaling $144 Billion In Just Six Years. In just six of his 25 years in Congress, John McCain voted for spending bills that included 12,763 earmarks totally $144.408 billion according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, which the McCain campaign has cited as an authoritative source for the definition of earmarks. [Appropriations Bills From FYs 1994, 1996, 1998, 2002, 2004 and 2005 for which the Congressional Research Service totaled earmarks and for which John McCain voted for the conference reports. “Earmarks in Appropriation Acts: FY1994, FY1996, FY1998, FY2000, FY2002, FY2004, FY2005,” Congressional Research Service, 1/26/06; Senate.gov; Center For American Progress, 4/16/08]

McCain Himself Has Asked For Earmarks Throughout His Career. As Factcheck.org pointed out in three cases they analyzed, “McCain may have requested, or been influential in securing, an earmark.” His $10 million request for funding for the Rehnquist Center in Arizona would “meet the public idea” of an earmark according to pork watchdog Taxpayers For Common Sense (TCS). McCain also asked the first Bush administration to “earmark” funds for a wastewater treatment plant, and got last-minute funds inserted into a conference report for an Air Force base, part of a plan that eventually reaped major profits for McCain supporters. TCS also called that an earmark, according to USA Today. [Factcheck.org; New York Times, 2/18/2006; WashingtonPost.com, 12/31/08; USA Today, 5/15/08]

McCain Keeps Making Exceptions For Some Earmarks When People Question His Pledge. When journalists and analysts have pointed out that the McCain definition of earmarks includes billions in aid to Israel, he made an exception, saying “of course not. I’m not cutting any aid.” McCain similarly made exceptions for military housing, a breast cancer research program, billions for Everglades restoration and an Alabama ferry. [Center For American Progress, 4/16/08; Ben Smith, Politico.com, 4/16/08; ABC News, “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” 4/20/08; ”Tales from the Trail” Blog, Reuters, 4/30/2008; CNN Live Feed (Allentown, PA), 4/30/2008; Miami Herald, 6/5/08; Congressional Record, 9/24/07; Taxpayers For Common Sense website; Jonathan Martin, Politico.com, 4/24/08; NPR’s All Things Considered, 4/23/08]

VO: She stopped the Bridge to Nowhere.

CG: Anchorage Daily News: “Palin Flies High As Reformer” – 12/27/07

REALITY: PALIN WAS FOR THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE BEFORE SHE WAS AGAINST IT

Politifact: Palin’s Stance On “The Bridge To Nowhere” Is “A Full Flop.” Politfact, a service of CQ and the St. Petersburg Times wrote, “McCain said Palin has ‘stopped government from wasting taxpayers’ money on things they don’t want or need. And when we in Congress decided to build a bridge in Alaska to nowhere for $233-million of yours, she said, we don’t want it. If we need it, we’ll build our own in Alaska. She’s the one that stood up to them.’ Nevermind that Alaska didn’t give the money back. It spent the money on other transportation projects. The context of Palin’s and McCain’s recent statements suggest Palin flagged the so-called Bridge to Nowhere project as wasteful spending. But that’s not the tune she was singing when she was running for governor, particularly not when she was standing before the Ketchikan Chamber of Commerce asking for their vote. And so, we rate Palin’s position a Full Flop.” [Politifact]

Anchorage Daily News Headline: “Palin Touts Stance on ‘Bridge to Nowhere,’ Doesn’t Note Flip Flop.” “When John McCain introduced Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate Friday, her reputation as a tough-minded budget-cutter was front and center. ‘I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere,’ Palin told the cheering McCain crowd, referring to Ketchikan’s Gravina Island bridge. But Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it. The Alaska governor campaigned in 2006 on a build-the-bridge platform, telling Ketchikan residents she felt their pain when politicians called them ‘nowhere.’ They’re still feeling pain today in Ketchikan, over Palin’s subsequent decision to use the bridge funds for other projects — and over the timing of her announcement, which they say came in a pre-dawn press release that seemed aimed at national news deadlines. ‘I think that’s when the campaign for national office began,’ said Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein on Saturday.” [Anchorage Daily News, 8/31/08]

Palin Was for the Bridge to Nowhere Before She Was Against It. In 2006, Palin was asked, “Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?” She responded, “Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” [Ancorage Daily News, 10/22/06, republished 08/29/08]

·         2006: Palin: Don’t Allow “Spinmeisters” To Turn Bridge To Nowhere Project “Into Something That’s So Negative.” “Part of my agenda is making sure that Southeast is heard. That your projects are important. That we go to bat for Southeast when we’re up against federal influences that aren’t in the best interest of Southeast.’ She cited the widespread negative attention focused on the Gravina Island crossing project. ‘We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,’ Palin said.” [Ketchikan Daily News, 10/2/06]

·         2006: Palin On Bridge To Nowhere: “Would Not Stand In The Way Of The Progress Toward That Bridge.” According to the Ketchikan Daily News, “People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and the purpose,’ said Palin, who described the link as the Ketchikan area’s potential for expansion and growth…Palin said Alaska’s congressional delegation worked hard to obtain funding for the bridge as part of a package deal and that she ‘would not stand in the way of the progress toward that bridge.’” [Ketchikan Daily News, 8/9/06, accessed 8/29/08]

·         2006: Palin Said People Across the Nation Were “Under These Misperceptions About the Bridge and its Purpose.” According to the Ketchikan Daily News in 2006, “‘People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and the purpose,’ said Palin, who described the link as the Ketchikan area’s potential for expansion and growth. The Ketchikan community now needs to have a strong, unified effort to say whether it wants the bridge or not. ‘And if you want the thing, there needs to be good justification,’ she said. ‘There needs to be the reasonableness that the rest of Alaska and the rest of the United States wants to see.’ She said that reasonableness could include a compromise in design and cost, such as limiting the link to a single span instead of the two-span Revilla-Pennock-Gravina route. ‘It’s pretty grandiose here, what is proposed,’ she said. Palin said Alaska’s congressional delegation worked hard to obtain funding for the bridge as part of a package deal and that she ‘would not stand in the way of the progress toward that bridge.’” [Ketchikan Daily News, 8/9/06]

Palin’s Spokesman Said She Supported the Bridge to Nowhere. “Republican Sarah Palin’s spokesman, Curtis Smith, said Palin supports the Ketchikan bridge project, but had no immediate response to Murkowski’s plans.” [Ketchikan Daily News, 11/21/06]

VO: He took on the drug industry.

CG: AP: “McCain Calls for Permitting the Importation of Prescription Drugs from Canada” – 11/17/07

REALITY: MCCAIN HAS SIDED WITH THE DRUG COMPANIES

McCain Opposed Advertising Regulations for Drug Ads. In 2003, McCain voted against an amendment that would require drug companies to release advertisements with balanced visual and audio information. The Health and Human Services secretary would be required to speed up the review process of such advertisements. The secretary also would be able to require drug companies to assess their drugs against similar ones that already exist and include those comparisons in advertisements. Drug companies violating the advertising rules would be subject to civil penalties. [2003 Senate Vote #248, 6/26/2003]

McCain Voted Against Allowing States To Develop Programs To Force Pharmaceutical Companies To Discount Drug Prices For Americans. In 2002, McCain voted against clarifying that current law does not prohibit a state from entering into drug rebate agreements with a manufacturer in order to ensure affordability and accessibility of outpatient prescription drugs for State’s residents who are not otherwise eligible for medical assistance under Medicaid. [2002 Senate Vote #182, 7/18/2002]

McCain Voted Against Medicaid Drug Discounts And Cracking Down On Provider Fraud. In 1995, McCain voted against restoring drug discounts to state Medicaid programs and public health facilities; to retain provisions against health care provider fraud and abuse; to retain current federal nursing home standards; and to remove provisions that provide greater or lesser Medicaid spending in states based upon the votes needed for passage. [1995 Senate Vote #573, 11/13/1995]

VO: She took on big oil.

CG: AP: Palin Takes on Oil Industry, Republicans” – 12/28/07

REALITY: PALIN HAS CLOSE TIES TO THE OIL INDUSTRY

In Her 2002 Campaign for Lieutenant Governor, Palin Raised ‘About 10 Percent Of Her Campaign Fund’ From Veco, An Oil Company Under Federal Investigation. “While mayor of Wasilla, Palin ran for lieutenant governor in 2002. She gathered $5,000 — or about 10 percent of her campaign fund — from Veco officials or their wives along the way.” [Anchorage Daily News, 9/6/06]

Palin Said She Had Begun Working With the White House and Even Talked With Dick Cheney About Alaska’s Energy Policy. In her 2007 State of the State Address, Palin said, “Of course, the primary focus of our long-term energy plan can be summed up in three words — NATURAL GAS PIPELNE! This gasline will fuel our homes, our economy, and careers for Alaskans - for generations. The gasline is critical not just for our future, but for the nation’s future. It’s also an essential component of our nation’s energy policy. Truly, for energy independence, the nation will look to Alaska. We’ve already begun working with the White House. In fact, I had a nice conversation with Vice President Cheney today. And we are also blessed to have a strong ally in former State Senator Drue Pearce, who’s been tasked by the President to get the gasline built. The energy industry is also engaged and I look forward to working with Congress and our legislators - our “partners” to deliver our natural gas to market.” [Excerpt from January 17, 2007 State of the State Address]

The Weekly Standard Called Palin “The Nation’s Most Prominent Advocate of Drilling in ANWR.” Sen. John McCain was reconsidering his opposition to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and planned to talk about the issue with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, “the nation’s most prominent advocate of drilling in ANWR,” an article in The Weekly Standard said. “In an interview with The Weekly Standard aboard his campaign plane last week, McCain made clear he has not ruled out a change in his position ? to one that endorses drilling in ANWR.” [The Weekly Standard, 8/25/08]

Palin Said She Would Beg to Disagree With Candidate Who Said We Can’t Drill Our Way Out of Our Problem. Asked by Invester’s Business Daily “Some politicians and presidential candidates say we can’t drill our way out of our energy problem and that drilling in ANWR will have no effect. What’s your best guess of the impact on prices?” Palin responded, “I beg to disagree with any candidate who would say we can’t drill our way out of our problem or that more supply won’t ultimately affect prices. Of course it will affect prices. Energy being a global market, it’s impossible to venture a guess on (specific) prices. We never would have thought oil would reach $140. Only a few months ago, we thought $100 would be the peak. And here it is at $140 (with) no end in sight. It’s very difficult to determine, but we do know the demand is going to continue to increase. The demand in Asia especially is one reason why prices are going to increase. But if I could predict energy prices, I wouldn’t be sitting here today.” [Investor’s Business Daily, 7/11/08]

Sierra Club Director Carl Pope Said “No One is Closer to the Oil Industry Than Governor Palin.” “No one is closer to the oil industry than Governor Palin,” said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club in comments reflecting the views of a cross section of environmental activists. They cite her eagerness to embrace expanded offshore oil development, her lawsuit against further protection of polar bears so as not to hinder oil drilling in Alaska’s ice-filled waters and her ardent support to allow oil companies into the Alaska wildlife refuge. [Associated Press, 8/30/08]

Palin Took $13,000 from Lobbyists Representing the Oil Industry in Her 2006 Campaign for Governor. The lobbyists who donated to her campaign represent a range of industries, including oil and gas, tobacco, education and the Native Alaskan community. “She’s fought oil companies and party bosses and do-nothing bureaucrats and anyone who puts their interests before the interests of the people she swore an oath to serve,” Mr. McCain said Friday at an Ohio rally to introduce her as his running mate. But since Mrs. Palin leads a major oil-producing state, that industry is one of her top donors. She collected nearly $13,000 from lobbyists who represent oil and gas industries in her primary and general campaigns, according a review of her campaign donations and 2006 registered state lobbyists. [Washington Times, 9/1/08]

Palin Said She Understood and Appreciated the Oil Industry. In 2006, Palin said, “I’m not anti-industry. As a former mayor of the fastest-growing area in Alaska and a former regulator of oil and gas, I understand and appreciate the contributions that industry provides to our state economy and the U.S. economy. My husband started his job on the Slope 18 years ago. He’s a blue collar union man up there, and I appreciate the job opportunities provided him. He’s from Dillingham, from Bristol Bay. He’s got good skills, a good work ethic and he has been rewarded for that work ethic, materially, if you will, with a good job on the North Slope. He’s the kind of Alaskan I want to see more of employed on the Slope. … I also have a great understanding of industry’s motivation. Industry’s motivation … unfortunately for us … is that they take as much possible and leave as little behind, but that’s what the CEOs of these producing companies are supposed to do; that’s what they are tasked to do by their shareholders. It’s all the more reason for us to understand what our relationship with the industry needs to be; that the state’s CEO works just as hard for the shareholders in this state, who are fellow Alaskans.” [Alaska Journal of Commerce, 10/8/06]

VO: He battled Republicans and reformed Washington.

CG: Boston Herald: “Maverick McCain Rips GOP” – 4/2/04

REALITY: MCCAIN ABRAMAOFF INVESTIGATION “IGNORED” ACTIONS BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

McCain Acknowledged That Members Had Responsibility In The Lobbying Scandal, But Refused To Investigate Member’s Actions In An Investigation That “Ignored” Congressional Republicans. McCain acknowledged that Members were responsible for their conduct in Congress surrounding the lobbying scandal, saying, “Many cast blame [for the Abramoff Scandal] only on the lobbying industry. But, we should not forget that we, as Members, owe it to the American people to conduct ourselves in a way that reinforces, rather than diminishes, the public’s faith and confidence in Congress.” But during his investigation, McCain refused to include the legislative actions taken by Members of Congress saying, “We stop when we find out where the money went.” The Associated Press reported that, “The intervention by congressional Republicans…was all but ignored in recent hearings on Capitol Hill led by [McCain], that examined Abramoff’s lobbying inside Interior. [Senator McCain, CQ Transcriptions, 1/25/06; Roll Call, 3/10/05; AP, 11/17/05]

McCain’s Abramoff Report Said No Need for New Lobbying Laws Following Abramoff Scandal. The report by released by John McCain and the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in June 2006 on the Abramoff investigation argued that “no new lobbying restrictions are needed to prevent schemes like those used by former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.” In addition, “despite a pledge by McCain two years ago to get to the bottom of a now-convicted lobbyist’s influence-peddling, his committee’s 373-page report does not detail the relationships between Abramoff and the dozens of lawmakers to whom the lobbyist helped funnel hundreds of thousands of dollars in tribal political donations.” [Arizona Republic, 6/23/06]

REALITY: McCain Has Backed Away From Bipartisan Reforms He Once Championed

2007: McCain Acknowledged His Shift On Immigration From Supporting Comprehensive Reform To Supporting An Enforcement First Strategy. “John McCain spent months earlier this year arguing that the United States must combine border security efforts with a temporary worker program and an eventual path to citizenship for many illegal immigrants. Now, the Republican presidential candidate emphasizes securing the borders first. The rest, he says, is still needed but will have to come later. ‘I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift,’ McCain told reporters Saturday after voters questioned him on his position during back-to-back appearances in this early voting state. ‘I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people’s priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders.’ The shift in approach is likely to draw criticism from McCain’s GOP opponents. Immigration has been a flash point in the race, with rivals Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson all seizing on it.” [Associated Press, 11/3/07]

·         2008: McCain Said He Would Oppose the Legislation He Authored With Kennedy. Asked whether he would vote for the immigration legislation he previously sponsored, McCain eventually replied, “No, I would not.” [CNN GOP Presidential Debate, 1/30/08]

2006: McCain Was “Noticeably Missing” From Latest Campaign Finance Reform Legislation, Likely To Avoid Charges Of Hypocrisy If He Side Steps The System In 2008. With John McCain “noticeably missing” as one of the former “key proponents of BCRA,” Senator Feingold and Congressmen Shays and Meehan offered campaign finance reform legislation “to raise the spending limits for the primary and general elections and significantly boost the matching funds available to candidates. They want to make these additional funds accessible to the candidates earlier in the process, provide additional public funds to candidates facing well-heeled opponents who are outside the public-financing system, and increase the current $3 tax check-off that finances presidential campaigns to $10 per individual, $20 for a married couple,” and to bring an “end to the use of ‘soft money’ from corporations and labor unions to pay for the national conventions held every four years.” McCain, who was “conspicuously absent from the latest [campaign finance reform] effort” was not made available for comment by his office. “Several people involved in discussions about the legislation said the senator’s absence was related to his widely expected bid for the presidency in 2008.” Meredith McGehee, a “longtime advocate for campaign finance reform,” said of McCain, “He does not want to be caught in a position where he can be accused, rightly or wrongly, of hypocrisy” should he opt out of public financing during the Republican presidential primary.” [Roll Call, 7/27/06; New York Sun, 7/28/06]

·         2007: McCain Removed His Name From Campaign Finance Legislation. “People involved in the Republican primary campaign of Senator John McCain of Arizona say he, too, is beginning to seek private donations for the primary and general elections, albeit with the option of returning them. A longtime proponent of campaign finance change, Mr. McCain has recently removed his name as a co-sponsor of a bill to expand the presidential public financing program.” [New York Times, 1/23/07]

VO: She battled Republicans and reformed Alaska.

They’ll make history. They’ll change Washington.
McCain. Palin.
Real change.

JOHN MCCAIN: I’m John McCain and I approve this message.

CG: Wall Street Journal: “Palin Fought for Reform in Alaska” – 8/30/08

McCain-Palin

The Original Mavericks

Paid for by McCain-Palin 2008. Approved by John McCain.

REALITY: PALIN IS PART OF THE SAME OLD CORRUPT ALASKA REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT

Palin Has Refused to Say If She Will Support Indicted Senator Stevens’ Re-Election Bid. “Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is not saying whether she will vote in November to send the indicted Ted Stevens back to the Senate for a seventh full term. The indictment has put Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) running mate in a tricky position. If Palin endorses Stevens, it will appear that she is undermining her message of taking on the GOP establishment and cleaning up corruption in her state. But should the popular governor oppose his reelection, it could deliver a blow to Stevens’s campaign and give Democrats ammunition as they try to pick up one more Senate seat. Palin’s spokesmen in the McCain campaign have not responded to several inquiries seeking comment on the governor’s position on Stevens. A spokesman for the McCain campaign told the Alaska-based Peninsula Clarion that Palin has yet to endorse Stevens, the paper reported on its website Friday.” [The Hill, 9/5/03]

The Usual Alaska Suspects - Ted Stevens, Don Young, And Lisa Murkowski Fundraised For Palin. “Will we see Ted Stevens stumping for Sarah Palin? Palin said this morning that Stevens appeared at a fund-raiser for her in Ketchikan and gave a speech about ‘moving Alaska forward.’ But does that mean he’ll pop up in any advertisements? (Remember his arguably pivotal role at the end of the Knowles and Murkowski Senate race?) Palin said she doubts it and hasn’t asked… She said Don Young came to one of her fund-raisers two days ago, and she expects Lisa Murkowski at an upcoming event. Tonight she planned to talk with John Binkley, who she says is writing a letter to his supporters on her behalf, and she planned to meet with Frank Murkowski tomorrow morning.” [“The Trail” blog, Anchorage Daily News, 10/13/06]

As Mayor, Palin Hired a Washington Lobbyist to Help Get Earmarks for Wasilla – Lobbyist Was Former Chief of Staff for Indicted Senator Ted Stevens. “And as mayor of the small town of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as earmarks, according to public spending records compiled by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste and lobbying documents. Wasilla’s lobbying firm was headed by Steven Silver — a former chief of staff to Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, a key proponent of the bridge project.” [USA Today, 8/31/08]

JULY 2008: Legislature Voted to Appoint a Special Counsel to Investigate Palin Abuse of Power Claim. In July 2008, the Alaska State Legislator voted 12-0 to approve $100,000 for a special investigator to begin an investigation into claims Palin fired a former state official because he would not fire a state trooper who was involved in a bitter custody battle with Palin’s sister.   The legislator’s intent was to investigate the events surrounding the termination of former Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan and potential abuses of power and improper action by Palin and her administration. [KTVA 11, 07/28/08]

After agreeing to Legislative Inquiry, Palin Changed Her Mind and Tried to Have Troopergate Handled by Her Own Personnel Board. Palin made multiple statements saying that she would fully cooperate with the Legislative inquiry, but now she wants Troopergate to be handled by the State of Alaska Personnel Board, which has three members: Debra English, who Palin reappointed on January 29, 2008; Laura Plenert, a registered Republican; Alfred Tamagni, Sr., who gave $400 to the Palin/Parnell campaign in 2006. The latter two were appointed by Frank Murkowski. [Alaska Department of Administration, Division of Personnel Director’s Office Website; Van Flein Letter to Branchflower]

Palin’s Lawyer Canceled the Deposition of an Aide Was a Key Witness in Troopergate. “The deposition of one of Gov. Sarah Palin’s staff members was canceled yesterday by the staffer’s attorney, in what is yet another setback to the state legislature’s investigation into claims that Palin fired the public safety commissioner after he refused to dismiss a trooper, Palin’s former brother in-law. Palin has denied any wrongdoing surrounding the dismissal of Walt Monegan, but has acknowledged that phone calls were made by her staff members to Public Safety officials regarding the trooper, Mike Wooten. One of those calls was made by Palin’s director of boards and commissions, Frank Bailey. Bailey was scheduled to be deposed as part of the legislature’s investigation, but his attorney canceled the deposition yesterday and challenged the legislature’s jurisdiction, according to the state senator running the probe.” [ABC News, 9/3/08]

Palin Administration Refuses to Release E-Mails, Citing Executive Privilege. “E-mails from the Palin administration are being withheld from the public and the governor is citing executive privilege. With subject lines like ‘Fagan,’ ‘Andrew Halcro’ and even ‘Alaska Ear,’ it makes some wonder how those topics could possibly be policy related; especially since those same e-mails were copied to the governor’s husband. The administration says public employees need to know they can debate openly amongst themselves. Andree McLeod, who tried repeatedly to get a job with the Palin administration, obtained the e-mails through a public records request. The Department of Law says the e-mails are privileged. Officials say the private e-mails within the Palin administration won’t be released.” [KTUU, 8/6/08]

ENOUGH !!!!

Robin Z — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:02:14 EDT

John McCain and Sarah Palin are campaigning today that they're going to bring CHANGE TO WASHINGTON?

What exactly are they going to change?

GEORGE W. BUSH = JOHN MCCAIN = GEORGE W. BUSH.

WAKE UP AMERICA and let's not fall prey to the Republican bag of tricks any longer!!

Stop The Meltdown!

Robin Z — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:19:50 EDT

The Republicans have destroyed our economy. In the past few days alone, the stock market has dropped hundreds of points, unemployment has been reported at its highest level in years, and now the government has taken over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Is this prosperity the American people can build their future on?

The Republicans just this week have stolen Barrack's campaign theme of CHANGE. They say THEY are the change agents we need. How is it change if we go from one Republican government to another, all run by the same players?

To me, all the Republicans are trying to do is change our minds. I don't believe they have any interest in changing America. Not one bit.

Let's vote to remove the Republicans from the White House and get George W. Bush and his elitist cronies out of there once and for all.

Today is the beginning!

John — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:29:45 EDT

9:13 am PST, September 4, 2008. Near 16th and Mission. I am ready to begin.

I volunteered in the Obama campaign during the primary. I wanted her to win over Clinton. However, since Obama has clinched the primary, I have done nothing.

I was thinking about leaving the country when Bush beat Kerry. I didn't do it, but I was thinking about it. It's unbelivable when you think about it: Gore won in 2000, yet Bush got elected. Bush won in 2004, yet I still dispute the result. I remember watching the results come in on the internet and seeing Kerry ahead in the polls and projections. I have to admit I was really discouraged by this country at that moment in time. To even get to the point where it was close meant that I disagree with so many other voters. Now I am really proud of the Democrats. To elect Obama was great. BUT WE ARE NOT FINISHED YET AND NO ONE SHOULD BE SATISFIED!

Abstinence policy in action.

Clayton Riggs — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:57:17 EDT

Palin's pregnant child proves abstinence education works!

If keeping our girls pregnant and our teens covered in genital warts and taking Valtrex herpes treatment everyday for life is your goal.

The press kept bringing up Chelsea Clinton's fictional pregnancy and wondering how they (the press) would've handled her fictional pregnancy.

Chelsea Clinton's mother and father educated her on safe sex and proper condom use and it's silly to talk about her fictional situation, when a real pregnant teen and her careless parents attempt to move into the Whitehouse.

While using a condom isn't 100% effective, having sex without any protection or education increases the chances of pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease exponentially.

I know this blog is ugly, but sometimes the truth is ugly.

Sarah Palin is George W. Bush in a Dress

Victoria Mac — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:32:18 EDT

If there was ever any doubt as to whether John McCain will give us 4 more years of the failed Bush aganda, look at who McCain chose for a running mate!! It's George W. Bush in Drag!

If you don't believe it, read this:

The Red Queen and the CIA, Part II?

signsSansSignifieds — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:57:26 EDT

We all remember how Bush and Cheney presumed to know The Truth about Saddam Hussein and Iraq, and then leaned on the CIA when its reports failed to support their assumptions. Cheney was so hostile to the CIA from the start that he arranged with Donald Rumsfeld to set up the Office for Special Plans, whose purpose was to funnel raw intelligence tidbits to the White House behind the back of the CIA. (This despite the fact that intelligence procedures have long held that raw intelligence should never be released because determining the value, relevance, validity and implications of a given bit of intel requires adherence to rigorous methodology unknown to those--such as politicians and the general public--who are not trained in that methodology.) And we all know what kind of methodology the White House used: "First the sentence, then the evidence." Needless to say, we all know how well that went. And then they turned around and blamed the CIA when things didn't go according to plan (if 'plan' is the word to use).

According to Laura Rozen, an expert in intelligence and foreign policy, CIA veterans are very worried that a President McCain will bring back the same disastrous approach to the CIA and intelligence in general that Bush and Cheney engaged in. She's comparing Obama and McCain on intelligence in a two-part article, the first of which, focused on McCain, is here.

Is This Guy Serious?

Tay — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:55:46 EDT

As of late, I have watched the rhetoric coming out of the McCain camp with increasing disbelief. It's hard for me to believe the level of short sightedness so frequently displayed. The idea that someone could suggest that only those making $5,000,000 constitute the rich in this country is simply ridiculous. It startles me that so many people can throw their support behind someone so obviously out of touch with the majority of the country's lives and issues.

I would like to live in the America John McCain lives in. I would like to live in a place that is so affluent that $3 million makes you middle class, where we all have so many houses that we can't easily recall how many there are, where Iraq isn't a mess and George W. has been a great president worthy of emulation. In John McCain's America, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" and all is right with the world. In John McCain's America nothing needs to change. Change is bad, in fact. In John McCain's America, things are so SWELL that we should just keep everything exactly as it is.

Unfortunately, the majority of us seem to live in the other America. We live in the America of mass foreclosures, astronomically high gas prices, high unemployment levels, an extremely costly (in many ways) war and more.

But, fortunately, we also live in an America where there is hope and things can change. Hmmm. Change....there's a thought.

Great Decision!

Jackson Robertson — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:32:19 EDT

Biden is a great choice for VP. His experience in foreign policy, and on domestic issues will be of value to a relatively young Obama. I was bullish on Obama without Biden, but this adding his passion and integrity to the Obama campaign is a wonderful thing.

I've saved politically related articles in my email for the last 6-7 years, and I think I've found a great forum to share some of these articles - and wonder why anyone could vote for somebody that reminds you of Bush.

An April post by the SF Chronicle from an AP article...

"More than 80 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, the highest such number since the early 1990s, according to a new survey."

This simply says that Americans want change, the want a change in leadership, a change in priorities and a change in the global perception of the United States. Obama is clearly the candidate for change.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2008/04/03/national/a220313D69.DTL

Jerome Corsi's Hatchet Job

Clayton Riggs — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:16:31 EDT

Why has the media embraced this book and it's author?

Corsi's book belongs in the fiction department.

"Fortunate Son" was much more realistic and factual than "Obama Nation," but the media spurned, ignored and crucified J.H. Hatfield until he finally committed suicide.

Corsi is merely an opportunistic writer, not a reporter. Please read the book in the bookstore(a fool and his money). It shouldn't take an attentive reader long to see the truth. While you are there look at his other writings. Corsi's subjects and ideas range from widely ridiculous to just plain foolish.
Don't take him seriously.

Life Ain't Fair.

Clayton Riggs — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:14:59 EDT

I'm not sure if a candidate's tax plans are important to your decision making, but if it they are check out this article in "The Wall Street Journal and this article in "The New Standard".

Now here's "Clayton's Most Unprofessional Opinion."

Taxes aren't important to me personally(drum-roll please), because I'm so poor I can't afford to pay attention(and there's the rim-shot). Ha!

But seriously folks, the tax plans are very important to me on a much larger level. Good and fair tax laws increase, reward and encourage the middle-class, ignore the poor and of course punish the rich. I don't want rich people actually penalized for making money, but if some are taxed down into the upper-middle-class(not likely), I know people in much worse situations. Above all, I don't want the middle-class paying as much tax as possible.

Rich people pay lots of taxes and pay lots of money(tax-deductible) to their lawyers and accountants to trim as much as possible off that amount. If we see their "real" income , they pay little or nothing and the super-rich know how to actually receive huge refunds.

I hear people say, "It's not fair to tax rich people, more than poor people." I have an answer for them, "Life ain't fair!" You are fortunate to be a rich person(it doesn't matter how) and have been rewarded "unfairly." Is it fair, that a guy drives a $100,000 car, works 35 hours a week and earns $700,000 annually, but another guy rides a bus, works a combined 60 hours a week from two jobs and makes minimum wage? No, but like I said, "Life ain't fair!"

Life isn't fair, that's why we make laws. Our taxes can't fix everything, but they help.

I played with the IRS tax estimator today and used fictional criteria to come up with the numbers. The fictional information I used is listed at the bottom of the page.

Joseph Magnum-of-Cristal:   Earned 1 million dollars
                                            Pays $45,033
                                                 or .045 of his income for taxes*

Joe Six-pack-of-Bud:   Earned $100,000
                                      Pays $11,794
                                          or .12 of his income for taxes*

That's not cool.

You'll notice that Joseph has more tax credits and deductions than Joe, but I figure in the real world Joseph's CPA would make sure his client gets a few breaks.

I also figured that Joe's CPA (most likely himself or an in-law), wouldn't be clever enough (or maybe brave enough) to take all possible deductions. Joe also makes less and can't contribute as much to his I.R.A. or other tax shelters.

*Clayton's math might not be "correct." If I made an error, please let me know and I'll correct it promptly!

Joseph Magnum-of-Cristal's IRS criteria:

Filing Status: Head of householdSomeone else can claim you as a dependent: NoNumber of jobs: 1Number of dependents: 3Will you be 65 or older 1/1/2009: NoAre you blind: NoChild & dependent care credit qualifying persons: 2 or moreChild & dependent care credit expenses: 15,000Eligible children for child tax credit: 3Other credits: 100,000Total salary: 1,000,000Total retirement plans: 99,999Tax withheld to date: 0Projected withholding for rest of year: 0Total earned income other than salary: Other nonwage income: Adjustments to income: 100,000Total itemized deductions: 308,998

Joe Six-pack-of-Bud's IRS criteria:
Filing Status: Head of householdSomeone else can claim you as a dependent: NoNumber of jobs: 1Number of dependents: 3Will you be 65 or older 1/1/2009: NoAre you blind: NoChild & dependent care credit qualifying persons: 2 or moreChild & dependent care credit expenses: 3,000Eligible children for child tax credit: 3Other credits: Total salary: 100,000Total retirement plans: 1,000Tax withheld to date: 0Projected withholding for rest of year: 0Total earned income other than salary: Other nonwage income: Adjustments to income: 500Total itemized deductions: 0

More McCain-Approved Shredding Of Constitution

Charley James — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:59:20 EDT

This morning, the Christian Science Monitor on-line edition carries a disturbing, detailed report on an Afghan woman, supposedly the number one woman terrorist suspect in the world according to the Bushies, who appears to have emerged from five years of secret detention by either the US Army or CIA.

In federal court, her lawyers maintained that she was held secretly, released in Pakistan where the US set her up by planting evidence, tortured her repeatedly at a prison inside Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and refused her access to medical care.

The article is at www.csmonitor.com/2008/0814/p99s01-duts.html.

This was done in our name, by our government. It seems that every day, something new is revealed that makes me ashamed to be an American - and glad that I reside outside of the country I grew up loving and respecting. Jan. 20, 2009, cannot come fast enough.

What To Believe

Dale — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:35:25 EDT

I've had good friends that are very conservative Reublicans/Independents spouting some of the worst gibberish I've heard in years. They forward me e-mails apparently prepared by the Swift Boat writers. Yes you have to check out a candidate's background, voting records and core beliefs, but the e-mails I get all tend to start with "Barack Hussein Obama" and then they trail off into his anti-American views - what anti-American views? Where is their fear coming from - ignorance, racism, - not the people I knew. I think that they were so traumatized by 9-11 that they can't get by Barry Obama calling himself Barack Hussein Obama. Well I'm Dale Robert Shack, I'm a retired Army officer, wounded in Viet Nam. I was responsible for the deaths of over 150 people. Does that make me dangerous. heroic, or stupid for fighting in a war I was against - oh by the way, I'm Canadian Americam, proud of it. I could have left for Canada, legally, and not fought with by multi-racial group of brothers in arms. I am very proud of the men I served with in the Army.

Michelle Obama is right, sometimes I'm not very proud of our nation - this administration has had members of it's cabinet act like Nazi's, in fear of security. They try to abridge our civil liberties that we fought so hard to acheive. That's where Osama Bin Laden has won a big part of his crazy attack on us - FEAR. If people don't understand what Ms. Obama was saying, wake up, put yourself in her place, or my place - I was brought up in a Jewish family and was cursed at, spat on, and looked down on by people in the 1950's.

Senator McCain went back to Viet Nam and worked to normalize relations with our former enemy. Is this consorting with a communist enemy, or a way to acheive long term peace. Ask Senator McCain, I'm getting so many mixed messages from him I find it hard to believe it's the same man that President George W. Bush once trashed so badly on the campaign trail. Senator McCain is a great Americam that lived through hell. If mud slinging begins and Senator MCain doesn't stop it, shame on him.

Everyone loosen up - my heart surgeon is Egyptian and his partner is Jewish. My wifes heart doctor is from Syria, and her heart surgeon is anglo-saxon. If you were in trouble and someone with a different name or different color skin came to save your life what would you do? We're Americans, let's act like it.

Listen and learn, and then vote for Senator Obama.

Flippy-Floppy and Wishy-Washy

Clayton Riggs — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:40:05 EDT

I don't understand why the public buys the branding of candidates as "flip-flopping" or "wishy-washy."

When a person changes their mind, it is usually after discovering a flaw in a previous idea. Scholars and fishermen refer to this as "thinking."

I don't know why educated people blindly follow the herd in this type of discourse.

Only an idiot makes a bad decision and sticks to it, despite mountains of evidence showing the idea's flaws.

Intelligent people change their minds, sometimes a thousand times per day, in a process known as thought. I know it's unfathomable to some, but it's true.

A fisherman starts his morning with worms and commits to the bait. He gets no bites all day. The folks fishing around him get their limit fishing with minnows. They even offer him free bait, but he sticks to his worms and goes home with an empty stringer.

I'll hire "wishy-washers" or "flip-floppers," before hiring idiots unable to make decisions, change directions, before damaging the company or going home with empty stringers.

The Source of Infection and The Cure.

Clayton Riggs — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 21:21:09 EDT

America contracted a nearly fatal disease on November 7, 2000.

America is a tough country and although the infection is tenacious she will survive.

Right now America’s sores are healing, although the source of infection is still present in our body. The source of infection is G. W. Bush and America is strong enough to recover from him alone, but Barack Obama speeds our healing time and boosts our energy.

When America gets up from the sick-bed and begins working again, we can wear our citizenship with pride and enjoy the envy of the entire Earth!

The United States of America is the best nation on Earth and soon she'll get the best leader on Earth.

Thank you Senator Barack Obama. I am very proud of you and America.

Don’t forget to vote!

The Right Candidate

Clayton Riggs — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 01:11:02 EDT

This is it.

I started voting at 18 and never stopped, but seldom felt emotionally and intellectually connected to a single candidate.

H. Ross Perot made me excited about politics. I recognized the smartest candidate running in 1992 and I watched, heard and read everything available to the public. I voted for Mr. Perot in 1992 and again in 1996. I knew he wouldn’t win, but I wanted America to understand, Clayton Riggs votes for the right candidate, not always the winning candidate.

I proudly and fondly tell my fellow Texans about my votes for Mr. Perot. They laugh at me and say “You threw your vote away.” Of course, they are dead wrong. My vote counted and America witnessed the most successful third-party presidential candidate since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. Mr. Perot earned18.9% of the popular vote and scared the shit out of the Republicans and the Democrats.

I continued voting and waiting for the right candidate.

The right candidate deserves my time, money and most importantly my vote.

On July 27, 2004, the right candidate appeared . . . and he wasn’t even in the race!

He spoke with authority and conviction. His words stuck with me and I couldn’t wait to hear the speech again and again. “The Audacity of Hope” rang in my head. I watched, heard and read the speech countless times.

Barack Obama is the right candidate and with my help, he will also be the winning candidate.

Dick Cheney (and George W. Bush) To Speak at Republican Convention

jgabriel — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:58:39 EDT

I had to do a doubletake to see if I had read this right. Looks like Cheney and Bush will speak at John McCain's convention, after all. We've got to spread the word about this!

Vice-President Dick Cheney will speak at the Republican National Convention next month in St. Paul on the same night as President Bush, according to representaives for the vice-president and John McCain's campaign.

"The Vice President looks forward to participating in the Republican National Convention and continuing to work for the election of Senator McCain and other Republican candidates in the coming months," Cheney spokeswoman Megan Mitchell said in a statement.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0808/Cheney_will_speak_at_GOP_convention.html?showall

Obama Ad "Original" Disputes McCain's Claim of "Original Maverick"

jgabriel — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:00:02 EDT

Obama is out with a new ad today, "Original":

"Original" He's the original maverick.Really?
MCCAIN:"The president and I agree on most issues. There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president ninety percent of the time."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHN9bLCgF7k

Troops stationed near Denver Convention (any in Minnesota?)

Mike Conwell — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:15:27 EDT

Courtesy of the Department of Homeland Security's daily news brief dated 8/4/08. It's not on the site now, but you can see it later today or tomorrow, through the 14th at http://www.dhs.gov/xinfoshare/programs/editorial_0542.shtm

33. July 30, Colorado Independent – (Colorado) Military Intelligence and National
Guard present at Denver DNC. The Colorado Army National Guard is expected to
transform a private Denver university campus into a restricted military lodging area
during the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in August. More than 400 soldiers
could be stationed in official capacity on the campus according to the National Guard,
but the Guard is not disclosing what the troops will be doing during the convention. In
mid-July the Colorado Independent reported that the Colorado National Guard was
planning to rent more than 500 rooms around the Denver area for business relating
specifically to the Democratic National Convention.

Source: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/07/30/18521134.php

Low-Road Express

jgabriel — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:12:34 EDT

Obama has debuted a new site dedicated to fighting the smears and untruths coming directly from the McCain campaign, "Low-Road Express" - http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/mccainslowroadexpress/

The site takes its name from a July 30 editorial in the NY Times lambasting McCain for his sudden turn toward aggressive, nasty attacks - most likely a direct result of his hiring of several individuals from the Bush reelection campaign. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/opinion/30wed1.html?_r=2&oref=login&pagewanted=print

Tell me again how he's so different from George W. Bush?

I Guess There Was a Time When This Was Pretty Funny

Dr. Mark Elrod — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:21:49 EDT

Like President Bush, Senator McCain likes to joke about what a bad student he was in school.

In the president's case, the gag usually goes like this: "I may not be the smartest guy in the room but I'm still the president."

But 4,000 Americans lives and $540 billion later, the president’s jokes just don’t get big yucks any more.

The good news is that this election is starting to look more and more like one of my favorite West Wing episodes.

"Crime, boy... I don't know."

Job Loss. Healthcare, Economy

Julia — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:31:57 EDT

On June 5th my husband lost his job as he was downsized. I had had a standing appointment for a mammogram on the 17th. When we got there we discovered that our insurance had been canceled. Prysbyterian Hospital did the mamogram anyway. A further test was ordered, an ultra sound, which diagnosed suspicious areas. A biopsy was done and it confirmed that I have early stage breat cancer. We thought about paying for Cobra but discovered the payment was $1200. The employer stiffed my husband on his last check by not paying him. With all our bills unemployment couldn't begin to cover a $1200 Cobra payment. I applied for medicaid but my application is being delayed because Disability Determination Services has not determined if my medical condition of depression meets the definition of disability for Medicaid. I finally found a surgeon who would take my case. I was told under no certain circumstances would a surgeon take my case for any other medical condition without insurance besides cancer. What are the uninsured people of this country supposed to do if Doctor's refuse to see them? The bills continue to add up $1200 for original diagnosis and $2036 for an MRI. I'm on pins and needles wondering how these bills are going to get paid and praying that medicaid comes through! Something must be done in the United States to stem the high cost of health care. I understand that no insurance company will insure you if you have a preexisiting condition of cancer. Yea Barack Obama and universal healthcare! May it bring an answer to the health care crisis in this country!

We can't afford our $1450 mortgage payment on unemployment either. My husband is out beating the streets everyday looking for employment! No one has any openings in his industry as it has been hit the hardest in this economic downturn. Bush doesn't even acknowledge that this country is in a recession! We have put our home on the market but from what I understand it takes an average of 8 months to sell your home! We don't have 8 months. We have priced it more than $10,000 below market value to try and entice a buyer sooner. Unfortunately, there are two foreclosures on our block and they have sold for !0,000 less than what we paid for our home 11 years ago! The real estate agent says foreclosures can now be used in appraisals! We are going to loose our rear end! What makes me so sad is that this home would have been completely paid for in 8 years! My husband and I have busted our you know whats for the las t 11 years. What is the answer ? Can anyone think of a solution to the housing crisis that exists in this country? What can be done to stem the tide of foreclosures of people who have simply lost their jobs and are having a difficult time finding work? Barack is promising to fix the economy but I'm not hearing any specifics. Please help the ailing economy Barack! I believe you can effect CHANGE!

So Much for "Compasionate Conservativism"

Dr. Mark Elrod — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:37:46 EDT

I'm not sure if it ever really existed in reality.

But the party of the right sure has been making it a lot easier for the opposition to paint them as detached and uncaring lately.

Last week, John McCain's top economic advisor, Phil Gramm, called the country with the highest worker productivity in the world "a nation of whiners" (that's America, by the way).

Phil Gramm is both an economist and a politician, so he should know better than to say something like this in front of cameras and microphones.

Like President Bush tried to do yesterday...

Unaware he was being recorded, President Bush at a Houston fundraiser last week compared Wall Street to a drunk with a hangover and cracked jokes about the ailing housing market. "There's no question about it. Wall Street got drunk — that's one of the reasons I asked you to turn off the TV cameras — it got drunk and now it's got a hangover," Bush said at a private fundraiser for Republican congressional candidate Pete Olson.

"The question is: How long will it sober up and not try to do all these fancy financial instruments?"

I would be the last person in the world to argue that economics or financial analysis are an exact science but you can't dismiss "fancy financial instruments" when hard-working people are hurting as a result of economic factors beyond their control

So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them.

Strike that last part.

Why is No One Challenging This Notion That the Surge is a Success?

Steven from Norman, OK — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:26:51 EDT

So the new thing in the McCain campaign is to retort Barack Obama's claims of superior judgment about the disaster of starting the Iraq War with claims of superior judgment about the success story the "surge" turned out to be. And this story of campaign talking points gets passed around in the surficially non-partisan election-year coverage from the media without any analysis. What gets lost in this traditional election year back-and-forth is that the fiction about the surge's success remains unchallenged.

It's like everyone has forgotten why we had this surge of troops in the first place. We were tired of getting our asses kicked, so congress set up the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group to come up with some things we could do to stop the hurtin'. When their report came out, Bush ignored most of the recommendations and keyed in on a footnote developed by some of the more hawkish members which suggested that the U.S. increase the number of soldiers in Baghdad by lengthening tours and whatnot. Strategy was developed to give purpose to these extra brigades, and the White House came up with the overarching goals, including reducing the violence enough to allow the Iraqis to come up with and enforce their own laws, training Iraqi security and law enforcement more quickly, and in general guiding Iraqis towards stable democracy. Good points certainly, but it required Iraqi leaders to take up the initiative. This is why the strategy was flawed.

The surge started in January of 2007 and would last through this month, July 2008. The new Democrat-controlled Congress gritted its teeth and passed many non-binding resolutions in full awareness of their lack of constitutional oversight into the executive branch's war powers. But they did manage to pass what would turn out to be completely irrelevant benchmark legislation that required the military to evaluate itself. They did evaluate themselves, dishonestly but still poorly, and the surge bumbled along. After the reporting frenzy of September 2007, the media started not caring about Iraq anymore, choosing instead to start Election 2008 coverage.

It wasn't until about November 2007 that violent attacks finally started to decline, which mostly went unnoticed at first. Eventually the media caught on to the fact that merely dozens of Americans instead of hundreds of Americans were being killed every month and reported it unequivocably as a success story, even though about a thousand Iraqi civilians still die every month from sectarian gunfire and suicide bombers. But since the whole stated purpose of the Surge was dependant on the Iraqis developing a functioning civil society, can we really call it a success? Have the Iraqis properly dealt with their problem of training militia members who turn around and become loyal to sectarian leaders like Muqtada al-Sadr? Are the national police loyal to the state? Are the Iraq Security Forces able to take our place yet? Do the people recognize the Iraqi parliament as the creator of laws? Are there oil-revenue sharing laws yet (I actually don't know about this one)? If these benchmarks of the surge aren't met, how can we call the surge a success? Someone needs to call John McCain's bluff.

(cross-posted at quibblingpotatoes.blogspot.com)

YOUR BROTHER IS THE ONE WHO THINKS LIKE YOU

Eric from Covina, CA — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:52:50 EDT

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

YOUR BROTHER IS THE ONE WHO THINKS LIKE YOU

The raging controversy over Barack Obama addressing the issue of irresponsible fathers in the Black community, clearly demonstrates that many of the old-school thinkers in the community are living in a time warp. We now have a Black man who is very likely to be the next President of the United States, yet there are those in the community who want him to keep quiet about the fact that we have soiled toilet paper hanging from our inaugural tux. Instead of saying, "Thanks, let me clean up my act", they’re saying, "Why are you picking on me–I saw a White boy with do-do on him too–why didn’t you say something to him?"

I call these people the "Devil worshipers". While these people often refer to the collective White establishment as the Devil, they wake up thinking about him, and go to bed thinking about him. They think the White man is all seeing, all knowing, and control every aspect of our lives. They’re convinced that he has total control over what we learn, what we can’t learn, how we act, and whether or not we can feed our families. While these people generally speak of the White man with either aggressive or dismissive disdain, they fail to recognize that their ceaseless preoccupation with him is actually a form of worship.

Our New War on Poverty

Tom Awtry — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:38:54 EDT

Presently we are engaged in an endless war within Iraq, where our economy has become the victim; but will either President Bush or Senator McCain admit or even relate our present economic condition to this unjustified war - “no”.

Forty some years back, in our history (1964), former President Johnson engaged America into another war, besides; it was the “War on Poverty”. This war had obtainable goals with achievable results, and for a while we were winning, making substantial strides, but sadly enough, it to lost to the unpopular funding devoted of the Vietnam War.

Senator Obama will also have to face the same enemy President Johnson did, and hopefully implement the same battle strategies to conquer this emerging parasite on America's financial woes, created by the current Administration and subscribed to by Senator McCain.

Have you noticed that President Bush and John McCain keep telling Americans our problems are all in our heads and that we just need to feel better! Senator McCain's former campaign co-chair Phil Gramm made the comment that Americans were in the middle of a "mental recession."

With banks failing, foreclosures and bankruptcies skyrocketing, inflation at the highest level in years, and thousands losing their jobs; how out of touch with reality are John McCain and George Bush with our society.

Obama Leads on Iran and Iraq – Bush and McCain Follow

Steven from Astoria, NY — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:42:11 EDT

Hope you all don't mind the shameless self-promotion ;-)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Leads-on-Iran-and-Ir-by-Steven-Leser-080719-400.html

July 19, 2008

By Steven Leser

Leadership is an interesting concept. The first few lines of Wikipedia’s entry on leadership discuss leadership as being:

1. Those entities that perform one or more acts of leading.
2. The ability to affect human behavior so as to accomplish a mission.
3. Influencing a group of people to move towards its goal setting or goal achievement.(1)

However you define leadership, Barack Obama has an overabundance of it and has done something unprecedented with his ability, no pun intended.

For the past seven years, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the rest of the GOP have been repeating the mantra that to negotiate with the leaders of countries with whom we have serious disagreements is tantamount to appeasement. That is the excuse they gave for not moving forward our relationships with Iran, North Korea and a host of other countries, to paraphrase, “We cannot talk to them, that would be appeasement.” (2)

Bush, McCain and other Republicans have aggressively sought to hang the ‘Appeasement’ label around the neck of any Democrat that has called for talks with Iran or North Korea, They have also termed any desire to bring the troops home from Iraq ‘defeatism’.

Enter Barack Obama. Obama has been the presumptive Democratic nominee for less than two months and is having an impact on American foreign policy. Various outlets are reporting that the Bush and McCain political teams have joined forces and are working on trying to help McCain with the election. To counter Obama’s popular message regarding bringing home the troops from Iraq and dialoguing with Iran, the Bush/McCain political team has decided that the Bush administration will negotiate with Iran on nuclear weapons and the Bush team has also decided that we will start bringing home troops from Iraq.

A sitting President from the opposite party is capitulating to Obama’s leadership on Foreign policy. I don’t think there is anything like this that has ever happened in the history of American politics and government.

The combined Bush/McCain think tank, (Doesn’t the idea of a combined Bush/McCain think tank sound like an oxymoron?) is doing this because they believe that the public prefers Obama’s foreign policy to Bush/McCain’s and they are trying to blunt his popularity in hopes of having a chance at winning this election. Again, this is a stunning testament to the power of Obama’s leadership.

It is also a testament of the inability of Bush/McCain to be leaders and provide leadership and proof of how unpopular their views have become.

Stepping back from the context of the current campaign for a moment, I wonder what could have been over the last seven years if Bush and the Republicans hadn’t been selling the American people and world this garbage about diplomacy being appeasement. What would have happened if the Bush team had done the right thing from the very beginning and engaged the James Baker wing of the Republican Party in trying to solve our problems with Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Palestinians and North Korea rather than engaging in saber rattling at every turn? How different and how much better of a world this would be? That is a crime that the Bush administration has committed that is so enormous it is incalculable.

I have been a supporter of Barack Obama since February precisely because I recognized this amazing ability of Obama to lead. When I examined him further, I saw that this ability was married with compassion and humility and the thoughtfulness and brilliance of a Harvard educated lawyer selected to the Harvard Law Review and the moral courage of a person willing to confront his own bases of support about things he felt they were doing that was wrong. This is a country desperate for thoughtful leadership, and we will get that when we elect Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

(1). Wikipedia on Leadership - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

(2). New York Times, “McCain Agrees With Bush’s Remarks on Appeasement“ - http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/mccain-agrees-with-bushs-remarks/

Foreign Policy or McBush Expansionism

Tom Awtry — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 04:54:14 EDT

Perhaps I’m an idealist in believing America’s Foreign Policy was in part established to spread our “good intentions” throughout the world and resolve possible conflicts before they develop into armed engagements. Today, this is not my belief!

Looking back and listening to friends and family I’m told, 9-11 formed our Foreign Policy; is this true, or were the wheels of government turning before George W. Bush entered office? Many Americans support an opinion of today’s War in Iraq was formed during the final years Reagan and Bush Sr. Administrations; to dominate the world’s financial monetary institutions and oil supplying nations, hence one possible scenario for the close relationships of between: George Bush Sr., Donald Rumsfelt and Dick Cheney where George Jr. is merely the messenger.

Listening carefully to John McCain’s Foreign Policy I find “no” deviation between the past (Bush) policies and his proposed future agenda for our international community. Never before in our nation’s history as a lame-duck American President attacked an opposing candidate’s view on Foreign Policy, standing on foreign soil, which was done on May 27th when President Bush was in Israel speaking before the Knesset. Senator McCain failed to comment on this event, which brought even Republicans leaders to back away from the President and Senator McCain.

Meanwhile:

When President George W. Bush appeared before the Israeli Knesset recently and denounced those who appease "terrorists and radicals," it was seen back home as a swipe against Democratic contender Barack Obama for saying that the U.S. should talk to its enemies. But his audience of Israeli legislators, who interrupted Bush's speech at least 14 times with thunderclaps of applause, interpreted it otherwise. They saw it as the American President's unswerving support of the Jewish nation on its 60th anniversary. Nevertheless, under instructions from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Israel envoys have been carrying out discreet talks with the very "radicals and terrorists" that Bush was warning against in his speech: Syria, the Lebanese militia Hizballah and the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

It is partly a measure of how far the Bush Administration's stature has fallen that even staunch allies like the Israelis are now ignoring White House commandments. But it may also be an act of desperation by the embattled Israeli leader, who sees no choice but to rebuff the U.S. if he wants to win back popular Israeli support.

Shrugging off Bush's warning against "appeasing" its enemies by negotiating with them, the Israeli government is engaging in Egyptian-brokered cease-fire talks with Hamas, the militant Islamic rulers of the Gaza strip. At the same time, through Turkish diplomats, it is sending out feelers to Damascus to discuss Israel's possible return of the Golan Heights in exchange for Syria's cutting off its support and sanctuary for Palestinian militant leaders from Hamas and Islamic Jihad. As one Israeli official told TIME: "For us, peace doesn't mean embassies in Damascus and Tel Aviv, but an end to Syria's destructive roles. Hamas has its headquarters in Damascus, and Syria backs Hizballah."

Source: Time

George W. Bush a Failure!!!???!!!

Mike P — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 03:06:09 EDT

Source: http://www.outsiderviews.com, retrieved July 18, 2008

Wolf Blitzer, the CNN commentator, had an interview with the U.S. House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. The Speaker called George W. Bush a total failure. In my view, Madame Speaker's verdict was too little, too late. From day one, she and the entire Democratic Leadership should have gone overdrive to make sure they began the process of rehabilitating the reputation of the Congress and the sanctity of the Constitution. They did not do that. They elected to compromise. Although I understand the decision on the impeachment question and do agree with it, I still view their near-capituation as inexcusable. That's the reason why the Congress is held in as low an esteem as the Executive Branch. The Speaker did speak up. I hope the Congress does get a fillibuster proof majority (one way or the other) so that the paralysis we have seen will go away. Our leaders must start governing instead of playing games. The era of playing games is truly over!!!!

THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS OWNED BY McCAIN SUPPORTERS

Gregory Montijo — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:17:32 EDT

TO ANYONE WHO READS THIS: STOP WATCHING THE TELEVISION FOR NEWS. THE REAL NEWS IS NOT THERE. ALMOST ALL MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS OWNED BY CORPORATE INTERESTS THAT WISH TO CONTINUE PROFIT TAKING FROM AN ILLEGAL WAR.

OUR COUNTRY IS IN MORAL, ETHICAL, AND FINANCIAL TROUBLE. THE PRICE OF OIL IS CONTROLLED BY BIG OIL. IT HAS BEEN THEIR PLAN TO BANKRUPT ALL BUT THE WEALTHY, THE REAL ELITE. THEY HAVE LITTLE REGARD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, ENCOURAGE OUR COMMERCIAL AIRLINES TO BE TAKEN OVER BY FOREIGN INTERESTS, AND CONTINUE TO SOCIALLY ENGINEER OUR LIVES TO THE POINT OF MASSIVE IMPOVERISHMENT.

AMERICA IS NO LONGER OWNED BY ALL AMERICANS. WE NEED TO PUT AN END TO THE CORPORATE CONTROL OF OUR BANKS, OF OUR FARMS, OF OUR ABILITY TO FEED OUR FAMILIES.

NONE OF THE ABOVE IS EVER GIVEN MORE THAN LIP SERVICE IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

**********

ACT NOW AND VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA

WE CAN'T REMEDIATE THE EFFECTS OF THE BUSH REGIME ON THE AMERICAN AS WELL AS GLOBAL LANDSCAPE. WE CAN'T PROVIDE FOR ALL AMERICANS AND THOSE SUFFERING ABROAD OVERNIGHT.

BUT, WITH BARACK OBAMA AND HIS VISION IN CHARGE, THE WAY WILL BECOME CLEAR AND WE WILL HEAD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. HIS TWO TERMS IN OFFICE AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL OVERCOME THE DESTRUCTION PERPETRATED UPON AMERICANS, ESPECIALLY THE ALMOST EXTINCT MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS, AND THE POOR.

JUST THINK ABOUT HOW THINGS WOULD BE DIFFERENT TODAY HAD BARACK OBAMA BEEN IN THE WHITE HOUSE EIGHT YEARS AGO. WE WOULD HAVE HAD OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS AVAILABLE TO REBUILD AMERICA AND TRULY HAVE "ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL."

The Surge is Not Really Over

Cindy in Salt Lake — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:27:33 EDT

There are more troops in Iraq now than before the surge; 18,000 of them. The surge is not really over and the benchmarks, such as an agreement on how to share oil wealth, have not been met. Watch this video: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#25710586.

They Want us Out

Tom Awtry — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 02:37:22 EDT

Reading what I considered a factual blog on HuffingtonPost.com, talking with numerous friends and family, listening to many past media newscasts; allows me to wonder why we’re still in Iraq. This past week even the Iraqi leaders -- notably Nouri al-Maliki -- are standing up to the US by demanding a timeline for withdrawal.

Many say this five year old war was about oil, while others claim Weapons of Mass Destruction and terrorism, which theory is correct? Personally, I believe it was for oil, Halliburton, Bechtel, Exxon, Shell, GE and the aerospace community of contractors, all who have and are, reaping enormous profits.

Now it’s time for our departure before these aforementioned companies “totally” bankrupt our US economy.

The most that can be expected at this stage are November electoral mandates for peace and a speedy withdrawal from both American and Iraqi voters. This will not be easy, despite the peace majorities entrenched in both countries. In the meantime, Congressional debate over the secret US-Iraq "status of forces" agreement will keep the issues front-and-center.

If Barack Obama goes through with his high-risk plan to visit Iraq [and Afghanistan], he may be confronted by US military commanders and Iraqi leaders questioning his 16-month timetable as naive and threatening to national security. On the other hand, Obama risks demoralization within his electoral base if he wavers on basics.

Meanwhile, in John McCain, the hawks have found the perfect iconic candidate for keeping the Iraq war alive through the present depths of its democratic legitimacy crisis. McCain's election would serve the interests of the Pentagon, revive the neo-conservative era, and further deepen the conflict between democracy and empire.

Source: HuffingtonPost

Update: 14 Jul 08

Obama Lays Out Clear Plan For Iraq Withdrawal In NY Times Op-Ed

The New York Times

The call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated, and that is needed for long-term success in Iraq and the security interests of the United States.

The differences on Iraq in this campaign are deep. Unlike Senator John McCain, I opposed the war in Iraq before it began, and would end it as president. I believed it was a grave mistake to allow ourselves to be distracted from the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban by invading a country that posed no imminent threat and had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Since then, more than 4,000 Americans have died and we have spent nearly $1 trillion. Our military is overstretched. Nearly every threat we face -- from Afghanistan to Al Qaeda to Iran -- has grown.

Outer Continental Shelf Drilling Could be Signed Into Law by Bush Soon!

Tom Awtry — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:02:49 EDT

Just received an e-Mail from MoveOn.org regarding their concern on off shore drilling, which is in line with Senator Obama’s policy.

Dear MoveOn member,

In recent weeks, conservatives led by Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh have sent over a million messages to Congress calling for offshore oil drilling. Then John McCain joined the push for drilling.

Today, George W. Bush reversed the coastal drilling ban first enacted by his father. Congress is the only thing standing in the way of drilling rigs on our beaches.1

It's a scam: experts agree that offshore drilling won't save anyone any money at the pumps for 10 years. And at that point, it might save 3 or 4 cents a gallon.2 But some senior Democratic senators indicated that they might fold under the pressure.

Can you tell Congress to stop drilling by signing this petition right away?

The petition says: "Americans don't need or want gimmicks. We want real solutions, and that means investing in new, cheaper energy sources now."

After you sign, please forward this email to your friends and family.

Thanks for all you do.

–Noah, Matt, Laura, Daniel and the rest of the team

Sources:
1. "Bush Lifts Drilling Moratorium, Prodding Congress," New York Times, July 14, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/washington/14drillcnd.html
2. "Will More Drilling Mean Cheaper Gas?", Time Magazine, June 18, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3834&id=13245-8708491-2zF_dpx&t=2

Who’s Campaigning for President?

Tom Awtry — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:35:09 EDT

Why is it Bush keeps echoing that he’s “not” going to become involved in the opposing candidate’s quest for the presidency, but continues to provide jabs at Senator Obama’s every comment when it opposes his highly prized programs, which have failed miserably?

I think it is fair access this observation based on an article, which appeared within Politico, entitled “Bush warns Obama on Iraq politicking” and quoted:

“I would hope that whoever follows me realizes we’re at war,” he said. “While there hasn’t been an attack on the homeland, that doesn’t mean people don’t want to attack us. … We have to deny safe haven. … They want us to leave. … If given a chance, democracy will succeed.”

Source: Politico

Bush’s latest jab came from an e-Mail circulated by the moveon.org where MoveOn delivered to its members a topic entitled “The beginning of the end?” and reads as follows:

Dear MoveOn member,

Three big things happened on Iraq this week. They could mean the beginning of the end of the war.

But since the media have mostly ignored them, I wanted to make sure you saw what's going on.

Here's the scoop:

Iraqis want U.S. Troops out. No one was expecting Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to speak up in favor of withdrawal—after all, he's close with the Bush administration. But with elections in Iraq coming up, and a great majority of Iraqis opposed to a prolonged U.S. occupation, Maliki can't afford to toe the Bush line. So he's surprised everyone by standing up this week for a timetable for troop withdrawals and a date certain to end the war. The LA Times headline reads, "Iraqi prime minister advocates withdrawal timeline."1

As a result, the "endless war agreement" Bush has been pushing fell through. Since January, hundreds of thousands of us pushed Congress to stand up to President Bush's proposed treaty with Iraq, which would have tied the next President's hands and made it much harder to get out. This week, the Washington Post reported that that agreement has fallen through—Iraqi leaders are putting their feet down and demanding a much shorter agreement.2

And now even the Pentagon is considering faster timelines. According to reporter Michael Hirsh at Newsweek, "a forthcoming Pentagon-sponsored report" will recommend a big drawdown of troops—suggesting "that U.S. forces be reduced to as few as 50,000 by the spring of 2009, down from about 150,000 now."3

In other words, it's now clear: Most Americans are for a timeline, and so are most Iraqis. And even experts in the Pentagon agree.

For his part, Barack Obama is using these developments to hammer home the point that John McCain and President Bush are now isolated in their resistance to any kind of timeline for withdrawal. He wrote an Op-Ed in the New York Times yesterday that reaffirmed his commitment to a timeline that would have all combat troops out of Iraq in 16 months.

It concludes, "Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea. . . [F]or far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender. It's not going to work this time. It's time to end this war."4

It's important that we all work to get the word out about these developments. You can even start by just forwarding this email. Most Americans still don't know that the Iraqis want us out. And that may be the single most important fact to share at this point in time.

I'm always shocked when someone points out that it's been six years since we first started working together to prevent an Iraq war. This week, we're turning a corner in that fight. Bush's permanent war agreement has fallen through. The Iraqi politicians are speaking up. And if we keep working together, we just might see the remaining holdouts in Washington coming around as well.

Thanks for all you do,

–Eli Pariser

Sources:

1. "Iraqi prime minister advocates withdrawal timetable," Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2008.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3940&id=13247-8708491-gQ4wgsx&t=2

2. "U.S., Iraq Scale Down Negotiations Over Forces," Washington Post, July 13, 2008.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3941&id=13247-8708491-gQ4wgsx&t=3

3. "Who Says Less Troops?," Newsweek, July 21, 2008.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/145848

4. "My Plan for Iraq," Barack Obama, New York Times, July 14, 2008.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3942&id=13247-8708491-gQ4wgsx&t=4

Barack Obama finished making a major speech on Iraq and foreign policy. Here's how he described the Bush-McCain approach:

George Bush and John McCain don't have a strategy for success in Iraq—they have a strategy for staying in Iraq. They said we couldn't leave when violence was up, they say we can't leave when violence is down. They refuse to press the Iraqis to make tough choices, and they label any timetable to redeploy our troops "surrender," even though we would be turning Iraq over to a sovereign Iraqi government—not to a terrorist enemy. Theirs is an endless focus on tactics inside Iraq, with no consideration of our strategy to face threats beyond Iraq's borders.

You can read the speech here:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3939&id=13247-8708491-gQ4wgsx&t=1

Why Chuck Hagel is DEFINITELY NOT a VP choice for Barack

Sue — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:27:09 EDT

From: http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/76457.html

Former voting machine exec looking to become America's next Vice President?

Posted on Sunday, July 13, 2008 - 9:57 am:

Hardly anyone seems to remember this, but in 2004, a trial balloon went up suggesting that Democrat John Kerry team up with Republican John McCain as his running mate.

Mixing Democrats and Republicans on a presidential ticket is an appalling idea. The two power-parties already have a tight fisted grip on American politics. Such semi-mergers will eliminate or manipulate such diversity of choice as we have left.

This weekend, another such merger has been testing public opinion waters. Republican Chuck Hagel is reported by the Associated Press as saying he will consider the Vice President slot with Barack Obama. This particular suggestion traces back to Hagel himself; there is no evidence that Obama has suggested this. The rumors may actually originate from the Republican Party, or could even come from one of the Democratic rivals wanting to get on the ticket with Obama.

As for the idea itself, it's great, if you are in favor of moving to a one-party system and allowing a presidential ticket with ties to the nation's largest voting machine company. Hagel was CEO of one of the nation's most problematic voting machine companies, Election Systems & Software*, before he ran for office. His votes were counted by the company he had been running, while he still had up to $5 million in ownership in it. His campaign finance manager, Michael McCarthy, owned another huge chunk through the McCarthy Group investiment firm.

*American Information Systems (AIS) changed its name to Election Systems & Software (ES&S) in 1997.

Details: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-3.pdf

SLIPPERY SLOPE TOWARD A ONE-PARTY SYSTEM

I liked having slightly more illusion about this great nation of ours than this current trial balloon permits. The uniparty concept is perilous.

There is no doubt that this is testing the waters -- by someone. I'm fairly familiar with the characteristic media symptoms when power politics is testing a political idea. This one has been sneaking around quietly in the backwaters -- I first heard about it in May -- and there was quite a bit of talk about it around June 20. But this weekend, it was launched in full force, with three successive Associated Press stories, the last one appearing about midnight (Pacific time) Saturday night.

The story was pushed out as follows:

(Obama) "Obama has invited Chuck Hagel to accompany him to Iraq."
(He also invited a Democrat.)

(Hagel) "I will consider an offer to be Vice President for Obama"

Then, and this is always very creepy to me, these trial balloon stories were immediately set upon by the Internet political propaganda teams. These operatives are as obvious as a rhino in a tea room. After each Obama/Hagel story is posted, up pop half a dozen comment posts, all sounding very much the same. They look something like this:

Gail from Illinois: "I think Hagel would be the ideal running mate, Obama would win in 2008!
MichiganMike: Obama/Hagel 2008!
Sue from Florida: Hagel is exactly what Obama needs!
IndyJohn: Hagel has always been my hero, he'd be a perfect running mate.

Sometimes, the comments are closed off before counterbalance can appear.

CHUCK'S FAVORITE VOTING MACHINES

Hagel worked for the George H.W. Bush administration in the 1980s. Initially, he was chosen to oversee the Agent Orange program for war veterans. His actions were controversial in this program.

Cellular technology pushed into the US by selling off territories in a "lottery" type mechanism. The cushiest territory "lottery" win went to Chuck Hagel, who got to corner the cell phone market in Washington DC and surrounding Virginia and Maryland areas. When Hagel ran for office in 1996, controversies about how he won the lucrative cell phone lottery surfaced in the campaign; I was not able to get specifics.

In the late 1980s, Chuck Hagel went to Saudi Arabia where he got the cell phone network going. He then went to work for George H.W. Bush in a privatization effort.

Originally from Nebraska, he had been living in the Washington DC area all through the 1980s. He moved back to Nebraska to take the helm at ES&S, then called AIS. He headed the AIS Board of Directors while Bob Urosevich ran the company. (As you may recall, Urosevich then went to run Diebold Election Systems.)

In 1994, Bob Urosevich left AIS and Hagel become CEO. This lasted until Hagel announced his run for the US Senate. He announced his candidacy two weeks after stepping down as AIS CEO. He also held stock in AIS and also in its parent company, McCarthy Group. AIS changed its name to Election Systems & Software in 1997.

Michael McCarthy, who heads McCarthy Group, was Hagels campaign finance director. When I first broke the story about Hagel and the voting machine company in 2002, Michael McCarthy's son was working in Hagel's DC office.

Hagel was not expected to win the 1996 primary, but he did, and it was such an upset that it made national news. "Can lightening strike twice?" one headline read, referring to the even more improbable prospects for Hagel winning the general. He did win. AIS/ES&S counted 80 percent of his votes.

By 2000, he was being talked about as the potential running mate for George W. Bush. He made the "short list" but Bush chose Dick Cheney instead. Hagel stated to the press in 2003 that he would consider a run for the presidency, and that was the event that caused me to call Alexander Bolton of "The Hill" to persuade a more mainstream media outlet to run a story on Hagel's voting machine company ties.

Hagel did not disclose his ownership in the voting machine company. He did disclose up to $5 million in McCarthy Group, but failed to disclose the underlying assets of McCarthy Group as required. He did not disclose that he had been CEO of the voting machine company, even though that was clearly required. He was required to list every position held during the past two years; he listed a volunteer position with the Red Cross, but failed to mention that he was CEO of the voting machine company that counted his votes. According to Bolton, Hagel's 1996 documents have been removed from the Senate Ethics Committee repository, along with the letters from the Ethics Committee asking him for proper disclosure.

Sources tell me 2003 Ethics Chairman Victor Baird took the position that Hagel failed to properly disclose the McCarthy underlying assets. Hours before Alex Bolton was set to interview him, Baird resigned. The new ethics chairperson took the official position that Hagel had done nothing wrong.

ES&S is now the largest voting machine company in the US, and certainly one of the most heavily criticized, for miscounting elections, voting machine malfunctions and questionable billing and contract procedures -- although the "most problematic" title is one that is hotly contested by all contenders.

We all need to contact Barack Obama to let him know we will not accept Chuck Hagel as his VP!!!!!

George W. Bush & The Oil Industry

Mike P — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:49:40 EDT

Source: http://www.outsiderviews.com, retrieved July 16, 2008

George W. Bush, in the name of the American People, lifted the executive ban on oil drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf yesterday. I am sorry to say that George W. Bush is now the new spokesperson for the American Petroleum Institute. The ROI that is promised supposedly is now. This is in fact not the case. Worst than this, all the so-called commentators/pundits (including Sean Hannity) literally repeat the talking points of the American Petroleum Institute to try and insure that the profits keep rolling in. Instead of using this opportunity to truly create a carbon-free future, George W. Bush is pushing the myth that we can drill our way out of this. I take my que from T. Boone Pickens. T. Boone Pickens is a Texas Oil Man. He's the same guy that helped underwrite the swift-boating of John Kerry. If he says we can't drill our way out of this disaster, then George W. Bush is wrong now as he has been again and again.

Comments on Fareed Zakaria--GPS Interview with Barck on Foreign Policy

Cheryl G — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 19:39:56 EDT

Great interview! Barack is really good at showing his liberal internationalist influences while calming conservative fears that he will be too much of a dove, "give away the store," and appear weak to dangerous forces. While making the obligatory reassurances in virile language that he will "hunt down" terrorists and occasionally use the death penalty for the most "heinous crimes," such as bin Laden's, to allay the fears of conservatives, he mostly explains that he will reverse Bush W.'s unilateralist and just plain dumb foreign policies which have caused such disastrous consequences.

The remark about how it is not a good idea when trying to win Muslim hearts and minds to confuse Shiites and Sunni extremists is a direct slam at McCain's mistakes on that front.

Another sop to conservatives is that he once again gives kudos to Bush's dad for building real coalitions and having savvy foreign policy chops. A documentary on PBS gave me increased appreciation for Bush number one, who, whatever his faults, seemed to think of country first (as McCain would say) even to the detriment of his poll numbers when he raised taxes (reversing his pledge) to help save the economy and when he downplayed the tearing down of the Berlin Wall (to bipartisan ridicule) to keep the Russians from reacting too negatively which could have forestalled their decisive reform.

After having a president for 8 years who until recently shut out his own state department and other experts from critical planning-- like nation-building right after the Iraq war-- in favor of incompetent loyalists, and was so blinded by ideology that he ignored his own insider's ,like Baker, warning against the war, it is such a pleasure to hear a presidential candidate make so much sense!

This is from Politico's Ben Smith's excellent blog, which is updated frequently. It's value for the political junkie, priceless http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0708/Spend_your_Sunday_reading.html

George W. Bush's Farewell Tour

Dr. Mark Elrod — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:47:03 EDT

My detractors have frequently given me a hard for being such a vocal critic of the president.

I actually like to think think that I've treated him with the respect that comes with his office and I haven't been as hard on him as I could be.

That's not easy given the fact that I think he's one of the worst presidents in the history of presidents.

This includes everything from US presidents to middle school class presidents.

But in most cases, the best testimony about George W. Bush general incompetence is found in his own words. As many have already observed, the president often sounds more like a frat boy than the commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation in the known universe.

Such as his parting words to G-8 leaders at his final meeting with them in Japan this week...

The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: 'Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter.'

He then punched the air while grinning widely, as the rest of those present including Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy looked on in shock.

One official who witnessed the extraordinary scene said afterwards: 'Everyone was very surprised that he was making a joke about America's record on pollution.'

I know he's a short-timer and he's largely irrelevant now but climate change and America's role in protecting the environment are too important to be reduced to a joke with other national leaders.

Brown and Sarkozy had to be questioning the sanity of the American voters who elected George W. Bush to be president with the same frequency as they did Washington and Lincoln.

Karl Rove

Mike P — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:44:53 EDT

Source: http://www.outsiderviews.com, retrieved July 10, 2008.

Karl Rove, George W. Bush's Architect, is at it yet again. According to CNN (http://www.cnn.com, retrieved July 10, 2008) he is refusing to testify before The House Judiciary Committee because of "Executive Privilege". The House is investigating among other things, selective prosecution of Democratic Office Holders, including the former Governor of Alabama Don Siegleman. Yet, Karl Rove continues to dispense his "advise" on Fox News and Fox-Affiliated Stations. Karl Rove is another symptom of the Texas Republican Mafia that has subrogated the constitution and the rule of law just for the sake of pure power. Lord Acton once said that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absoutely. George W. Bush and his henchmen saw to it that they played rough shot over the Constitution and the rule of law in my view. The Congress and the Courts were asleep at the wheel. It may not be too late, but the Congress has to continue to push to restore a semblance of order that is crucial in order for the country to regain its' footing with all the challenges that it has around the world. I wonder if it is up to the task.

Its Time For America To Graduate

Scott Foval — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:56:26 EDT

For a while now numerous American leaders have called for a change from business-as-usual politics. Barack Obama arguably has the most star power of this new generation. In reality, though, he is boiling down the complex web of issues that America needs to address into a core message for a mass audience to digest. “Change” is the mantra, because in these days of “sheeople” that can't pay attention long enough to see the train that's about to hit them, one word is just about all that can get through the noise coming from their iPod.

His advisers understand this intimately. His top “commander” is David Ploeff, a member of my own generation of political operatives who grew up with TV, worked for the old school candidates, and cut our teeth on Baby Boomers' perceptions of the world – often having more than a few misgivings about how the old ideas were working out. Barack Obama himself straddles the two generations, but is arguably more “Next Generation” than “Boomer.” To put it in TV terms, our parents liked Captain Kirk, but our generation knew that Jean Luc Picard was better.

So now the next generation political campaign is setting records in nearly every area of American politics. Ploeff, with a ripened, old-school mentor in strategist and media guru David Axelrod, is hatching a plan to be competitive in 50 states, many that haven't voted for a Democrat in two to three generations. They are raising money that out-paced even the money machines of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush using a hybrid of small donors and big money supporters woven into a symbiotic patchwork, rather than big lobbyists just running the table. Finally, and this may be the most important part, they've managed to boil the campaign down to “change” and make it stick.

Yes, they are stealing a page from Bill Clinton's own playbook. Anyone who's seen “The War Room” remembers the two mantras that James “Semper Fi” Carville (a.k.a. “Copperhead”), Paul “Motormouth” Begala (a.k.a. “The Texan”), and George “The Whiz Kid” Stephanopolous (a.k.a. “The Greek”) drilled into staffers' heads. “Change vs. More of the Same” and “It's the Economy Stupid” are as famous now for how closely they followed the good old P.R. rule of K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid), as Bubba is for actually taking it to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. When you remember this factoid it might explain why the former POTUS was more than a little hurt and uncharacteristically hypersensitive when Obama kicked him and his wife in the tail on the campaign trail.

The fact remains, when Barack Obama was a young “Barry;” he was exposed to the lessons that were taught during the Reagan and Clinton eras. What he and his own “War Room” understand now is that those political lessons need to be improved upon and revised for the next generation. They understood at the campaign's outset that K.I.S.S. was going to have to be boiled down even further for today's “Ritalin Kids” to absorb. The result of their work is that he has a bigger army of diverse, excited, and energized young activists joining his campaign organization (i.e. the “movement”) than anything modern American politics has ever seen.

If you take the 100,000-foot view of the two major Presidential campaigns, there is a stark contrast between the messages preached out on the stump. It is so simple, really; but not everyone is seeing it -- either because they are blinded by the hubris that got them where they are today in the first place, or they are just part of a different generation. John McCain is a product of an older generation, the Clintons are Boomers (and so are Al Gore and John Kerry, mind you – part of the reason they never captured the next generation's imagination), while Barack Obama is recognized "one of us” in the minds of these young activists. He “gets it” and “means it.”

The older folks don't believe it though, because they think they've seen this dog-and-pony-show before.

They're right. His name was John F. Kennedy, and if you've been paying attention you'll quickly remember that Kennedy's brother Ted and daughter Caroline are major players in Barack Obama's kitchen cabinet of advisors. So is Gore, and hopefully so will be the Clintons if the former POTUS can put his ego in his pocket.

The JFK comparisons have been all over the place, but most commentators haven't quite been able to nail the “why.” What is it about Barack Obama's candidacy that reflects John F. Kennedy's? The reason is simple. It's the “movement,” not the particular candidate, something the older generation was unable to achieve in the post-JFK-assassination political landscape. The people who were there for the inside discussions in some of those aforementioned campaigns know and privately might even admit -- it has been tried numerous times.

So Obama is going for it, not for himself, but for “the movement” and this time the Secret Service is hopefully going to keep him alive to actually make it happen. Hopefully the Clintons will go the way of Gore and Kerry and work with the Obama juggernaut to bring the Boomers into the fold. Obama's folks will hopefully keep just enough independence there to insure that the next generation campaign continues adding independent voters, Reagan Democrats, and maybe even a few Republicans willing to cross over and vote for “change.” If that happens (and the polls are looking like McCain doesn't have a snowball's chance in his supporters' favorite tax-dodging land of Barbados), the Obamakins will have proven they have learned all the lessons necessary to go out and lead. They will have earned the right to “graduate” to The White House.

The question is, are the American people ready to graduate from the new school of political and diplomatic leadership? I think so; otherwise people wouldn't be so passionate about crossing over in the first place. They are tired of the divisive ways of George Bush, Newt Gingrich, and Karl Rove, and Jesse Helms is now gone (R.I.P. to the 'ol hate-monger). They're tired of being looked at as “those people,” with a pariah as a leader, by other countries. In this economically connected global community, it is time that we start acting as the 232 years our country has aged. In short, it is time for the United States to graduate into genuine long-term leadership.

We're no longer the new kid on the block that needs to prove its greatness to the rest of the world. We don't need to lead by shoving “our way” down the throats of those who don't understand that Democracy is better. We need to adapt a higher level of leadership than even our own country has been called to deliver before. It's called “demonstrative leadership,” and it is how truly great societies go from historic to legendary. Rather than having to invade to get what we want, as George W. Bush has attempted and failed to do, we are going to have to raise the bar of democracy and show that it works for the long term. This is arguably the single greatest challenge for any society in human history, and even the great ones don't always make it.

Of all the times in our country's still young life, though, it is time that “America” stands for a unified and flexible definition of a democracy that works well, innovates, and really leads the world rather than representing an ideological slice of the past. People like Obama are pushing us in this new direction, not because they don't like America as it is, but because they understand that our country must evolve to survive. Like everything in our young country's fast ascension, our adolescence was painful and difficult, and sometimes reckless. It is time for us to prove that we are ready to leave behind the imperialism, the nukes, the Cold War, and the Culture Wars. We have learned enough now to know that pushing our way upon others isn't authentic leadership.

As an adult nation, ready to “graduate” from those ideas and actions, we must show the world that we know how to behave, be responsible, and truly lead as the great country we profess to be. After all, there are a lot of other adolescent countries out there who are learning from the lessons we must teach.

Obama, you can do better

Andrew from South Orange, NJ — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 09:33:45 EDT

Obama, you can do better.

I'm not referring to your position on the pending FISA bill, though I don't believe it should be allowed to pass in its current form. I'm talking about your explanation of your shift in position.

Why Obama?

Molly W. — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:58:22 EDT

Many people are neutral on the upcoming election. And they all ask why Obama? Why someone with so little experience to which I say; first off experience has nothing to do with it. Kennedy became our president when he had just over the experience Obama has. He is known as one of the best presidents this country ever had.

Secondly John McCain goes up there and supports George W. Bush. The man who drove this country into the ground. And those of you who believe he didn't I will say this, 7.7 trillion dollars(in DEBT). No the figure isn't even in the billions anymore it's now in the trillions. I didn't even know that trillion was an actual number because when it gets that high it's hard to tell which ones are actual numbers and which ones preschoolers made up for emphasis. On top of that he supports the war in Iraq. And when he gives us updates on the war he so blindly supports, he smiles. He can't even fake depression that we are in this war or he doesn't know what he's saying and that is pretty scary. Lastly, I still can't get over the fact that when told the towers were going down on September 11th, he stayed with the toddlers reading picture books. Don't believe me? There's VIDEOS of him sitting there being told and staying there after being told. And McCain still supports him and wants to keep Bush's morals at heart.

Next off, the war in Iraq. I read somewhere that the war has a 19% support rate. People are constantly protesting, and yet McCain goes up there with every intention to keep the war going in his own words and I quote, "make it 100 years", "that's fine with me." FINE. He didn't say that sounds logical, or practical, no that's fine. I'm sorry that just bugs me, it sounds like he was saying "cheese on my burger sounds just FINE thanks." Like he's just going with the flow and the fate of this country wouldn't be in his hands if he won.

Faith can't be used as a wedge nor patriotism a bludgeon in the words of Obama himself at the second rally in MN to which I attended. Faith cannot be used to deny the right of scientists to develop in their research. Nor can it be used to discriminate against gay people, and deny them the right to marry and get the same rights as others. Because that my friend is prejudice and when you are prejudice that means you are willing to go to cruel lengths to be sure that the chosen group doesn't get their rights.

Last but not least I would like to say that to anyone who has a problem with Obama swearing in on the Koran(though he did not and it was a rumor)go out and learn some respect for other religions, because people with other religions can in fact be trusted.

And for all the Obama supporters who can vote but aren't registered, please register. Go out and make a difference in the world( as Obama would say: I'm not asking you just to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about change in Washington...I'm asking you to believe in yours.)But on this note I would like to sign off with one of my favorite quotes and then I will say bye.
Quote:
"I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war".

Bye everyone (:

POTUS Siting in Little Rock

Dr. Mark Elrod — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:29:54 EDT

My buddy Chuck West snapped this photo of President Bush's motorcade passing his house in Little Rock yesterday.

Yes, that's an Obama yard sign in Chuck's well-manicured front yard...

Gallup Poll: Americans Worry McCain Too Similar to Bush

jgabriel — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:29:09 EDT

Gallup's latest polling has some interesting nuggets. Take a look: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108490/Americans-Worry-McCain-Would-Too-Similar-Bush.aspx

Bush, Bushed and Bush no more: The third time's the charm

Nick Danger — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:55:21 EDT

According to a recent L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll released this past Wednesday, three out of four Americans, including large numbers of Republicans, blame President Bush's economic policies for making the country worse off during the last eight years. Not surprising, this reflects a sharp increase in public pessimism during the last year.

Nine percent of respondents said the country's economic condition had improved since Bush became president, compared with 75% who said conditions had worsened. Among Republicans, 42% said the country was worse off, while 26% said it was about the same, and 22% thought economic conditions had improved. Many Republicans polled admitted they'd voted for Bush in the past two elections but wouldn't do so again. That's good since he can't run again but how does that translate to Barack Obama? We have three a three front war the Obama campaign must wage 1) Unify Democrats, 2) attract Independents to the campaign and 3) go behind the Red curtain and secretly enlighten sectors of the disenfranchised to join our ranks. Of course this all must be done with finesse while not appearing to move too far in any one direction or toward any one group or segment of any group while also being careful not to make the slightest mistake in any speech, appointment or otherwise that might be construed as fodder for the cannons of the Republican guard. It's a tall order to be had, but done with grace will take us over the beach-head and through the jungle to our prize. We find ourselves at a cross roads and the time has come to not wrestle with each other over policy matters but to forge a sharp cohesive tool the campaign would like and desperately needs to cut a swath right through that jungle with ease. The time has come to lay down our egos and set our differences aside to ensure that we win this election. We can find ways to blame the W and hold our breath but the most powerful way to use this weapon...and we've got to come up for air sooner or later, after all we are mammals and thinking ones at that... is to use these poll numbers to unify ourselves as one voice. The time has come to shore up our support for a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress! Mount your steed ladies and gentlemen and crack those whips... Talyho!

The Sandy Path to Oil & Gas

Nick Danger — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:22:29 EDT

Yesterday I turned on MSNBC's "Hardball" for a couple minutes while taking a break from a tedius day making money to fill my tank. CNBC's Jim Kramer was chatting with guest host Mike Barnacle about gas prices in the good ol' USA and the effects of outside. They touched on speculators and offshore drilling, a sore spot for us sunny southern California regulars. Eventually they got to the effects of the Iraq war on oil prices. Behind the scenes our government, The Bush administration is calling on Opec for an additional 2 million barrels of crude a day to bring prices back down to manageable levels that existed before the spike in prices. No official figures have been released but it is estimated that Iraq's pre-war levels were 2 to possibly 4 million barrels a day. So in essence we were told on national television that Iraq was pumping more than enough oil to end our high gas prices before George W Bush invaded on false pretenses. Where is the rest of the media in covering this story? Where is the investigative journalism? Why have there been no questions on this issue? And to add injury to insult, much of the oil pumped in Iraq today has been stolen and/or funneled off to a black market that is in some cases funding the very terrorists whose influence we are attempting to oust!

Voting from the Space Station

Jerod Poore — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:35:07 EDT

One good thing then Governor George W. Bush did - signing a law that makes it relatively easy for astronauts to vote.

For anyone who missed the story on NPR you can find it here:

NASA Helps Astronauts Cast Ballots from Space

While two votes from space won't make much of a difference in the presidential contest in Texas, who knows what they'll mean at the state-level given the GOTV efforts.

Regardless, that NASA and the Texas election officials go through the trouble to help the astronauts vote is one of those "proud to be American" moments.

McCain: Lock-step and (oil) barrel

Janet Ritz — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:09:30 EDT

From THE ENVIRONMENTALIST

In a campaign year where John McCain is seemingly doing everything he can to publicly distance himself from George W. Bush, he's also been emulating the historically unpopular president by walking in lock-step with him along the path to Texas oil.

While Barack Obama was in Illinois shoveling sand in bags to hold back the Bush-neglected infrastructure crumbling around him -- resulting in a multi-state version of Katrina with both an oblivious Republican president and Republican presidential candidate -- John McCain just happened to be on his way to Texas to accept the whoops and cheers (and money) from oil industry insiders for his proclaimed flip-flop on offshore drilling as the answer to America's oil-supply woes.

Want something worse? Aside from the fact that he did it while Senator Obama was showing empathy to those impacted by an unstable climate and deteriorating infrastructure, it turns out that John McCain gave his oil pandering speech CONCURRENT to the release of his new ad-buy proclaiming his independence from the Bush Administration on global warming.

Obama must learn from Kucinich's impeachment of Bush

Future America — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:15:21 EDT

by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
June 11, 2008

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3143

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has introduced 35 articles of impeachment against George W. Bush. Two of the articles deal with the fact that Bush was never elected, and in fact stole the election of 2004 in Ohio. They should serve as a cautionary notice to the Obama campaign that this year's election could also be stolen.

Kucinich's courage in introducing these articles is underscored by the fact that the Congress should have removed Bush from office years ago. From lying to the world to perpetrate the war in Iraq, to violating the Constitution on scores of basic civil rights and liberties issues, to fostering a regime based on unprecedented corruption and robbery, George W. Bush would be known as the worst president in the history of the United States if in fact he had been elected president.

But these articles of impeachment contain charges that come directly from the independent reportage on the stolen 2004 election that appeared first at www.freepress.org and in other non-corporate and internet-based media throughout the United States. Ironically, though these facts have finally penetrated to a proposed Congressional indictment of the nation's chief executive, they have yet to be reported in the "mainstream" corporate-owned media.

Kucinich's Article 28 charges Bush with "tampering with free and fair elections," along with "corruption of the administration of justice." Article 29 charges him and his staff and political cronies and underlings with "conspiracy to violate the Civil Rights Act of 1965" (co-author Bob Fitrakis, attorney-at-law, helped draft these Articles 28 and 29 based in part on information that was first posted at www.freepress.org).

Many of the specific charges leveled in the bill of impeachment can be traced directly to conflict of interest charged raised in Ohio by grassroots election protection activists before, during and after the 2004 voting. Bush deserves impeachment, Kucinich writes, for "willfully allowing his agent, Ohio Secretary of State John Kenneth Blackwell, the Co-Chair of the Bush-Cheney Re-election Campaign, to ensure that uncounted and provisional ballots in Ohio's 2004 presidential election would be disproportionately concentrated in urban African-American districts."

The impeachment document also notes that "in Ohio's Lucas County, which includes Toledo, 3,122 or 41.13% of the provisional ballots went uncounted under the direction of George W. Bush's agent, the Secretary of State of Ohio, John Kenneth Blackwell, Co-Chair of the Committee to Re-Elect Bush/Cheney in Ohio....In Ohio's Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, 8,559 or 32.82% of the provisional ballots went uncounted....In Ohio's Hamilton County, which includes Cincinnati, 3,529 or 24.23% of the provisional ballots went uncounted."

In our numerous conversations with Rep. Kucinich since the Ohio-centered theft of the 2004 election, he has made it clear that he fully understands the depth of planning and coordination that went into the hijacking of the presidency. Based on sophisticated coordination between Blackwell and White House consiglieri Karl Rove, the GOP launched a high-tech blitzkrieg on the electoral process. Their tactics ranged from removing more than 300,000 registered Ohio citizens from the voter rolls, to short-changing inner city precincts of needed voting machines, to rigging electronic vote counts, to calling a phony Homeland Security alert to several score other tactics, many of which continue to surface.

The tragedy of this impeachment is that it did not occur in 2004, when the independent media filled with the first revelations of what really happened in Ohio. Two new election protection documentaries, David Earnhardt's UNCOUNTED and a new release coming from Emmy-award winner Dorothy Fadiman, make the experience even more indelible.

The Bush catastrophe is now winding down, having exceeded all expectations in its destruction of the fabric of American law, economy and ecology. But if Barack Obama allows history to repeat itself yet again in 2008, this nation will plunge even deeper into the depths. The only way to avoid that is to proceed with this impeachment in all its potential force. At very least, this Congress must thoroughly expose and act on what was done to our sacred democratic process in 2004. As we have since learned, the world cannot afford to have this happen again.

Starting to believe

Brit — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 02:27:54 EDT

As I lay in bed watching Barack Obama's speech for A More Perfect Union, I began thinking about my childhood. I have fond memories of some presidential elections in the past, but in the last few years I have been so cynical and so negative about our countries future. I wanted to know where it all went wrong.

I remember one night sometime during 1992, I was about 4 years old, we were on vacation and I was sitting in the living room. My parents must have been watching some of the candidates debate, because I remember hearing Bush and Clinton talk. I remember thinking Bush was a funny name because it reminded me of the tail of a squirrel (ok I was an odd child). I remember thinking Bill Clinton was cool. It was superficial, but at 4 years old, I was at least paying some attention.

I remember the next election, in 1996. I remember I really wanted to actually get involved. I remember being in Spring Lake in the living room of the house we rented, watching the canditates debate. I knew nothing about what they were saying, but I listened and watched intently, acting like I knew exactly what was going on. I remember feeling excited that I was part of something so significant. I remember thinking that I couldn't wait until I could vote. Then I remember my mom telling me that I should make a list of topics that are important to me, and listen to the speeches given by Clinton and Dole, and put checks in the boxes and see which president gets the most checks, so I can see who I agree with most. Now, granted I probably put topics down like "funny, smart, experienced" etc. down, because lets face it, I was only 8, I do remember putting X in the boxes for the candidates. I remember that I wanted to like Dole because I liked Dole canned peaches, but Clinton ended up having many more X's, and my mom like Clinton, so I figured it was ok. I remember how exciting it was to be a part of something like that. I thought it was so cool to be able to choose our president. In this huge country of ours, my opinion mattered. I felt like somehow, getting to vote and having a say tied our whole country together.

Then came 2000. And it turned out, that was the year I lost my excitment. In 2000, I was 12 now, and able to understand much more about the presidential elections. I was also in a US history class where we were learning about how elections actually work, with delegates and everything. I remember listening to the speeches. I remember wanting Gore to win. I remember the "fights" between my mom who liked Gore and my dad who liked Bush. I remember waiting up in my room with the TV on waiting for the election results. I remember that at one point the news stations (which we have learned are often wrong) had said that Gore had won Florida. I was so excited. I was getting ready to go to sleep when I heard my mom and I turned back on the TV. They retracted that Gore had won Florida, and it was still undecided. I was disappointed, so I decided I was determined to stay up all night and wait for a final answer. I tried, but I eventually fell asleep before any annoucements. When I woke up though I had so much faith that Gore won, because why would the news have said it if it wasn't likely to happen? That's the mind of a 12 year old. I remember waking up and hearing that Gore had conceded. I was so disappointed. Then I went to school and heard that Gore had retracted his concession. I began to gain hope again. Throughout the next few weeks I heard chatter about hanging chads, unfair voting practices, etc. I began to get so confused. When Bush was declared the winner I was devastated. I knew that Gore had won the popular vote. I knew how the electoral process worked, but I couldn't accept that even though Gore won the popular vote, somehow Bush was president. I became bitter at the process. As I got older I looked into the 2000 election more. I did a project on it in 8th grade for example. I recently watched the movie Recount, and it just reminded me how angry I actually am at the whole thing. I grew up (at least till the age of 12) loving that I could vote and that my vote counted. I was so excited to turn 18 and vote. And then, with one election, I began to doubt if my vote counted at all.

The 2004 election was of less interest to me. I was 16 then. I knew I didn't want Bush to be president. Not again. I didn't particularly like Kerry either, but I had decided he was the lesser of 2 evils. I didn't really watch the debates, I just listened to my parents and friends and tried to determine which candidate I wanted. Then I thought about it, and realized that I didn't want another 4 years of what we had. My interest level decreased so much.

For the longest time I thought when I turned 18 the first thing I should do is register to vote. When my 18 birthday came I got my licensed changed so it was not the provisional license, I bought cigarettes even though I don't smoke just to get carded. Then I went home. I thought "YES I CAN FINALLY VOTE." Then I thought "But does it matter? Does my vote matter? Probably not." And guess what, I didn't register. Not until I got to college. And the only reason I registered when I got to college was because someone came to my door, gave me a sheet that I could fill out, and told me if I filled it out right then they'd mail it for me and everything. I was lazy, and didn't care, but figured hey, why not, I should register.

When I heard that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton might be running for president, I began to pay slightly more attention. A woman and a black man? I was so excited. I felt like even if I can't believe that my vote counts, I can believe that our nation is moving forward in terms of race and gender. On a college campus, especially one as democratic as mine, you tend to get swept up in things. I began to listen to more and more speeches, began to look stuff up, etc. When I came home for the summer I talked to my parents and started getting into more heavy duty conversations. I started listening to Barack Obama's speeches. My mothers enthusiam for Obama most certainly has contributed to my enthusiam. And both my father and mothers ability to hold meaningful conversations with me about this election has helped get me excited. However, as I listened to Barack Obama talk, for the first time since I was 12, I felt hope.

For the first time I felt like if I voted, I might be able to make that difference. That by contributing to this campaign I was getting a chance to be a part of something bigger than myself. That I was making a difference in this world. I began to think that if Obama is president, we might be able to have the America I so niavely believed in when I was younger- a better America. Not just one where votes matter, but one where we as people matter, regardless of our race, gender, religion, or socioeconomic status.

I finally believe that one person can make a difference. That I can make a difference.

Thank you Barack Obama, for giving me a chance to hope, and for giving me a reason to want to vote once again.

Man of Peace

Dr. Mark Elrod — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:49:12 EDT

Like most of us, President Bush is learning that hindsight is 20-20.

President Bush has admitted to The Times that his gun-slinging rhetoric made the world believe that he was a “guy really anxious for war” in Iraq. He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran.

In an exclusive interview, he expressed regret at the bitter divisions over the war and said that he was troubled about how his country had been misunderstood. “I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric.”

Phrases such as “bring them on” or “dead or alive”, he said, “indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace”. He said that he found it very painful “to put youngsters in harm’s way”. He added: “I try to meet with as many of the families as I can. And I have an obligation to comfort and console as best as I possibly can. I also have an obligation to make sure that those lives were not lost in vain.”

Yep. And I'm not sorry I hit that baseball through my parent's upstairs window when when I was twelve -- I'm only sorry for jumping up and down as I was circling the bases and then apologizing for being such a good hitter.

Maybe this is the kind of thing the president is talking about:

"'Kick ass!' [Bush] said, echoing Colin Powell's tough talk. 'If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! We must be tougher than hell! This Vietnam stuff, this is not even close. It is a mind-set. We can't send that message. It's an excuse to prepare us for withdrawal.

"There is a series of moments and this is one of them. Our will is being tested, but we are resolute. We have a better way. Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!'"

I'll go out on a limb and say that when scholars and academics get around to writing the history of George W. Bush's eight years in the White House, the words "man of peace" will not be used very often.

The current reality is that if the Bush administration was a movie, most rational people would have walked out on it a long time ago.

For and Against Visiting Surrender (but Backwards)

Robert Vertrees — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 02:00:42 EDT

These observations might be a little dated, but what the heck...

In response to being heckled during a speech Sen. John McCain said he would "never surrender in Iraq."
"Surrender"? Didn't we attack Iraq? Attackers can't "surrender," attackers can only "stop attacking."
When a rapist stops raping his victim and runs away, the cops don't say that the rapist "surrendered" to the victim. Only defenders can "surrender." When attackers stop attacking it's not called "surrendering," it's called "leaving."

Also, John McCain approved of and supports the Bush administration's invasion and subsequent "war in Iraq" but last week insinuated that Barack Obama isn't qualified to make policy decisions on Iraq because Obama hasn't visited Iraq in over four years. How many times did George W. Bush visit Iraq before he authorized the unilateral, preemptive, military action to overthrow its government?

And finally, I’ve recently decided that one can be for the invasion of Iraq and against the handling of the war in Iraq, but one cannot be for the handling of the war in Iraq and for the invasion because all explanations that justify why Iraq is the clusterfuck that it is are reasons why the Bush administration should not have rushed into the "go-it-alone" invasion of Iraq.

-Rocky

http://rockyrob.blogspot.com/

History Lessons

Janet Ritz — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:01:04 EDT

Cross-posted from The Huffington Post - original publish date: April 13, 2008

In her recent speech at the Conference on World Affairs, Rachel Maddow cited James Madison's warning about the unitary executive: The propensity of an unchecked executive branch to lean toward war in opposition to a legislature more likely to debate the issue before moving toward conflict.

Maddow's supposition, that the Bush administration's seeming incompetence, its torture memos, its rush to war -- Bush and Cheney's direct effort to shift power to the executive and, thereby, to shift the entire country to a more warlike stance -- does have historical precedence...

"Time to decompress"?

Robert Vertrees — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:27:21 EDT

Barack Obama finally reached the magic number of primary delegates necessary for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination yet Hillary Clinton still refuses to concede or even explain her campaign's immediate objectives. And now she, (and the Right), are justifying her current stalling by saying that she can't make any decisions right now because she "needs time to decompress."

Really? "Time to decompress"? Are you kidding me?!!! For the past three months Hillary has been shouting at whoever will listen that she is the better presidential candidate yet now it's okay that she is without the capacity to make any decisions because she "needs time to decompress"?

Can you imagine FDR, JFK, or even Bill Clinton ever saying that he can't make any decisions right now because he "needs time to decompress"?

Picture George W. Bush explaining that he can't answer any questions about Scott McClellan's book because the past seven years have been very strenuous, he has terribly mismanaged an unnecessary war in Iraq, and his administration is involved in numerous scandals, and he really just "needs time to decompress"?

http://rockyrob.blogspot.com/

Are we supposed to thank Scott McClellan?

Karen T. Zachary — Wed, 28 May 2008 11:04:19 EDT

Of course I haven't read Scott McClellan's new book What Happened (is that a question or a statement?), but I've heard the juicy excerpts on TV this morning. Essentially it sounds like he's confirming things some of us "knew" for a long time -- but , wait, one of my favorite semi-pro bloggers, Bill in Portland Maine, says it much better:

MASSIVE JEERS to Scott McClellan. The latest former Bush lapdog---he was press secretary from '03 to '06---to come out of the woodwork has several juicy nuggets in his hot-off-the-presses tell-all book. Bottom line: he confirms everything that we dirty hippie bloggers were screaming about at the top of our lungs, but which the traditional media ignored because...well, because Scott McClellan stood at his little White House podium and denied it all, lying out of his fat little elitist face as the stenographers printed his crap without scrutiny. [Click on Read More for the rest.]

I have no respect for people who participated in shenanigans of the Bush administration, failed to resign in protest, and then come out with a book admitting it all. And yes, Colin Powell, I'm looking at you.

Scott McClellan was and still is a snotty-nosed punk; don't buy his book.

And to start your day with a chuckle, check out Bill in Portland Maine's Cheers and Jeers at Daily Kos.

PHOENIX MARS LANDER: Inspiration for Voters

Obama PEACE Warrior — Mon, 26 May 2008 10:13:10 EDT

We hope to see our Nation's National HONOR restored, & the AMERICAN Way of Life restored when President Bush leaves the White House. I am confident that our candidate, Barack OBAMA, is the President who will help restore our National Spirit,

VISUALIZE a shining STARSHIP, rising up from the DEEPEST FATHOMS of an OCEAN OF STARS. Waiting impatiently for the ROGUE COMMANDER of the STARSHIP FLEET, George W. BUSH, to finally relinquish Command! He boards an ESCAPE POD, & is gone in a FLASH, back to CRAWFORD, TEXAS, U.S.A. And President BARACK OBAMA is piped aboard.

In Seven Months, President OBAMA will begin the hard task of setting a NEW Course for our FUTURE, with ENERGY INDEPENDENCE as a vital imperative. He will need encouragement & prayers & support from us MOST, after he becomes President. When the "rubber meets the ROADBLOCKS which the Conservative Republicans will surely try to put in our way! Getting American economy back on Track & beginning the difficult, sensitive work of WINDING DOWN our Military Occupation of IRAQ & bringing our TROOPS home!

Democrats & Independents, Moderate Republicans, Ron Paul supporters, Greens: All will be needed to help deal with all the critical problems that have piled up & been IGNORED by Pres. Bush for six long years. The American Dream WILL be re-imagined, the best of Treasured American Values & Honored Traditions will again be a "BEACON" to others. America is successful & believable when when we LEAD BY EXAMPLE, rather than by sheer FORCE, TRULY "Free & Fair" Elections here in America & a TRULY Free & Fair NEWS coverage by the MEDIA, will show people who live in Repressive Regimes the KEY to solving THEIR problems It will show them that they TOO "have the POWER to be a POSITIVE, PEACEFUL Force for Good & for the CHANGE they want to see, in THEIR OWN neck of the Woods!

A far different EXample than the World has experienced uner the American "Leadership" of Pres. George W. Bush & Vice Pres. Dick Cheney! Let's show the World our PURPLE STATES, not PURPLE FINGERS when we VOTE in November!

Recount - the HBO movie

Irene from Babbitt, MN — Mon, 26 May 2008 00:20:39 EDT

If you want to get fired up for this election, if you want to get your friends fired up, find someone with HBO and watch "Recount," a movie starring and produced by Kevin Spacey about the 2000 election.