The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

John McCain

Post Poll Shows Challenge for McCain


Sen. John McCain holds a press availability after touring the Dow Corning plant in Freeland, Mich., Sept. 23, 2008. (The Saginaw News/Jeff Schrier)

Updated 8:19 a.m.
By Dan Balz
On the day John McCain gave his acceptance speech in St. Paul, Minn., Steve Schmidt, the leader of the McCain campaign, said he would try not to focus on the round of polls coming out immediately after the Republican convention. Instead, he said, he would wait a few weeks to see how the race was settling in just before the presidential debates.

Little did he know that an economic upheaval was coming with the potential to reshape the presidential race in a way that could put his candidate at a distinct disadvantage. The latest Washington Post-ABC News poll, just out this morning, underscores the challenge McCain now faces as he prepares for Friday's first debate in Mississippi.

The size of Obama's lead in the new poll -- 52 percent to 43 percent among likely voters -- will draw plenty of attention. It's the first time Obama has been over the 50-percent mark in a Post-ABC News poll, and easily outside the margin of error.

The nine-point margin is also larger than a number of other recent national polls. Given that the race has been very close for a long time, that Obama advantage could sag over the next couple of weeks, unless the economy has permanently altered the political environment. With negotiations over a rescue package underway and the markets edgy awaiting a possible agreement, it's too soon to know that.

Top officials from both campaigns e-mailed me late last night to express skepticism at the size of Obama's lead. Schmidt called The Post poll an outlier and said it does not conform to what his campaign is seeing in its own polls. He said the battleground states still appear very tight.

Bill McInturff, McCain's pollster, sent along the campaign's polling in battlegrounds Wednesday morning. They showed a close race, which he said suggested that nationally the race is close. "Somewhere, in some poll, there'd be significant/negative movement," he wrote. "That's not happened."

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said the nine-point spread seemed too rosy, although he added that the Obama campaign does not try to analyze the race through a national lens. He did not contest the idea that Obama is gaining ground, and he also raised the issue of whether the campaign's intensive vote-mobilization efforts could be having an impact on the polls. In the states, he said he believed things are solidifying in Obama's direction.

Other aspects of the poll may be more problematic for McCain than the overall margin, however. The survey suggests that McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, got a real bounce from their convention, but that, as with bounces of the past, it has dissipated. Whether that's because of the new focus on the economy, a natural settling or other factors is less important than the fact that what went up has begun to come down.

Take Palin. There's no question that she has energized the Republican base. The crowd she drew in Florida on Sunday -- estimated at up to 60,000 people -- says she's captured the fancy of the party faithful. But the Post-ABC poll shows that independents are notably less impressed with her today than they were in the week after she made her national debut.

Similarly, McCain got a boost from his convention in the sheer enthusiasm for his candidacy -- an area where he has long lagged behind Obama. The new poll shows that strong enthusiasm for McCain fell back in the past two weeks and is now about half as great as for Obama. Can McCain rev up the enthusiasm down the stretch? The Obama campaign long has argued that this enthusiasm gap is a real advantage in the battle to get voters to the polls on Election Day.

Another concern for McCain is that Obama has reopened his once-wide lead on who is the real change agent in the race. This has been at the heart of Obama's candidacy, but McCain made genuine inroads on the strength of his convention. Now, he has slipped back.

The biggest worry for McCain is that, because of rising concerns about the economy, the playing field is now tilted so heavily in the direction of Obama and the Democrats. When the general election began in June, 34 percent of Americans cited jobs and the economy as the issues that would be the most important in their vote. Twenty percent cited Iraq.

Today, half of registered voters say the economy and jobs are the most important issues in the campaign. Just 9 percent cite the war in Iraq, even as McCain has come to believe that the issue of the war plays to his advantage because of the reduction in violence that the surge has helped produce.

McCain now needs events to help reduce the importance of the economy as an issue. Or, he must find a way in the debates to challenge Obama's standing on the issue.

So many of the states remain close, according to recent polls, that both sides are right to assume that that this race could be a battle to the end. But it seemed clear the day the government let Lehman Brothers go bankrupt and the Dow dropped 500 points that McCain could suffer politically.

The economic crisis has further soured the public mood. President Bush's approval rating in a series of state polls released this week has taken another dip. Those facts are dead weights on McCain's shoulders, and the Post-ABC poll suggests they are taking a toll. That makes the debates more important than ever. For McCain, the first one can't arrive soon enough.

Posted at 7:21 AM ET on Sep 24, 2008  | Category:  John McCain
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Candidate Reaction: Iranian President Ahmadinejad's Remarks | Next: McCain Denies Reid's Claim He Backs Bailout


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



I saw the debate.
It's pretty sad when the American media gives "kudos" to the loser and the winner's name, "John McCain" isn't even mentioned. Talk about putting a spin on something...WOW!
But by all means, feel free to embrace your fantasy. It's the only happiness those who hate America will find throughout this election.
I mean,...if it helps you to sleep better at night more power to ya.
Maybe you'll have a wet dream about Obama being president.

Posted by: Thozmaniac | September 27, 2008 1:14 PM

HI
Just nuke them
{SAC} trained killer Wake up America.

Posted by: david clayton | September 24, 2008 7:08 PM

Maybe some of you should listen to former President Bill Clinton who says if Democrats want someone to dump on John McCain, he's not the guy.

(From AP)

Some members of his party have been complaining that Clinton has not been enthusiastic enough in his support for Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, who defeated Clinton's wife in the primary campaign, and heaping too much praise on McCain.

But Clinton told CNN's "Larry King Live" on Wednesday that he doesn't think "dumping" on McCain or his running mate, Sarah Palin, is a winning strategy. He said undecided voters aren't interested in attacks but solutions for the problems they face.

"I just don't believe that getting up here and hyperventilating about Gov. Palin, or Sen. McCain for that matter, is a productive use of a former president's time and is not a vote-getter," he said, adding that he admires McCain even though he disagrees with several of his positions.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:39 PM

dbw:

I have to assume it was simply made up. I think I would have spotted something like that, and there's no such quote on Google News for the last 2 weeks.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 5:20 PM

JakeD:

I too would love to see where Hillary supposedly called Palin an "opportunist".

I mean, that's pretty rich coming from a Democrat whose candidate for PRESIDENT is the entry-level Barack Obama.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 5:05 PM

HEMI and McGeerick:

By the way, if you really want to 'do your homework' on the Graham-Leach-Bliley bill that you are trying to use to pin the financial meltdown on Republicans, a local talk show guy last night was reading the New York Times article he pulled from the 1999 archive the day Bill Clinton signed that bill.

You should have heard the quotes of Bill Clinton, crowing about how great that legislation would be for the financial services industry, consumers, and all but taking credit for it as his idea....

Oh wait....I'm starting to let facts get in the way of this "Blame the Republicans for Everything" campaign....my bad.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 5:01 PM

HEMI and McGeerick:
"...the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. That bill, introduced and engineered by McCain's trusted economic adviser Phil Gramm and passed into law with McCain voting in support....is widely acknowledged as opening the way for increased risk and dangerous financial practices."

Thanks, McGeerick, for imploring us to do our 'complete homework'. Maybe you should follow your own advice.
- Joe Biden also voted in support of this bill.
- Bill Clinton supported and signed it.
- Robert Rubin, one of Obama's closest economic advisors, was the chief Democrat who championed this bill.

But I'm sure it was just a lack of doing your homework that caused all of that helpful information to be left out of your post....

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 4:55 PM

Will you accept the scripted Presidential 'debate' again?
Brought to you by your 'good friends' at Wall Street.

No Paul or Nader Main Street USA,
nor Cynthia McKinney.

Posted by: OPEN REAL DEBATES | September 24, 2008 4:53 PM

HEMI said:
"Last month Pelosi couldn't even pass a bill to stop speculative trading in the oil market because the Republicans shot it down, and you expect me to believe that somehow the Democrats over powered the Repubs in 2003 when they wanted to fix the housing crises. Maybe I'm missing something."

HEMI, do you realize how badly you contradict yourself? You claim there is no way Democrats could have blocked Bush's proposal for reform in 2003 because the Republicans held the majority in Congress.

Your proof? A bill that Pelosi and the Democrats, who are now the majority, couldn't get past the minority Republicans.

Did you stop to think: gee, if the minority-Republicans just blocked Pelosi, then perhaps....just perhaps...it might be possible that the Democrats blocked Bush's reform package in 2003 when the Democrats were the minority!

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 4:49 PM

Let me get this straight: The republicans double the national debt since 2001 to $10 trillion, increase the size of gov't with deficit spending, creates an imaginary link between al qaeda and Iraq to justify an illegal invasion of a soverign nation, reduces oversight and regulation of the financial "free" markets that allow failing companies to obscenely reward CEOs for failing, submits atrocious blank check bailout spending bills, and allows the military to deteriorate to the point that our country's safety is at risk, then top it off by selecting candidates for pres that couldn't balance their own checkbook.

And they have the better plan?

Posted by: EH | September 24, 2008 4:48 PM

Trade allocates productions according to efficiency and resource availability. Free trade breaks artificial barriers, encourage competition and innovation, and elevate the overall economic activities and living standards.

Who's afraid of free trade? The lazy and the incompetent.

Free trade doesn't entail foreign production. Even with foreign production, the lion share of profit is not on the manufacturing. For something made in China that you buy at Walmart, typically 10 cents on a dollar goes to the Chinese factory. And yes, the Chinese know that and are also concerned with environmental damage and other unsustainable costs.

Companies like Apple are afraid not of foreign competition, but of trade barriers that limit the market for its excellent products.

---
1. Obama promised massive spendings on healthcare, energy, infrastructure, education, foreclosure relief, better father program, etc, in a time we're facing the risk of financial system collapse. Either he's buying votes with empty promise or he'll wreck the economic foundation. Clinton administration officials call the math wrong.
2. Businesses, large and small, count on free trade to revive. Obama's protectionist approach will make it harder for the economy to recover. Again, Obama is no Clinton here.

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I'll start with these two. Yesterday Obama said to the press that his spending plans will have to be changed because of the bail out. And if you believe that trade bull ---- that McCain is selling you must be out of your mind. How do think we're gonna pay off our debt if we don't produce anything anymore. These companies are making a lot of money using slave labor with no environmental laws but it bankrupting our country. I'm trying to tell you that McCain is waving a false flag and don't care about this country. Wake up already.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 3:51 PM
---
Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.
With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.
Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 4:40 PM

"McCain had never heard of Palin until after the computer printed her name one day before his announcement."

Except, of course, that Gov. Palin met with Sen. McCain in D.C. in March of this year.

I checked Google News to no avail, so if anyone else can get me a link where Sen. Clinton called Gov. Palin an "opportunist", I would appreciate it.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 4:38 PM

I am not surprised that California is one of the states that are having a huge crisis with their state budget. It's because they have the largest population of illegal immigrants that continue to feed off of programs meant for American citizens. Get rid of the illegal criminals and then you would see a positive change, until then I could care less about their problems.

Posted by: James | September 24, 2008 4:32 PM

Michigan: Movement on Today's Map
Posted Sep 24, 2008 at 12:11 PM | by Maurice Berger

While PollTrack recently moved Michigan to "Leaning Democrat" on Today's Map, it left it "To Close To Call" on Tomorrow's Map. Why? Because the state may not behave like its neighbors in this cycle. The local Democratic party is doing poorly in the state--especially Govenor Jennifer Granholm--blamed for the local and especially harsh downturn in the economy. While the Democratic brand may be helping Obama right now in a number of states, it may be hurting him in Michigan, where his PT average lead just dropped below the 4% mark and a new Marketing Resource Group of Lansing poll shows McCain up by 3%--46% to 43%. Thus PollTrack moves the state back to "Too Close To Call" on Today's Map.

Posted by: Scott | September 24, 2008 4:14 PM

Again people, who runs the House and Congress? Democrats do so stop blaming just the Republicans for this mess we are in right now. As for intelligence, Obama wins, but just like any job, experience is what people want, not just big words with no backing. What does Obama stand for? Hope and that is about it.

Posted by: James | September 24, 2008 4:12 PM

factchecker says that "Facts are facts" and that's right. The only problem is, partial facts are just partial facts.
factchecker, if you think the turning point in this crisis took place in 2005, you need to take a longer look back to 1999 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. That bill, introduced and engineered by McCain's trusted economic adviser Phil Gramm and passed into law with McCain voting in support, dismantled 65-year-old regulations that controlled commercial banking, investment banking and insurance services. It is widely acknowledged as opening the way for increased risk and dangerous financial practices. But apparently you and other McCain backers would rather ignore that turning point. Time to take the blinders off and do your homework completely.

Posted by: McGeerick | September 24, 2008 3:36 PM

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Your right. This is Gramm's baby. And so was Enron.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 3:57 PM

1. Obama promised massive spendings on healthcare, energy, infrastructure, education, foreclosure relief, better father program, etc, in a time we're facing the risk of financial system collapse. Either he's buying votes with empty promise or he'll wreck the economic foundation. Clinton administration officials call the math wrong.
2. Businesses, large and small, count on free trade to revive. Obama's protectionist approach will make it harder for the economy to recover. Again, Obama is no Clinton here.

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I'll start with these two. Yesterday Obama said to the press that his spending plans will have to be changed because of the bail out. And if you believe that trade bull ---- that McCain is selling you must be out of your mind. How do think we're gonna pay off our debt if we don't produce anything anymore. These companies are making a lot of money using slave labor with no environmental laws but it bankrupting our country. I'm trying to tell you that McCain is waving a false flag and don't care about this country. Wake up already.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 3:51 PM

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ANGERED BY SARAH PALIN’S REMARKS

Comments uttered by Sarah Palin has angered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton who described Sarah Palin as an opportunist with no qualifications. Senator Hillary Clinton also stated that John McCain and Sarah Palin’s records on women’s rights are abominable. The country cannot withstand anymore George Bush failures cloaked in McCain/Palin. Asking Sarah Palin to become Vice President is like asking the grazing moose behind her trailer to pilot the shuttle.

National Organization of Women (NOW) Endorsed Pro-Women’s Rights ticket Obama / Biden for their outstanding works bettering the lives of women.

During her first term as Mayor, Palin went on an intense firing spree by sacking, or requesting resumes and resignation letters from the chief of police, finance director, public works director, and librarian.

In October of 1996, Palin consulted the city librarian about censoring "objectionable" books. The librarian was shocked and responded that the books were selected "on the basis of national selection criteria of libraries this size" and would resist all efforts to ban or remove any books from the library. A few months later Emmons received a letter from Palin stating that she had been terminated from her job. Emmons was reinstated the next day after public outcry.

Long time Alaskan acquaintance described Sarah Palin as a malicious, conniving opportunist, a reckless spender, and power abuser. Initially Palin supported the 'bridge to nowhere' project and even wore t-shirts that supported the project. When she realized that the project was not supported by the public she decided to back off.

Palin is an avid pro-lifer. Teen pregnancies are a major dilemma facing the nation today. The government spent $1 billion in supporting abstinence-only sex education programs since 1996. In the case of Palin's daughter, such programs are failing us. Palin is comfortable with giving her own daughter a choice, but wants to take away that choice from the rest of the nation.

By picking a young, attractive and vivacious woman as his partner in crime, McCain hoped to pull in all the disappointed Clinton supporters. This was his crucial mistake, because Sarah Palin is the antithesis of Hillary Clinton. She stands against women rights and would reverse women's rights by fifty years. Women are not as gullible as McCain and his advisors had hoped that they would be. Just because McCain placed a young woman in front of the crowd does not mean women will automatically vote for her without any question. Women will soon realize that Sarah Palin is an anti-choice, homophobic, polar bear, wolf, moose, and deer killing machine.

Sarah Palin is incapable of writing a speech. The speech given by her at the Republican National Convention was written long before she was considered for McCain’s running mate by the computer. McCain had never heard of Palin until after the computer printed her name one day before his announcement.

The thought that Sarah Palin will do anything in the White House is unsettling, because she is a unhinged lunatic who will mess up and give the public the perception that women cannot be in power. Hillary Rodham Clinton and women throughout the country are very angry that Sarah “moose burger” Palin is in such an important position.

Posted by: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON SHARP WORDS TOWARD SARAH PALIN | September 24, 2008 3:39 PM

factchecker says that "Facts are facts" and that's right. The only problem is, partial facts are just partial facts.
factchecker, if you think the turning point in this crisis took place in 2005, you need to take a longer look back to 1999 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. That bill, introduced and engineered by McCain's trusted economic adviser Phil Gramm and passed into law with McCain voting in support, dismantled 65-year-old regulations that controlled commercial banking, investment banking and insurance services. It is widely acknowledged as opening the way for increased risk and dangerous financial practices. But apparently you and other McCain backers would rather ignore that turning point. Time to take the blinders off and do your homework completely.

Posted by: McGeerick | September 24, 2008 3:36 PM

I can see the right wing nut jobs shaking in their pants in these posts. You can TRY HARD this time to LIE & MISLEAD like the last two elections.. but Americans won't be fooled.. your days of raping this country are over.. GO OBAMA.. GO HONESTY.. GO DIPLOMACY...

Posted by: Obama Biden 09 | September 24, 2008 3:35 PM

Is there a difference between outright lying and plain BS?

Lying, i guess, is where one knows the truth and tries to conceal it.

BS is where you think the truth is irrelevant and you just talk to excite your audience.

The McCain campaign is down to the BS level.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 3:23 PM

Republicans have given us the biggest and most expensive government in US history, and it just keeps getting worse. Now they want tax payers to buyout failing private businesses and pay executive golden parachutes. Their false claims of being about smaller government, fiscal responsibility, and the free market haven't held any truth for decades. No one is buying it and taxpayers are tired of paying for it. We are financially, ethically and morally in need of change in direction in this country. We cannot afford another Republican in the White House, it's just too costly for America.

Posted by: Dan in Seattle | September 24, 2008 3:22 PM

These national poll's are completely misleading. In the states where the election will be decided the race is still neck and neck. If this would have happened closer to the election McCain would be sunk (he probably is anyways), but there are still 40 days for Americans to use their collective amnesia super power to completely forget about the wall street bail out.

McCain needs to seem credible on this issue, the debates will be his one opportunity to do this.

Posted by: DCDave | September 24, 2008 3:21 PM

Hemi, a great president once told people he's not qualified.

Do you hire a contractor just because he says he's great?

---
And I can show ya where McCain said he don't know much about economics and needs to be schooled.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:46 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 3:21 PM

Bush is on TV right now trying to tell us that this bail out is for us. Remember the WMDs?

This economic take over has been in the works for over a century through many Democratic and Republican administrations. Each one promised us change and the only change we got was more of the same.

Your future and the futures of your offspring for the next 200 years are on the verge of being given away.
http://ewebsmith.com/Finance/ronpaulbailout.html

Posted by: Web Smith | September 24, 2008 3:20 PM

no wait i mean palling she have much hottness with goggles and behive and shoot mooses she make good president she dont haave to talk to press or anyone cause she president and can bomb all countries who dont do what we say.

palling for president 2008!
much hottness!!
dont be sexist pig with lipstick vote for hottie she talk to leaders at un today!!!!!!!

Posted by: d miner | September 24, 2008 3:20 PM

"Obama's campaign said that the Democratic nominee had called McCain at 8:30 Wednesday morning to ask him if he would "join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal." They also said that McCain returned the call at 2:30 Wednesday afternoon and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement, and that the two campaigns are currently "working together on the details.""

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-suspends-campaign-calls-for-first-debate-to-be-delayed/#more-20186

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 3:16 PM

me vote macaine he risk life for country went up in plane he didnt know how to fly then crash and get captures
just like bush did to economy

lifelong republican for Obama!

Posted by: d miner | September 24, 2008 3:15 PM

McCain is a coward. Palin is a neophyte. Not even the RNC Bush political SWAT team that was sent in to rescue them from themselves can protect them now.

Posted by: JMFulton, Jr. | September 24, 2008 3:14 PM

1. No, Bush43 is fiscally loose and socially backwards. I'm not a religious ideologue, neither is McCain.

2. Historical data mining shows when the same party controls both the executive and legislative branches, it's a disaster. I believe that since the check and balance is broken loose with so many partisans around who vote along party line 95+% of the time, not counting creative votes such as "Present". For the rest, you can over-mine and find apocalypse date in tea leaves.

3. The downside of the mixed government is grid lock. That's why we need someone who can work with the other party ON RECORD, someone who pisses off Rush Limbaugh and George F Will.

Still waiting for proof on Obama...

---
Humility --
If by fiscal conservative you mean the Republican Congress and President's policies of the last 8 years, I think we've had enough. And, obviously, I think the rest of the voting public agrees.
Supply side economics are, in fact, by the empirical evidence of the last 3 Repugnicant Administrations, a failure.
-No Republican President has ever left office with an unemployment rate under 5%. Democats have.
-No Republican President has ever submitted let alone balanced the federal budget. Democats have.
-Each of the last 3 Repugnicant administrations have significantly increased the national debt... The last one by 4 trillion dollars. The last Democatic President reduced the national debt by half a trillion in one year.
-The last Democratic President presided over an economy that took the stock market from the 3000s to over 11000. The last Republican President has taken the stock market from the 11000s to the 10000s (that's backward)
Who do you trust on the economy. Certainly not another fiscal conservative.
Posted by: DougH1 | September 24, 2008 1:24 PM
---
Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.
With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.
Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 3:08 PM

The only poll that really matters is on November 4...and it won't be conducted by media outlets who are obviously in the tank for BHO.

This poll is meaningless, IMO.

Just wait until the debates. Without his teleprompter and David Axelrod-penned speeches, the empty-suit BHO will fall flat on his @$$.

Posted by: NObama | September 24, 2008 3:07 PM

McCain suspends campaign, calls for first debate to be delayed
Posted: 03:02 PM ET

(CNN) — John McCain announced Wednesday he is suspending his campaign tomorrow and returning to Washington to work on the economic crisis, and called on opponent Barack Obama to join him.

He also called on the Commission on Presidential Debates to postpone the first faceoff until Congress addressed the crisis.

“Tomorrow morning, I will suspend my campaign and return to Washington after speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative. I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me,” he said in New York, according to a transcript of the remarks released by his campaign.

“I am calling on the President to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem,” he said.

“We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved. I am directing my campaign to work with the Obama campaign and the commission on presidential debates to delay Friday night’s debate until we have taken action to address this crisis.” The Obama campaign told CNN it was reviewing McCain’s request.

“I am confident that before the markets open on Monday we can achieve consensus on legislation that will stabilize our financial markets, protect taxpayers and homeowners, and earn the confidence of the American people. All we must do to achieve this is temporarily set politics aside, and I am committed to doing so.

“Following September 11th, our national leaders came together at a time of crisis. We must show that kind of patriotism now. Americans across our country lament the fact that partisan divisions in Washington have prevented us from addressing our national challenges. Now is our chance to come together to prove that Washington is once again capable of leading this country.”
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-suspends-campaign-calls-for-first-debate-to-be-delayed/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 3:05 PM

McCain's a train wreck on the economy. If he does something, it's a fair bet it's going to be bad for the economy, or individuals. He only backs the bankers that can pad his pockets.

Posted by: Jill | September 24, 2008 3:01 PM

Did Bush look like a moron at the UN yesterday or what?

Embarrasing.

....maybe 10 seconds of polite applause at the end.....the whole world is waiting for the fool to go.......

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 2:55 PM

1. Obama promised massive spendings on healthcare, energy, infrastructure, education, foreclosure relief, better father program, etc, in a time we're facing the risk of financial system collapse. Either he's buying votes with empty promise or he'll wreck the economic foundation. Clinton administration officials call the math wrong.
2. Businesses, large and small, count on free trade to revive. Obama's protectionist approach will make it harder for the economy to recover. Again, Obama is no Clinton here.
3. The nation's problem that directly contributes to the current crisis is too much debt and not enough savings. Obama's capital gain tax will further poison the public's attitude towards savings.
4. Again, where's his convincing record?
(You can see my previous post on deregulation and McCain's record.)
---
Obama supports a directed middle class tax cut, and increases taxes above a certain income level, keeping things closer to revenue neutral. McCain is pro-Bush 'tax cuts' which were 'tax deferrals' to future generations. He also less gung ho on foolish free trade agreements than McCain. I wish he was rigorously against unmitigated free trade with 3rd world countries, but ah well. Also, he supports ending oil industry subsidies. McCain appears to be pro-tax cut while only proposing cutting maybe 10 billion in earmarks. McCain has a history of being anti-regulation without critically evaluating what regulations exist and what purpose they serve. Assuming (with no good basis) that either could mystically pass their legislation without congress making serious modifications, Obama wins not so much on great proposals, but by virtue of McCain's exceedingly terrible economic background and plans.
Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:28 PM
---
Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.
With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.
Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 2:54 PM

Hemi:

Did you catch Whoopi Goldberg asking McCain "Do you want to make me a slave again?" (twice) during that ambush?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:20

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

No, But I'll check it out tonight.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:54 PM

See my previous post.
----
"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy."
--------------------------------------
If you are shown the record you'll see where McCain helped to bring the economy to its knees. Do you really think you can prove McCains economics are strong by showing his record? Seems to me that would be something you'd want to avoid.
Posted by: JP123 | September 24, 2008 1:18

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

And I can show ya where McCain said he don't know much about economics and needs to be schooled.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:46 PM

ZappoDave:

Whether you believe him or not, Sen. McCain says he regrets being involved in the Keating 5. He thereafter dedicated himself to campaign finance reform, and did, in fact, spend the next years pushing for and finally getting it, with McCain-Feingold passed into law. I would hold that legislation up against Obama's rinky-dink ethics rule that "you have to stand up while eating with a lobbyist" any day of the week.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:44 PM

There were a number of interesting ideas from both candidates for the economic crisis compiled here: http://www.slander08.com

Posted by: Bill Safe | September 24, 2008 2:42 PM

So, McCain and the Republicans need to change the focus from the economy. Easy! Attack Iran. I'll wager we'll see an October Surprise around Iran. I'm not saying this because I'm happy about it, but it's just too easy. Perhaps Israel will bomb Iranian nuclear facilities and get the pot boiling. Fearful and confused voters would then go with the hawk candidate. Depressing, eh?

Posted by: logic | September 24, 2008 2:40 PM

CHALLENGE FOR OBAMA:

How to get more media like the Washington Post to cover up his long term relationship with unrepentent domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.

"Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home.

The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC.

In early 1995, Mr. Obama was appointed the first chairman of the board, which handled fiscal matters. Mr. Ayers co-chaired the foundation's other key body, the "Collaborative," which shaped education policy.

Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval

CAC translated Mr. Ayers's radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with "external partners," which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).


The Obama campaign has cried foul when Bill Ayers comes up, claiming "guilt by association." Yet the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Posted by: Facts | September 24, 2008 2:40 PM

The Democrats created this mess.

In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused.

See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:15

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Ya know, this is all fine and good but the Republicans had control in 2003. Last month Pelosi couldn't even pass a bill to stop speculative trading in the oil market because the Republicans shot it down, and you expect me to believe that somehow the Democrats over powered the Repubs in 2003 when they wanted to fix the housing crises. Maybe I'm missing something.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:38 PM

Forget about Palin -- she is not running for President. It's McCain who can't handle the job. He is too old, too impulsive, too much of a military man, and not enough of diplomat, not enough of an economist. He is impulsive and shots from the hip. That may be fun in the movies, but is grossly irresponsible in a national leader who is responsible for millions of peoples' lives.

Posted by: bodo | September 24, 2008 2:37 PM

McCain knows all about bailing out rich bankers and screwing over middle class and poor people, he's been doing it for years.


*McCain - Founding Member of the Keating Five:

McCain was one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)

Though he was not convicted of anything, McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
.


Here's some more Keating 5 straight-talk, my friends:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxBCAaulG-k
.

Posted by: ZappoDave | September 24, 2008 2:34 PM

The empty suit will be outed as a vacuum during the debates.

He won't have his teleprompter to read from. I'm quite sure he'll come across as a very shallow pimp trying for the hustle.

The lower IQ mouth breathers will be filling their drool buckets. The more gifted of us will see through the attempted sham and be somewhat entertained.

I sure hope there are some questions on abortion & affirmative action.

Posted by: Skinny Bill | September 24, 2008 2:33 PM

The empty suit will be outed as a vacuum during the debates.

He won't have his teleprompter to read from. I'm quite sure he'll come across as a very shallow pimp trying for the hustle.

The lower IQ mouth breathers will be fill their drool buckets. The more gifted of us will see through the attempted sham and be somewhat entertained.

I sure hope there are some questions on abortion & affirmative action.

Posted by: Skinny Bill | September 24, 2008 2:33 PM

For the record, I've never posted in the WashPo "Shopping" section -- I still get paid for every one of them, however, even if I don't write them -- that was the fake JakeD for crying out loud!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:22 PM

-------------------------------------------

JakeD is a paid shill?

First Clay Aiken is gay and now this?

Will wonders never cease???

Posted by: I'm shocked and awed!!! | September 24, 2008 2:28 PM

Kevin:

Mike "Billionaire" Bloomberg agrees with John "fundamentals of the economy are strong" McCain -- the same economy that GREW 3.3% last quarter -- you know, the one at $14 TRILLION?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:15 PM

-------------------------------------------

I'll bet you one billion dollars that Mike Bloomberg doesn't think the "fundamentals" of our economy means the "american workers".

Because not one single person with any sort of Economics education thinks that "fundamentals" equates with "american workers" when discussing the economy.

That line of BS belongs soley to John "I don't know much about the economy" McCain.

I should know....I went to ECONOMICS SCHOOL. Which makes me smarter on the subject then some two-bit LAWYER.

Especially a two-bit LAWYER trying to tout the strength of our economy in the midst of it's complete and total meltdown.

Posted by: WTF cares about Bloomberg? | September 24, 2008 2:25 PM

See my previous post.
----
"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy."
--------------------------------------
If you are shown the record you'll see where McCain helped to bring the economy to its knees. Do you really think you can prove McCains economics are strong by showing his record? Seems to me that would be something you'd want to avoid.
Posted by: JP123 | September 24, 2008 1:18 PM
---
Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.
With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.
Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 2:24 PM

strange days

The proposal to negotiate FTAs with other countries is visionary and would do far more to open markets for American firms and to counter trade protectionism than a policy of retaliation against countries with unfair trade practices. Especially significant is the proposal to establish FTAs with Central and Eastern European countries. Such agreements would be far more effective than foreign aid as a tool to breathe new economic life into these countries. Moreover, the prospect of such FTAs would help dissuade the European Community from erecting new trade barriers to American goods.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 2:24 PM

Thank God the McCain campaign has finally lost the steam he got from his purely political (and insane) pick of Palin. At least people finally got it through their heads.

Posted by: Angie | September 24, 2008 2:23 PM

Deregulation is not all evil. For most of the past 26 yrs, deregulation broke barriers, encouraged more competition, boosted economic activities and increased market efficiency.

There were disasters along the way, which highlights the need for necessary and prudent regulation, something McCain stands for.

On Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, McCain cosponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, and warned, ON RECORD,
"If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190#sMonofilemx003Ammx002Fmmx002Fmmx002Fmhomemx002Fmgovtrackmx002Fmdatamx002Fmusmx002Fm109mx002Fmcrmx002Fms20060525-16.xmlElementm0m0m0m

Still waiting for proof on Obama...

---
"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."
Because being a deregulation fanboy of some 26 years and Mr. S&L crisis guy couldn't possible factor in to it. If only he hadn't admitted to knowing little about economics.
Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:12 PM
---
Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.
Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.
With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.
Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 2:23 PM

So the Post creates a phony poll to cover up another relevant story that the American people care about:

FACTS ARE FACTS --

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett

Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.
Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.

Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.

It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.

Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.

Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.

The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''

What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4:
Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

Posted by: factchecker | September 24, 2008 2:22 PM

For the record, I've never posted in the WashPo "Shopping" section -- I still get paid for every one of them, however, even if I don't write them -- that was the fake JakeD for crying out loud!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:22 PM

Hemi:

Did you catch Whoopi Goldberg asking McCain "Do you want to make me a slave again?" (twice) during that ambush?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:20 PM

Media Exposes Another McCain Lie: Davis Took $15k LAST MONTH from Freddie Mac (Under FBI Investigation)!


The first rule of American Politics, Don't Lie to the Media:

"On Sunday, in an interview with CNBC and the New York Times, Mr. McCain responded to a question about Mr. Davis’s role in the advocacy group by saying that his campaign manager “has had nothing to do with it since, and I’ll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.”


Rule Two: Don't lie to the Media:

"One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager from the end of 2005 through last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement. The disclosure contradicts a statement Sunday night by Mr. McCain that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had no involvement with the company for the last several years"


Rule Three: Don't Lie to the Media:

"They said Mr. Davis’s his firm, Davis & Manafort, was kept on the payroll because of Mr. Davis’s close ties to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who was widely expected by 2006 to run again for the White House...."

"Freddie Mac’s roughly $500,000 in payments to Davis & Manafort began immediately after Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in late 2005 disbanded an advocacy coalition that they had set up and hired Mr. Davis to run, the people familiar with the arrangement said...."


Rule Four: Don't Lie to the media:

"After the Homeownership Alliance was dissolved, Mr. Davis asked to stay on a retainer, the people familiar with the deal said. Hollis McLoughlin, who was chief of staff to Richard F. Syron, Freddie Mac’s chief executive, arranged for a new contract with Davis & Manafort, at the reduced rate of $15,000 a month..."

"No one at Davis & Manafort other than Mr. Davis was involved in efforts on Freddie Mac’s behalf, the people familiar with the arrangement said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin


And Oh BTW, Freddie Mac is now under investigation by the FBI...

"Sources say FBI investigating Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and AIG."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080924/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/financial_meltdown_investigation
.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 24, 2008 2:19 PM

Zogby's new book on polling practices reveals that the age group 19-29 ("First Globals") are less nationalistic, more realistic about how much (or little) money they will earn, more caring about the needs of society, and more global in their thinking. This is why the rhetoric of confrontation championed by Bush/McCain/Cheney/Palin is doomed. Obama is the voice of the future and the young people are our only hope. They will drive Obama to win in November and save this country from the horrors of the past that the Republicans have given America.

Posted by: Dan Rains | September 24, 2008 2:19 PM

For the record, I don't read "Anonymous" or fake "JakeD" comments anymore -- if anyone else has a question for me, just let me know -- I'm retired, with plenty of time to waste here, but even I don't have that much time in a day.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:09 PM

------------------------------------------

For the record...nobody cares.

And we are all more than aware that you have plenty of time to waste.

I noticed yesterday you posted 35 anti-Obama posts in the WashPo "Shopping" section for crying out loud!

Posted by: For the record.... | September 24, 2008 2:19 PM

Washington / ABC poll???

Come on, will ya

Two liberal entities who are in the tank for the empty suit telling the country that the suit has a ~10ppt lead.

Just goes to show one, liberals have no shame.

Posted by: Skinny Bill | September 24, 2008 2:19 PM

Strange Days:

Gov. Bush was not a two bit Chicago politician who likes to give speeches, but hasn't done anything substantive while in the US Senate. That was more descriptive of Sen. Kerry in 2004. In that race, we had two war veterans running for President. I joined many Democrats in defending Sen. Kerry against those who trashed his service (why aren't those same Democrats defending Sen. McCain against those who are trashing his service with rumors of treason, rape, etc.?).

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:19 PM

Who's polling people with cell phones? Are land-line polls even valid anymore? How accurate can land line polls be in this day and age? I don't even know very many people any more who have a land line phone. Why do the pollsters think polls are even accurate when they omit the ranks of cell-only voters?

Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 2:03 PM

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

You hit the nail right on the head my friend. They don't poll people with cell phones. I found one poll that said they did a sample, but that's it. And we all know that most of Obama's voters are cell phone users. I know McCain is losing this thing by a wide margin. People have had it with the job loss, the war, and the corrupt criminals in the White House that think their above the law.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:17 PM

Kevin:

Mike "Billionaire" Bloomberg agrees with John "fundamentals of the economy are strong" McCain -- the same economy that GREW 3.3% last quarter -- you know, the one at $14 TRILLION?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:15 PM

"My vote will be for someone who risked his life for his country, and not a two bit Chicago politician who likes to give speeches, but hasn't done anything substantive while in the US Senate."

So you voted for Kerry in '04, right? Or were you mocking his service in Vietnam like the rest of 'em? My how the times change, huh?

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 2:14 PM

My vote will be for someone who risked his life for his country, and not a two bit Chicago politician who likes to give speeches, but hasn't done anything substantive while in the US Senate.

Posted by: well | September 24, 2008 2:06 PM

-------------------------------------------

You don't think nuclear non-proliferation and ethics reform is "substantive"?

Kind of a strange line of thinking but then again your own team called nuclear non-proliferation a "liberal" issue so go figure.

And lord knows ethics reforms and the GOP don't get along too well...

I guess you'll be ok though. After all, McCain has passed some pretty good legislation as well.

Although, it's a shame that he's since flip-flopped on most of the bills he passed...

Posted by: Strange... | September 24, 2008 2:14 PM

President Dumb A$$ due to speak out of his rear end again tonight.

Thank you in advance, Mr. Adult Dunce, for reminding america that you and McCain are repulipigs

By the way, did you check with McCain campaign manager Scmidt first, to see if that would be helpful to Geriatric John?

Didn't think so.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 2:13 PM

Not exactly...:

The following wouldn't look that good on the back of a pickup truck either.

"The reason the current Democrat controlled Congress has the lowest approval rating ever is because they said vote for them for change. Then, in 2006, the democrats took over and they decided to run out the clock and do nothing, and then blame everything on the Republicans. They are in charge and wield much power. But Obama's party did nothing, exactly what he does. Because the media is on their side, they get away with it."

But it's true. FYI Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was the one who took impeachment off the table.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:13 PM

"My vote will be for someone who risked his life for his country..."

Then vote for my Brother-in-Law. He risked his life for his country too. So have millions.

Has anyone asked why McCain graduated near the bottom of his class and crashed so many planes? Military service doesn't qualify you to be President buddy.

John "fundementals of the economy are strong" McCain doesn't have a clue.

Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 2:13 PM

Obama doesn't know what he's doing, that's why he picked Biden.

Posted by: obama clueless | September 24, 2008 2:12 PM

well:

Me too.

Todd:

Sounds like a personal problem.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:10 PM

The reason the current Democrat controlled Congress has the lowest approval rating ever is because they said vote for them for change. Then, in 2006, the democrats took over and they decided to run out the clock and do nothing, and then blame everything on the Republicans. They are in charge and wield much power. But Obama's party did nothing, exactly what he does. Because the media is on their side, they get away with it.

Posted by: duh | September 24, 2008 2:00 PM

-------------------------------------------

The Dems don't have enough votes to get past the roadblocks the Repubs put up anytime they try and pass meaningful legislation.

You see....to the Repubs "country first" is just a bumper sticker slogan.

In reality they follow the "Repubs First...Screw the Dems and by extension the American People" mantra.

But that slogan doesn't look as good on the back of a pickup truck now does it?

See SCHIP and withdrawing our troops in a reasonable fashion as Exhibit A of how the Repubs have roadblocked key legislation sought by the Dems....

Posted by: Not exactly... | September 24, 2008 2:09 PM

For the record, I don't read "Anonymous" or fake "JakeD" comments anymore -- if anyone else has a question for me, just let me know -- I'm retired, with plenty of time to waste here, but even I don't have that much time in a day.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:09 PM

that's okay JakeDI peed my pants and no-one even noticed.

Posted by: Todd | September 24, 2008 2:09 PM

Ben Bernarke and Henry Paultion, both are the failed managers of the failed policy of the failed Bush Government and must be fired first rather than making them super dictators of the failed Empire. They have fooled America and the World for the last full year bragging again and again that America's economy is robust and on sound footings. They are the problems and cannot be allowed to be heros to resolve the matter.The Bush-Cheney gang has fooled the democrats during the approval of Iraq War Resolution too. This time Democrats must be more careful and should not ACCEPT their prerssure and gimmicks. It is the fault of the failed Bush Presidency and the money hungry and greedy Republicans, they need to be suffered heavily in the election, rather than bailed them out taking shared responsibilities of more than trillion dollar fiasco.THE BEST APPROACH IS LET THE NEW MANAGEMENT OF OBAMA LOOK IN TO THE PROBLEM AND RESOLVE IT IN A JUST AND FAIR WAY.

Posted by: john dahodi | September 24, 2008 2:09 PM

My vote will be for someone who risked his life for his country, and not a two bit Chicago politician who likes to give speeches, but hasn't done anything substantive while in the US Senate.

Posted by: well | September 24, 2008 2:06 PM

Lame:

As I understand it, the same problem with McCain raising his arms impacts his elbows at 90 degree angles.

Carol:

You're welcome. Laughter is, indeed, the best medicine (especially when you get to be my age ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:05 PM

I can believe anyone on this site even reads the comments I post anymore. Don't you all realize I'm perpetually high?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 2:04 PM

The Democrats created this mess.

In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused.

See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:15

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Ya know, this is all fine and good but the Republicans had control in 2003. Last month Pelosi couldn't even pass a bill to stop speculative trading in the oil market because the Republicans shot it down, and you expect me to believe that somehow the Democrats over powered the Repubs in 2003 when they wanted to fix the housing crises. Maybe I'm missing something.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 2:04 PM

Who's polling people with cell phones? Are land-line polls even valid anymore? How accurate can land line polls be in this day and age? I don't even know very many people any more who have a land line phone. Why do the pollsters think polls are even accurate when they omit the ranks of cell-only voters?

Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 2:03 PM

McCain challenges himself daily.

How dare people who voted for George Bush twice even think they have remotely good judgment?! Please do this country a favor and stay home or vote for someone that actually has a brain, I will give you a hint the last name starts with an O.

Posted by: erik | September 24, 2008 2:03 PM

The bottom line is McCain smells of Ben-Gay and Palin is a tranny. We just can't have that in the White House

Posted by: me | September 24, 2008 2:01 PM

The reason the current Democrat controlled Congress has the lowest approval rating ever is because they said vote for them for change. Then, in 2006, the democrats took over and they decided to run out the clock and do nothing, and then blame everything on the Republicans. They are in charge and wield much power. But Obama's party did nothing, exactly what he does. Because the media is on their side, they get away with it.

Posted by: duh | September 24, 2008 2:00 PM

Talk about sleazy ads, Obama's ad ridicules McCain for not using computers or email much. The reason that he doesn't (he does use a PDA) is because of wounds he received while being tortured as he was rotting in a filthy cell in Vietnam for 5 years, for all of us and our freedom. So that is how the Obama faithful repay McCain for his sacrifice. Unpatriotic. No wonder why Obama doesn't place his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, and wouldn't wear a US flag pin.

Say whatever happened to the son of that Tennessee Democrat Representative who reportedly hacked Gov. Palin's email. Talk about criminals. How about the GOP offices in Florida and Indiana that were just vandalized. Talk about criminals.

Posted by: ads | September 24, 2008 1:52 PM

------------------------------------------

John McCain admitted he didn't know how to use a computer. And for once he didn't use the POW excuse as the reason. And how exactly would a person with torture injuries be able to use the tiny keys on a PDA but not a regular keyboard. Did you think that one through?

John McCain didn't wear a flag pin during his convention speech (Obama did). What an unpatriotic old man he is.

Sarah Palin's email account wouldn't have been hacked had she not been doing official business on a freakin yahoo account.

And you don't even want to get into a pissing match on which team has the most criminals....

Any other dumb comments you'd like me to pee on?

Posted by: Lame.... | September 24, 2008 2:00 PM

Nice Try ads,

But McCain doesn't know how to use a computer, because he didn't care to learn how - he has servants to take care of his needs, so why would he bother? His past injuries have nothing to do with it - if you can use a PDA, you can use a laptop....if you knew how.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:57 PM

I just thought I would toss this into the mix since Obama is accusing McCains campaign manager of taking funds from Fannie Mae.
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office Party/State Total
1. Dodd, Christopher J S D-CT
$133,900

2. Kerry, John S D-MA
$111,000

3. Obama, Barack S D-IL
$105,849

4. Clinton, Hillary S D-NY
$75,550

5. Kanjorski, Paul E H D-PA
$65,500

6. Bennett, Robert F S R-UT
$61,499

7. Johnson, Tim S D-SD
$61,000

8. Conrad, Kent S D-ND
$58,991

9. Davis, Tom H R-VA
$55,499

10. Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' S R-MO
$55,400

11. Bachus, Spencer H R-AL
$55,300

12. Shelby, Richard C S R-AL
$55,000

13. Emanuel, Rahm H D-IL
$51,750

14. Reed, Jack S D-RI
$50,750

15. Carper, Tom S D-DE
$44,389

16. Frank, Barney H D-MA
$40,100

17. Maloney, Carolyn B H D-NY
$38,750

18. Bean, Melissa H D-IL
$37,249

19. Blunt, Roy H R-MO
$36,500

20. Pryce, Deborah H R-OH
$34,750

21. Miller, Gary H R-CA
$33,000

22. Pelosi, Nancy H D-CA
$32,750

23. Reynolds, Tom H R-NY
$32,700

24. Hoyer, Steny H H D-MD
$30,500

25. Hooley, Darlene H D-OR
$28,750

for the full article please go to http://pfds.opensecrets.org/092408.html

After all Obama supporters are such supporters of honesty.

Posted by: jace1 | September 24, 2008 1:54 PM

"A much more left-wing agenda than Obama’s would consist of erecting new trade barriers, reregulating various industries and otherwise getting the government even more involved in the economy than Obama would. This program has the dubious distinction of being disliked by both voters and experts alike."

Which 'experts'? There is a good case for trade barriers and regulations. You don't just let labor go anywhere it wants (a.k.a. borders ... then again, we do, but most people don't) why should capital? Realistically a US citizen can't go work in Canada, Mexico, places in Europe without huge barriers, but business can offshore there with almost no barriers? How much sense does that make? If you're going to be a free trader you have to let both sides play the same game or you are playing dirty. By saying capital is unrestricted but labor is in where it can go, you're crippling the worker. For the record I don't agree with either unregulated flow of capital or labor, but if you're going to be for one, you can't be against the other and be in any way consistent.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:53 PM

Thanks for the laugh, JakeD.

The Democrats are so much more fiscally conservative than the current Republican party.

Clinton = $559 billion SURPLUS Budget.

Bush = Wasted the 559 billion surplus, and added $410 billion in DEFICIT spending.

Republican waste money like its the "End of Days". Democrats plan for a future.

Posted by: Carol | September 24, 2008 1:53 PM

dbw and Mark:

Obamaniacs are too short-sighted (or worse) to acknowledge that fiscally conservative policies, overall, tend toward better economic periods (even if those rewards are reaped during Democratic administrations). It didn't matter whether Clinton or Bush41 had won in 1992. The peace dividend from the end of the Cold War would have been the same.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:44 PM

-------------------------------------------

So by your logic a better "economic trend" is on its way shortly now that Repubs have been in power for the last 8 years?

Or are you going to admit that there has been nothing "fiscally conservative" about your team whatsoever the last 8 years?

Geez...I was wrong about you Mr. Almighty LAW SCHOOL guy.

You smoke a lot more than poll....

Posted by: Getthefuc#outtahere..... | September 24, 2008 1:53 PM

Cuz I'll match you with Sarah'd daily lies about the bridge to nowhere, troopergate, earmarks, road to nowhere, selling plane for a profit, not raising taxes, being experienced, being a good mayor, knowing anything about Russia, issuing orders to AK National Guard, not blinking when accepting the VP nomination, and her ability to lead our country from day one. -----------------------------------------------------------

Yea, that tranny has given three seperate reasons for the firing in troopergate and now the third one has been proven a lie!!

Posted by: orange | September 24, 2008 1:53 PM

Talk about sleazy ads, Obama's ad ridicules McCain for not using computers or email much. The reason that he doesn't (he does use a PDA) is because of wounds he received while being tortured as he was rotting in a filthy cell in Vietnam for 5 years, for all of us and our freedom. So that is how the Obama faithful repay McCain for his sacrifice. Unpatriotic. No wonder why Obama doesn't place his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, and wouldn't wear a US flag pin.

Say whatever happened to the son of that Tennessee Democrat Representative who reportedly hacked Gov. Palin's email. Talk about criminals. How about the GOP offices in Florida and Indiana that were just vandalized. Talk about criminals.

Posted by: ads | September 24, 2008 1:52 PM

"A much more left-wing agenda than Obama’s would consist of erecting new trade barriers, reregulating various industries and otherwise getting the government even more involved in the economy than Obama would. This program has the dubious distinction of being disliked by both voters and experts alike."

Which 'experts'? There is a good case for trade barriers and regulations. You don't just let labor go anywhere it wants (a.k.a. borders ... then again, we do, but most people don't) why should capital? Realistically a US citizen can't go work in Canada, Mexico, places in Europe without huge barriers, but business can offshore there with almost no barriers? How much sense does that make? If you're going to be a free trader you have to let both sides play the same game or you are playing dirty. By saying capital is unrestricted but labor is in where it can go, you're crippling the worker. For the record I don't agree with either unregulated flow of capital or labor, but if you're going to be for one, you can't be against the other and be in any way consistent.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:52 PM

McCain is a LIAR!...again.


Another day, another lie revealed. Turns out Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, was involved with Freddie Mac. Quite recently.

"One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month from the end of 2005 through last month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement."

"The disclosure undercuts a statement by Mr. McCain on Sunday night that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had had no involvement with the company for the last several years."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&hp
.


The issue is that, indeed, on Sunday McCain said that Davis had "nothing to do with" with Freddie Mac since 2005, and invited reporters to check up on it. Well, it turns out reporters did, and Davis was involved after that point, and even right up to the present -- having Davis's company be receiving payments from Freddie Mac as of last month hardly counts as "no involvement." Worse yet, it seems those payments were made specifically because of Davis's "close ties" to McCain.


There's even a little bit of schadenfreude involved, here, in that it was McCain's flagrant lie on the matter that compelled parties to come forward, just to make sure people knew that "not involved" meant "involved, and still taking their money."


"Mr. Davis took a leave from Davis & Manafort for the presidential campaign, but as a partner and equity-holder continues to benefit from its income. No one at Davis & Manafort other than Mr. Davis was involved in efforts on Freddie Mac’s behalf, the people familiar with the arrangement said." [...]

"On Sunday, in an interview with CNBC and The New York Times, Mr. McCain responded to a question about Mr. Davis’s role in the advocacy group through 2005 by saying that his campaign manager “has had nothing to do with it since, and I’ll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.”

"Such assertions, along with McCain campaign television ads tying Mr. Obama to former Fannie Mae chiefs, have riled current and former officials of the two companies and provoked them to volunteer rebuttals. The two officials with direct knowledge of Freddie Mac’s post-2005 contract with Mr. Davis spoke on condition of anonymity. Four other outside consultants, three Democrats and a Republican also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the arrangement was widely known among people involved in Freddie Mac’s lobbying efforts."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&hp
.

If the McCain campaign is so ticked off at being called liars, they might try, well... not lying. I know, I know, that's so "pre-Bushian" of me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXL9Nc-lSvE
.

Posted by: McCain is a Liar! | September 24, 2008 1:49 PM

Czechoslovakia jp123...but it doesn't matter, it only exists in McCains head (and maybe Palin's as much as she knows Foreign Policy

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:48 PM

"By the way, which preacher do you think voters should be more concerned about?
- The pentecostal preacher of a church Palin hasn't attended in 6 years?
- Or the racist black-liberation-leader Jeremiah Wright who Obama sat under until a few months ago?"

Actually, I'm far more worried about voices from God than the voice of Jeremiah Wright. And if you'd bothered to look at the link I posted you'd have known that Palin adessed the Assembly in June, 2008.
True it's on Huffington, but it's also on film.


Posted by: 11thCavVet | September 24, 2008 1:48 PM

When we adopt the role of impartial spectators, sympathy is the sentiment that is the basis for moral judgments.
- Acting from a sense of duty corrects for any lack of appropriate sentiment in particular instances.
- The deity has implanted powerful instincts (passions), which lead us behave in ways that are ultimately beneficial for all.
- Self-interest coupled with the predisposition to 'trade', 'barter', and 'exchange' provides a basis for the division of labor and economic development.
- In a market free from monopolies and self-serving public policies, competition among the self-interests of isolated consumers and producers produces a stable and expanding economy.
- The self-interested pursuit of wealth may not be individually satisfying but leads to an aggregate increase in wealth that is in the best interests of a nation. . . . . Adam Smith

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

Considering that both the WaPo and ABC have intentionally lied in support of BHO, I'm going to guess that there's something about the poll they aren't telling us, such as it consisting of 60% Dems or something.

Posted by: 24AheadDotCom | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

Wouldn't it be great if Obama's rise in the polls resulted from a growing recognition of the importance of THINKING?

Thinking was the single most important factor that convinced me to select Obama from the crowded Democratic primary line-up last January. I'm not suggesting that the other Democratic candidates aren't smart, but after watching and reading about the candidates, I was most impressed with Obama's clear pattern of weighing the relevant facts, listening to advice from realiable sources when possible, and thinking his way through to the best decision or response available to him.

Now that Obama's opponent is John McCain, the contrast between thinking and the alternative is clearer than ever. McCain operates on instinct, impulse, emotion. While some may admire his passion, some of the rest of us feel safer with a president who is more careful with our economy, our national defense, our foreign relations - our future.

Posted by: DoTheMath | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

Hemi:

Perhaps you missed Whoopi Goldberg asking McCain "Do you want to make me a slave again?" (twice).

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

McCain needs to pass the Honesty Test before trying to be POTUS.

McCain's Current Honesty Grade = D-

http://www.mccainpedia.org/index.php/Count_the_Lies

Posted by: MLC | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

Czechoslovakia jp123...but it doesn't matter...it doesn't exist

Posted by: orange | September 24, 2008 1:46 PM

dbw and Mark:

Obamaniacs are too short-sighted (or worse) to acknowledge that fiscally conservative policies, overall, tend toward better economic periods (even if those rewards are reaped during Democratic administrations). It didn't matter whether Clinton or Bush41 had won in 1992. The peace dividend from the end of the Cold War would have been the same.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:44 PM

Czechoslovakia jp123...but it doesn't matter...it doesn't exists.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:44 PM

HEMI said:
"I can't recall anyone ever having to put up with crap like [O'Reilley's interview with Obama] to prove he has what it takes to be President. I don't know if you ever saw it but it more like an attack session than an interview."

HEMI, does your "recall" reach back more than a couple days?

Sincerely,
The View & Barbara Walters

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 1:19 PM

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Would you care to fill me in. If your talking about McCain getting questioned about his stupid ad on Obama wanting to teach sex ed to Kindergarten Children, I've seen it. And if that's what your comparing Obama's session with O'Reilly to, I don't think you've seen it. Just to make sure I've seen the whole thing, I'll go back and check it out.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 1:44 PM

"Except that you fail to point out how the Reagan/Bush years fueled the climb and that the most recent economy had to deal with both the 9/11 attack, subsequent actions and the Iraq war. Potentially huge drags on the economy."

It cost us around 5 trillion to make our economic situation look good, but I'll grant you that, they made it look good...for a while. You can also make your personal finances look good too with the Bush method. First, cash advance the equivalent of 10% of your income every year on credit cards. For the first 5 years, or thereabouts, it will be awesome.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:44 PM

The way MSNBC and the WaPo are lying about Gov. Palin, I wouldn't put it passed them that they "polled" themselves in this instance. Regardless, the only "poll" that matters is on Election Day.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:01 AM

-----------------------------------------

You have it backwards....Palin is the one doing the lying...on a daily basis....despite the lies being refuted....on a daily basis.

Care to share with us which lies about Palin the WashPo and MSNBC are spreading?

Cuz I'll match you with Sarah'd daily lies about the bridge to nowhere, troopergate, earmarks, road to nowhere, selling plane for a profit, not raising taxes, being experienced, being a good mayor, knowing anything about Russia, issuing orders to AK National Guard, not blinking when accepting the VP nomination, and her ability to lead our country from day one.

Posted by: JakeD smokes poll... | September 24, 2008 1:42 PM

Even if Obama does figure out how to meet the challenge well enough to get elected, there are any number of ways in which his plans could fail. He has never run any government entity — no state, no city, not even a municipal agency — and he may not prove to be good at doing so. The economy could deteriorate further, leaving him with a Clinton-like choice between manageable deficits and direct help for the middle class. Or maybe the many economists who like his agenda are simply wrong. Maybe his health-care program won’t bring down costs. Maybe the Virginia model won’t work for the rest of the country.

But it’s not entirely clear what the alternative is, at least in the broad sense and at least for the time being. A much more left-wing agenda than Obama’s would consist of erecting new trade barriers, reregulating various industries and otherwise getting the government even more involved in the economy than Obama would. This program has the dubious distinction of being disliked by both voters and experts alike. Populism hasn’t won a national election, or even the Democratic nomination, in decades, and economists can point to any number of ways why it wouldn’t work anyway.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:42 PM

11thCavVet:

If you want to be taken seriously, you should find a different source than the huffingtonpost.

By the way, which preacher do you think voters should be more concerned about?
- The pentecostal preacher of a church Palin hasn't attended in 6 years?
- Or the racist black-liberation-leader Jeremiah Wright who Obama sat under until a few months ago?

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 1:41 PM

Lets have Obama go to the 57 states again---------------------------------------------Sure, let's do that while McSame is in Checkoslovakia

Posted by: jp123 | September 24, 2008 1:41 PM

attention McCain bloggers:

staff conference call in 20 minutes at 02:00 pm EST

Don't be late. New talking points.

Posted by: krovegop | September 24, 2008 1:41 PM

"That's what happens when the Senate and House leaders refuse to impeach a sitting war criminal."

Hell, even stand up to one from time to time would have been nice to see.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:40 PM

(sorry, I'm still used to GNP -- the 2007 est. for GDP was $13.794 trillion ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:40 PM

"The last Democratic President presided over an economy that took the stock market from the 3000s to over 11000. The last Republican President has taken the stock market from the 11000s to the 10000s"

Except that you fail to point out how the Reagan/Bush years fueled the climb and that the most recent economy had to deal with both the 9/11 attack, subsequent actions and the Iraq war. Potentially huge drags on the economy.

And that Clinton was a moderate, and closer to McCain than Obama really in terms of economic policies. Hillary is left of Bill, Obama is left of Hillary.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:39 PM

"I'm gonna tar feather and hang the idiot.
Me and what army you may ask?
You're in for a surprise."

I'd be surprised if you could read a map and had the general wherewithal to drive more than 40 miles from where you live. I'd be surprised if you have a map. Heck, I'm surprised you can use a computer.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:39 PM

DougH1 said:
"No Republican President has ever left office with an unemployment rate under 5%. Democats have."

And a Democrat left office with an unemployment rate over 7%. Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II never have.

Your next irrelevant point?

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 1:38 PM

Congress has an alltime low approval rating. Yes.

That's what happens when the Senate and House leaders refuse to impeach a sitting war criminal.

Pelosi's days are numbered, too

Posted by: low for a good reason | September 24, 2008 1:38 PM

DougH1:

Don't tell me you've bought into "The One" hype about a single President being able to magically control the $11 trillion economy?!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:37 PM

thats just too funny

Posted by: orange | September 24, 2008 1:37 PM

Mark:

Where in the NY times article did it say the Dems refused?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:36 PM

If Obama wins, and I see one liberal crying about the state of affairs after Obama sells us out to foreign powers and puts on the front lines of the battle against muslim extremism,
I'm gonna tar feather and hang the idiot.
Me and what army you may ask?
You're in for a surprise.

Posted by: Orange | September 24, 2008 1:35 PM

It seems like the Mcshame's camp not only paid a lot of money for sleazy ads, but the have spent a lot of money to get these republicans bloggers to control the blogs.
But that is what happens when you are desperate and know you have nothing to offer, but sleaze. Looks like shear desperation to me. OBAMA 08

Posted by: tygirl | September 24, 2008 1:35 PM

Death to republican rule.

Long live America.

Posted by: patriot | September 24, 2008 1:34 PM

McCainites! Worry not. Palin and her peacher will engineer a victory directly from God. Witches will die! The chosen will flock to Alaska and speak in tongues as one and will be saved a taken up to heaven.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/the-witch-hunter-anoints_b_128805.html

Posted by: 11thCavVet | September 24, 2008 1:34 PM

"Free markets work despite the occasional meltdown."

Free markets never work unless there are only stable, competitive market model equilibria in that market with no possibility cost externalization. When you find one of those markets, please let me know. Until then, free markets are policy supported by no economic theory or evidence.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:34 PM

If Obama wins, and I see one liberal crying about the state of affairs after Obama sells us out to foreign powers and puts on the front lines of the battle against muslim extremism,
I'm gonna tar feather and hang the idiot.
Me and what army you may ask?
You're in for a surprise.
-------------------------------------------LOL You must be from Texas...you have your own Army!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:34 PM

The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew how big our federal government is. It was never meant to be this way. The thirteen colonies merged for the purpose of having a strong centralized government that existed only to serve the states, and to have limited powers that benefited the good of all states. Government at the state level was to be the boss of federal and local government. The tax dollars that Obama plans to spend on socialized programs such as national healthcare will come from the taxpayers one way or the other. The money the government uses to pay for military expenses, welfare, civil servant salaries, government works programs, disaster relief, etc . . . is based on the money the government expects to collect from taxpayers and businesses. The money is not just sitting around waiting to be spent; it is a projected amount that they expect to collect. He has committed to tax cuts, tax credits, reducing the deficit, education benefits, healthcare benefits, and other social reforms [that I am sure I missed.] In fact, Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation says Obama has proposed nearly $350 billion per year in new spending. However, at this point in time, the entire corporate tax code only raises about $350 billion annually. So, it’s unrealistic to think the extra tax dollars collected will be enough to pay for all these things, and it’s unrealistic that he will be able to achieve all the promises he has committed to. It could be he knows this, and is aware that honoring all his promises is not a feasible proposition; I cannot speculate on that, only he can answer that. Still, not only has he committed his administration to providing all those benefits to the voters, but he committed to raising the minimum wage again [it was just raised a few months ago], and raising taxes on businesses too. By raising taxes on businesses and raising the minimum wage, it just makes it that much harder for small businesses to remain in business. A business cannot be viable if there is not enough cash flow to keep it solvent. By adding more overhead in the form of another wage increase, and a reduction in cash flow by increasing taxes, the profit margins for the business shrink, which in turn reduces cash flow. Small businesses are the heart and soul of America; more people are employed by small businesses than large businesses. In order to stay in business, they would have to raise their prices, which would in turn be passed on to the public. Raising the minimum wage might increase the amount of money in your paycheck, but the IRS would just take more tax to build their coffers. Likewise, the IRS increasing taxes on businesses might help the government to raise more tax dollars, but when the business owner raises his price in order to stay in business the public will be burdened with the extra cost. If the business fails, and the people are left unemployed, another burden is placed on the tax payers in the form of unemployment or health & welfare assistance. As for whether it is better to have a state run organization or a private run organization; usually it’s better to have a privately run organization. The free market tends to promote fiscal responsibility and a good work ethic; socialism does just the opposite, it promotes waste and slothfulness. The more a government regulates an industry, the more control they possess, and the less control the people have. I think socialism is anti-American. Study some of Karl Marx and Adam Smith’s work if you want to know more, they are pretty much the authorities everyone consults when researching the issues. Additionally, Obama wants to restrict trade. The cons want to keep the trade flowing. Stopping trade is a bad thing, as the value of the stuff we export is more than the products we import. His line of reasoning is from an outdated fiscal philosophy, that may have been great during JFK’s short tenure, but in our current dilemma, we cannot afford to go that route. I would just like to see him cornered in the debates, and see what his response is to this argument.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 1:31 PM

"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."
-------------------------------------------I guess it's a shame then that the majority of voters don't agree with that statement.

Posted by: orange | September 24, 2008 1:31 PM

Congress has been under Democrat control since 2006. The approval ratings for this Congress is the lowest ever for a Congress. Democrats should not pretend that they are blameless.

Posted by: RealityCheck | September 24, 2008 1:30 PM

If Obama wins, and I see one liberal crying about the state of affairs after Obama sells us out to foreign powers and puts on the front lines of the battle against muslim extremism,
I'm gonna tar feather and hang the idiot.
Me and what army you may ask?
You're in for a surprise.

Posted by: thozman | September 24, 2008 1:29 PM

"I'm still open to any evidence that Obama is better on economy, and I happen to know a little on the subject."

Obama supports a directed middle class tax cut, and increases taxes above a certain income level, keeping things closer to revenue neutral. McCain is pro-Bush 'tax cuts' which were 'tax deferrals' to future generations. He also less gung ho on foolish free trade agreements than McCain. I wish he was rigorously against unmitigated free trade with 3rd world countries, but ah well. Also, he supports ending oil industry subsidies. McCain appears to be pro-tax cut while only proposing cutting maybe 10 billion in earmarks. McCain has a history of being anti-regulation without critically evaluating what regulations exist and what purpose they serve. Assuming (with no good basis) that either could mystically pass their legislation without congress making serious modifications, Obama wins not so much on great proposals, but by virtue of McCain's exceedingly terrible economic background and plans.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:28 PM

The Cuba embargo In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in August 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an important inducement for change."

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 1:28 PM

"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."
-------------------------------------------You are a part of the minority that actually believes this??

Posted by: orange | September 24, 2008 1:28 PM

Looks like two Marks in here. My are the ones without all the !!!s

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:28 PM

Humility --

If by fiscal conservative you mean the Republican Congress and President's policies of the last 8 years, I think we've had enough. And, obviously, I think the rest of the voting public agrees.

Supply side economics are, in fact, by the empirical evidence of the last 3 Repugnicant Administrations, a failure.

-No Republican President has ever left office with an unemployment rate under 5%. Democats have.

-No Republican President has ever submitted let alone balanced the federal budget. Democats have.

-Each of the last 3 Repugnicant administrations have significantly increased the national debt... The last one by 4 trillion dollars. The last Democatic President reduced the national debt by half a trillion in one year.

-The last Democratic President presided over an economy that took the stock market from the 3000s to over 11000. The last Republican President has taken the stock market from the 11000s to the 10000s (that's backward)

Who do you trust on the economy. Certainly not another fiscal conservative.

Posted by: DougH1 | September 24, 2008 1:24 PM

""Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."

Because being a deregulation fanboy of some 26 years and Mr. S&L crisis guy couldn't possible factor in to it."

I agree with the original poster, McCain CAN win on the economy. Free markets work despite the occasional meltdown. When that happens, you put in regulations only where necessary and continue on.

Much is being made of the "bailout" cost per taxpayer but in reality, if you read what is likely to happen, the cost will be nowhere near that.

If you moved back 25 years and had a strictly regulated economny with higher taxes the innovation level, the growth level, would be no where near what it is even today in this "crisis." Over that time each taxpayer would have likely paid more than they are paying with the occasional crisis to manage.

The price you pay for a freer market is greater volatility but over time you will see greater growth and innovation as well.

So McCain gets my vote based on economics if nothing else. Not so much McCain or Obama themselves, but their policy directions.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:24 PM

i don't know, thought McCain would have gotten a boost from Palin's, "Bullwinkle Comes To Washington" tour. You know, adding to her resumé with Kissenger photo ops, etc. Great pick McCain, when you said you'll protect the country, you sure meant it.

Posted by: juan baldez | September 24, 2008 1:23 PM

The Democrats created this mess!


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

It was the Democrats who pushed for deregulation.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:23 PM

The Democrats created this mess!


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

It was the Democrats who pushed for deregulation.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:23 PM

huh! just heard on TV that WAPO admitted that this poll was off kilter . . . the sampling base was lopsided. How funny!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:22 PM

@mark

If you seriously think the Dems are deregulators then you are obviously not a republican.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 1:21 PM

It is really going to be difficult for McCain to hide from his role as a deregulator when the GOP Party Platform calls for even more disastrous deregulation.

Consevatism has failed America, time to be rid of it.

Posted by: lipreader | September 24, 2008 1:20 PM

Wow. sensing defeat, the McCain paidf bloggers are really resorting to some sleazy, desperate stuff here.

It won't matter.

Say hello to the next president of the United States: Barack Obama

McCain is an old fart who'se ready for the old folks home. His ideas even older. Maybe Palin can help him change his depends (adult diapers) once in a while.

Posted by: average jane | September 24, 2008 1:00

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Tell me about it. I heard yesterday that McCain had people being paid to post nonsense. Their so easy to pick out to. Everything is Rezko, Ayers, slumlords, the same bull we heard from Hillary's crew. Everything they talk about leads nowhere. I tell them when they get something against Obama to go down to the courthouse and file charges.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 1:20 PM

If, when the debate opens, McCain blinks twice, groans loudly, and falls over dead, I'm convinced people will still support his candidacy, such is their mighty fanaticism. We'll see posts like this:

* McCain is a maverick - he's the first dead man running for president!

* Obama is a moslum [sic]/socialist!

* The press is show a clear living person bias!

* The Democrats are going to complain unfairness when McCain wins the dead voters demographic!

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:19 PM

HEMI said:
"I can't recall anyone ever having to put up with crap like [O'Reilley's interview with Obama] to prove he has what it takes to be President. I don't know if you ever saw it but it more like an attack session than an interview."

HEMI, does your "recall" reach back more than a couple days?

Sincerely,
The View & Barbara Walters

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 1:19 PM

I'm still open to any evidence that Obama is better on economy, and I happen to know a little on the subject. But LOL is all you can muster.

----
"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."

LOL

Posted by: oscars2212 | September 24, 2008 1:08 PM
----


Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.

Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.

With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:18 PM

AVERAGE JANE

I’m not paid! In fact I was still pretty open minded about the whole thing until the liberal blogosphere and the liberal rags slung all that mud at Palin; after that I’ve been spot on in my attempt to defecate on the Obama campaign. You guys brought my adversity upon yourself.

How about D.D.Eisenhower? This golf-playing general changed the family German name (like "Steinweg" pianos to "Steinway" to please the vox populi ...) from Eisenhauer to Eisenhower. Eisen = iron & Hauer = striker. Literally: striker of iron.

That’s a low blow. “We Like Ike .“ Keep in mind that he was the HNIC who orchestrated D Day. And as far as his popularity, he blew A. Stevenson away with 442 to 89 electoral votes in 1952; and 457 to 73 in 1956. Obama is no comparison whatsoever, where DDE is concerned. BTW, the German immigrants, landed in Phila. as early as 1700, and played a pretty big part in the blessings of liberty you enjoy today.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 1:18 PM

"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.

Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy."
--------------------------------------
If you are shown the record you'll see where McCain helped to bring the economy to its knees. Do you really think you can prove McCains economics are strong by showing his record? Seems to me that would be something you'd want to avoid.

Posted by: JP123 | September 24, 2008 1:18 PM

IN my 3 million miles I have traveled the most bigotry I could find in the world was in Indiana . Their is a portion of these people who do not like black people .period. I don't know why but it's visceral . The other is south africa. where white hated blacks and screwed them overNow blacks are in charge and hate whites and are screwing them over.The economy under the current leadership is in shambles.I think Barack has a hidden problem in his own party. I like the guy but I am not comfortable with his associates.too much mystery here

Posted by: denfenster | September 24, 2008 1:17 PM

IN my 3 million miles I have traveled the most bigotry I could find in the world was in Indiana . Their is a portion of these people who do not like black people .period. I don't know why but it's visceral . The other is south africa. where white hated blacks and screwed them overNow blacks are in charge and hate whites and are screwing them over.The economy under the current leadership is in shambles.I think Barack has a hidden problem in his own party. I like the guy but I am not comfortable with his associates.too much mystery here

Posted by: denfenster | September 24, 2008 1:17 PM

The Democrats created this mess.

In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused.

See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:15 PM

The Democrats created this mess.

In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused.

See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.

Proof!

The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

A vote for the Democrats is a vote for continued disaster.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:15 PM

"All of the talk or bias in the world won't change this fundamental difference. If you want to move this country farther down the road to socialism, Obama and the Democrats are your clear choice. If you do want the bipartisanship middle of the road approach Independants profess to want, McCain is your choice. If you want something else, too bad, so sad.

It really is just that simple."

You summed it up very nicely. Plus, any leaning to the right by McCain will be pulled back to moderate by a Democratic congress. Obama on the other hand will have much closer to free reign. Both will be constrained by the debt AND their promises of tax cuts.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 1:13 PM

Noooooo me want palling for president so macaine got to win he gross but when kick bucket palling be pres and will be awsome to have hottie run country with beehive onn head and fix economie withtax cuts and she have hottie glasses look like welding goggles she has major hotness and won miss america democratic party gonna lose obama no hottie he smart guy me want beer with hottie she one of us. palling in o8!!!!!!!

Posted by: d Miner | September 24, 2008 1:12 PM

"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."

Because being a deregulation fanboy of some 26 years and Mr. S&L crisis guy couldn't possible factor in to it. If only he hadn't admitted to knowing little about economics.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 1:12 PM

None of you Obamaniacs live in North Dakota or Utah?!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:09 PM

Vote for Obama so they can paint the white house black.

Posted by: ludacris | September 24, 2008 1:08 PM

"Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that."

LOL

Posted by: oscars2212 | September 24, 2008 1:08 PM

AVERAGE JANE

I’m not paid! In fact I was still pretty open minded about the whole thing until the liberal blogosphere and the liberal rags slung all that mud at Palin; after that I’ve been spot on in my attempt to defecate on the Obama campaign. You guys brought my adversity upon yourself.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 1:07 PM

"McCain has clashed with top Republicans in Congress and with Bush countless times. You Obama-ists try to tie McCain to Bush, but most know...."


What I know is McCain claimed to have supported Bush 90 % of the time.

And his virtual lock step waltz with Bush since 2004 is a record John Sidney may wish he could run away from, but frankly can't.

Like I said, it's tough running against a sitting POTUS and your own party.


Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 1:06 PM

That's right! THE ONE does not need help from mere mortals such as Ron Klain. He's taking THREE DAYS off for some other reason. How dare you insinuate otherwise?!

(sarcasm off)

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 1:06 PM

Anonymous ... from anonymity writes:

"President Johnson, President Roosevelt, President Washington, President Cliton, President Kennedy, and President Obama? What the hell kind of name is that to run America? I could see President Obama as a leader for a Middle East country, but not America."

Psst, mispelled "Clinton" ...

How about D.D.Eisenhower? This golf-playing general changed the family German name (like "Steinweg" pianos to "Steinway" to please the vox populi ...) from Eisenhauer to Eisenhower. Eisen = iron & Hauer = striker. Literally: striker of iron.

Are you serious in making fun of a person's name? Just too ridiculous to be real, even for someone who hides in anonymity.

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 1:04 PM

"Preparing Sen. Obama is Ron Klain, who assisted Sen. John Kerry and Vice President Al Gore in the debates during their failed presidential bids. Mr. Klain was played by Kevin Spacey in the movie "Recount," about the 2000 Florida vote debacle.

The McCain campaign has hired Brett O'Donnell, the debate coach who led Jerry Falwell's Liberty University to several national debate championships. He has critiqued all of Sen. McCain's debates, as well as those of Sen. Obama. His advice to Sen. McCain: stand up. Mr. O'Donnell told the campaign that Sen. McCain had his worst debates when he was seated. "Proximity can be a problem for McCain," one adviser said. "He'll take the bait and get sucked into fights.""

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122204781847961747.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:38 PM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Why do a get the feeling that Obama don’t need no help with the debates. That speech at the convention was his and it was perfect. The true test was doing that 4 part interview with that vulture O'Reilly and walking out of there alive. I can't recall anyone ever having to put up with crap like that to prove he has what it takes to be President. I don't know if you ever saw it but it more like an attack session than an interview.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 1:03 PM

Illegal immigration In a March 2004 questionnaire, Obama was asked if the government should "crack down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants." He replied "Oppose." In a Jan. 31, 2008, televised debate, he said that "we do have to crack down on those employers that are taking advantage of the situation."

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 1:01 PM

Economy should be the top issue and McCain can win on that.

Show me the record that proves Obama is stronger on economy.

With the turmoil, the next president has to be fiscally conservative and work with the opposition to reform the system. Obama made too many promises for that and would rather vote "Present" than breaking the party line.

Posted by: Humility still a virtue | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

Wow. sensing defeat, the McCain paidf bloggers are really resorting to some sleazy, desperate stuff here.

It won't matter.

Say hello to the next president of the United States: Barack Obama

McCain is an old fart who'se ready for the old folks home. His ideas even older. Maybe Palin can help him change his depends (adult diapers) once in a while.

Posted by: average jane | September 24, 2008 1:00 PM

So let me get this straight. Bush and Cheney wipe their a$$ with the constitution and break every law have, and now they want to go by the Letter of the law. Ha Ha Ha, that's funny. Maybe they should send Sarah Palin's corrupt a$$ down to testify so the American people don't have to worry about putting another criminal in office. I don't care where Obama came from, he will be our next President.


Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 12:46 PM


I don't see Bush or Cheney’s name on the docket anywhere. Just a concerned citizen claiming his birth certificate was doctored up. Time will tell I guess

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 12:59 PM

A couple things - the article doesn't point out the party id used in polling. I read that it weighed dems much higher than polls that show Obama with a 4-pt lead. I support Obama and would love for the national lead to be 9 pts, but that poll seems inaccurate.

The other thing - Palin's Florida crowd wasn't near 60,000. Numerous sources have said it was 20-25,000. That's still a big number, and you wonder why it was inflated.


Posted by: Rachel | September 24, 2008 12:59 PM

Obama admitted cocaine use. Even Clinton tried pot.

Posted by: big deal | September 24, 2008 12:56 PM

Anonymous:
Your position that the media is not biased is absurd.

If Obama is the favorite, it is because a) the media refuses to attack Obama b) the failure of congressional and Bush policies. Of the two candidates, only one (McCain) has demonstrated the ability and willingness to work with both parties and effect change.

McCain has clashed with top Republicans in Congress and with Bush countless times. You Obama-ists try to tie McCain to Bush, but most know that McCain has an independent streak and is not a zealot. Just off the top of my head, I can name McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform and the McCain-Kennedy education reform that McCain did with the other party. Nobody can name anything positive that Obama did, except run his pie hole. As the most liberal partisan Senator, Obama has only demonstrated that it will be business as usual in Washington.

Regarding the budget, appropriations bills originate in the House of Represenatives (US Constitution, Article 1, Section 7). The House has been under Democrat control since 2006. Any budget deficits are due to an irresponsible Congress.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:55 PM

"Palin Smoked Pot, But Said She Doesn’t Support Legalizing It. “Palin doesn’t support legalizing marijuana, worrying about the message it would send to her four kids. But when it comes to cracking
down on drugs, she says methamphetamines are the greater threat and should have a higher priority. Palin said she has smoked marijuana -- remember, it was legal under state law, she said, even if illegal under
U.S. law -- but says she didn’t like it and doesn’t smoke it now. ‘I can’t claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled.’” [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 8/6/06]


Palin Admitted Inhaling Marijuana. “Palin, who has admitted to inhaling as a young woman, said little. But she repeatedly asked why, if the goal was growing hemp for clothing, did the group write the initiative to make it legal to smoke marijuana to get high?” [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 10/26/00]


Palin Signed Resolution Opposing Legalization of Marijuana. In 2000, Palin signed a resolution opposing Ballot Measure No. 5, legalizing the uses of hemp, including marijuana, saying it would allow Alaska to become a drug haven and that it sent “a confusing message to our community’s young people.”
[Resolution 00-47, 10/9/2000]"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:53 PM

THE CANDIDATE WHO DEMANDS TO KNOW THE TRUE CAUSE OF THE CRISIS
IS THE CANDIDATE WHO WILL BACK THE RIGHT SOLUTION!

• IS THE TARGETING OF AMERICANS BY GOV'T AGENCIES A ROOT CAUSE OF WALL STREET MELTDOWN?

Once again, Congress is being asked to rush through emergency legislation -- to cede effective control of the economy to the government.

Officials continue to blame lax lending policies on the part of the mortgage industry for spawning this crisis.

But were lenders ORDERED to offer "easy credit" to people "targeted" by government agencies?

Is government "targeting" of American citizens a root cause of the mortgage meltdown that spawned the broader financial crisis?

Consider this:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/targeting-u-s-citizens-govt-agencies-root-cause-wall-street-financial-crisis OR
members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener | September 24, 2008 12:53 PM

I BET THAT THE "RESOLUTION TRUST" BEING SPOKEN OF CURRENTLY WILL ONLY AMORTIZE THE LOSSES OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS ... IN WHICH EVENT THE BANKERS CAN CONTINUE TO RUIN A GOOD LIFE FOR THE REST OF US. Remember "Disintermediation" ... 1979?. A term coined during the Savings & Loan (remember Savings & Loans) debacle ... about 1979. It was part of Reaganomics ... disintermediation just meant being upside down on a loan. Here was the banks worry. Back then banks had portfolios of loans earning 8% on a 30 year loan. If you wanted to sell your portfolio to get cash you had to take a discount. For example a $1M portfolio of loans at 30 years ammortization, 20 year remaining term would only bring at sale about $800,000 (after discount required by the purchaser to get a yield higher than 8%). If the bank needed cash, they had to SELL THE LOANS, BUT, they hated doing this because the $200,000 loss went straight against the net worth of the bank's stock, and hence, the owners of the bank's pockets. This brought wailing and nashing of teeth to any investor (which bought bank stock). So Reaganomics figured, rather than force the old system and really hurt the bankers, lets just ammortize the loss over 10 years. Corrupt practices, from Realtors, Appraisers and Bankers went unabated, until ... 1989 the collapse occurred anyway. So, all that happened was the "orderly rip-off" by S&L's and their buddies, until they could find a new way to rip-off someone else. Same thing this time .. how little we learn.

Posted by: vs | September 24, 2008 12:53 PM

"By contrast, Gov. Palin wanted to be seated during her debate, because she was more comfortable that way during her successful run for Alaska governor. Negotiators agreed the candidates will use a lectern."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122204781847961747.html


"Not deeply versed in policy, Ms. Palin skipped some candidate forums; at others, she flipped through hand-written, color-coded index cards strategically placed behind her nameplate."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=3&_r=2

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:50 PM

BERG v. OBAMA et al

Plaintiff Philip J. Berg alleged that Defendant Barack Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old to regain his U.S. citizenship status.

Answers are due from the various parties to the lawsuite as follows:

Barrack Obama September 24, 2008;

DNC: September 24, 2008 and

FEC: October 21, 2008 (Federal and Government Employees and Entities have sixty (60) days)

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-paedce/case_no-2:2008cv04083/case_id-281573


Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 12:15 PM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

So let me get this straight. Bush and Cheney wipe their a$$ with the constitution and break every law have, and now they want to go by the Letter of the law. Ha Ha Ha, that's funny. Maybe they should send Sarah Palin's corrupt a$$ down to testify so the American people don't have to worry about putting another criminal in office. I don't care where Obama came from, he will be our next President.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 12:46 PM

bummer dudes!

Decriminalization of marijuana While running for the U.S. Senate in January 2004, Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use. In the Oct. 30, 2007, presidential debate, he joined other Democratic candidates in opposing the decriminalization of marijuana.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 12:39 PM

"Preparing Sen. Obama is Ron Klain, who assisted Sen. John Kerry and Vice President Al Gore in the debates during their failed presidential bids. Mr. Klain was played by Kevin Spacey in the movie "Recount," about the 2000 Florida vote debacle.

The McCain campaign has hired Brett O'Donnell, the debate coach who led Jerry Falwell's Liberty University to several national debate championships. He has critiqued all of Sen. McCain's debates, as well as those of Sen. Obama. His advice to Sen. McCain: stand up. Mr. O'Donnell told the campaign that Sen. McCain had his worst debates when he was seated. "Proximity can be a problem for McCain," one adviser said. "He'll take the bait and get sucked into fights.""

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122204781847961747.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:38 PM

mzbond:

You think he VOLUNTEERED to become a prisoner of war?! That's as crazy as Barack HUSSEIN Obama being a secret Muslim agent ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 12:37 PM


TO PREVIEW:
Preview of Friday's debate.
Moderator: Sen. McCain, can you explain the operational and cognitive perspectives on each of the former soviet republics?
Moderator: Sen. Obama, what is the capital of France?
Seriously, will the media give Obama the questions in advance? Or, is Obama himself writing the questions that will be asked of him?
Posted by: Preview
...................................
PREVIEW: You are just making excuses for how incompetent McCain will sound next to Obama. The media bias you speak of doesn't exist. Some outlets are more liberal and some others are more conservative. Mostly, the media outlets report the stories as they are. Obama is the favorite in this election--that is NOT BIASED if its TRUE! I'm tired of these excuses. You McCain voters are siding with an administration that is essentially a clone of the last one, in which our international reputation has been tarnished, our budget deficit is off the charts, we were lied to, we started an unprovoked war (which many members of the administration have profited immensely from), I mean I can go on and on. Why do you still support this party? It continues to deliberately hide the truth from you, mislead you, and send hypocritical messages. I just don't get how so many Americans are duped by the GOP....I think it speaks to the incompetence of our nation's electorate

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:36 PM

I am now convinced that McCain deserted his command and elected to be a POW. Clearly, no one in the ordinary fighting arena knew who his father was so there would have been a good chance he would not have survived, but the commanders in the POW camps did - so he was sure to return home alive. McCain is a phoney through and through. He is not qualified to be president of any organization let alone president of the United States.

Posted by: mzbond | September 24, 2008 12:34 PM

The McCain campaign captured in a photo;

http://home.comcast.net/~n1riw/mv70906.jpg

Posted by: Think! | September 24, 2008 12:34 PM

Since the WaPo won't discuss anything negative about The One, what's up with Obama needed THREE DAYS to prepare for the foreign policy debate?! Time Magazine is also reporting that the campaign is abandoning their 50-State strategy. Too bad! Maybe he should have thought about that before reneging on the promise to "aggressively pursue an agreement on public financing." I still believe that will be viewed as his biggest mistake of this entire campaign.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 12:31 PM

Bonus Quote of the Day
"When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"

-- Sen. Joe Biden, in an interview with CBS News.

Of course, as Reason points out, Roosevelt wasn't president in 1929 and televisions were still experimental.

Posted by: Helen | September 24, 2008 12:26 PM

"A few facets of this claim immediately jump out as being far-fetched: first, that a sitting U.S. Senator who has already spent a good deal of time and money securing his party's nomination for the presidency would suddenly be discovered as ineligible due to an obscure provision of U.S. law; and second, that U.S. law would essentially penalize someone who would otherwise qualify for natural-born citizenship status simply because his mother was too young. The fact is, the qualifications listed in the example quoted above are moot because they refer to someone who was born outside the United States. Since Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, they do not apply to him.

The Fourteenth Amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." Since Hawaii is part of the United States, even if Barack Obama's parents were both non-U.S. citizens who hadn't even set foot in the country until just before he was born, he'd still qualify as a natural-born citizen.

Some have claimed that Barack Obama's Hawaiian birthplace doesn't qualify him as a natural-born citizen because Hawaii was not yet a state when he was born. This claim is wrong: Hawaii was admitted as the 50th state almost two years before Barack Obama's birth there (21 August 1959 for statehood vs. 4 August 1961 for Obama's birthdate).

Some outdated versions of this item conclude by stating that "It should be demanded that Obama produce his 1961 Hawaiian birth certificate," but in fact his campaign made an image of that document available on the Internet back in mid-2008.

In August 2008, Philadelphia attorney Philip Berg filed suit in U.S. District Court challenging Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency on the grounds that Obama was actually born in Kenya (not Hawaii) and/or subsequently gave up his U.S. citizenship and thus does not qualify as a native-born citizen of the U.S. Lawsuits over candidates' eligibility are not uncommon: similar lawsuits (none of them successful), for example, have been filed challenging the citizenship status of John McCain (who was born in the Panama Canal Zone), challenging the Wyoming residency status of Dick Cheney (who was born in Wyoming but moved to Texas), and challenging the citizenship status of 1964 Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater (who was born in Arizona before that territory was admitted as a state)."

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:25 PM

Polls? And clearly biased ones at that? Are you kidding me?

Anyone who hasn't made up their mind about this election hasn't been paying attention - to this campaign or politics for the last 70 years. There are no surprises here for "Independants" to weigh.

Obama is a solid member of the neosocialist left determined to change what is left of American capitalism first into a full blown social democratic state and then into a purely socialist state.

McCain is a moderate Democrat determined to make the middle work. The fact that he is also a defense hawk doesn't make him a Republican, nor does the fact that he chose Sarah who is.

In one sense, both Obama and McCain are right. Obama will do his best to bring incremental, but very real change - to socialism. McCain is right that he has always been a maverick and will take on his own party to make the middle of the road work.

All of the talk or bias in the world won't change this fundamental difference. If you want to move this country farther down the road to socialism, Obama and the Democrats are your clear choice. If you do want the bipartisanship middle of the road approach Independants profess to want, McCain is your choice. If you want something else, too bad, so sad.

It really is just that simple.

Posted by: R U Kidding | September 24, 2008 12:24 PM

Obamamania is clearly a Republican mole. No Democrat would call it the "Democrat party." What a dummie.

Posted by: Alexander | September 24, 2008 12:22 PM

This week Sarah Palin is getting the rest of the credentials she needs to be a republican president. She is doing her internship at the UN. She walks around with a notebook and pencil in hand, asking questions to a few foriegn leaders as well as an old secretary of state Henry Kissinger. She was asked by McCain to tone down her lipstick while she is getting tutored in foreign affairs. McCain was more worried that one of them foreign leaders might make an unwanted move on the new student if she wore too much lipstick.

A few days ago somebody asked McCain about Sarah Palin's readyness for being president. McCain responded that she is ready and he is even thinking of putting her on top of the ticket. Why not dirty old man. He enjoyed her being under him for the past 3 weeks. Now he wants her on top. What other position does she like?

Posted by: Clayton | September 24, 2008 12:22 PM

Big challenge, indeed. Why did you fight so hard for an ideologically based, extreme anti-government regulation agenda as a Senator? Why are you embracing the anti-environment, anti-science evangelicals that you once called a danger to America? What happened to McCain 2000? He's not the same guy as McCain 2008, that's for sure. How can you let the slimy Bush/Rove campaign team run your election campaign after you insisted that there was need for 'civil discourse'? Why did you panic and make a reckless and impulsive pick for VP? Why should anyone believe that you won't continue the failed Republican/Bush policies that got us into a phony war and destroyed the American economy. I'd say it's a challenge.

Posted by: thebob.bob | September 24, 2008 12:18 PM

Hardly favorable actions from Obama toward "his governor." And no less an authority than Karl Rove said on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes" yesterday, "Blagojevich only has the most tenuous ties to Obama."

– by Viveca Novak and Justin Bank
Sources
"Obama donates Rezko Contribution," Associated Press. 1 June 2007.

Scott, Janny, "In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd," New York Times. 30 July 2007.

Mitch, Robert and Pearson, Rick, "Blagojevich warns Obama of GOP trap," Chicago Tribune. 19 Sept 2008.


Posted by: need4trh | September 24, 2008 11:47

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

That was some ad. McCain needs to do his homework and get solid evidence like this.

Obama unleashed a tough new TV ad that charged McCain had protected tax breaks for insurance companies that hide profits offshore.

Without mentioning dates or the companies involved, the commercial implies McCain went to the Atlantic Ocean island of Bermuda with corporate executives and, while there, "pledged to protect tax breaks for American corporations that hide their profits offshore. And grateful insurance company executives and their lobbyists who benefit from the tax scheme, gave McCain $50,000."

There was no immediate response from the McCain campaign. The attack on the Arizona senator was the latest in a series of increasingly negative television spots by both sides in the historic and close contest for the White House.

I can't believe Tucker Bigmouth didn't try to lie his way out of it. That's because John McCain loooves his corporate tax loopholes.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 12:17 PM

When discussing the issues, Republicans will say yes, McCain is right on the issues. Democrats will say Obama is right on the issues. I feel getting into a debate on issues and arguing over who is more right than the other (especially in blogs) can at times be counterproductive. Certainly it has the potential to be productive, though in the end, generally speaking, opinions will always be divided.

So one way to get around debating on many of the issues is to limit myself to just one – the concept of term limits, for my argument on voting a party other than Republican in office. Simply due to Bush’s failure as president over the last eight years, another Republican in office – especially McCain – for the next four, won’t be any different whatsoever and will be disastrous to our economy and security.

If you’re an independent or an undecided Republican and if all of the arguments you’ve heard continue to fail in helping you make a decision, consider this: I believe it would be wise to make a switch and put a Democrat in office this time around. It’s been eight long years since the Bush administration first took the seat, and I believe it is healthy, just like term limits are healthy, to now rotate toward the other party. We need to show the world that Americans are not stubborn people and that we realize it’s up to us to do it differently this time, and not have a repeat of the last 8 years of the failed Bush administration. I am actually a registered Republican, but that is an easy fix.

Now if you insist on debating issues, I’m not going to talk about Palin’s far right ring fundamentalist religious fanaticisms, nor am I going to discuss her incompetency to be president if the need should ever arise. As far is McCain is concerned, I’m not even going to give a mere mention of his out of touch ways and his inability to offer us viable solutions to problems we are currently facing. If we must discuss the issues, let’s limit it to the one most important necessary for our prosperity and survival – the economy.

Money, being the fuel of economy, has to be spent by the people. The majority of the current workforce and those who have the potential to enter the workforce is the middle class and those who are not there yet (90-95% of all Americans). The Republicans tend to support the upper class. It only makes sense for the wealthier to pay more taxes to the government so that the government can have the capital it needs to introduce it to areas that need the support – the financial, energy (green), and homeland security. The budget has to be balanced again. Our infrastructure across the board needs to be upgraded and maintained. Arguably, our economy took the first hit during our market correction of the late 90s/early 00s and the second on 9/11. The Republicans’ priorities have been elsewhere since. With an improved economy, we will all be safer and our quality of life will be enhanced.

And finally to those Hillary Clinton supporters, for this election, it’s time to vote for the antithesis of the Republican party, the one she is supporting. Vote Democrat. Vote Obama.

Posted by: Why Obama should be President | September 24, 2008 12:16 PM

BERG v. OBAMA et al

Plaintiff Philip J. Berg alleged that Defendant Barack Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old to regain his U.S. citizenship status.

Answers are due from the various parties to the lawsuite as follows:

Barrack Obama September 24, 2008;

DNC: September 24, 2008 and

FEC: October 21, 2008 (Federal and Government Employees and Entities have sixty (60) days)

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-paedce/case_no-2:2008cv04083/case_id-281573

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 12:15 PM

MA:

No. That would make him disqualified to be elected President of the United States.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 12:13 PM

Gary:

That's certainly your opinion, but I don't have a circulation of 673,180 (Daily) or 890,163 (Sunday) -- although that's slipping -- I just think that the largest and one of the oldest newspapers in D.C. should be held to a slightly higher standard, that's all.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 12:12 PM

Did John Sidney McCain colloborate with the North Vietnamese?

http://greensboring.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=8270

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 12:11 PM

"Anyone who has seen my posts knows I'm a conservative, and no friend of Obama.

With that said, could my fellow McCain backers please stop with the "Obama-is-a-closet-Muslim" nonsense? He's not a Muslim.

And what if he was? Most imams are more tolerant and well-reasoned than Jeremiah Wright, so I think there is plenty to question Obama about....but being a Muslim is not one of them."

Bravo, there is a lot to criticize Obama about: waffling on FISA, being pro-faith based initiative, pro-gun control, pro-abortion stances while trying to dance around the issue because he's afraid to touch it.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 12:11 PM

I work for the Obama campaign and the democrat party. They told me to keep posting pro-Obama messages and to refute anything bad that someone has to say about Obama.

Posted by: obamamania | September 24, 2008 12:11 PM

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 12:08 PM

"With an Obama administration and a democrat controlled congress, it will be big government city baby. Some bastions of liberalism in this country have already started giving free tuition for illegals. I do not trust an Obama administration with a Reid/Pelosi Congress."

It seems that under Bush and the Republicans there was a lot of big government happening. Only it was happening only if you're rich. And there was a lot of taxing, only they were taxing the next generation by means of mortgaging the country's future. As for the free college tuition for illegals, it is dispensed by the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, or a whole new fictional character?

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 12:07 PM

Gettyleigh

Stalin's wild hordes "liberated" Ausschwitz, you hypothesize from your comfi chair?

Take it from 500 million Europeans, Stalin never "liberated" anything or anybody, except his own murderous ways & those with America's quiet indifference to the fate of his victims - that's history, not Hollywood.

KZ survivors (e.g., from Ausschwitz & other KZs) once "liberated" by the Red Army Feb. 1945, were thoroughly interrogated by Stalin's party commissars, & then trucked off to disappear in the Gulags hidden from view inside the vast communist Imperium.

Remember?

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 12:07 PM

"I do not trust an Obama administration with a Reid/Pelosi Congress."

But you trusted Bush-Lott-Hastert ! LMAO

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 12:07 PM

Anyone who has seen my posts knows I'm a conservative, and no friend of Obama.

With that said, could my fellow McCain backers please stop with the "Obama-is-a-closet-Muslim" nonsense? He's not a Muslim.

And what if he was? Most imams are more tolerant and well-reasoned than Jeremiah Wright, so I think there is plenty to question Obama about....but being a Muslim is not one of them.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 12:06 PM

I laughed at the headline on the WP main page for this story: "Analysis: A Challenge for McCain."

That pretty much sums up what many believe when it comes to John McCain and the economy--analyzing it is a real challenge.

Posted by: Jackson | September 24, 2008 12:05 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 12:03 PM

With an Obama administration and a democrat controlled congress, it will be big government city baby. Some bastions of liberalism in this country have already started giving free tuition for illegals. I do not trust an Obama administration with a Reid/Pelosi Congress.

Posted by: sane | September 24, 2008 12:02 PM

"Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side."


And 100 % American.

This nation used to count people of color as less than a full person. 3/5 I believe for male Negro slaves. Hardly a legacy that we would want to return to.

John Sidney McCain is 100% wrong on continuing our occupation of Iraq, continuing Bush's tax cuts and continuing to borrow the hunderds of bllions necessary to pay for it all.

And he still apparently hasn't figured out if he'll support the Wall St bail out.

Must be tough not only running against the sitting POTUS, who's armpit McCain stuck his nose in back in 2004, but running against your own party as well.

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 12:02 PM

"Mark, the reason you are having trouble paying for your kids' college is that Republican rule has given you a $1000 tax break and increased the cost of everything else in your life."

I'm sure its Bill Clinton's fault somehow. I can't imagine how, but I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, so I haven't been given my Reason of the Day that its Bill Clinton's fault.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 12:01 PM

Mark, the reason you are having trouble paying for your kids' college is that Republican rule has given you a $1000 tax break and increased the cost of everything else in your life. The entire economy has been destroyed by neocon philosophy, and like a sheep you talk about high taxes. Wake up and take some real responsibility for your views. Be informed.

Posted by: Dave | September 24, 2008 11:57 AM

"Vote Obama if you want to pay for free college tuition for illegals."

Apparently I didn't read the Obama plan to pay for non-citizen's college tuition while making citizens pay in full. (i.e., because it doesn't exist).

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:57 AM

hemi

• Abraham Lincoln is regarded by most authorities as America’s greatest president, despite the fact that many others in that office had superior education and experience.

For all of Obama’s schooling he has never really practiced law for a substantial length of time, and his claims of being a professor of law have been debunked, as he was actually only a senior lecturer on leave from Harvard. So what he actually took away from that education is largely untested.

America has only ever had one PHD as a president, Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was a great president, but despite Wilson's best efforts to reconcile the US and Germany after WWI, the Treaty of Versailles, left both the Germans and many Americans bitterly disillusioned and he left office broken and defeated. Obama can't hold a candle to Wilson.

No amount of education can prepare you to be a leader, leaders are born not made.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 11:08 AM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I don't recall ever hearing Obama say he was a Professor of law. And Obama's education is only part of why I would rather see him President. This is about having someone that will represent the people. Bush and McCain don't care about the people. Believe me, I've looked in to McCain's record on a lot of things, and he lies about most of them. He says country first, and the Troops the Troops, then votes against their needs every time. He can't be trusted on anything he says. Look at the way he runs his campaign. I can see putting up a fight but he flat out lies. If he'll lie to us now, what makes you think he'll do anything different as President?

(Education)

Undergraduate
Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA
Undergraduate, 1981-1983

(Columbia University)
B.A. Political Science with specialization in international relations
Thesis topic: Soviet nuclear disarmament

(Graduate)
Harvard Law School
J.D. magna cumm laude 1988-1991

President, Harvard Law Review

(Organizing and other work experience)
1983-1984 Writer/Researcher for Business International Corporation. Helped companies understand overseas markets in the “Financing Foreign Operations” service and wrote for the “Business International Money Report”
1984-1985 Community Organizer for New York Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), promoting personal, community, and government reform at City College in Harlem.
1985-1988 Director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland on Chicago's South Side. While director grew the DCP staff from 1 to 13 and their budget from $70,000 to $400,000.
1992 Led Chicago's Project Vote! push. This effort resulted in a record number of voter registrations, over 600,000 in Chicago. 1)
(Teaching)
1993-2004 Visiting Law and Government Fellow, then Senior Lecturer, in Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. Taught courses on the due process and equal protection areas of constitutional law, on voting rights, and on racism and law. Helped develop a casebook on voting rights.
(Law Practice)
1993-2002 Worked as an associate attorney with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Represented non-profits and private individuals in urban development projects, voting rights cases, and wrongful firings. Filed major suit that forced the state of Illinois to enforce the Motor Voter Law and successfully argued a wrongful firing case before the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
(Illinois Senate 1996-2004)
Chairman, Health and Human Services Committee
Spearheaded a successful bipartisan effort in Illinois to pass the broadest ethics-reform legislation in 25 years, and gained bipartisan support for his successful bills reforming death penalty interrogations and ending racial profiling by police. Worked with the Republican-led effort to reform welfare.
Also sponsored successful bills expanding tax credits and child-care subsidies for low-income working families, protecting overtime pay for workers, expanding health care for children, and providing job skills training for juveniles.
New York Times chart on Obama's legislative record in the Illinois Senate: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/07/29/us/politics/20070730_OBAMA_GRAPHIC.html

(United States Senate 2004-present)
Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs
Member, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Member, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Member, Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Shares responsibility for the bipartisan Coburn-Obama Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, requiring full online disclosure of all entities receiving federal funds, and the bipartisan Lugar-Obama Cooperative Proliferation Detection, Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006, deepening non-proliferation work with WMD and including surface-to-air missiles, land mines, and other weapons that may be used by terrorists. Also worked with Coburn to end the abuse of no-bid contracts in the wake of disasters

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 11:56 AM

I guess if we allow Obama to win then the people who couldn't afford a house in the first place will now have their mortgages paid for so they can continue to not work and buy themselves nice rims for thier cars, nikes, and clothing. I feel if people made the mistake of purchasing a house not within there means then the hell with them. I could have bought a $250,000 home because that is what they said I could afford, but instead I bought a house for $134,000 because I knew my limits.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 11:55 AM

to "need4trh" (Obama backer)
& "gettyleigh" (McCain backer:

If YOU have an opinion you would like to add to the discussion, then by all means type it out.

But if all you are going to do is copy-and-paste garbage from partisan websites, take it elsewhere. No one wants those lengthy pastes of crap, from either side, cluttering the message board.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 11:55 AM

WaPo, why do you post such trash as gettyleigh and allow them to post almost 40 ridiculous internet rumors/racially tinged crap? Be a serious news outlet. LEt voices be heard, but skim the utter crap from left and right. You cheapen your venue when you allow postings like gettyleigh

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 11:54 AM

Vote Obama if you want to pay for free college tuition for illegals. Personally, I will have a problem paying for my own kids' college.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 11:54 AM

"So what you are saying g here is you support the biased media in their elating a novice to the position of the presidency?"

Silly goose. To take a simple element from this off-mark rant, I haven't seen a convincing argument that the media is 'liberal' (whatever that means). Is there some sort of case you can put forward to support that notion? If whatever comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth is God's own truth to you, you're a 'fridge. Sorry.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:52 AM

I don't vote for gun control zealots.

WWW.GUNBANOBAMA.COM

Posted by: 2A | September 24, 2008 11:50 AM

I don't believe anything that JakeD comes up with anymore.

Posted by: Gary | September 24, 2008 11:48 AM

"Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side."

I quit reading at this point. If someone said something like that about anyone, even hypothetically, I don't care whom, in my presence, they'd be picking their teeth up off the floor. I'm much more anti-McCain than pro-Obama, but everytime I see something like this, I want Obama to win just see the rivers or brown running down the legs of racist freaks.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:48 AM

McCain conferance call 5:00 am EST

"My friends, I just wanted to give you a heads up on the DELICIOUSLY FALSE BLATNT POLITICAL PROPAGANDA AD, our gracious and unholy father THE RNC/GOP HAS GIVEN US TO CONTINUE ON IN THIS WAR AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THE MIDDLE CLASS, WHICH, I THE ULTRA-ELITIST, JOHN MCCAIN TRULY HATE!!!!

ALL BLESING BE UNTO OUR father, "THE great and mighty spin master and unholy liar THE RNC/GOP, thy will be done......"

From factcheck.0rg

Guilt and Associations
September 23, 2008
McCain once again tries to tar Obama with the controversies of others.
Summary
A McCain-Palin ad says that Obama was "born of the corrupt Chicago political machine" and implies that the candidate himself is corrupt by association with four local political figures. But the ad's implication and many of its supporting details are false. In fact, this is a particularly egregious example of ricochet sliming:

William Daley, the first figure mentioned in the ad, is indeed related to the other famous Chicago Daleys, but he's never been accused of any wrongdoing. And the former commerce secretary isn't Obama's only economic adviser, as the ad implies.


Emil Jones, Illinois state Senate leader, may indeed have been Obama's "political godfather." But he, too, hasn't been charged with or even seriously accused of misdeeds despite the ad's claim of an "ethical cloud."


Obama did have a past relationship with real estate developer Tony Rezko, but he is no longer Obama's "money man." Obama hasn't been associated with him since his indictment for wire fraud, bribery, money laundering and attempted extortion, and Obama donated all of the disgraced businessman's previous campaign contributions to charity.
Rod Blagojevich has been touched by plenty of scandal but his relationship with Obama doesn't extend much beyond being "his governor." In fact, Obama has worked on ethics legislation triggered by some of the Blagojevich's questionable moves.
Most important, the ad offers no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama himself in connection with any of these relationships, however close or distant.
Analysis
The McCain-Palin campaign's new ad, "Chicago Machine," tries to tie Barack Obama to four Illinois powerbrokers. The campaign says it will air nationally. We'll take a look at the merits of each individual's "corrupt" status as well as their connection to Obama in turn.


Daley and Nightly


The ad begins with a statement that Obama was "born of the corrupt Chicago political machine," then shows Obama saying that Chicago toughened him up. The announcer returns, saying, "His economic adviser: William Daley. Lobbyist. Mayor's brother."


McCain-Palin 2008: "Chicago Machine"


Announcer: Barack Obama.
Born of the corrupt Chicago political machine.

Barack Obama: In terms of my toughness, look first of all, I come from Chicago.

Announcer: His economic adviser, William Daley. Lobbyist. Mayor's brother.
His money man, Tony Rezko. Client. Patron. Convicted Felon.
His "political godfather." Emil Jones. Under ethical cloud.
His governor, Rod Blagojevich. A legacy of federal and state investigations.

With friends like that, Obama is not ready to lead.

John McCain: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.First off, Obama wasn't born in Chicago and didn't grow up there. He didn't arrive in the city until 1985, after he finished college. As a community organizer, he often fought City Hall. His rise in politics there wasn't a product of grooming by the Chicago machine, though he made allies of some machine politicans along the way.

Second, William Daley isn't "his economic adviser." He may be one of his advisers in that area, but look at some of the others: Former Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, former National Economic Adviser Gene Sperling, former chairpersons of the Council of Economic Advisers Laura Tyson and Joseph Stiglitz, former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker, and Berkshire Hathaway Chairman and CEO Warren Buffett.

Not that Daley is without qualifications himself. He's a former secretary of commerce. But the ad's likely intent here is to remind viewers of the mayoral administration of Daley's father, Richard J., which, though the elder Daley himself was never indicted, was riddled with corruption and patronage politics. The Boss died in office in 1976, almost a decade before Obama arrived in Chicago.

William Daley's brother, Richard M., is the current mayor of Chicago. He hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing, though some members of his administration have been.

But William Daley, the Daley mentioned in this ad, has had no such scandal or corruption allegations leveled against him. The implication to the contrary is false.


Rezko Redux


The ad lists convicted Illinois businessman Tony Rezko as Obama's "money man," "client" and "patron." Rezko was convicted on 16 counts of wire fraud and mail fraud in June. But Obama has not been seen with Rezko for some time, and he donated the former businessman's $11,500 in campaign contributions to charity in 2007.

As we concluded back in December 2007, "Obama has a relationship with Rezko that dates back many years, but there’s no indication Obama did anything improper."


The Godfather


The ad then turns to Obama's "political godfather" Emil Jones, who the ad says is "under ethical cloud." Jones certainly has been a close confidant of Obama and has used the "godfather" verbiage himself – though the relationship wasn't always so cozy. Obama described him as an "old ward heeler" in his memoir.

But the ethics charge could use a bit more explanation.

The words "under an ethical cloud" do appear in a June 16 Associated Press story about Jones. The full quote is:

AP: Another Obama mentor, state Senate President Emil Jones, serves under an ethical cloud. He has several family members on the state payroll and uses his clout to aid their business interests.

Another AP report said: "Jones has relatives on the state payroll, steers state grants to favorite organizations and uses his clout to punish enemies and bury GOP legislation." But there have been no indictments, investigations or serious inquiries into any improper behavior by Jones.


O Governor, My Governor


Finally, the ad turns to "his governor, Rod Blagojevich" and his "legacy of state and federal investigations." His governor? Ooooh. (Cue scary organ music.)

The Democratic governor certainly has been besieged by investigations, controversy and other charges of impropriety. But his connections to Obama are not substantial. Obama is just one of more than 13 million Illinois residents of whom it could also be said that Blagojevich is "their governor."

In a July 2008 New Yorker article, Illinois Democratic Rep. Rahm Emanuel did tell a reporter that "he and Obama 'participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod [Blagojevich] was running for governor.' " But there hasn't been evidence of much contact since then. In fact, the ethics bill that Obama spearheaded while in the Ilinois Legislature was a response to some of Blagojevich's transgressions. And the Chicago Tribune reported that:

Chicago Tribune (Sept. 19): The embattled Illinois governor was shunned by the Obama camp at the Democratic National Convention in Denver last month while several potential opponents to a possible Blagojevich third-term bid were showcased with floor speeches.

Hardly favorable actions from Obama toward "his governor." And no less an authority than Karl Rove said on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes" yesterday, "Blagojevich only has the most tenuous ties to Obama."

– by Viveca Novak and Justin Bank
Sources
"Obama donates Rezko Contribution," Associated Press. 1 June 2007.

Scott, Janny, "In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd," New York Times. 30 July 2007.

Mitch, Robert and Pearson, Rick, "Blagojevich warns Obama of GOP trap," Chicago Tribune. 19 Sept 2008.

Posted by: need4trh | September 24, 2008 11:47 AM

President Johnson, President Roosevelt, President Washington, President Cliton, President Kennedy, and President Obama? What the hell kind of name is that to run America? I could see President Obama as a leader for a Middle East country, but not America.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 11:44 AM

Preview of Friday's debate.

Moderator: Sen. McCain, can you explain the operational and cognitive perspectives on each of the former soviet republics?

Moderator: Sen. Obama, what is the capital of France?

Seriously, will the media give Obama the questions in advance? Or, is Obama himself writing the questions that will be asked of him?

Posted by: Preview | September 24, 2008 11:43 AM

STRANGE DAYS

"If the media were fair and not on a mission to get an extreme liberal minority Senator with hardly any experience elected, than McCain would win in a landslide."

So what you are saying g here is you support the biased media in their elating a novice to the position of the presidency? Yea you’re a real peach! If others don’t agree with your line of reasoning they are somehow subhuman? I think you better put the flavor aid back in that fridgerator you don’t claim to live in, as you are either poison by the Obama’s hypnosis or you intentionally choose to neglect the facts of what is considered a fair election. Do you work for ACORN on the side too?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 11:42 AM

"Hey strange days, enough of the kool-aid. Barney Frank, democrat head of the banking committee, and the rest of them favored giving loans to people for houses that they knew couldn't afford them."

It probably would take a giant, animated pitcher bursting through a wall offering a colored, sugar-water, multi-drug cocktail to believe anything someone with the moniker 'democraps' says. Such are the mighty fictions of the right wing nuts in this country that even Tolkien himself could have learned from their creativity.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:41 AM

Now, I really have to go out, but want to say that I think McCain really dropped the ball. The fact that he wasn't ready for this economic collapse is totally clueless. It's unsurprising that Obama wasn't ready, but for McCain to not be ready to deal with an economic collapse prior to Nov 4, is shocking.

It's one thing for Obama, who has no real compelling record of being competent in anything except climbing the ladder to benefit himself, to be clueless & caught off guard. But for McCain, with his depth & experience, that can only mean that he truly is an economic idiot. Since he's already mature, experienced, etc, and since he had plenty of opportunity to strengthen himself this year in economic matters, we can only conclude that this is a chronic, permanent condition of economic idiocy on McCain's part. I.e. we can conclude that he won't or can't improve his ability to lead on economics. And that is bad, given what we face.

What I find puzzling is that there appears to be some strange movements in the electoral map at RCP despite the strengthening in Obama's numbers. I.e. there are more "undecided" states than before. It suggests that Obama's support may be deepening in those states he already leads in. As the RCP map turns more and more grey, it seem to me that there are more and more "undecideds" instead of actual gains for Obama in those swing states.

Finally, we can't trust polls anymore now that the media has started with its "racist" chants again. The shift in polling may be due to people becoming reluctant to tell the truth about their votes again. It seems to me, during primary season, every time the media started chanting "racism", it only hurt Obama with white voters who became offended, but another effect was that the polling became more optimistic for Obama than the results later justified. I.e. the "racism" expectations stirred up by the press and the Obama campaign was associated with inaccurate polling, in my recollection.


RCP electoral map showing spreading grey "undecided" regions:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 24, 2008 11:40 AM

The surprise from the Palin pick is fading and Obama is starting to look like the more serious candidate -- despite his thin resume.

http://www.politicswithagrin.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 11:36 AM

You're right McGetridoff. Except it's spelled Phil Gramm.
That's Gramm of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that deregulated investment banks.
That's Phil Gramm, who led the Senate Banking Committee which sponsored the Act.
That's Gramm, who after he left the Senate, joined UBS Warburg, at the time the investment banking arm of the largest Swiss bank.
Phil Gramm registered as a UBS lobbyist in 2004 and began advising John S. McCain as his top economic adviser and general co-chairman during McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.
And, yes, that's the same Phil Gramm who called us a nation of "whiners".

Posted by: Jackie | September 24, 2008 11:36 AM

NBC just awarded the election to Obama. Katie Couric will be swearing him in this afternoon.

Posted by: Breaking News | September 24, 2008 11:36 AM

STRANGE DAYS HERE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE REASONS I WONT VOTE FOR HIM, RACE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! AND HIS LEGAL CAPABILITIES SURELY DON’T SWAY MY OPINION. HE SCARES THE HELL OUT OF ME THAT’S WHY!

Obama's Not Exactly's:
1.) Selma March Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965. (Google'Obama Selma ' for his full March 4, 2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.)
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.
4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya . It is the first widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo Oba ma, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out the following link for verification of that....and for more.
Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth.
5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT EXACTLY, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya , his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). From....and for more....go to.....
http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-American,_only_6.25%25_African
7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.
4-3-08 Article 'Obama was 'quite religious in islam'' http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=60559
8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book).
February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a year ago: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as 'one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.' This is just one example of what Pamela is talking about when she says 'Obama's narrative is being altered, enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts.'
9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one teacher says you could speak the language.
10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia , I Have More Foreign Experience - NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.
11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies.
12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT EXACTLY, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.
13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT EXACTLY, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.
14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.
15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT EXACTLY, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.
16.) Voting 'Present' is Common In Illinois Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.
17.) Oops, I Misvoted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.
18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT EXACTLY, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.
21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it took just 14 days from start to finish.
22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.
23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.
24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT EXACTLY, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens . You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.
25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.
26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.
27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.
28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA - NOT EXACTLY, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.
29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - NOT EXACTLY, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction off Israel .
30.) I Want All Votes To Count - NOT EXACTLY, you said let the delegates decide.
31.) I Want Americans To Decide - NOT EXACTLY, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.
32.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - NOT EXACTLY, you passed 26, most of which you didn't write yourself.
33.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - NOT EXACTLY, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.
34.) I Don't Take PAC Money - NOT EXACTLY, you take loads of it.
35.) I don't Have Lobbysists - NOT EXACTLY, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting.
36.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - NOT EXACTLY, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.
37.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - NOT EXACTLY, you weren't in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time.
38.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - NOT EXACTLY, your plan leaves us all to pay for the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy it.
39.) My uncle liberated Auschwitz concentration camp - NOT EXACTLY, your mother had no brothers and the Russan army did the liberating.
Posted by Tennessee Conservative Watch

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 11:34 AM

Now, they are saying that racism is why its close. Well, it was close in 2000 and 2004 too. It's close only because the media is in the tank for Obama; otherwise, McCain wins huge. The media elites can't believe that so many folks want to vote for McCain/Palin, both of whom are mavericks and reformers. Besides, McCain suffered through five years of hell for us. I feel I owe him my vote. Obama is highly partisan and hasn't done anything of any substance except for run his mouth. And then, he needs a teleprompter or else he fumbles all over his words.

Posted by: suzie | September 24, 2008 11:32 AM

Hey strange days, enough of the kool-aid. Barney Frank, democrat head of the banking committee, and the rest of them favored giving loans to people for houses that they knew couldn't afford them.

Posted by: democraps
----------------------------------------
WTF? what are you smoking? You're an imbicile.

Posted by: TruePatriot | September 24, 2008 11:32 AM

"Joyce

it matters not to me! obama could have successfully defended Jesus Christ, himself, and he still wouldn't get my vote!"

And there you have it folks, I don't know what to say. Is it because he's black? Is it because the writer is working on their fifth Bloody Mary of the morning? Is is because a rare phobia of people who's names begin with "B"? Who knows and who cares? Why even talk to such a person? You might as well speak to your refrigerator, you open the door, light goes on, close the door, light goes off, stays cold on the inside. Its not going to do anything its not built to do.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:32 AM

remember when

Long before he ever ran for political office, Obama wrote a book about himself and his amazing journey from messed up kid to his life at the time of writing the book. It was quite an epic, considering he was 34 at the time.
In the book, called "Dreams From My Father," he writes that he used marijuana and cocaine ("maybe a little blow".) Oddly enough, he writes that he didn't try heroin because he didn't like the pusher who was selling it. In his defense he stated that "Teenage boys are frequently confused." When consulted, classmates confer that “Barry Obama” was no more confused than anyone else, and that “hey it was the seventies, everyone was doing it!”

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 11:30 AM

"Joyce

it matters not to me! obama could have successfully defended Jesus Christ, himself, and he still wouldn't get my vote!"

And there you have it folks, I don't know what to say. Is it because he's black? Is it because the writer is working on their fifth Bloody Mary of the morning? Is is because a rare phobia of people who's names begin with "B"? Who knows and who cares? Why even talk to such a person? You might as well speak to your refrigerator, you open the door, light goes on, close the door, light goes off, stays cold on the inside. Its not going to do anything its not built to do.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:30 AM

Hey strange days, enough of the kool-aid. Barney Frank, democrat head of the banking committee, and the rest of them favored giving loans to people for houses that they knew couldn't afford them.

Posted by: democraps | September 24, 2008 11:23 AM

This poll is clearly an outlier, but if McCain doesn't get off this socialism kick he's on, it will become very real.

The nonsense he's spewing doesn't attract anyone -- it only alienates his supporters.

Posted by: info | September 24, 2008 11:23 AM

"If the media were fair and not on a mission to get an extreme liberal minority Senator with hardly any experience elected, than McCain would win in a landslide."

McCain has a lot of experience causing problems. Its like putting a drunk behind the wheel of a car and then telling people not worry - he's got a lot of experience.

Posted by: Stange Days | September 24, 2008 11:23 AM

Joyce

it matters not to me! obama could have successfully defended Jesus Christ, himself, and he still wouldn't get my vote!

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 11:22 AM

MCCAIN CONFERANCE CALL 3:00 EST

"Well, my republican cronies, and Karl Rove my friend, and of course all of you of that believe and do anything I say constituency, um 'THE RELIABLES", The PoLls say we have lost our bounce Sarah Palin's now Sarah Fail and worst of all they've pinned me down on that estrogen loaded show 'THE VIEW', and PSYCHOLOGICALLY attached John McCain and LIAR in the same sentence... I'll never live that down in a million years", uh why did I go on there, and why did I go on that Ellen Degenres show. "Ithought Karl said we OWNED the media?" "Now every woman and woman, who's a lesbian knows their concerns are not my concerns, and their issues are non issues.

'Ah, F--- God and the Religiuos Conservative Right, I knew I shouldn't have gotten involved with them. Thier Hypocrisy only highlights my Hypocrisy", F---, anyway THE RNC (THE ONLY TRUE GOD) have graciously given us a new PROPAGANDA ad about the UPPITY N---- Obama and well, as usual, I'p John McCain and I support this most recent of the many Propaganda ads we have released upon this America which I in fact hate...."


ISN'T THIS JUST LIKE THE
RHETORIC THAT GOES ON BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AT CAMP Mcshame?

Fact check issued this statement responding to another McCain/RNC...OUTRIGHT LIE AND SMEAR of senator Obama. This makes McCain 39 Obama 7. Ads that are not quite the truth. Again McCain 69 Obama 2 ads that are evil and blantly misleading and and designed to asolutely defile the character of the opponent.

From factcheck.org

Guilt and Associations


September 23, 2008
McCain once again tries to tar Obama with the controversies of others.
Summary
A McCain-Palin ad says that Obama was "born of the corrupt Chicago political machine" and implies that the candidate himself is corrupt by association with four local political figures. But the ad's implication and many of its supporting details are false. In fact, this is a particularly EGREGIOUS example of RICHOCHET SLING:

William Daley, the first figure mentioned in the ad, is indeed related to the other famous Chicago Daleys, but he's never been accused of any wrongdoing. And the former commerce secretary isn't Obama's only economic adviser, as the ad implies.


Emil Jones, Illinois state Senate leader, may indeed have been Obama's "political godfather." But he, too, hasn't been charged with or even seriously accused of misdeeds despite the ad's claim of an "ethical cloud."


Obama did have a past relationship with real estate developer Tony Rezko, but he is no longer Obama's "money man." Obama hasn't been associated with him since his indictment for wire fraud, bribery, money laundering and attempted extortion, and Obama donated all of the disgraced businessman's previous campaign contributions to charity.
Rod Blagojevich has been touched by plenty of scandal but his relationship with Obama doesn't extend much beyond being "his governor." In fact, Obama has worked on ethics legislation triggered by some of the Blagojevich's questionable moves.
Most important, the ad offers no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama himself in connection with any of these relationships, however close or distant.


Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:

Desktop users Mobile users


Please consider supporting FactCheck.org and expanding our audience by Digging this article:

SUFFICE TO SAY: Even though McShame and his Cronies know this is an extremely EGREGIOUS SMEAR AND LIE, they've JOINED in and determined within their very own HEARTS, that this is the ONLY WAY THE REBUSHAGAINS CAN WIN this thing, by LIES SMEAR AND FEARS AND GUESS WHAT

"I'm John McBush 3rd term, JOINER, CONFORMIST, hypocrite and BALDFACED LIAR, and I support these LIES, FEAR, AND SMEAR CAMPIGN PROPAGANDA ADS AND APPROVE THESE tactics"

Want a little more? Check out my page 'THE FACT OF THE MATTER' at 4:00pm PST. http://www.need4trth.blogspot.com


Nation we can not afford the politics of yesterday. The Politics of, say and not act, do evil and call it something else, LIE and smile for the camera as if to say, "aha I fooled you!!"

Say no to McCain Palin in '08, on election night give them the full throttled United popoulace answer of "not four more" "not 4 mour years but 3 more months"

These guys are the BIGGEST COOKS AND LIARS WE'VE EVER SEEN.

Posted by: need4trth | September 24, 2008 11:22 AM

MCCAIN CONFERANCE CALL 3:00 EST

"Well, my republican cronies, and Karl Rove my friend, and of course all of you of that believe and do anything I say constituency, um 'THE RELIABLES", The PoLls say we have lost our bounce Sarah Palin's now Sarah Fail and worst of all they've pinned me down on that estrogen loaded show 'THE VIEW', and PSYCHOLOGICALLY attached John McCain and LIAR in the same sentence... I'll never live that down in a million years", uh why did I go on there, and why did I go on that Ellen Degenres show. "Ithought Karl said we OWNED the media?" "Now every woman and woman, who's a lesbian knows their concerns are not my concerns, and their issues are non issues.

'Ah, F--- God and the Religiuos Conservative Right, I knew I shouldn't have gotten involved with them. Thier Hypocrisy only highlights my Hypocrisy", F---, anyway THE RNC (THE ONLY TRUE GOD) have graciously given us a new PROPAGANDA ad about the UPPITY N---- Obama and well, as usual, I'p John McCain and I support this most recent of the many Propaganda ads we have released upon this America which I in fact hate...."


ISN'T THIS JUST LIKE THE
RHETORIC THAT GOES ON BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AT CAMP Mcshame?

Fact check issued this statement responding to another McCain/RNC...OUTRIGHT LIE AND SMEAR of senator Obama. This makes McCain 39 Obama 7. Ads that are not quite the truth. Again McCain 69 Obama 2 ads that are evil and blantly misleading and and designed to asolutely defile the character of the opponent.

From factcheck.org

Guilt and Associations


September 23, 2008
McCain once again tries to tar Obama with the controversies of others.
Summary
A McCain-Palin ad says that Obama was "born of the corrupt Chicago political machine" and implies that the candidate himself is corrupt by association with four local political figures. But the ad's implication and many of its supporting details are false. In fact, this is a particularly EGREGIOUS example of RICHOCHET SLING:

William Daley, the first figure mentioned in the ad, is indeed related to the other famous Chicago Daleys, but he's never been accused of any wrongdoing. And the former commerce secretary isn't Obama's only economic adviser, as the ad implies.


Emil Jones, Illinois state Senate leader, may indeed have been Obama's "political godfather." But he, too, hasn't been charged with or even seriously accused of misdeeds despite the ad's claim of an "ethical cloud."


Obama did have a past relationship with real estate developer Tony Rezko, but he is no longer Obama's "money man." Obama hasn't been associated with him since his indictment for wire fraud, bribery, money laundering and attempted extortion, and Obama donated all of the disgraced businessman's previous campaign contributions to charity.
Rod Blagojevich has been touched by plenty of scandal but his relationship with Obama doesn't extend much beyond being "his governor." In fact, Obama has worked on ethics legislation triggered by some of the Blagojevich's questionable moves.
Most important, the ad offers no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama himself in connection with any of these relationships, however close or distant.


Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:

Desktop users Mobile users


Please consider supporting FactCheck.org and expanding our audience by Digging this article:

SUFFICE TO SAY: Even though McShame and his Cronies know this is an extremely EGREGIOUS SMEAR AND LIE, they've JOINED in and determined within their very own HEARTS, that this is the ONLY WAY THE REBUSHAGAINS CAN WIN this thing, by LIES SMEAR AND FEARS AND GUESS WHAT

"I'm John McBush 3rd term, JOINER, CONFORMIST, hypocrite and BALDFACED LIAR, and I support these LIES, FEAR, AND SMEAR CAMPIGN PROPAGANDA ADS AND APPROVE THESE tactics"

Want a little more? Check out my page 'THE FACT OF THE MATTER' at 4:00pm PST. http://www.need4trth.blogspot.com


Nation we can not afford the politics of yesterday. The Politics of, say and not act, do evil and call it something else, LIE and smile for the camera as if to say, "aha I fooled you!!"

Say no to McCain Palin in '08, on election night give them the full throttled United popoulace answer of "not four more" "not 4 mour years but 3 more months"

These guys are the BIGGEST COOKS AND LIARS WE'VE EVER SEEN.

Posted by: need4trth | September 24, 2008 11:22 AM

Obama said, "We live in the greatest nation on earth. Will you help me change it?"

Joe Biden said "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America."

There's the old joke about how one knows when a lawyer is lying, the punch line is, when their lips move or when they speak....either way, we have only one side represented by the legal profession....
Biden/Obama...

Obama has a half-sister. Anyone seen a picture of her? She says she’s an advisor, but she’s kept securely locked in a closet, and only allowed to be heard when she is needed to deny Obama is a Muslim.

Posted by: starryperdun | September 24, 2008 11:21 AM

Everyone posting on this blog needs to read torrito's comment that commences with "i'm an old retired guy."

This is exactly what we need to hear from the voice of "experience."

Posted by: jeff777 | September 24, 2008 11:21 AM

If Obama is so great, how come the media covers up his shady past, lies for him, and gives him softball questions. Where I come from, something which they have to sell you on is not worth buying.

Posted by: gary | September 24, 2008 11:20 AM

Isn't the Democratic party all about raising taxes and government control? I guess people want to have the government control their destiny.
At least McCain tells it like it is rather then shoving hope down peoples throats just for the votes.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 11:18 AM

"With Democrats in charge of both Houses of Congress and heading all the committees, they intentionally did nothing about the financial industry so that the could blame Bush and the Republicans."

You must have forgotten about the eighty some-odd filibusters and Bush's veto mania. Or you're just playing make-believe, which is what the McCain candidacy is pretty much about these days.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:17 AM

Please forgive the spelling, I went to public schools, which liberals like Obama have ruined. Some are now not correcting incorrectly spelled words in order to protect the child's self-esteem.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 11:17 AM

brock101

the national enquirer! how funny! want some of my special jimmy jones grape flavored flavor aid? i know this neat place down in Jonestown, Guyana you can go hang out. i cant believe you quoted the enquirer as a reputable source of information. I bet you have been abducted by UFO's too. Obama had you at hello!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 11:16 AM

gettyleigh...
Try to keep up. This statement was released by the University of Chicago last March....

"The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

Posted by: Joyce | September 24, 2008 11:15 AM

In 2006, the Democrats said vote for them and things would change. Well, things have changed, for the worse. With Democrats in charge of both Houses of Congress and heading all the committees, they intentionally did nothing about the financial industry so that the could blame Bush and the Republicans. An Obama administration with a Democratic controlled Congress is the scariest scenario that I can envision.

Posted by: Jim | September 24, 2008 11:14 AM

To Anonymous:
Please learn how to spell.

Posted by: Wash. DC | September 24, 2008 11:13 AM

McCain took the American public for a ride in the 1980s with his association with Charles Keating and masterminding the biggest savings and loans meltdown and bailout to that date. The US taxpayers were forced to fork out $200 Billion to bail out Lincoln Savings and Loans in 1989. Now McCain is at it again. All his advisors have one hand in the cookie jar while McCain makes us look the other way by putting a cheerleader as a running mate. This time the meltdown is so huge that no amount of new regulation will be able to clean up the mess, Phill Graham and McCain have created by their deregulation of the financial instituitions.

It is now revealed that McPhony has no clothes. He is as fake as it comes.

Posted by: McGetridoff | September 24, 2008 11:12 AM

And McCain continues to talk taxes like the current Admin. How's that working for you? With his numerous houses, cars, and planes he has no idea how to fix your economic troubles. Remember he's been in the Senate for longer than some have been alive. Why hasn't he done anything since? Like the Admin, he has no clue. He's still living in the 60s it's obvious-anti technology, no clue on the economy (his own words) and his own wealth tells the story.

Posted by: solsenz | September 24, 2008 11:12 AM

To the intelectually-deficient "Anonymous" who compared the golden-parachutes awarded to Raines and Johnson (of Fannie) to the the payout Fiorna received on her way out the door at HP:

Small problem with your comparison, genius. Taxpayers are having to bail out Fannie & Freddie, meaning you and I are essentially paying those big bonuses to Obama's friends via our taxes. No such bailout is needed for HP.

Any other nonsense you want to add?

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 11:11 AM

"I don’t deny the Bush Administration’s involvement; but you better wake up to the realities of life, as this downturn has been a long time coming and it just happened to land on the GOP’s watch!"

14 years of congressional control and 8 years of a Republican presidency... unless you're talking about geological time. Clinton did latch on to deregulation, but it didn't come from his side of the fence. Bush had total republican control of congress for four years and he did nothing except make the situation worse. In fixing this problem the republicans have a terribly shallow bench.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:11 AM

If the media were fair and not on a mission to get an extreme liberal minority Senator with hardly any experience elected, than McCain would win in a landslide. In 2000, McCain was the media's darling because they didn't want Bush. Now, the media has turned on McCain in favor of their new darling. In interviews, Obama and Biden get the softball treatment.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 11:10 AM

McCain comes across as a "cross old man" with fews specifics or metrics as to "his plan".

And for the surge..well, I was there..the increase in troopers in Baghdad did make a difference. But, with some 80,000 Son's of Iraq on the US payroll..that did the most to calm things down...families were just not eating and the civilian security offered along with money made a huge difference. Couple all that with the Sadr Army standing down is what made the violence come to a halt. What will happen when the money stops or the Shia begin to bleed again the Sunni's is another issue.

Keep in mind the Bush and I suspect the McCain position early on was to disband the Iraqi Army..this strategic decision is in part what caused the insurgency to increase substantially, especially in late 2004 and 2005. I never hear much from McCain on those issues.

In short, I just don't believe this guy and afraid McCain will place our country into another conflict someplace..somewhere.

Posted by: LTC US Army | September 24, 2008 10:53 AM

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I've heard about people being paid in Iraq but it's hard to find out the details. Are people being paid to fight or not to fight. And why aren't the Iraqi's using their oil revenue.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 11:10 AM

Thanks Hemi...I should have remembered!

Posted by: Joyce | September 24, 2008 11:08 AM

hemi

• Abraham Lincoln is regarded by most authorities as America’s greatest president, despite the fact that many others in that office had superior education and experience.

For all of Obama’s schooling he has never really practiced law for a substantial length of time, and his claims of being a professor of law have been debunked, as he was actually only a senior lecturer on leave from Harvard. So what he actually took away from that education is largely untested.

America has only ever had one PHD as a president, Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was a great president, but despite Wilson's best efforts to reconcile the US and Germany after WWI, the Treaty of Versailles, left both the Germans and many Americans bitterly disillusioned and he left office broken and defeated. Obama can't hold a candle to Wilson.

No amount of education can prepare you to be a leader, leaders are born not made.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 11:08 AM

McCain is'nt close. Even the racist can't stop him from being president. Young people will make up for the old bigots. The youth understand that McCain don't give a damn about anything but getting elected.

He is 72 years old with skin cancer. Sarah palin is an average skank that cheated on first dude. http:nationalenquirer.com. They were right about John Edwards.

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 11:07 AM

Did the "Chicago Machine" who helped Obama send money to the Middle East?

McCain/Palin will bring this country back rather then a person who has a Muslim last name and attended a racist church. Come on people Obama scares the hell out of me and if you want to be friends with the people that want to destroy us then vote Obama.

Posted by: Red/White/Blue | September 24, 2008 11:04 AM

Keep on trying to convince yourselves. Why is McCain even close? It says everything a Obama. Why is Govenor Palin such a threat? Maybe not selecting Senator Clinton will be the turning point of this election!!!!!

Posted by: kt | September 24, 2008 11:02 AM

Three cheers for Congress!! They are saying no thanks to the Bush demands for immediate $700 billion with no strings attached.

A normal person, say me, could take $150 billion and work through one company at a time, LOOKING AT THE BOOKS and never go more than $10 billion in the red. If we are buying mortgages, we get to evaluate them one at a time, not as 'bundles". Yes it takes time, but bundles of mortgages are what got the big boys into the trouble they are in. THEY DONT GET TO MAKE THE RULES. Or else, they dont get our money.

We dont have to give the store away. Its our money, and we can vote NO to any congress person who votes with Bush to be hysterical.


Posted by: Bruce Becker | September 24, 2008 11:01 AM

McKeating Five the Deregulator Man and his army of hideous sycophants are trying to spin him as somehow having any viability in this crisis by either providing insane fictions about Obama or pretending he isn't one of the four horsemen of this financial apocalypse. Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of people I wish were running instead of Obama, but McCain is possibly the last human being on the plant you want heading up the show in a banking sector crisis.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 11:00 AM

It is too bad that the general public doesn;t undrstand this financail crisis. The heart of the matter is the lowering of underwriting standards by Fane Mae and Freddy Mack. McCain proposed legislation to curtail then in 05 and it was voted down. Mostely becasue these institutions lined the pockets of politticains with Political donations and who knows what else. Obama while only in the Senate for a few short years was the numbers one taker of these donations. It will be very interesting to see what the FBI investigations reveal. I beleive that Obama is corrupt. There is a visoe on the web that shows the CEO of Freddy Mac or Fanny Mai prasing his great work as far as I am concerned that places Obama on day one in the heart and source of the financial crisis. Any assertion to the contrary is rediculous. McCain despite having lobbyist paid fromm these enties tried to curtali there activites. McCain is something of a rareity in politics. A politicain with integrety. Obama will go with whatever is expetdient to get him ahead. Voting present so his voting record can't be faulted. Proposing huge tax cuts to buy votes. Then saying maybe we can;t institute these palns right now becaause the economy is hurting. He is a flip flopper and will say whatever he thinks the voters wnat to hear. McCain for example said that we should send more troops to Iraq even though it was politically unpopular. Both candidates will get us out of Iraq only One McCain has and will gotten the US out of Iraq with a somewhat stabilized Iraq. Vote for McCain

Posted by: anonoumous | September 24, 2008 11:00 AM

The American people are smart enough to realize that the people who got you into the mess are hardly the best people for getting us out of it. The distrust of the Republicans is palatable and I think many Americans feel that they have been sold the Brooklyn bridge so that they can jump off it.
McCain;s behavior accentuates his problem, he has been far too erratic and angry rather than focused and energetic.

Posted by: nclwtk | September 24, 2008 11:00 AM

Snap! Andrea D Hussein Davies

“YOU'RE ALL TOO STUPID TO BE ALIVE. YOUR HATE KEEPS YOU GOING!”
If that’s not the pot calling the kettle black! I’m an 11th generation American, and a veteran, my family having escaped the horrors of persecution in 1700 Germany and France at the end of the 30 years war, they made it to America with the spirit of freedom running through their veins. Since then a lot of them have gave their all to ensure that freedom existed for posterity; freedom in America, and abroad. Sorry that you would rather see your sons and daughters live a life dominated by fear and oppression vs having them fight to preserve their way of life. Don’t worry lady, I’ll send my children off to war so you can sit back , with your conscientious objector mentality, and enjoy the blessings of liberty that my family’s blood has been spilt for, and while my kids lay their lives on the line. You don’t have to contribute a thing; after all I wouldn’t expect a democrat, to fight for their rights to run their mouth.

And another thing, if you think that the republicans are solely responsible for the economy’s melt down, you’re either drunk on the grape flavored flavor-aid or ignorant. You better look at your neighbors who bought into loans that they couldn’t afford and the people who gave them those loans; you better look at Alan Greenspan under the Clinton Administration, you better look at the band aid on the economy’s downturn after the dot com bubble burst in the late 90’s, and consider that congress has been controlled by the democrats for the last two years. I don’t deny the Bush Administration’s involvement; but you better wake up to the realities of life, as this downturn has been a long time coming and it just happened to land on the GOP’s watch!

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 10:59 AM

Perhaps this trend is also payback for McCain spending the last month producing malicious advertisements against his opponent and keeping his VP choice in a bubble so she doesn't have to explain her positions to the American people.

Posted by: toldyouso | September 24, 2008 10:58 AM

John...
The majority of our presidents have been lawyers. Obama graduated at the top of his class at Harvard, taught constitutional law and practiced as a civil rights lawyer. John McCain - like George W. Bush - did not have the grades to even get into law school. McCain does not have the temperament or the intellectual capacity to be president. We certainly don't need another president like GWB, who "goes by his gut" because he can't or won't weigh and digest complicated factual information.

Posted by: Joyce | September 24, 2008 10:47 AM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

I'm sorry my friend, but you got it all wrong. George W Bush looks in to your soul.

Posted by: Hemi | September 24, 2008 10:56 AM

Tony...
Barack Obama bought and paid for his own house with his own money from the book he wrote himself.
What has John McCain run? Without his father-in-law's money and connections, we would never have heard of John McCain. Did you know Big Daddy Jim Hensley served time? And Hensley was rewarded handsomely by Kemper Marley for taking the rap for one of his mob pals? Yup. This is the great American success story Cindy and John like to brag about.

Posted by: Bill in AZ | September 24, 2008 10:55 AM

This is the clever article by George Will.

"Off with his head" said the Queen of Hearts.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will092308.php3

Posted by: Bruce Becker | September 24, 2008 10:54 AM

McCain comes across as a "cross old man" with fews specifics or metrics as to "his plan".

And for the surge..well, I was there..the increase in troopers in Baghdad did make a difference. But, with some 80,000 Son's of Iraq on the US payroll..that did the most to calm things down...families were just not eating and the civilian security offered along with money made a huge difference. Couple all that with the Sadr Army standing down is what made the violence come to a halt. What will happen when the money stops or the Shia begin to bleed again the Sunni's is another issue.

Keep in mind the Bush and I suspect the McCain position early on was to disband the Iraqi Army..this strategic decision is in part what caused the insurgency to increase substantially, especially in late 2004 and 2005. I never hear much from McCain on those issues.

In short, I just don't believe this guy and afraid McCain will place our country into another conflict someplace..somewhere.

Posted by: LTC US Army | September 24, 2008 10:53 AM

Bush scared Congress with WMD talk and got us into the mess in Iraq. Now he is doing the same thing with the banks, and wants a trillion dollars of our grandkids' future to bail out his banking buddies.

Call your representative and stop this.

"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself" - FDR on the depression. Do you get it?

Posted by: Gary B | September 24, 2008 10:53 AM

Add Mario Bartiromo to the list of journalists who have interviewed Gov. Palin. "The Hunt for Black Gold" will air tonight at 9 PM on CNBC, focusing on our own domestic oil and gas supply.

Did anyone else see Chuck Todd on the Today Show? He is no John King. I could do better just using my iPhone.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 10:53 AM

Anonymous

RU PAUL is the mother you wanted to breast feed you from his weener!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:51 AM


.

That is truly surprising!

Who knew that using Rove style tactics and basing your campaign on nothing but lies, slander and on not having a plan for America's future wouldn't be all that successful?

And here I was thinking 51% of Americans were mentally handicapped.

You mean that it actually matters that a presidential candidate has vision and leadership in a trying time?

Who could have known that keeping your VP choice under lock-down from the press and not letting her answer questions besides "why are you so great?" wouldn't work when you're running for president?

Silly me, I thought, brilliant, McCain surely would succeed running as Bush did in '04, by relying on the conservative base to push him over the 50% mark.

Oh well, I guess Americans have too much common sense. But we'll get them next time though.

-Richie rich

.
.
.

Posted by: el_barto | September 24, 2008 10:50 AM

Anonymous

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

NOT RU PAUL YOU CACATOID

Ru Paul is the mother that breast fed you from his weener!

Posted by: VOTE4RP | September 24, 2008 10:50 AM

Anonymous

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

NOT RU PAUL YOU CACATOID

Posted by: VOTE4RP | September 24, 2008 10:49 AM

John...
The majority of our presidents have been lawyers. Obama graduated at the top of his class at Harvard, taught constitutional law and practiced as a civil rights lawyer. John McCain - like George W. Bush - did not have the grades to even get into law school. McCain does not have the temperament or the intellectual capacity to be president. We certainly don't need another president like GWB, who "goes by his gut" because he can't or won't weigh and digest complicated factual information.

Posted by: Joyce | September 24, 2008 10:47 AM

I can't believe the public buys into Obamaeconomics. He couldn't buy his house right without help from a felon. He has never run any thing. He has no economic experience. Nada. Yet, some think he can run a US economy just because he's a Democrat. Give me a break. The man is mouthing his way all to the presidency. This is the first in the history of America.

Posted by: Tony | September 24, 2008 10:44 AM

Davis'firm is not failing and is not investigated by the FBI.
Obama's top economic adviser's' caused economic collapse and are being investigated by the FBI.

Who do you trust?

Vote Sen.McCain/Gov. Palin

Posted by: pete | September 24, 2008 10:42 AM

The post by "torrito" which start "I'm an old retired guy"... is simply brilliant.

The wisdom of the ages shines through- he sums up this campaign beautifully.

Refer to post:
toritto | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

Posted by: MartiniG | September 24, 2008 10:42 AM

"
Obama, Capitol Hill Leaders Speak as One on Crisis

» Top 35 Politics Articles
» Most Popular on washingtonpost.com
"

What were they doing before the crisis?
Enjoying the soft pillows?
Dancing with stars?


Posted by: jy2008 | September 24, 2008 10:41 AM

You can call him McPAIN, or You can call him McSAME, or you can call him McBUTTNUGGET, ... but ya doesn't has to call him McOLD!
[stolen from Ray J. Johnson;circa 1975]

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:40 AM

"President Bush's approval rating in a series of state polls released this week has taken another dip." The article doesn't mention that the Democratic Congress' approval rating is lower than Bush's. Slanted "news" from the Post? Never!

Posted by: Richdoode | September 24, 2008 10:40 AM

?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuPaul

"Vote for the candidate that actually has a record of having the balls to go against the grain...A true maverick...A true republican...A true american!

Vote Raul Paul!

Write it in if you have to!

Let the republicans know who the real candidate for change is!

Posted by: vote4RP | September 24, 2008 10:30 AM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:38 AM

Raul Paul is like a sugar coated cyanide pill.

Posted by: pete | September 24, 2008 10:37 AM

"If they push independents to say which party they lean more toward, we get this:

Democrats: 54
Republicans: 38

This poll is weighted from +10 to +16 in favor of the Democrats. That, folks, is what's called stacking the deck."

Naw, that's called "real life" because those independents are gonna vote. And it doesn't look like they're likely to vote for Palin.


"Lot's of blog reaction about the initial story that a major PR firm is most likely responsible for spreading smears about Sarah Palin..."

Yeah. She's a RADICAL MUSLIM -- show us her BIRTH CERTIFICATE -- now do ya get the picture? Right back atcha, GOP smearmeisters.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:34 AM

. In comparing PRESIDENTIAL candidates, McCain's nothing like Bush, it's ever so obvious that there is a distinct, distinction in many ways. Obimba's tactic of trying to join McCain and Bush at the hip is his only game. He has not come out on the campaign with any real concrete positions on the issues that matter, which tells me he is not his own man. His indecisiveness illustrates him as lacking the backbone to tell it like it is; and also shows that he is merely trying to court the vote of everyone, whether they agree with his values or not. In a sense he is trying to steal the vote. Further, Obama is tied to the Chicago Machine and his whole campaign is tied to that entity. His affiliation to nefarious characters is a detriment to his being able to run our country in an objective manner. I have voted both ways before, as I vote for the man not the party; frankly, Obama scares the hell out of me.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:34 AM

.
,
,
,
PRESIDENT-ELECT, MR. BARACK OBAMA
.
.
.
.

Posted by: Bob From an Elite State | September 24, 2008 10:34 AM

****ATTENTION *******

ANYONE WHO VOTED FOR BUSH IN 2004, ESPECIALLY, OWES THIS COUNTRY AN APOLOGY.

THESE REPUBLICANS HAVE LIED US INTO WAR
ROBBED US BLIND, AND NOW THEY WANT US TO PAY FOR IT

AND STILL, YOU PEOPLE WILL VOTE FOR THEM. YOU ALL DESERVE TO HAVE YOUR VOTING RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS, AND STILL, WITH YOUR BIGOTRY, YOU TALK ABOUT OBAMA LIKE HES A NI**ER!

I AM SO ANGRY, I'M SHAKING. YOU HAVE RUINED YOUR KIDS, GRANDKIDS AND THEIR GRANDKIDS FUTURES, AND STILL, SPEWING THE CRAP, THAT'S ALL YOU UNDERSTAND.

IF MCCAIN WINS, HE'LL START:
WAR WITH RUSSIA
WAR WITH IRAN
THE DRAFT
TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY PERMAMENT. AND EXACTLY, HOW HAVE YOU BENEFITTED FROM THESE TAX CUTS, YOU'RE PAYING FOR?

YOU HAVEN'T. YOU ARE DEAF, DUMB AND BLIND.
I PAY YOU HAVE KIDS AND GRANDKIDS, IF MCCAIN WINS AND THEY'RE UNDER 35 YRS OLD, THEY'RE DRAFTED! YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU GET, AND YOU HAVE GOTTEN, JUST WHAT YOU DESERVE.

YOU'RE ALL TOO STUPID TO BE ALIVE. YOUR HATE KEEPS YOU GOING! ICK

Posted by: Andrea D Hussein Davies | September 24, 2008 10:32 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:32 AM

ATTN: Conservatives:

Get used to it: Mr. President-Elect, Barack OBama

Posted by: Bob (gleeful in RI) | September 24, 2008 10:32 AM

It looks like the message has been heard! The economy is not; as the Bushies and John McCain would like us to believe, "fundamentally sound", but rather "fundamentally corrupt". All that blubber about growth is a flat out lie! Burying the American people in debt is not growth. Real growth is having some extra cash in the bank for that rainy day, not a stack of credit cards to top off with an extra 19% for a bottle of milk or a pair of school shoes. Real growth is actually having the deed to your home, not a stack of perpetual mortgages. Real growth is leaving some of you hard assets to your children when you check out, not a list of creditors to contact. Real growth is not built on debt but the assets that we hold.
The myth that your'e well off by buying something today for zero down and no payments till January next year is just a scam to hook you into a long term debt on something that will fall apart or be out of style way before you pay it off.

Even if you were to use McCains revised definition of his "fundamentally sound" comment meaning the American worker, it's still a lie. The American worker is in fact "fundamentally bankrupt", being paid less for more work. Having less health care than the people's representatives (or so they claim to be)and being sold a line about "working is good for you" while their bosses strip their company bare and slip off to the Bahamas to work at not working.

Pelosi said it right, "the party is over", but she forgot to say, "now clean up your mess."

Posted by: Johann Wagener | September 24, 2008 10:30 AM

John-

If you're such a genius about elections, why don't you explain to us how Bush was elected? I can guarantee he wasn't elected by the American people.

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 10:30 AM

Vote for the candidate that actually has a record of having the balls to go against the grain...A true maverick...A true republican...A true american!

Vote Raul Paul!

Write it in if you have to!

Let the republicans know who the real candidate for change is!

Posted by: vote4RP | September 24, 2008 10:30 AM

"
Joe Biden's history lesson off by 4 years and 1 president but ...
Los Angeles Times

Barack Obama tells running mate Joe Biden to keep quiet
New York Daily News
NY1 - The Right Perspective - AM850 - Times of Malta
"

Poor Biden. Simply say,
Do not talk if you do not know how to lie.

Posted by: jy2008 | September 24, 2008 10:30 AM

THIS JUST IN
Lot's of blog reaction about the initial story that a major PR firm is most likely responsible for spreading smears about Sarah Palin, that the advertisement being spread has links to David "Astroturf" Axelrod and the Obama campaign, and that this is evidence of a broader effort organized from the top to spread false rumors about Obama's political enemies.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194172.php

Posted by: GETTYLEIGH | September 24, 2008 10:28 AM

"After Republican incumbent Sen. Peter Fitzgerald announced on April 15, 2003 that he would not seek re-election, and his predecessor, Democrat Carol Moseley Braun declined to run for election, the Democratic and Republican primary elections held on March 16, 2004 included a total of 15 candidates, who combined to spend a record total of over $60 million seeking the open seat. The Democratic primary election, including seven candidates who combined to spend over $46 million, was the most expensive U.S. Senate primary election in history. Obama came from behind after the leading Democrat in the race, Blair Hull, became embroiled in a domestic abuse scandal. Obama won the primary with a landslide margin of 29% over his closest Democratic rival; his vote total equalled the combined total of votes for all eight candidates in the Republican primary."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois,_2004

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:28 AM

Here's how the Post conducted this phony poll...

Yes, it appears to be good news for Obama, but there's one issue with this poll, which was taken September 19 - 22. If you scroll way down to the section about party affiliation, this is what you'll find:

Party affiliation:

Democrat: 38%

Republican 28%

Independent: 29%

If they push independents to say which party they lean more toward, we get this:

Democrats: 54

Republicans: 38

This poll is weighted from +10 to +16 in favor of the Democrats. That, folks, is what's called stacking the deck.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:28 AM

McCain has insulated himself with some of the most corrupt lobbyists in Washington. The economy he claimed was strong is in ruins and he would have you believe it is Obama's fault. I've never seen a more sorry candidate for ANY office. Do they really think they're doing their party a favor by prancing Palin around for photo-ops and NO questions from the press. Its proof that the GOP have absolutely NO confidence in her whatsoever.

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 10:24 AM

Maybe some of you who support Obama should look at how he was elected to be Senator because it wasn't by the people, but by default. I guess having a lawyer running the country is better then having a war hero with more experience to do the job.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 10:23 AM

Seriously, Pete? You might want to work up your feigned outrage against McLobby and co.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/24davis.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Posted by: McCain is just soooo mavericky!! | September 24, 2008 10:21 AM

"Only last Friday, Senator John McCain was demanding that two former Fannie Mae executives and supporters of Senator Barack Obama, Franklin Raines and James Johnson, give back more than $20 million they each received in golden parachutes from the troubled company. “In a McCain-Palin administration, there will be no seat for these people at the policy-making table,’’ Mr. McCain declared. “They won’t even get past the front gate at the White House.’’

But on Tuesday, Mr. McCain had only praise for one of his own high-profile supporters, Carly Fiorina, the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard who received a severance package totaling $42 million after she was fired from the company in 2005.

Asked at a news conference if the same logic should not apply to Ms. Fiorina as to Mr. Raines and Mr. Johnson, Mr. McCain side-stepped the question."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/mccain-stands-by-fiorina/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:20 AM

Economy is main issue this year and shows how this Mcold is out of mind and out of touch
with poor judgment is that instead of choosing some one with economy experience
has got some one worse than himself.
Voting for McBush is as same as endorsing adultery, since McCheater who has admitted adultery while married to his first wife.
That marriage broke up after McCain met Cindy Hensley, who was young, rich and offered McCain
a base to launch the political career he was already contemplating. How could you trust this Cheater man to lead America?
Shame on Media that are in longer-standing love affair with McCain and are not showing that his temper gets the best of him,
he's mentally disturbed and time after time, has made statements that suggest he's either confused, unaware of the reality of the situation, or true liar.

Posted by: Tom | September 24, 2008 10:18 AM

Troopergate saga continues, can you say impartial? (part 1)

"Sarah Palin initially welcomed the investigation of accusations that she dismissed the state's public safety commissioner because he refused

to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper. "Hold me accountable," she said.

But she has increasingly opposed it since Republican presidential candidate John McCain tapped her as his running mate. The McCain campaign

dispatched a legal team to Alaska including O'Callaghan, a former top U.S. terrorism prosecutor from New York to bolster Palin's local

lawyer.

McCain-Palin presidential campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan announced today that Todd Palin would not appear, because he no longer believes

the Legislature's investigation is legitimate.

Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, said the McCain campaign is doing all it can to prevent the Legislature from completing a report on

whether the GOP's vice presidential nominee abused her power as governor."
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/530493.html


"Campaign spokesmen said Thursday that while the governor is resisting the legislative investigation, she is cooperating with a separate

inquiry the state Personnel Board is conducting.
The board, and not the Legislature, is the proper authority to look into Monegan's dismissal, they said."
http://www.adn.com/troopergate/story/530885.html


"But Palin's state-hired attorney Thomas Van Flein said the matter should be taken up by the state's personnel board. Van Flein and Palin

have asked the three members to resolve the dispute over the firing.

The board's members are appointed by the governor. One of the three, Debra English, was re-appointed by Palin in January. The other two

members - Laura Plenert and Alfred Tamagni, Sr - have served since 2004 and 2006, respectively."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/06/politics/main4422385.shtml

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:17 AM

No can do, ManUnitdFan.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 10:17 AM

Troopergate saga continues, can you say impartial? (part 2)

"Tamgani donated $400 to Palin for her 2006 race for Governor."
http://www.followthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/contributor.phtml?d=536479826


So her self appointed board, with at least one contributore to her past campaign is impartial?

I wonder what if any relationship the board members have to Palin as Palin is known for appointing her frineds to government positions.


"So when there was a vacancy at the state Agriculture Department, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the

$95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the

roughly $2 million agency.

Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five high school classmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages."
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-palin_14pol.ART.State.Edition1.26e9372.html


Also it looks like at least one board member shares Palin's depth of experience.


"PLENERT, LAURA
Food & Beverage, MCDONALDS OF KETCHIKAN, RESTAURANT MANAGER, MCDONALDS, AK, 2002 1 $500"

http://www.followthemoney.org/database/search.phtml?searchbox=Laura+Plenert

"Republican campaign officials indicated they are done answering questions about an investigation into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of

her public safety commissioner Tuesday, citing a request by a state investigator."

"He has asked to keep things confidential, so we will respect those wishes," campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton told reporters.

Palin has dropped an earlier pledge to cooperate with a probe by the state Legislature, with aides arguing it has been "tainted" by partisan

politics since she became Sen. John McCain's running mate. But Stapleton said Palin's lawyers have agreed to "general parameters of immediate

cooperation" with the investigation she requested from the state Personnel Board, which has hired Anchorage lawyer Timothy Petumenos to

conduct the inquiry."

"No date has been set for completing the personnel board probe, which Palin's campaign argues is the proper legal venue for the

investigation. Under state law, those investigations can take as long as two years.

Campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan said he believed Petumenos would act in "an expedited manner," but that results may not emerge before the

November elections.

"If that is concluded before the election, so be it. If that is concluded after the election, so be it," he said."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

I'm an old retired guy who doesn’t have to work and I can honestly say it won't matter to me in the long run who wins this election. At my age any election I participate in could be my last. I do believe however that the current administration has been the worst in my lifetime (born during FDR). I don't think anyone can rationally deny that. We have had 8 years of corruption, unnecessary war and shredding of the Constitution. Over the weekend we reached we suffered the worst economic meltdown since 1929. Now this party wants us to give them 4 more years so that John the "maverick" and St. Sarah of the Snows can fix Washington. ...like I was born yesterday.

If "small town working class" rust-belt voters in Ohio, Pa., Michigan and Indiana help re-elect the GOP then I for one don't want to hear anymore whining from them about their disappearing jobs and livelihoods, the high cost of college and gas, lack of health care etc. Let Johnnie's "patriotism" put food on your table. Go flip burghers!

Screw 'ya. Cling to your guns and religion. Pray to Jesus when you go hunting for a meal. Stay with that church and keep your weapon. You will need both the soup kitchen and the rifle. You will deserve what you get.

I got mine already. I live comfortably in the sunny South on a golf course, got my steady income, my "socialist" medicare and prescription drug coverage that you younger people wish you had but will never get under the Republicans. I sent my girls to college and they are successfully out on their own. The world won't run out of gas before I go and the planet won't get too hot.

A McCain election ain't gonna hurt me!

As Johnny Carson used to say - I upped my lifestyle - up yours!

God helps those who help themselves - if you're in deep doodoo economically and you vote Republican for their "values", you deserve it.

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

Anonymous

i suspect you missed the story about Palin drawing 60,000, yes that is sixty thousand, at the villages in florida

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

While the brick helps to hold up the building, the brick has no brain, and cannot know what is going on inside the house. The house of bricks can withstand the wind currents created by the Big Bad Wolf, but the wolf is always lurking somewhere on the trail that goes through the woods. So all the little piggys should stay home, and apply the lip gloss. And... my logic is better than your logic. Duh!

Posted by: rick | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

While the brick helps to hold up the building, the brick has no brain, and cannot know what is going on inside the house. The house of bricks can withstand the wind currents created by the Big Bad Wolf, but the wolf is always lurking somewhere on the trail that goes through the woods. So all the little piggys should stay home, and apply the lip gloss. And... my logic is better than your logic. Duh!

Posted by: rick | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

to both sides:

QUIT CUT-AND-PASTING LONG FREAKIN' ARTICLES!!!!

No one reads them, and they only clutter the board. If YOU have something to say, type it. If you want to refer to a short statement you found, fine, paste it in.

But if you think a long multi-paragraph article from another web-site makes a great point, paste the link....not the whole crappy thing.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 10:16 AM

Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?

We wont.

Posted by: PulSamsara | September 24, 2008 10:13 AM

McCain wouldn't be around for much of the administration either, Jake. So take it from me, member of said "future generation": we'd like Obama in office. If you could find a way to swallow your pride and vote Obama on November 4, we'd be most appreciative.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | September 24, 2008 10:11 AM

Koronin said:
"That was already done dude, more than 6 months ago in the primaries."

Now you sound like the flabber-gasted journalists. They think Obama's ties to domestic terrorists and communist-sympathizers is old news because THEY covered it months ago. Palin is fresh meat.

But don't play stupid, because you sound like an otherwise intelligent guy....no one other than party loyalists pays attention much during the primaries. Most of the independent/undecided voters who will decide this election only started really paying attention when the conventions began.

So to say media coverage of Obama has been as harsh as Palin's is as foolish a statement as they come, when all those 'harsh' stories on Obama were published months ago when nobody cared.

By the way, mainstream outlets only dared publish any story bashing Obama back when Hillary was still in the race, and most of them favored her. Find me one....one.....front page story in any major newspaper on Obama's ties to Ayers/Rezko/Wright, published in the past two months.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 10:10 AM

To James. You say you don't know Obama,well I you have to do is watch CNN or Msnbc,Countdown with Keith Olderman or Rachel Maddow,and you will get to know him. So don't use that as an excuse,just watch the news and the debate this friday.McCain is partially to blame for what is happening in the economy due to him voting against regulations since he has been in the senate and just after this last collapse of AIG he says he is for it.(LIAR,LIAR.)He is for the trickle down affect and that is what's causing the economy collapsing.He forgets to tell people that he wreaked 5 times when in Vietnam,so I quess he was just asking to be captured,and graduated #889 in military school,(NOT VERY SMART.)Obama graduated in the top,he is very intelligent,and that is what we need leading this country,instead of someone that we want a beer with or feel he deserves to be President just because he was a POW.Anytime McCain does'nt want to answer a question by the press he gives the POW story.HE IS NOUN,VERB,AND POW.How would you like to end up having Phil Graham as Secretary of treasure,the man that said we are fundamentally strong and americans have become a bunch of whiners and Phil was involved in part of the housing crisis,they are for the rich and that's it.McCain just said a day before AIG collapsing that the economy was fundamentally strong,he has repeated this 22 times through this economy crisis.McCain has said that Phil Graham will be appointed Secretary of Treasure.So please think about do you really want to have a President again that thinks of his wealthy friends before Mainstreet people?

Posted by: Gail | September 24, 2008 10:10 AM

A lot of people on these pages don't like Obama, because he has a foreign sounding name, and darker skin pigmentation, so obviously they race issue with argument.

Posted by: PaulB | September 24, 2008 10:10 AM

The Republicans ( John McCain is one of them) have run this country into the ground--they sit high and mighty and invoke God all the time, when that doesn't work they invoke patriotism ---they are the most self righteous hypocrites ever but they live double lives-sex, drugs and rock and roll, lobby firm payoffs, scandals and scandals and more scandals. They have used fear to take away from the citizens of this country: We have lost the freedoms as in not other time in this country, i.e.- the Patriot act and the "executive privilege invoked by our own King George, we have lost our standing in the world, wirh preemptive war in Iraq, and the use and authorization of Torture, we have lost the lives of the young men and women who have fought for the right reasons and been lied to about this war -= not for attrition of 911 but for OIL!, and now we are about to lose our financial system and be plunged into a deepening recession of at least a decade or more.
Enough is enough! If this country can not see beyond the need of its own nose then we deserve the likes of McCain the Insane and Palin (America's Got Talent!) and we deserve to have them tell us that they know best and they will not listen to the voters and the American people. If you do not agree with them-watch out they will stop at no ends to discredit and eliminate you- all the while smiling that creepy smile and winking and crinkle up her nose!.
Vote for Barak Obama! We will have a leader who will listen and be thoughtful as we try to climb out of the Republican Abyss created by King George and the slime master-Cheney and continued for at least 4 more years if you elect MCINSANE and PALIN - now that is a bridge to nowhere!

Posted by: mrs-ct | September 24, 2008 10:10 AM

"The Times’s Jackie Calmes and David D. Kirkpatrick report that the “disclosure undercuts a remark by Mr. McCain on Sunday night that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had had no involvement with the company for the last several years.” Here are more details from their story:

Mr. Davis’s firm received the payments from the company, Freddie Mac, until it was taken over by the government this month along with Fannie Mae, the other big mortgage lender whose deteriorating finances helped precipitate the cascading problems on Wall Street, the two people said.

They said they did not recall Mr. Davis’s doing much substantive work for the company in return for the money, other than to speak to a political action committee of high-ranking employees in October 2006 on the approaching midterm Congressional elections. They said Mr. Davis’s firm, Davis Manafort, had been kept on the payroll because of his close ties to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who by 2006 was widely expected to run again for the White House."
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/the-early-word-the-freddie-chronicles/#more-6392

"Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are being investigated by the FBI. Top executives of both these failed companies were economic advisors to Obama.

Who do you trust?

Vote Sen. McCain/ Gov. Palin.

Posted by: pete | September 24, 2008 10:03 AM "

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:09 AM

hope the African Americans vote for Obama for the right reasons rather then the color of his skin, but that is highly unlikely. Most will vote for that reason and that reason only and that is very, very sad.

Posted by: James
*************************
Thanks for your faux concern, dillweed. I know that it is hard for you think with that white hood over your head, but there are intelligent, engaged black people who vote based on issues and not on race (btw, we have been voting for white candidates for some time on - guess what- ISSUES!!!)
What is really sad is that you feel compelled by racist panic to write this.

Posted by: James the D**khead was here... | September 24, 2008 10:08 AM

Obama mania is setting in!

This is great! things are starting to open up. Can't wait to get past all the commercials and watch the debates. Gee John, how much did your guy get paid from Freddie and Fannie?

http://www.boppoll.com

I just got my morning bops in on McCain and I already feel much better this morning. 300 bops to start the day, keeps plenty of stress away! Goal today, 1,000,000 on McCain's bop-o-meter. Tell your friends! We need a major bop party today!

Posted by: Landslide! | September 24, 2008 10:06 AM

"Panic"?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 10:06 AM

"The term Bradley effect, less commonly called[1] the Wilder effect, refers to a frequently observed discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other.[2][3][4] Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor's race despite being ahead in voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to a tendency on the part of white voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, when, on election day, they vote for his/her white opponent.[5]

One theory for the Bradley effect is that some white voters give inaccurate polling responses for fear that, by stating their true preference, they will appear to the pollster to be racially prejudiced. The reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well. The race of the pollster conducting the interview may be a factor into voters' answers. Some pollsters believe that they do not receive deliberately false answers from white voters. The Bradley effect, these pollsters believe, is caused by pollsters' failure to account for general political leanings among voters who are undecided between Democrats and Republicans."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect

"I hope the African Americans vote for Obama for the right reasons rather then the color of his skin, but that is highly unlikely. Most will vote for that reason and that reason only and that is very, very sad.

Posted by: James | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:05 AM

Stayathomedad

You missed my point -I think you are right that we should not be vilifying Palin for her parenting. But I think to do the same to the other side just makes the campaign about something that it is not and threatens to go down a very nasty road since neither side can claim to have always been there. I will absolutely defend Palin as a mother - my mother worked and raised us with the help of our dad. Dad did his share of grocery shopping and back to school nights and mom worked as hard as he did both in the professional world and the domestic world. Kids do not suffer if they do not receive undivided attention from either or both parents. Sometimes the model of hard work and dedication is a great example that kids learn a great deal from. So Palin working, and campaigning for a ticket she believes in has my admiration - as does Obama's work and campaign for the same. But who gets my vote is not dependent on who is the better parent.

Posted by: An | September 24, 2008 10:03 AM

Republicans have screwed things up so badly, it'll take decades to fix it. McCain has supported the disastrous policies of Bush and the neo-cons for years. Now, he's even adopted the Bush/Rove campaign team. It's gotten to bad that even George Will has rejected the idea of a McCain presidency. He says the guy is impulsive and reckless. The choice of Palin for VP is just one example. Never mind that his advisers are all working for foreign governments or the Banking/Wall Street. Yeah, they've done a great job in ripping off America.

Bush/McCain. No More Years!

Posted by: thebob.bob | September 24, 2008 10:03 AM

Obama's Not Exactly's:
1.) Selma March Got Me Born - NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965. (Google'Obama Selma ' for his full March 4, 2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.)
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.
4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya . It is the first widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo Oba ma, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out the following link for verification of that....and for more.
Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth.
5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT EXACTLY, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya , his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). From....and for more....go to.....
http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-American,_only_6.25%25_African
7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.
4-3-08 Article 'Obama was 'quite religious in islam'' http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=60559
8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book).
February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a year ago: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as 'one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.' This is just one example of what Pamela is talking about when she says 'Obama's narrative is being altered, enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts.'
9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one teacher says you could speak the language.
10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia , I Have More Foreign Experience - NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.
11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies.
12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT EXACTLY, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.
13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT EXACTLY, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.
14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist.
15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT EXACTLY, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.
16.) Voting 'Present' is Common In Illinois Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.
17.) Oops, I Misvoted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.
18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT EXACTLY, you didn't write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.
21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it took just 14 days from start to finish.
22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.
23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.
24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT EXACTLY, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens . You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.
25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.
26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.
27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.
28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA - NOT EXACTLY, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them.
29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - NOT EXACTLY, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction off Israel .
30.) I Want All Votes To Count - NOT EXACTLY, you said let the delegates decide.
31.) I Want Americans To Decide - NOT EXACTLY, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.
32.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - NOT EXACTLY, you passed 26, most of which you didn't write yourself.
33.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - NOT EXACTLY, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.
34.) I Don't Take PAC Money - NOT EXACTLY, you take loads of it.
35.) I don't Have Lobbysists - NOT EXACTLY, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting.
36.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - NOT EXACTLY, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.
37.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - NOT EXACTLY, you weren't in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time.
38.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - NOT EXACTLY, your plan leaves us all to pay for the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy it.
39.) My uncle liberated Auschwitz concentration camp - NOT EXACTLY, your mother had no brothers and the Russan army did the liberating.
Posted by Tennessee Conservative Watch

Posted by: getty leigh | September 24, 2008 10:03 AM

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are being investigated by the FBI. Top executives of both these failed companies were economic advisors to Obama.

Who do you trust?

Vote Sen. McCain/ Gov. Palin.

Posted by: pete | September 24, 2008 10:03 AM

"Ivan Moore: Palin remains popular but not like before"

"Anchorage pollster/consultant Ivan Moore has a new poll out from 500 likely Alaska voters. While Gov. Palin's popularity remains very high - 68 percent overall give her a positive rating - Moore sees serious slippage among Democrats/progressives, a smaller but significant drop among non-partisans/moderates, and little or no change among Republicans/conservatives.

Here's Moore's e-mail, under the heading "THE HONEYMOON IS COMING TO AN END":

In a new survey conducted September 20-22, Ivan Moore Research finds Sarah Palin's positive-negative rating in Alaska taking a real hit, for the first time since Palin was elected in November 2006. The survey was conducted with 500 likely voters in the State of Alaska, for a margin of error of 4.4%. The track of the last five Palin ratings is as follows, along with a comparison point from January 2008:"

http://community.adn.com/adn/node/131785

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 10:01 AM

Koroian:

The "challenge" would simply prove that polls are irrelevant until Election Day. As McCain proved in that POW camp for 5 1/2 years, he doesn't need anyone's help.

Did anyone else see PETA urging ice cream be made from human breast milk?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 10:01 AM

I hope the African Americans vote for Obama for the right reasons rather then the color of his skin, but that is highly unlikely. Most will vote for that reason and that reason only and that is very, very sad.

Posted by: James | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

Panic is setting in w/ jakeD and the other rightwing nutjobs posting comments here. They're like wounded dogs desperately nipping at anything and anyone. However, I have to give them credit; they're smart enough to see the writing on the wall. McSame and Bubbles Palin are done.

Posted by: TruePatriot | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

It appears that according to our non-partisan press:

- if you decline to vote for McCain/Palin because you are uncomfortable with Palin's level of experience or her views on certain issues, then you are just an informed voter exercising your right to vote as you wish.

- if you decline to vote for Obama/Biden because you are uncomfortable with Obama's lack of experience or his views on certain issues, then you are a racist.

The liberal-infused media elites are setting the table....you must be a racist if you don't support Obama, and if he loses just watch how our press will spend the next four years implying that our country must still be filled with racists because we couldn't all see just how wonderful Barack Obama is.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

"This is starting to look more like it should. Voters are seeing more of these two and in Obama they like what they see. Really, what's not to like?"

Oh, I don't know. His inabiltiy to make decisions, his socialistic tendencies, his lack of experience especially on the world stage (which directly affects the US ecnonomy), that he'd enable Nancy Pelosi's congressional agenda. Ugh.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

hadeze
i wasnt born with a silver spoon. in fact we were dirt poor. but i managed to crawl out of the gutter and make a life for myself, including getting a job that provides health care. if others want to be slackers, or be frivolous with their money thats their prerogative. but i refuse to vote for someone who will give my money away. McCains plan will reimburse you up to five grand on a tax credit for health care. you can get a pretty good plan for less than that. all these hippies running around who have been neglectful to their body, and spent their money on who knows what . . . want me to take care of them now? yeah right!

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

dbw said:
> It's the "conservatives" who have battled
> to protect your freedom to be stupid.

Hey, dbw, how are the conservatives protecting our freedom, again? Is it through the illegal wiretapping, the extraordinary rendition, or the backing of a national ID card ("paperz! I must zee your paperz!")? I forget. Seems to me that the conservatives are bent on destroying our freedoms in order to save them...

Posted by: Paul HUSSEIN Jackson | September 24, 2008 9:58 AM

---
have been a Democrat since the day I was able to vote and I am sadden that without experience and not knowing Sen. Obama my vote will have to go with McCain. I would rather vote on reality then hope. People have to remember that the House is ran by the Democrats so why are we blaming everything on the Republicans? If Hillary would have won then I would be on board with her because she is real and not someone who promises the world will change if you vote for me.
---

Nice try, you're just a GOP troll who knows their candidate sucks so bad they can only post things like this.

How about talking positive about McCain for a change? Oh wait, what? You're not sure what he stands for either? Don't worry, no one does.

Posted by: Koronin | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

re: hadeze
"Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada, Pauline Marois, Parti Québecois, Québec, Mme Rachida Dati, Minister of Justice, France ..." who?

They are NOBODY.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

re: hadeze
"Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada, Pauline Marois, Parti Québecois, Québec, Mme Rachida Dati, Minister of Justice, France ..." who?

They are NOBODY.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

7 posts in 16 minutes? gettyleigh, getajob. If you can't make your point succinctly, you are playing in the wrong sandbox.

Posted by: jocelyln | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

To hell with both liars. I'm writing Ron Paul on my ballot!

Vote Ron Paul

Posted by: 101 | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

To hell with both liars. I'm writing Ron Paul on my ballot!

Vote Ron Paul

Posted by: Chinga101 | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

To hell with both liars. I'm writing Ron Paul on my ballot!

Vote Ron Paul

Posted by: 101 | September 24, 2008 9:53 AM

re: hadeze
"Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada, Pauline Marois, Parti Québecois, Québec, Mme Rachida Dati, Minister of Justice, France ..." who?

They are NOBODY.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:52 AM

To hell with both liars. I'm writing Ron Paul on my ballot!

Vote Ron Paul

Posted by: Chinga101 | September 24, 2008 9:52 AM

To hell with both liars. I'm writing Ron Paul on my ballot!

Vote Ron Paul

Posted by: Chinga101 | September 24, 2008 9:52 AM

Paul Stewart:

You mean other than comprehensive sex education K-12 plus abortion on demand?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 9:52 AM

---
I have a challenge for our non-partisan mainstream media. For the next two weeks, run nothing but a constant stream of negative articles about Barack Obama. Every single day, plaster your front pages and lead-in stories with resets of Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers
---

That was already done dude, more than 6 months ago in the primaries.

I thought McCain and his people were supposed to be tough? You all sound like a bunch of whiny children.

Posted by: Koronin | September 24, 2008 9:47 AM

Tommy F writes:

"If Obama doesn't have a 10-point lead in all the polls by Nov 4, he loses."

Probably closer to 5 or 6. Clarence Page has a good article out today addressing this.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/obama_vsbubba_vote.html

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 9:46 AM

AN
you need to go back and read all the posts, as there are people bashing Sarah about the same thing.

Posted by: stayathomedad | September 24, 2008 9:46 AM

What?! How is Rev. Wrong going to sell his book then? He's not even going for the Colbert Bump?

Speaking of which, did anyone see Jackson Browne last night? What part of "fair use" doesn't he understand?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 9:44 AM

SONIA:

It's the "conservatives" who have battled to protect your freedom to be stupid.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:44 AM

How come Rick Davis is so white,darn
he reminds me of casper the Ghost,and
so do mcpain.just wondering is he an albino
are just a paleface? scarey

Posted by: R.limpballs | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

Gettyleigh...you write:

"socialism, at the national level, is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

If this is so, what is Bush's capitalism for the 50 millions US citizens who do not have universal health care? Whose "misery" is theirs?

Should one speculate that you too are one of these 50 million uninsured modern-day miserables?

If Victor Hugo were alive he might dedicate "Les Miserables" to your 50 million Americans of 2008 - thanks to Bush's version of modern capitalism they would have one friend, in France that is.

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

That spread should ought to be fail safe if it can be held to election day. No Bradley effect, margin of error or other issues could compound to take out a margin like that. And, of course, Obama is registering more voters every day, many more than the Republicans. So I believe he can win even if the polls show only a 4 to 5% lead. Particularly when you look at the electoral colleges.

This is starting to look more like it should. Voters are seeing more of these two and in Obama they like what they see. Really, what's not to like?

McCain is looking more the confused man he is everyday. His "Country First" slogan is really "President First".

Posted by: Paul Stewart | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

I have been a Democrat since the day I was able to vote and I am sadden that without experience and not knowing Sen. Obama my vote will have to go with McCain. I would rather vote on reality then hope. People have to remember that the House is ran by the Democrats so why are we blaming everything on the Republicans? If Hillary would have won then I would be on board with her because she is real and not someone who promises the world will change if you vote for me.

Posted by: James | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

Not only did McCain get money from Freddie Mac, He also has ties to Raffaello Follieri. It's funny that his dementia only works in his favor.

So I think it's ridiculous that he would put out these hypocritical smear ads that haven't helped him, and have frankly, just made him look desparate.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

Not only did McCain get money from Freddie Mac, He also has ties to Raffaello Follieri. It's funny that his dementia only works in his favor.

So I think it's ridiculous that he would put out these hypocritical smear ads that haven't helped him, and have frankly, just made him look desparate.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:43 AM

The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew how big our federal government is. It was never meant to be this way. The thirteen colonies merged for the purpose of having a strong centralized government that existed only to serve the states, and to have limited powers that benefited the good of all states. Government at the state level was to be the boss of federal and local government. The tax dollars that Obama plans to spend on socialized programs such as national healthcare will come from the taxpayers one way or the other. The money the government uses to pay for military expenses, welfare, civil servant salaries, government works programs, disaster relief, etc . . . is based on the money the government expects to collect from taxpayers and businesses. The money is not just sitting around waiting to be spent; it is a projected amount that they expect to collect. He has committed to tax cuts, tax credits, reducing the deficit, education benefits, healthcare benefits, and other social reforms [that I am sure I missed.] In fact, Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation says Obama has proposed nearly $350 billion per year in new spending. However, at this point in time, the entire corporate tax code only raises about $350 billion annually. So, it’s unrealistic to think the extra tax dollars collected will be enough to pay for all these things, and it’s unrealistic that he will be able to achieve all the promises he has committed to. It could be he knows this, and is aware that honoring all his promises is not a feasible proposition; I cannot speculate on that, only he can answer that. Still, not only has he committed his administration to providing all those benefits to the voters, but he committed to raising the minimum wage again [it was just raised a few months ago], and raising taxes on businesses too. By raising taxes on businesses and raising the minimum wage, it just makes it that much harder for small businesses to remain in business. A business cannot be viable if there is not enough cash flow to keep it solvent. By adding more overhead in the form of another wage increase, and a reduction in cash flow by increasing taxes, the profit margins for the business shrink, which in turn reduces cash flow. Small businesses are the heart and soul of America; more people are employed by small businesses than large businesses. In order to stay in business, they would have to raise their prices, which would in turn be passed on to the public. Raising the minimum wage might increase the amount of money in your paycheck, but the IRS would just take more tax to build their coffers. Likewise, the IRS increasing taxes on businesses might help the government to raise more tax dollars, but when the business owner raises his price in order to stay in business the public will be burdened with the extra cost. If the business fails, and the people are left unemployed, another burden is placed on the tax payers in the form of unemployment or health & welfare assistance. As for whether it is better to have a state run organization or a private run organization; usually it’s better to have a privately run organization. The free market tends to promote fiscal responsibility and a good work ethic; socialism does just the opposite, it promotes waste and slothfulness. The more a government regulates an industry, the more control they possess, and the less control the people have. I think socialism is anti-American. Study some of Karl Marx and Adam Smith’s work if you want to know more, they are pretty much the authorities everyone consults when researching the issues. Additionally, Obama wants to restrict trade. The cons want to keep the trade flowing. Stopping trade is a bad thing, as the value of the stuff we export is more than the products we import. His line of reasoning is from an outdated fiscal philosophy, that may have been great during JFK’s short tenure, but in our current dilemma, we cannot afford to go that route. I would just like to see him cornered in the debates, and see what his response is to this argument.

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:42 AM

Anonymous:

If you are going to call people 'ignorant', then don't be a coward and refuse to use initials or some identifer so we can keep track of your nonsensical posts.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:42 AM

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 9:33 AM

Ok, I'm not a conservative, I don't like Palin, but you are really stretching. Assuming she wouldn't know other female leaders around the world...that is pretty baseless.

The more liberals do that sort of baseless attack, the more ammunition we provide the Conservatives to counter and make us out to be lying, "the liberal elite". Stick to the facts, please.

Posted by: CynicalGuy | September 24, 2008 9:42 AM

Re: stayathomedad

So now we bring the kids into it again. Great. So we can't question Palin about leaving her kids, or taking them out of school to go with her or ask about how she handles the job/campaign, but we can ask Obama about not seeing his kids? He actually answered this a few months ago - video conferences with his kids each night; phone calls every day and flying back to se them frequently. ... but for the sake of argument - let's leave all the kids out of this - the spouses on each side do a remarkable job of caring for the children - Cindy McCain still has a teenager at home, Michelle Obama has two young children and Sarah Palin has four kids at home (I know, five total, but four at home). Each has a spouse to pick up the parenting slack, so let's not make this about who is the better parent. We don't need the best parent on this (and I could argue that being available with technology is more than most do) - we need the best potential president out of who we have running.

So let's look at what we should be looking at .... who do you trust with your kids future? Who do you think will provide the best economic plan (again, out of those we can choose from)? Whose views on domestic agendas do you most agree with? Who do you believe will work with the international community best?

I'm not trying to tell anyone who to vote for. There are valid reasons to vote for either party, it just depends on what your priorities are and what your outlook it. But be fair - let's not bring parenting into this because both sides can say some nasty things about the other and no one wants to degenerate into that.

Posted by: An | September 24, 2008 9:39 AM

If Obama wins, I hope he abuses his executive powers, much like Bush has, to ban anyone from the conservative bases of America to vote again..that would do away with the world's problems......

Posted by: Sonia | September 24, 2008 9:38 AM

edia Echo Obama’s False Claim that McCain Lied about Sex Ed Bill
Many major news organizations accepted at face value Obama’s denial that he backed comprehensive sex education for kindergartners. Reporters should have read the actual text of the bill.

By Colleen Raezler
Culture and Media Institute
September 17, 2008


Did the media tell the truth about the sex ed bill Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama supported in the Illinois state Senate? Was the bill aimed at protecting kids from sexual predators, as he says? Or would it have extended "comprehensive" sex education to the kindergarten level, as GOP nominee John McCain says?

After McCain released a campaign ad asserting that Obama supported teaching "comprehensive" sex education to five-year-olds, many of Big Media’s biggest players not only accepted the Illinois senator’s explanation uncritically, they impugned McCain’s character with accusations of lying, deception and distortion.

Apparently, many of these reporters never read the actual text of SB 99, which proposed changes to the sex education sections of the Illinois School Code.

Obama’s campaign said SB 99 was written to guard young children against sexual predators. The term “sexual predator,” however, never appears in the document. Only 57 lines in the 14-page, 455-line document (a 19-line section repeated almost verbatim two more times) address “unwanted” and “nonconsensual sexual advances.” Even this section is aimed principally at resisting “peer pressure,” not child molesters, as Obama implies.

Here is the small portion of the bill that addresses nonconsensual sexual advances, the only part of the bill that could be construed as applying to sexual predators

The real content of the bill was not acknowledged by the Obama campaign. Instead, Obama spokesman Bill Burton responded to the McCain ad by saying, “It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls” (emphasis added).

CMI found numerous examples of the media reporting, as fact, the language from the Obama campaign response:

September 10, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow: “The legislation in question was not sponsored by Barack Obama. It never became law and it was actually designed to warn young children about sexual predators.” (Emphasis added.)
September 12, New York Times editorial: “The kindergarten ad flat out lies. …at most, kindergarteners were to be taught the dangers of sexual predators.”
September 12, PBS’s Judy Woodruff on NewsHour: “Obama supported a law to educate children on the dangers of sexual predators.” (Emphasis added.)
September 12, syndicated columnist Mark Shields on PBS NewsHour: “Obama voted for…a bill in the Illinois state legislature that would – for age-appropriate sex educations for youngsters taught to be – to warn them about adult sexual predators and what they could do to avoid and to discourage and to resist.” (Emphasis added.)
September 12, CNN’s Larry King during The Larry King Show: “…the quote about kindergartners is not teaching sex to kindergarten kids. It’s dealing with predators.” (Emphasis added.)
September 15, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow: “Obama supported legislation to help keep kindergarteners safe from sexual predators, and turning that into some creepy, anti-sex ed ad, it’s not just a McCain lie, it is a prevarication miracle, totally unknowable through rational means.” (Emphasis added.)
On September 15, CNN’s Election Center and Anderson Cooper 360 both featured Viveca Novak of factcheck.org. According to Novak, “The kind of thing he was interested in having kids at a young age learn about what was inappropriate sexual advances that might be made against them. (Emphasis added.)
CBS’s Bill Plante did a little better in his September 10 “reality check” to Evening News viewers, but he still bought into the “sexual predators” fig leaf: “The facts: the bill introduced in the Illinois legislature never became law. It called for non-mandatory sex education for grades K – 12 that was ‘age and developmentally appropriate.’ For kindergartners, that included, among other things, ‘how to say no to unwanted sexual advances.’ Obama did vote for the bill in committee, and he says he supports similar laws in other states. But he said the point was to help parents teach their children how to deal with sexual predators.” (Emphasis added.)

At the July 23, 2007 CNN/YouTube debate, Obama himself said the bill was aimed at protecting children from predators:

I’ve got a 9-year-old daughter and a 6-year-old daughter. And I want them to know if somebody is doing something wrong to them, encroaching on their privacy, that they should come talk to me or my wife. And we’ve had that conversation, but not every parent is going to have that conversation with their child, and I think it’s important that every child does, to make sure that they’re not subject to the sexual predators.

Byron York at National Review noted that a press release issued by groups who supported the 2003 bill in question, including the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, “contained no mention of sexual predators or inappropriate touching.”

SB 99 never passed the Illinois Senate. Ralph Rivera, state lobbyist for Illinois Citizens for Life, told CMI, “If it was only ‘stranger danger,’ it would have blown through the Senate and passed.”

As Castellanos noted on Election Center, SB 99 included “standards in there [in] which 5-8 year-olds should be, you know, talking about body parts, lifestyles and what feels good and a lot of American think that that’s going too far. Now, you know, whether he intended it or not, that’s what he voted for and that’s fair game.”


Posted by: dragonfly777 | September 24, 2008 9:38 AM

STAN:
"[McCain's] crash course in foreign policy for Palin is a utter joke and disgrace."

So then you must be as thoroughly disgusted with Obama's crash course in foreign policy this summer, Stan?

Palin now only needs to take a 7 day jaunt around the globe, and she will have equaled if not exceeded Obama's foreign policy credentials!

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:37 AM

gettyleigh


You are ignorant.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:36 AM

Posted by: herzliebster | September 24, 2008 9:36 AM

Hmmm, let's see. We have a bunch of republicans whining about wanting these CEOs to keep their fortunes, multiple houses and cars, and they want the taxpayers to bail them out. But when the taxpayer wanted help to keep THEIR homes, they were called a bunch of whiners by these SAME republicans and were given NO bailout.

Why are their oversized fortunes more important than the rest of America's modest and undersized ones?

Now, for the last time, once and for all, explain to me how Obama is the elitist and the republicans are "just like you and me." Go ahead. I triple dog dare you.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET SUPERCAPITALISM AT ITS WORST

Executive salaries, CEO bonuses, grand robberies of the U.S. TREASURY in the $MILLIONS, $BILLIONS, and $TRILLIONS.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET SUPERCAPITALISTS robbed the AMERICAN PEOPLE of a $Trillion. RULE OF LAW states that the AMERICAN PEOPLE will be protected and all private properties, money, and wealth domestic and abroad owned by GOP REPUBLICAN SUPERCAPITALISTS taking part in robbing the U.S. TREASURY (AMERICAN PEOPLE) will immediately be confiscated and returned to the U.S. TREASURY (AMERICAN PEOPLE).

REPLACE GOP REPUBLICAN CEO GOLDEN PARACHUTES WITH CRIMINAL TRIALS AND PROPERTY CONFISCATION. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL PREVAIL AND THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WILL BE REINSTATED. LONG LIVE FREEDOM AND JUSTICE. CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY WILL BE THE LAW OF THE LAND.


INSIDE JOB AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL:
GOP REPUBLICAN WHITE HOUSE ILLEGAL WARS AND
WALL STREET CRIMINAL DEREGULATED SPECULATIONS

You asked for it and you got it. GOP REPUBLICANS INSIDERS McCain, Bush, Cheney, Paulson, and Rice were hired by Super-Capitalists (Super Wealthy GOP REPUBLICANS) to start Illegal Oil Wars against Oil producing Nations and DEREGULATE (eliminate AMERICAN PEOPLE PROTECTION) the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (White House, Congress, Supreme Court), TREASURY and WALL STREET. These INSIDERS did exactly what they were paid to do. Past GOP REPUBLICANS (Nixon, Reagan, Bush I) and current GOP REPUBLICANS (Bush II, Cheney, Rice, McCain, Paulson) have a credibility factor of zero. Americans no longer believe them, the World has never believed them and now they are done. They came in with the 9/11 attack upon the AMERICAN PEOPLE and leave with the Wall Street $1Trillion attack upon the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Wave after wave after wave the GOP REPUBLICANS attack the AMERICAN PEOPLE based on the premise of disrespect for anyone who is not a GOP RICH REPUBLICAN. Either you are in their group (GOP RICH REPUBLICAN) or out (debt ridden worker bee / victim). GOP REPUBLICANS view the AMERICAN PEOPLE as gullible sheep perpetually fattened with debt and led to the subhuman existence slaughter. When slavery (free labor) ended GOP RICH REPUBLICANS attacked and enslaved the people of the world through unbalanced trade. Now that foreign sweatshops are demanding better pay and treatment, GOP RICH REPUBLICANS are attacking the AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS. GOP RICH REPUBLICANS are banking on the idea that the AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS are non-thinking drones fat with artificial food, high on Wall Street sponsored imported drugs (legal / illegal), and choked with clutter, debt and noise.

Through massive GOP REPUBLICAN SPONSORED DEREGULATIONS, GOP REPUBLICAN CEOs, Treasury Secretary, Wall Street Speculators, White House Administration, Cabinet Members, and their insider friends each walked away with more than $20,000,000 annually of money stolen directly from the U.S. TREASURY (AMERICAN PEOPLE). After eight years of GRAND FRAUD AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, thousands of GOP REPUBLICANS ROBBED OUR UNITED STATES TREASURY OF $1TRILLION (ACTS OF TREASON AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE).

The AMERICAN PEOPLE will hold ALL GOP REPUBLICANS INVOLVED in these ACTS OF TREASON accountable before a TRIAL. ALL GOP REPUBLICANS INVOLVED in these ACTS OF TREASON will have ALL OF THEIR PROPERTIES (corporate and private, domestic and foreign sheltered) CONFISCATED, SOLD and RETURNED to OUR NATIONAL TREASURY (AMERICAN PEOPLE). The UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION (WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE) shall prevail, despite the criminal efforts of GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET SUPER-CAPITALIST CRIMINALS.

CONGRESS WILL NOT ADJOURN UNTIL AFTER THE GOP REPUBLICAN PARTY FIX THEIR COLOSSAL MESS

GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN WALL STREET DEREGULATIONS
GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN ALSO WANTED TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY (BONEHEAD)
GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN sponsored landmark legislation in 1999 that removed the walls between banks, investment firms and insurance companies. GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN bill allowed a company like AIG to expand beyond its traditional insurance business (which is still profitable) into exotic new extremely high risk products that brought the company down and created this colossal mess.

WALL STREET SRO - SELF REGULATORY ORGANIZATION
THE GOP REPUBLICAN RUN Government (GOP President, GOP Congress, GOP Supreme Court) looked the other way, while GOP REPUBLICAN Super-capitalist Obscenely Rich WALL STREET SRO Speculators Robbed Our U.S. TREASURY and Forced the $Trillion Debt Upon the AMERICAN PEOPLE.


Average Americans are becoming poorer, because GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET super rich SPECULATORS and corporate CEOs are paying themselves, business partners, friends, and family members at least $10,000,000 annually from MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY. These major crimes committed by WALL STREET SPECULATORS AND CEOs have gone beyond greed and into acts of treason against the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Seize the stolen money and properties valued in the $TRILLIONS back from these super criminals for attacking America. Those stolen $MILLIONS / $BILLIONS / $TRILLIONS belong to the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

RULE OF LAW states that the People of the United States will be defended. Those who attack American Citizens will be prosecuted. WALL STREET SPECULATORS and CORPORATE CEOs dictatorship over the AMERICAN PEOPLE is over. Average Americans are not going to accept WALL STREET CORPORATE CRIMES anymore. Rights of Citizen and Average Workers of the United States will be enforced. The AMERICAN PEOPLE will always come before corporate interests, because Americans Love America more than Wall Street Speculators love greed.


GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET $TRILLION FRAUD AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

Direct impact of GOP McCain sponsored deregulations
Bankrupt and floundering
Failure of the investment bank
Government's takeover

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET's business model has collapsed

Greed and fear routinely govern GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET financial markets and GLOBAL CRISIS.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET (giant investment houses, brokerage firms, hedge funds, "private equity" firms) irresponsibly TRADED the savings of average Americans (placed LAS VEGAS STYLE BETS on extremely high risk stocks, bonds, and other securities).

DUBIOUS MORTGAGES were PACKAGED into BONDS and SOLD and TRADED. Investment houses had huge incentives to increase LEVERAGE (OBSCENELY HIGH BORROWING).

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET compensation is heavily skewed toward annual bonuses, reflecting the profits traders and managers earned in the tune of lavish base salaries and obscenely high annual bonuses of $20,000,000.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET relies heavily on OBSCENELY HIGH LEVERAGE (OBSCENELY HIGH BORROWING). $3 Trillion (stocks, bonds, other securities) backed by only $80 billion in shareholders' equity while the $2.8 Trillion was LEVERAGE (BORROWED).

Leverage (huge borrowing) can create huge debts (huge principal and interest obligations)

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET is a manic machine for gambling.
Traders and money managers are given huge incentives to do whatever would increase short-term profits.

For decades, GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN sponsored legislation that broadly deregulated WALL STREET banking and insurance industries.

GOP REPUBLICAN JOHN MCCAIN swept away Consumer Protection legislation and opened the way for a less restricted high risk financial marketplace.

While the GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET boom continued, government (White House, Congress, Supreme Court) looked the other way.

GOP REPUBLICAN Congress resisted tougher regulation and permitted WALL STREET to run out of control at obscenely high LEVERAGE (OBSCENELY HIGH BORROWED MONEY) RATIOS perpetrating intentional fraud against the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET leaders intentionally deceived customers and lenders into taking hazardous risks for short-term rewards regardless of the long-term dangers to the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Mortgages went bad. The powerful high leverage went into reverse. Losses eroded firms' capital bases and raised doubts about their survival.

Financial firms took major stupid and wasteful risks that severely damaged the American Economy and impeded economic recovery.

GOP REPUBLICAN STOCK MARKET $TRILLION FRAUD has deepened consumers' pessimism, fear and reluctance to spend. There may be more failures of FINANCIAL FIRMS.

GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET financial crises resemble the GOP REPUBLICAN illegal miscalculated war.


How were we ever made to believe that the now-collapsing GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET model ever made sense? Common sense should have told us that making RISKY BETS with HUGE AMOUNTS of BORROWED MONEY was a DANGEROUS GAME; if the bets pay off you make money beyond your wildest dreams, but if they go bad you face utter ruin.

Common sense should have told us that betting fortunes on meaningless fluctuations in stock, bond or currency values (McCain sponsored deregulated hedge funds) was about as productive as a trip to Las Vegas. Common sense should have told us that buying and selling exotic securities based on other securities based on bundles of mortgages that were treated like mere numbers on a balance sheet (no recognition that the whole iffy construct was based on real people living in real houses that they might or might not be able to afford) was not an intelligent endeavor.

Somehow, we all forgot that "HIGHLY LEVERAGED" is just another way of saying "DEEPLY INDEBTED." Now we've had a wake-up call, and maybe the erstwhile Masters of the Universe will have to stop playing with imaginary money and go back to using the real stuff.


The View Destroyed Unprepared GOP REPUBLICAN John McCain

McCain / Palin Failin are rejected for voting against Women Rights


RUL OF LAW WILL ENFORCE CONFISCATION OF ALL GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET SPECULATORS’ AND CEOS’ PERSONAL PROPERTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR ECONOMY’S MELTDOWN. All money and properties of the Super Rich CEOs and WALL STREET Speculators domestic and abroad will be confiscated and returned to the United States TREASURY and the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

WALL STREET SRO - SELF REGULATORY ORGANIZATION
OUR GOP REPUBLICAN RUN Government (GOP President, GOP Congress, GOP Supreme Court) looked the other way, while GOP REPUBLICAN Super-capitalist Obscenely Rich WALL STREET SRO Speculators Robbed Our U.S. TREASURY and Forced the $Trillion Debt Upon the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

GOP REPUBLICAN LIARS SUPER RICH WALL STREET GET RICH QUICK GREEDY
BILLION DOLLARS RISKY UNSECURED LOANS RISKY UNSECURED LOANS RISKY UNSECURED LOANS
REPACKAGED AND SOLD TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

GOP REPUBLICAN LIARS SUPER RICH WALL STREET ROBBER BARONS
COMMIT TREASON AND GRAND FRAUD AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.


WALL STREET SRO - SELF REGULATORY ORGANIZATION
OUR GOP REPUBLICAN RUN Government (GOP President, GOP Congress, GOP Supreme Court) looked the other way, while GOP REPUBLICAN Super-capitalist Obscenely Rich WALL STREET SRO Speculators Robbed Our U.S. TREASURY and Forced the $Trillion Debt Upon the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Posted by: GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET $1TRILLION FRAUD AGAINST AMERICA | September 24, 2008 9:36 AM

Is it possible that Obama’s presidency is an effrontery set up by radical Middle Eastern interests?
Obama has long-standing ties to left-wing elements in our polity, such as Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour [AKA Donald Warden of the Black Panthers] , a financial investor for top Middle Eastern sheiks. Less known are the reasons al-Mansour, an activist and African-American Muslim, would be a key backer, and financial supporter, for Obama's education; didn't Obama claim he went to Harvard on a scholarship?

After reading the articles and watching the video at the newsmax link, formulate your opinion and answer the question. If you leave a bogus repsponse without reading the articles, I will delete your answer.

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_s...

http://www.investors.com/editorial/edito...

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:34 AM

aBigSam said:
"[McCain] is going to have to explain why Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, was paid 15,000.00 per month since end of 2005 through last month by Freddie Mac."

I forget, BigSam. How much were Obama advisors Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines paid by Fannie/Freddie?

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:33 AM

Tzipi Livni in Israel, Dr. Angela Merkel, Bundeskanzlerin, Berlin, Matti Vanhanen, Prime Minister, Finland, Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada, Pauline Marois, Parti Québecois, Québec, Mme Rachida Dati, Minister of Justice, France ... are politicians easily recognized by the international press. Every journalist, reporter knows their names ... sans faute.

Question: Would Gov. Palin correctly identify these women leaders?

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 9:33 AM

STAN, i suspect you missed the story about Palin drawing 60,000, yes that is sixty thousand, at the villages in florida

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:29 AM

Give me a break! Palin or the edentulous ol'man for President, and on the heels of Dubyah...God save America from such a fate/plight!

What next, Mickey Mouse for President? Wake up, rational Americans and vote for Senators Obama-Biden, before it is too late. Dubyah has destroyed our Economy, our currency our image in the World...

Act responsibly!

Posted by: dir | September 24, 2008 9:27 AM

Give me a break! Palin or the edentulous ol'man for President, and on the heels of Dubyah...God save America from such a fate/plight!

What next, Mickey Mouse for President. Wake up, rational Americans and vote for Senators Obama-Biden, before it is too late. Dubyah has destroyed our Economy, our currency our image in the World...

Act responsibly!

Posted by: dir | September 24, 2008 9:27 AM

Sadly, the people of the Obama Temple have become comfortable with the practice of demagoguery. For, Obama is the sort of political leader who gains power by appealing to people's emotions, instincts, and prejudices in a way that is manipulative and dangerous; preying on the naiveté of the younger generation and the lack of insight of those who should know better but don’t, is Obama’s strategy to attract voters. Change is not necessarily always a good thing, especially when it administers the medicine of socialism. Thomas Sowell, a distinguished authority on economics, once said “socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Obama’s, unquestioned flattery and praise, is evocative of another socialistic demagogue, he is just as mesmerizing as Jim Jones, who dazzled the members of the “Peoples Temple” in 1978 at a little place called Jonestown, Guyana; the revolution they experienced there was “revolutionary suicide.” If the Obamabots keep on drinking the “flavor aid,” spiked by this spellbinding “cult of personality,” the freedoms and protections we all cherish so much, will go the way of the 909 people who committed suicide with the cyanide laced grape drink; our liberties will be just like the spirit of those people, and the essence of the 276 children among them. The fundamental nature of our liberties will vanish into the thin air, just as the prototypical souls of those who deified the false idol of the “People’s Temple” 30 years ago. Socialism, at the national level, is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. In the end when all is equal, and socialism fails and the coffers are bare, who will the poor and misfortunate people lean on then?



Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:26 AM

JakeD and all the Republicans are going down and quickly becoming irrelevant. Obama has broken open a 9 point lead and is ahead in most battlegrounds. People are waking up to the complete failure of Republican rule and are feeling it in their wallets. For 8 years we have witnessed lying, corruption, manipulation and every other dirty trick of the narcissistic Republicans. Good bye GOP and Good riddance.
OBAMA-BIDEN 2008

Posted by: ProudLib | September 24, 2008 9:26 AM

Elrod said:
"2) Palin has had a neutral or negative effective outside the GOP base."

Elrod, you obviously don't know what you are talking about. Nearly every poll has found at least some slice of the previously-undecided pie that Palin has pulled toward the Republicans.

The only negatives that became stronger in polling related to Palin is among liberals who were going to vote for Obama anyway. And no wonder....she threatens the liberals notion of what a strong woman is supposed to be.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:26 AM

Other recent Biden gaffes:

1) "President Roosevelt went on television to announce the Depression"; 2) "my helicopter was forced down in Afghanistan"; 3) "Obama will never take my guns away"; 4) "That was a terrible ad Obama made against McCain"; 5) (two hours later) "That was a fine Obama ad; 6) "you better work on those pecs" (to a reporter Biden jabbed in the chest). Remind me which ones I missed.

Posted by: Richdoode | September 24, 2008 9:25 AM

Sadly, the people of the Obama Temple have become comfortable with the practice of demagoguery. For, Obama is the sort of political leader who gains power by appealing to people's emotions, instincts, and prejudices in a way that is manipulative and dangerous; preying on the naiveté of the younger generation and the lack of insight of those who should know better but don’t, is Obama’s strategy to attract voters. Change is not necessarily always a good thing, especially when it administers the medicine of socialism. Thomas Sowell, a distinguished authority on economics, once said “socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Obama’s, unquestioned flattery and praise, is evocative of another socialistic demagogue, he is just as mesmerizing as Jim Jones, who dazzled the members of the “Peoples Temple” in 1978 at a little place called Jonestown, Guyana; the revolution they experienced there was “revolutionary suicide.” If the Obamabots keep on drinking the “flavor aid,” spiked by this spellbinding “cult of personality,” the freedoms and protections we all cherish so much, will go the way of the 909 people who committed suicide with the cyanide laced grape drink; our liberties will be just like the spirit of those people, and the essence of the 276 children among them. The fundamental nature of our liberties will vanish into the thin air, just as the prototypical souls of those who deified the false idol of the “People’s Temple” 30 years ago. Socialism, at the national level, is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. In the end when all is equal, and socialism fails and the coffers are bare, who will the poor and misfortunate people lean on then?



Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:25 AM

Since the Washington Post's own Fact-Checker told us last week that McCain was lying in an ad because he relied on information reported in the Washington Post, should we believe this Washington Post poll?

Or should I wait for the Washington Post Fact-Checker to verify whether his employers poll is reliable or not?

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:21 AM

McCain was +10 in a USA Today poll just two weeks ago. Its hard to know where this
race is situated.

Rev. Wright has a book tour Oct. 10th?

this is awesome!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:20 AM

The poll isn't McCain's only challenge.

He's going to have to explain why Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, was paid 15,000.00 per month since end of 2005 through last month by Freddie Mac. McCain said just this week that Rick Davis had nothing whatsoever to do with Freddie Mac. Then what on earth was he being paid for?

Posted by: aBigSAM | September 24, 2008 9:20 AM

While this poll may be too strong for Obama, it's telling how panicky the Republicans are in response. Every poll out there has discovered three things:

1) The RNC bounce is long gone.
2) Palin has had a neutral or negative effective outside the GOP base.
3) The economy is the number one issue and it hurts McCain (polls differ on how much).

Note that more Democrats back Obama than Republicans back McCain in this poll. And look at how much Independents have swung to Obama (after moving to McCain after the RNC). The only thing to quibble with is the Party ID screen with D+10, but other polls (including Gallup yesterday) show the Dems re-establishing a large lead again since this crisis began. Even if you shrink the party ID screen you still get a sizable Obama lead.

If Obama does as well among Dems as McCain does among Republicans, and Indies are basically split, Obama wins.

Posted by: Elrod | September 24, 2008 9:20 AM

like that matters TORITTO, when you have Biden on record bashing Obama and other etnicities. Looking back on Biden’s charming cluelessness we can go to the time when the famously verbose senator was asked to state in 25 words or less why Democrats should nominate him. His response was 45 words. I suppose that, by Biden’s standards, coming in at just under twice his allotted length counts as a victory of sorts. Biden then explained why he could win: “If people learn my story, learn my record, I think I can compete. The question is, can I raise the money?” This is sort of like me saying that I think I can compete for a starting NFL quarterback job, but the question is, can I avoid injuries? It’s a question, but it’s certainly not the question. And then there was the time when referring to Obama he said, “You have the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate bright and clean and a nice looking guy I mean that is a story book man.” And let’s not forget the time Biden attempted to endear himself to an Indian American supporter by telling him that in Delaware, “You cannot go to a 7/11 or dunkin donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent . . . I’m not joking.”

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:19 AM

like that matters TORITTO, when you have Biden on record bashing Obama and other etnicities. Looking back on Biden’s charming cluelessness we can go to the time when the famously verbose senator was asked to state in 25 words or less why Democrats should nominate him. His response was 45 words. I suppose that, by Biden’s standards, coming in at just under twice his allotted length counts as a victory of sorts. Biden then explained why he could win: “If people learn my story, learn my record, I think I can compete. The question is, can I raise the money?” This is sort of like me saying that I think I can compete for a starting NFL quarterback job, but the question is, can I avoid injuries? It’s a question, but it’s certainly not the question. And then there was the time when referring to Obama he said, “You have the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate bright and clean and a nice looking guy I mean that is a story book man.” And let’s not forget the time Biden attempted to endear himself to an Indian American supporter by telling him that in Delaware, “You cannot go to a 7/11 or dunkin donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent . . . I’m not joking.”

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

like that matters TORITTO, when you have Biden on record bashing Obama and other etnicities. Looking back on Biden’s charming cluelessness we can go to the time when the famously verbose senator was asked to state in 25 words or less why Democrats should nominate him. His response was 45 words. I suppose that, by Biden’s standards, coming in at just under twice his allotted length counts as a victory of sorts. Biden then explained why he could win: “If people learn my story, learn my record, I think I can compete. The question is, can I raise the money?” This is sort of like me saying that I think I can compete for a starting NFL quarterback job, but the question is, can I avoid injuries? It’s a question, but it’s certainly not the question. And then there was the time when referring to Obama he said, “You have the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate bright and clean and a nice looking guy I mean that is a story book man.” And let’s not forget the time Biden attempted to endear himself to an Indian American supporter by telling him that in Delaware, “You cannot go to a 7/11 or dunkin donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent . . . I’m not joking.”

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

like that matters TORITTO, when you have Biden on record bashing Obama and other etnicities. Looking back on Biden’s charming cluelessness we can go to the time when the famously verbose senator was asked to state in 25 words or less why Democrats should nominate him. His response was 45 words. I suppose that, by Biden’s standards, coming in at just under twice his allotted length counts as a victory of sorts. Biden then explained why he could win: “If people learn my story, learn my record, I think I can compete. The question is, can I raise the money?” This is sort of like me saying that I think I can compete for a starting NFL quarterback job, but the question is, can I avoid injuries? It’s a question, but it’s certainly not the question. And then there was the time when referring to Obama he said, “You have the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate bright and clean and a nice looking guy I mean that is a story book man.” And let’s not forget the time Biden attempted to endear himself to an Indian American supporter by telling him that in Delaware, “You cannot go to a 7/11 or dunkin donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent . . . I’m not joking.”

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

JakeD,

I think you are underestimating the kids.

But is this great though? People voicing their opinions? People actually caring about their country? There are countries in the world where you can be arrested and/or executed for the things we say on here.

We might have different opinions about how to fix the countries problems, but that is great.

Makes me proud to be an American.

I'm still trying to convince my dumb-@$$ friends to actually register. They don't understand what it means to vote.

Posted by: CynicalGuy | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

McCain drew 5k in Jacksonville florida at a rally.

Obama had 20k in metro park and another 10k trying to get in.

McCain is going down hard.

People want real change. McCain is now trying to copy the obama campain and is all of sudden a man of change. Its crap

His crash course in foreign policy for Palin is a utter joke and disgrace.

Go Obama

Posted by: Stan | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

Great

Posted by: dir | September 24, 2008 9:18 AM

"...the Post-ABC poll shows that independents are notably less impressed with [Palin] today than they were in the week after she made her national debut."

I have a challenge for our non-partisan mainstream media. For the next two weeks, run nothing but a constant stream of negative articles about Barack Obama. Every single day, plaster your front pages and lead-in stories with resets of Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, questions about Obama's experience, Joe Biden gaffes (plenty to choose from), etc.

Then do another poll, and see if "independents become less impressed with Obama".

The polls are little more than the media's barometer to see how well they are doing in getting out Obama's message and trashing conservatives....errrrrr, I mean "reporting the news".

Isn't it interesting that in the week after Palin's speech when McCain got a much-larger-than-normal bounce in the polls, all the media elite's dismissed polls as meaningless....but as soon as they can find a poll that shows a swing back toward Obama, suddenly polls are meaningful to them again.

Any the MSM wonders why conservatives think they are biased....yeah, wonder why.

Posted by: dbw | September 24, 2008 9:17 AM

toritto: Damaging, but not overly so. He's a "county" chairman. Still, not good in swing state NM.

His remarks: Not terrible. It's not as if he's white. He's Hispanic speaking about Hispanic. I don't know - maybe I'm desensitized.

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 9:17 AM

Can anyone actually believe a Washington Post poll? Notice they don't put the questions in the article. I've been called on those polls and the questions are like this... "Since McCain and the Bush Republicans have screwed up the economy you'll vote for Obama right?" or "Do you feel less likely to vote for a Republican now that they picked a gun toting religious nut like Palin for Vice President." OK, not quite that bad but close. Print the questions if you want me to take the poll seriously.

Posted by: Richdoode | September 24, 2008 9:11 AM

The Bernalillo county N. M. GOP chairman Fernando C de Baca is in hot water for having said the following:

."The truth is that Hispanics came here as conquerors," he said. "African-Americans came here as slaves.

"Hispanics consider themselves above blacks. They won't vote for a black president."

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 9:11 AM

stayathomedad: LOL

Sure a lot of double and triple posters this morning. Somebody substitute decaf in the Republican dining room?

Posted by: Pig Lipstick | September 24, 2008 9:10 AM

Two words

Lose cannon=mccain

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 9:09 AM

CynicalGuy:

That would be a first for the so-called Rock the Vote. I guess anything is possible.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 9:08 AM

Jokes I get from my Republican friends (yes-some of my best friends are Republicans)


A woman married three times walked into a bridal shop one day and told the sales clerk that she was looking for a wedding gown for her fourth wedding.

'Of course, madam,' replied the sales clerk, 'exactly what type and color are you looking for?' The bride-to-be said: 'A long frilly white dress with a veil.'

The sales clerk hesitated a bit, then said, 'Please don't take this the wrong way, but gowns of that nature are considered more appropriate for brides who are being married the first time - for those who are a bit more innocent, if you know what I mean? Perhaps ivory or sky blue would be nice?'

'Well,' replied the customer, a little peeved at the clerk's directness, 'I can assure you that a white gown would be quite appropriate. Believe it or not, despite all my marriages, I remain as innocent as a first-time bride. You see, my first husband was so excited about our wedding, he died as we were checking into our hotel. My second husband and I got into such a terrible fight in the limo on our way to our honeymoon that we had that wedding annulled immediately and never spoke to each other again.'

'What about your third husband?' asked the sales clerk.


'That one was a Democrat,' said the woman, 'and every night for four years, he just sat on the edge of the bed and told me how good it was going to be, but nothing ever happened.'

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 9:08 AM

It is really unfair to characterize McCain supporters as racists. Plenty of them are idiots, brainwashed, or just plain ignorant, and many of them are employed by companies that depend on Republican largesse. There are many reasons to vote for somebody who would finish the job of destroying the country. Yeah, I know you don't care, you morons. Why don't you tell me again about how the mortgage crash was caused by laws against redlining? Then explain it to blacks and latinos. People who make that argument ARE racists.

Posted by: j salerno | September 24, 2008 9:07 AM

It is really unfair to characterize McCain supporters as racists. Plenty of them are idiots, brainwashed, or just plain ignorant, and many of them are employed by companies that depend on Republican largesse. There are many reasons to vote for somebody who would finish the job of destroying the country. Yeah, I know you don't care, you morons. Why don't you tell me again about how the mortgage crash was caused by laws against redlining? Then explain it to blacks and latinos. People who make that argument ARE racists.

Posted by: j salerno | September 24, 2008 9:07 AM

Tim

Parrots repeat after rush, sean

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 9:07 AM

DOWN goes Frazier. I mean, McCain.

Posted by: Pig Lipstick | September 24, 2008 9:06 AM

A community organization, with longstanding ties to Barack Obama, has, according to numerous reports, repeatedly run afoul of voter registration laws both locally and nationally. Just a few of the headlines in circulation:

Felony charges filed against 7 in Washington State's biggest case of voter-registration fraud perpetuated by ACORN

Hampton police last week charged Brittany Wyatt and Jessica Lemon, both 18-year-olds working for Community Voters Project, who live in Newport News, with one count of voter fraud

Missouri ACORN Voter Fraud Scandal Makes the National News

Voter fraud case traced to Defiance County registrations volunteer

Pro-Obama Community Organizer Group Involved in (More) Voter Fraud

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has been caught in another voter registration scandal, this time here in Milwaukee


Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 9:05 AM

I was a Republican supporting Senator Obama. Now, I'm no longer supporting Senator Obama, and I'm probably not a Republican anymore either. When Senator Obama endorsed the so-called 'financial rescue plan', I opted out. I credit him for qualifying his support, but at it's core, I believe this initiative by the Bush administration, with co-Conspirators in Congress posing as the 'good cops', is the contemporary equivalent of those ships anchored in Boston Harbor and laden with tea from the British East India Company in 1773. The 'Tea Tax' levied by King George back then bears a striking resemblance to the $700-Billion plunder of this country's supposedly unlimited line of credit, not one dollar of which will be paid back in the lifetimes of those who propose to use it today. If that is not taxation without representation, I don't know what is. I oppose the bailout in any configuration, and I urge anyone else with a conscience to do the same.

Posted by: ted in pdx | September 24, 2008 9:04 AM

JakeD - The "Bradley effect" is part of the issue. Republicans don't like to take telephone polls for at least two reasons: (1) conservatives are conservative... we're private. (2) many don't trust media types, including pollsters. For these and other reasons, I believe the polls are skewed, at least nationally. State polls are somewhat more accurate, but some are not, IMO. Colorado, for example, is probably closer to McCain than you would think. West Virginia, however, is likely even MORE Republican than the polls indicate.

As to the "Diebold" issue, I don't think this is a factor since so many "watchdog" groups have their mitts in the inkwell.

I DO think, however, that many Dems are ready to cry foul at the drop of a hat.

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 9:03 AM

Not yet, ManUntdFan. Luckily for me personally (assuming I make it that far) I won't be around for much of either Administration. My concern are the future generations. Which reminds me ...

All right-thinking residents of Georgia, Kentucky and Virginia:

Early voting for McCain-Palin has started in your States. Please do so ASAP. You may not get the chance otherwise.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 9:03 AM

This is what Joe Biden thinks

"In 1929 when the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed," Biden told Couric. "He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"
Well Mr. Roosevelt was not president in 1929 and TV sets were experimental at that time.!!!!!!
And you think Sarah Palin is not qualified?

Posted by: JHT | September 24, 2008 9:03 AM

The media, libs, and Hollywood are in a panic! Keep on believing the biased poles. Obama is from the Chicago Southside Political Machine which is corrupt to the first magnatude! He is indeed a child of that system and I don't want him anywhere near the Oval Office... have a good day.

Posted by: Tim | September 24, 2008 9:03 AM

You cheer your favorite sports team. You vote for the best person to do the job. This is a life or death election year. Will you vote for the best person or vote for the one you would like to have a beer with. Race or age can't factor into this election.

Our country's future is at stake. We can't just listen to pundits we have to do our on research.

Posted by: circus monkey | September 24, 2008 9:02 AM

Anon writes:

"I'm hoping and praying that John McCain is still going to win this. If McCain loses mark my words all you Obama-Fanboys are going to be let down when you see he is all talk and does nothing that he says."


Meanwhile the Obama camp is organized and registering voters in key swing states.

And this recent polling reflects the electorate's economic unease and rejection of McCain's latest political epiphany, that he's going to take on Wall St with new and tougher regulation and oversight.

Mark your words? Oh puhleeze.

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 9:01 AM

Anon writes:

"I'm hoping and praying that John McCain is still going to win this. If McCain loses mark my words all you Obama-Fanboys are going to be let down when you see he is all talk and does nothing that he says."


Meanwhile the Obama camp is organized and registering voters in key swing states.

And this recent polling reflects the electorate's economic unease and rejection of McCain's latest political epiphany, that he's going to take on Wall St with new and tougher regulation and oversight.

Mark your words? Oh puhleeze.

Posted by: MA | September 24, 2008 9:01 AM

The US national psyche has been traumatized
enough with lies and misinformation by cynical sharks mocking gullible folks
who deserve to be robbed for being so dumb!?
The wildest crook dreams came true.
Surprised anyone?

Posted by: freud | September 24, 2008 9:01 AM

i'm a stay at home dad, i surely don't know how obama can be on the campaign trail without ever seeing his kids. he must be a deadbeat dad. they say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and you know his father wasn't there for him when he was a child. shame on him!

Posted by: stayathomedad | September 24, 2008 9:01 AM

Sarah Palin visited Henry Kissinger in New York. She was looking at him like a 2nd grader looking at the teacher with a notebook and pencil in hand to write down everything he said. What a fool McCain is to select her as his running mate. He is paying the price for it now.

Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 8:57 AM

I love the wapo and all these liberal rags. People just look at the percentage of negativity in the comments against barrack and do the math. There are a lot of people bashing Obama than there are McCain. As for this poll . . . why not just base it on a sample from his wife and daughters. And the fact that ABC is involved, doesn't lend any credibility to it at all. The ideology of the liberal media is that if we at least make obimbo look like he is winning, people will jump on the bandwagon, cuz nobody likes to be on the losing side. Manipulation may work for twenty somethings, but the boomers and the gen xer's are above that tom foolery. Check out a real poll if you can handle the truth.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/

Posted by: gettyleigh | September 24, 2008 8:56 AM

Just remember, the polls mean very very little come election day. 18-30 year olds don't own landline phones, which is how these polls are conducted, not on cell phones. So, even if Obama and McCain were statistically even, come election day, the youth vote will decide the election.

So, regardless of what your beliefs you want to spew on this message board...where most everyone has already made up their mind...go convince the demographic that actually has an impact on this election.

I believe (and this is just my belief, I have no data to back it up) that the youth vote will be dramatically skew Democrat.

Posted by: CynicalGuy | September 24, 2008 8:56 AM

That's funny... "8 years of misery" - I didn't see anyone complaining when NINJA loans were being given out and the housing markets were booming - greedy hogs at the trough - you don't get something for nothing (Geddy Lee)

"8 years of war" - for accuracy's sake, it's 6+ years

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

TommyF:

Are you attributing that all to the Bradley Effect or something nefarious like Diebold 2.0?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

McCain on foreign policy. Bomb Bomb Iran. McCain on the economy. The economy is strong. McCain don't know McCain how can anyone predict what this man will say or do. Lose cannon. He's the crazy uncle at the picnic telling war stories.

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

McCain on foreign policy. Bomb Bomb Iran. McCain on the economy. The economy is strong. McCain don't know McCain how can anyone predict what this man will say or do. Lose cannon. He's the crazy uncle at the picnic telling war stories.

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

McCain on foreign policy. Bomb Bomb Iran. McCain on the economy. The economy is strong. McCain don't know McCain how can anyone predict what this man will say or do. Lose cannon.

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

McCain on foreign policy. Bomb Bomb Iran. McCain on the economy. The economy is strong. McCain don't know McCain how can anyone predict what this man will say or do. Lose cannon.

Posted by: brock101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM

Sounds like sour grapes this morning, Jake. Is it November 4th yet?

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | September 24, 2008 8:51 AM

The American people are coming to the realization that Grandpa McCain is just too old to be President. He looks absolutely ghastly, a walking cadaver that is clearly confused, angry and falling apart. Coupled with the fact that he has chosen a vapid, lying, fundamentalist Freak for a running mate, it should be no surprize that their poll numbers are cratering. The Presidency has never been more demanding and challenging of a position than in will be in 2009. It will demand intellectual prowess, an even temperment, superb judgement, tremendous vitality and credibility across the globe.
As he did at the Naval Academy, McCain gets straight Fs in all categories of leadership, whereas, as he did at Columbia & Harvard, Barack is at the top of the class.

Posted by: Robert Luciano | September 24, 2008 8:50 AM

25,000 is still a big number

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:50 AM

Dan,
Remember: You REAP what you SOW...!!!
8 Years of DEMOCRATS - PEACE & PROSPERITY
8 Years of REPUBLICANS - WAR & MISERY
You SOW McPAIN, we shall REAP PAIN!

Posted by: MrFACT | September 24, 2008 8:50 AM

RM:

Post even ONE "lie" of mine. I already proved you lied about Palin being "done with them."

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:48 AM

Re: Crowd size

your quote: "The crowd she drew in Florida on Sunday -- estimated at up to 60,000 people -- says she's captured the fancy of the party faithful:

Compare to this:

Miami Herald article

"But Palin drew thousands more than the estimated 20,000 people that turned out for Bush. A fire rescue official estimated the crowd at 25,000 to 30,000, while the Republican Party of Florida pegged the audience at twice that size"

your quote just repeats the number given by the Republican Party about the audience size when an local fire official who usually knows something about crowd size indicates a crowd number half that. We know that Republicans have repeatedly lied about and exaggerated the attendance figures of their audiences. So you would do your readers a big service in at least pointing out that the 60'000 is a republican party estimate and nothing else.

Posted by: Patrick | September 24, 2008 8:48 AM

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

-Gerald Ford made this quote

Think carefully about who you choose for president.

Posted by: Joe Detroit | September 24, 2008 8:45 AM

Obama's 700 million dollar campaign and the shameless media together is trying to brainwash the American public into voting for this Fraud named Obama. His campaign is like the latest pop album or Star Wars movie, he's not any good but the public buys it. I'm hoping and praying that John McCain is still going to win this. If McCain loses mark my words all you Obama-Fanboys are going to be let down when you see he is all talk and does nothing that he says.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:45 AM

Agree with thoren58.

Thinks have changed dramatically-But, only in the Headlines.

There really is nothing new about the financial mess, except that now it is finally becoming an issue for the Media to play with.

That, and Bushie the catatonic, brain-dead Chimp, being let out of his cage to go nutso with the Federal Reserve.

Someone needs to sedate him for the next few months!

Then, we really need Mitt Romney to pick a Running Mate(Alan Keyes or even Huckleberry would work), and allow all the Fiscal, Capitalistic, America First, Conservatives to rally with a Candidate we can actually SUPPORT-And so desperately NEED!

NEVER, would I have imagined the Flawed Primary Process would have been SOOOOOO Flawed, as to give us what we have now!

Posted by: SAINT-The | September 24, 2008 8:45 AM

Thank you. Would you like my forecast on any other race or event? Bailout? Elections? War? Ask away!

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:44 AM

JakeD(King of Lies):

Sexist. Oops, is that term only reserved for the Republicans when they get caught in lies?

Posted by: rm | September 24, 2008 8:43 AM

JakeD(King of Lies):

Sexist. Oops, is that term only reserved for the Republicans when they get caught in lies?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:43 AM

Thank you. Would you like my forecast on any other race or event? Bailout? Elections? War? Ask away!

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:43 AM

Thank you. Would you like my forecast on any other race or event? Bailout? Elections? War? Ask away!

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:43 AM

larry:

Just wait until Rev. Wrong goes on his new book tour (starting October 10th).

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:43 AM

Trig needs Palin more than we need her. Please go back to Alaska and raise your children well.

Posted by: Tara | September 24, 2008 8:40 AM

with biden out there rambling incoherently, and democrats defeated on their no-drill agenda by the american people and republicans, things are going downhill for obama. all the republicans need to do is run some refresher ads featuring jeremiah wright and his mentoree, barack hussein obama....
http://www.examiner.com/x-852-Atlanta-Civics-Examiner

Posted by: larry clifton | September 24, 2008 8:38 AM

rm:

Stutter much? I will point out your lies every time you post them. Thank you very much.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:38 AM

I am going to argue that Obama needs to challenge McCain foreign policy experience with what is happening with climate change. He needs to state that as his foreign policy he will gather leaders of world to come up with solutions to global warming.

Posted by: frente | September 24, 2008 8:37 AM

I am going to argue that Obama needs to challenge McCain foreign policy experience with what is happening with climate change. He needs to state that as his foreign policy he will gather leaders of world to come up with solutions to global warming.

Posted by: frente | September 24, 2008 8:37 AM

It appears that we have found the weapons of mass destruction. We had them all the time and they were pointed at our temples(temples in this case being a double metaphor).

Posted by: g. ponti | September 24, 2008 8:37 AM

Lets have Obama go to the 57 states again

Posted by: GA | September 24, 2008 8:37 AM

TommyF:

Thanks for the forecast. I guess everyone can just pack up and go home.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:37 AM

It seems we had the wepons of mass destruction all the time...and they were pointed at our temples

Posted by: g ponti | September 24, 2008 8:35 AM

Meanwhile, Gallup shows Obama LOSING ground... it's now 47-44 nationally. Rasmussen has them tied 48-48 nationally.

But let's not kid ourselves. The polls do not reflect all the people who don't like to take polls - and most of them are Republican.

If Obama doesn't have a 10-point lead in all the polls by Nov 4, he loses.

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

JakeD:

I meant exactly what I wrote and please don't ever respond to any of my posts. I don't like you. Thanks

Posted by: RM | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

JakeD:

I meant exactly what I wrote and please don't ever respond to any of my posts. I don't like you. Thanks

Posted by: RM | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

JakeD:

I meant exactly what I wrote and please don't ever respond to any of my posts. I don't like you. Thanks

Posted by: RM | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

Meanwhile, Gallup shows Obama LOSING ground... it's now 47-44 nationally. Rasmussen has them tied 48-48 nationally.

But let's not kid ourselves. The polls do not reflect all the people who don't like to take polls - and most of them are Republican.

If Obama doesn't have a 10-point lead in all the polls by Nov 4, he loses.

Posted by: TommyF | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

Talk about "uninformed"!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:34 AM

Reminds me of the 10 pt McCain lead in the USA Today/Gallup poll after the convention....BUT it's Great- keeps Biden right where we and the NRA want him- on the ticket....and keeps Hilary on the sidelines, pacing in circles until 2012!

Posted by: Scott | September 24, 2008 8:28 AM

rm:

She was holding a sleeping Trig when she arrived in NYC, with Todd and their youngest daughter in tow. What are you talking about "she's done with them"?!

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:28 AM

The first debate is on National Security - we need to pay attention to John McCain's Coercive Diplomacy. .............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/23/john-mccain-and-coercive-diplomacy/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | September 24, 2008 8:25 AM

JackD

Think I'll just stick with the WaPo - they've been around a lot longer in this jungle than your idealistic word of Repub wisdom on this thread.

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 8:24 AM

even you guys don't believe it. basically you just lost your credit by doing such thing. ByeBye, washington post

Posted by: driver | September 24, 2008 8:24 AM

John McCain is very aware that he has made a mistake in selecting Sarah Palin as his VP choice. Palin appears to be an "empty head" when it comes to dealing with the press. McCain also had no idea that the national financial crisis would cause a severe backlash when it comes to handling the nations economy. Frankly, McCain is on a downward spiral which will get worse before the election. Many are saying that Obama will win this election by a landslide.

Posted by: DC Insider | September 24, 2008 8:23 AM

Could Someone of the Right Please try and Explain why the Selection of Gov Palin has them so exicted. I can not see it, the Republican Party was always the party of experience, and she hasn't got it. She isn't a stay at home Mom, she has worked as a NEWS ANCHOR, Mayor, State Oil Board Member and several other things since her first kid was born. She has a Journalism Degree, and was never in business beyond a low level. She "MAY" share your values, but there are lots of Republican Women with experience that share the same values, and I strongly suspect at least Senator Kay Baily Hutchson can handle a rifle just as well. What is the deal? Is it her looks? The whole Alaskan thing? Surely its not that she gave money back to the people while running a state gov awash in Federal and Oil Money. Why do you like her so much?

Posted by: Muddy | September 24, 2008 8:22 AM

Well gee, how very convenient that Bush wants this package done URGENTLY, IMMEDIATELY. He wants to stop the bleeding asap so his best buddy McCain doesn't continue to slide downward. Why should Americans foot the bill for these huge banks that created there own mess. These REPUBLICANS who did this to themselves after SCREWING the American people, the taxpayers, now want US to bail them out. The Republican party is entirely to blame! we owe them NOTHING. The few hundred banks at risk can fail and the remaining thousands left over will pick up the new business and rest of the tab, we do NOT need to bail these greedy scum sucking PIGS out. Let them rot in their pile of partisan dirt designed and fought for by Bush, that they've created for themselves!

Posted by: Democrats 08 | September 24, 2008 8:22 AM

FlaLady:

I surely was a stay at home mom with my children when they were newborns. Neither of my children have special needs either. She used her kids up at the conventions to get sympathy and now she is done with them. Why don't you stop covering up for an opportunist who a few months ago did not know what a V.P. did.

Posted by: rm | September 24, 2008 8:19 AM

Gramps is a joke and palin is an even bigger joke. W3erte it not for latent racisim which is as american as apple pie, this election would not even be close.

Posted by: chris c | September 24, 2008 8:18 AM

FlaLady:

I surely was a stay at home mom with my children when they were newborns. Neither of my children have special needs either. She used her kids up at the conventions to get sympathy and now she is done with them. Why don't you stop covering up for an opportunist who a few months ago did not know what a V.P. did.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:18 AM

Did the "update" relate to McInturff's internal polling? How about you link that in .PDF so we can make up our own minds?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:17 AM

rm, you're a stay-at-home mom are you? How are Biden's kids? Is Obama missing his? Quit taking cheap shots.

Posted by: FlaLady | September 24, 2008 8:14 AM

McCain might have won if he had picked Romney. They would have gone in the direction of experience and fiscal responsibility. Given the economy, that choice would have been a winner. After only a couple of weeks, McCain's choice of Palin makes him look stupid. She's a loser. Most significantly, McCain reached out to the social conservative "base" with the Palin pick rather than the fiscal conservative "base" with a Romney pick. That was a mistake for McCain, the Republican Party, and our country. Even if McCain/Romney hadn't won, they would have galvanized the role of the Republican Party as fiscally responsible. That goes a lot further for everyone that the family values garbage, which folks like Palin peddle but fail typically fail to live up to even in their personal lives. McCain/Palin: The Bridge to Nowhere.

Posted by: thoren58 | September 24, 2008 8:14 AM

Meet the new Republican Party: More government, more regulation, more taxes AND a bailout for overpaid executives.
What stays the same is cutting benefits for the poor and needy.
Speak about having your cake and eating it too. I hope they choke on it.
Your Truly,
A Real Patriot

Posted by: James Thomas | September 24, 2008 8:14 AM

Where is Trig? As a mother of two, I would be really missing my newborn.

Posted by: rm | September 24, 2008 8:11 AM

the post poll?
the one that won't print a word negative about Obama?

LMAO

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:10 AM

Does Joe Biden Know How They Spelled POTATO in 1929?

Politico
September 23, 2008
Categories: Joe Biden

Biden garbles Depression history

Joe Biden's denunciation of his own campaign's ad to Katie Couric got so much attention last night that another odd note in the interview slipped by.

He was speaking about the role of the White House in a financial crisis.

"When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed," Biden told Couric. "He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

As Reason's Jesse Walker footnotes it: "And if you owned an experimental TV set in 1929, you would have seen him. And you would have said to yourself, 'Who is that guy? What happened to President Hoover?'"

Posted by: Scott | September 24, 2008 8:08 AM

"McCain now needs events to help reduce the importance of the economy as an issue. Or, he must find a way in the debates to challenge Obama's standing on the issue."

SO YOU GUYS STAY IN BUSINESS?

This should be 70/30 for Obama if we had an informed voting population. I am giving McPalin 30 based on the percentage of evangelicals in the country. Republicans have NOTHING to offer this country...

Posted by: jalehw | September 24, 2008 8:07 AM

The way MSNBC and the WaPo are lying about Gov. Palin, I wouldn't put it passed them that they "polled" themselves in this instance. Regardless, the only "poll" that matters is on Election Day.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:01 AM

This is great! things are starting to open up. Can't wait to get past all the commercials and watch the debates. Jee John, how much did your guy get paid from Freddie and Fannie?

http://www.boppoll.com

I just got my morning bops in on McCain and I already feel much better this morning. 300 bops to start the day, keeps plenty of stress away! Goal today, 1,000,000 on McCain's bop-o-meter. Tell your friends!

Posted by: Now we are talking Landslide! | September 24, 2008 7:58 AM

Rather than a bailout, we should charge the Secretary of the Treasury with buying 51 percent of the five fittest banks with an infusion of capital. Those that have sinned the most can go under.

Posted by: David Blackburn | September 24, 2008 7:55 AM

I don't believe anything the WaPo comes up with anymore.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 7:54 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company