Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Top Reasons Why John McCain Lost
I'm a politics junkie so I've been reminiscing about the 2008 presidential campaign which culminated a week ago with the election of Barack Obama over John McCain as our next president. Yay! As a huge Obama supporter I could give you 1000 reasons why he won. However, as a fed up liberal, I think that it's much more interesting to look at the top reasons why John McCain lost:
6. George W. Bush
- Worst president ever
- abysmal approval rating
- McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time = NOT a maverick
- McCain had no clear policy differences from Bush
5. Economic Crisis Response
- "The fundamentals of the economy are strong."
- suspension of his campaign (didn't really) political gimmick
- despite his intervention, House Republicans first voted against bailout (no leadership by McCain)
- uninterested and uninvolved in White House meeting
- Republican economic theories of deregulation and trickle-down economics mostly to blame
- didn't look presidential
4. Debate Performance
- won't look Obama in the eye
- won't say the same smears as on campaign trail to Obama's face (until 3rd debate and then it just came across as mean)
- "That One"
- erratic
- no clear difference from failed Bush policies
- poor temperament
3. Dishonorable Campaign
- originally promised he wouldn't then blamed Obama for it
- "Change" (stealing Obama's slogans / message)
- "Obama wants kids to learn about sex before learning to read."
- "He'll raise your taxes"
- "Lipstick on a pig"
- "Pals around with a terrorist"
- "Real America"
- "Obama is a socialist"
- "Barack Hussein Obama"
- rally attendees yell hate speech
- had to defend Obama from his own crowd members
- Joe the (fake) Plumber (plant / wingnut)
- lost credibility
2. Sarah Palin as VP Choice
- completely unqualified (Foreign policy, Interviews)
- obviously not a "Country First" decision by McCain
- McCain lost "experience" attack on Obama
- not a true reformer (Wasilla left in debt, bridge to nowhere, ethics violation)
- national joke (SNL - Tina Fey, late night comics, etc.)
- hypocrite ("Hockey Mom" vs. 150K wardrobe, bridge to nowhere, "reformer")
- kept away from media
- no credibility
1. Barack Obama
- terrific candidate
- Democrat after 8 years of Dubya (R)
- great VP pick (Joe Biden)
- true message of change
- more presidential
- bipartisanship
- better policies
- better campaign
- better temperament
- hope
I will never doubt that Obama was the better choice no matter what McCain might have said or did but, after listing all of these negatives against McCain, it really shows just how bad the Republicans have to be to be able to get a Democrat elected president (let alone the first black one ever). I think if McCain had just been more positive, effectively outlined his different vision for the future separated from Bush, and if he had made a responsible and not political choice for his VP, this could have been a much closer election, and he might have even squeaked out a win (even with Bush on his back). I believe this could have been possible only because of people's instinctive reaction to reject change, especially in a time of hardship and while we're in two wars. I also think that it's possible that, no matter how McCain ran his campaign, Obama's message was so strong that he was able to overcome this obstacle.
If you want to succeed in politics then you have a great blueprint with Barack Obama's campaign but Democrats should watch out because they better believe that some Republicans will be smart enough to learn from McCain's mistakes. Hopefully that will mean the end of the nasty and divisive tactics they've been using to scare people for votes. If that is the only outcome of this election for their side, then I'm proud to help them out by listing exactly how John McCain totally blew it. Besides, it feels good to gloat a little after all that us liberals have been through over the past decade. When Barack Obama is sworn in as our 44th president it will be a new day for America and, if they truly want a better way forward for our country, then Republicans should also learn from his successful campaign and his examples through leadership in the years to come. If we can just go back to who has the best ideas and policies no matter what political party they belong to, then I believe we will all be better off.
6. George W. Bush- Worst president ever
- abysmal approval rating
- McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time = NOT a maverick
- McCain had no clear policy differences from Bush
5. Economic Crisis Response
- "The fundamentals of the economy are strong."
- suspension of his campaign (didn't really) political gimmick
- despite his intervention, House Republicans first voted against bailout (no leadership by McCain)
- uninterested and uninvolved in White House meeting
- Republican economic theories of deregulation and trickle-down economics mostly to blame
- didn't look presidential
4. Debate Performance
- won't look Obama in the eye
- won't say the same smears as on campaign trail to Obama's face (until 3rd debate and then it just came across as mean)
- "That One"
- erratic
- no clear difference from failed Bush policies
- poor temperament
3. Dishonorable Campaign
- originally promised he wouldn't then blamed Obama for it
- "Change" (stealing Obama's slogans / message)
- "Obama wants kids to learn about sex before learning to read."
- "He'll raise your taxes"
- "Lipstick on a pig"
- "Pals around with a terrorist"
- "Real America"
- "Obama is a socialist"
- "Barack Hussein Obama"
- rally attendees yell hate speech
- had to defend Obama from his own crowd members
- Joe the (fake) Plumber (plant / wingnut)
- lost credibility
2. Sarah Palin as VP Choice
- completely unqualified (Foreign policy, Interviews)
- obviously not a "Country First" decision by McCain
- McCain lost "experience" attack on Obama
- not a true reformer (Wasilla left in debt, bridge to nowhere, ethics violation)
- national joke (SNL - Tina Fey, late night comics, etc.)
- hypocrite ("Hockey Mom" vs. 150K wardrobe, bridge to nowhere, "reformer")
- kept away from media
- no credibility
1. Barack Obama
- terrific candidate
- Democrat after 8 years of Dubya (R)
- great VP pick (Joe Biden)
- true message of change
- more presidential
- bipartisanship
- better policies
- better campaign
- better temperament
- hope
I will never doubt that Obama was the better choice no matter what McCain might have said or did but, after listing all of these negatives against McCain, it really shows just how bad the Republicans have to be to be able to get a Democrat elected president (let alone the first black one ever). I think if McCain had just been more positive, effectively outlined his different vision for the future separated from Bush, and if he had made a responsible and not political choice for his VP, this could have been a much closer election, and he might have even squeaked out a win (even with Bush on his back). I believe this could have been possible only because of people's instinctive reaction to reject change, especially in a time of hardship and while we're in two wars. I also think that it's possible that, no matter how McCain ran his campaign, Obama's message was so strong that he was able to overcome this obstacle.If you want to succeed in politics then you have a great blueprint with Barack Obama's campaign but Democrats should watch out because they better believe that some Republicans will be smart enough to learn from McCain's mistakes. Hopefully that will mean the end of the nasty and divisive tactics they've been using to scare people for votes. If that is the only outcome of this election for their side, then I'm proud to help them out by listing exactly how John McCain totally blew it. Besides, it feels good to gloat a little after all that us liberals have been through over the past decade. When Barack Obama is sworn in as our 44th president it will be a new day for America and, if they truly want a better way forward for our country, then Republicans should also learn from his successful campaign and his examples through leadership in the years to come. If we can just go back to who has the best ideas and policies no matter what political party they belong to, then I believe we will all be better off.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Alabama vs. LSU Now the Most Dangerous Rivalry
Hey, I'm a huge Bama fan since birth, but this is ridiculous.According to the Mobile Press-Register:
An Escambia County couple died Saturday after an argument over the Alabama/LSU football game ended in shotgun blasts, according to Conecuh County authorities.
The shooting allegedly occurred about 7 p.m. at the home of Michael Williams near the Owassa community in Conecuh County, Chapman said.
Investigators said witnesses told them that Dennis Smith, an LSU fan, called Williams, a fan of the Crimson Tide, after the game Saturday evening and an argument ensued.
Officers said Donna Smith was a relative of Michael Williams' girlfriend.
Soon, the Smiths arrived at Williams' home and the men wound up in a physical altercation, officers said.
Smith retrieved a pistol from his vehicle, and threatened Williams, who armed himself with a shotgun and fired two blasts, striking and killing Dennis Smith, officers said.
Donna Smith then threatened Williams, who shot and killed the woman, they said.
It looks like Williams may have a case for self-defense (at least how this article is written) and, of course, alcohol was also involved but it is so sad that people would take something as trivial as a disagreement over a football game to the point where guns are brandished and lives are taken. I recall someone getting stabbed at a recent Alabama-Auburn game, but this is the first time I've ever heard of a death as a result of a sports rivalry. It's nothing to be proud of for sure...
Believe me, I completely understand how emotions can be on high over sports, and especially with heated SEC football rivalries. However, people need to remember that in the end it is just a game. Sports are suppose to build community spirit, not be the motivation behind murder.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
The Clanton Advertiser Continues to Deny Reality
Recently I pointed out how my hometown "newspaper" The Clanton Advertiser endorsed John McCain based only on a falsehood about Barack Obama. After repeated requests and a angry phone call, they have yet to even acknowledge that they got a basic fact about Obama wrong, and they refuse to print a retraction, correction or even my letter to the editor addressing this matter.
I will admit that this is personal for me. I delivered the Advertiser to over 70 households all over south Chilton County six-nights-a-week for over a year. I was not fired or laid-off but simply had to quit the job after gas prices increased to the point that I could no longer afford to make deliveries for their organization. Also, my father was the co-founder of the original newspaper that was bought in 1975 and became what is now The Clanton Advertiser. I am a long-time reader and resident of the small Alabama town that this organization is suppose to serve. On top of all of that I've been engaging in discussions on their new website which now allows people to comment on articles. There I've encountered the most disgusting opinions imaginable about Barack Obama and I'm proud to say that my participation has tamped down the fear-mongering and hate-filled rhetoric from those on the 'right' who used to be able to post without being challenged by anyone.
After sending yet another email demanding an answer for their irresponsible journalism, I received the following response from Managing Editor Brent Maze:
Not only does he try to cover the fact that they plainly got it wrong about Obama's legislative record by giving a weak excuse for how badly the article was written, he is now parroting more Republican talking points about Obama!
I've removed part of his email dealing with one of my comments that was deleted since that issue has been resolved, but here is the rest of Maze's response:
For the record, I was not bullying anyone. I simply let him know that there would be consequences if they refused to correct their mistake such as my writing on this blog and my canceled plans to advertise in their "newspaper." This is something that I'm sure they're not use to at all: accountability.
Of course I had to reply and included his boss as a CC, but my emails were 'bounced' back to me. Because the emails were bounced back to me, not at the same time but an hour apart, I'm pretty sure that they read my response and just bounced the emails so I'd leave them alone. How sneaky and dishonest is that?
Here is my reply to Mr. Maze (with a paragraph pertaining to my deleted comment removed):
I know that The Clanton Advertiser is a small town paper whose priority is obviously (based on their name) selling advertising and that they are probably used to operating without scrutiny, but this kind of irresponsible and sloppy journalism should not go on anywhere without some kind of accountability. As an ardent Obama supporter, I am sick and tired of the falsehoods being spread about him, and the fact the the Advertiser refuses to even admit their mistake shows their obvious bias and a complete lack of professionalism. Just because they are located in a very pro-Republican county in a very pro-Republican state does not give them free reign to mislead their readers and never set the record straight just because the fact they got wrong was about a Democrat.
They truth is obvious: They lied about Obama and will never admit their mistake. Due to their lack of any published response, I now believe that it was their intent to deliberately mislead their readers about Obama's record. Because of this and their recent inclination to censor comments on their website for no good reason, I will no longer be participating on their website, will never advertise with their organization, or even read their sorry excuse for a paper.
I encourage anyone who reads The Clanton Advertiser to take everything they publish, regardless of who it may favor, with a huge grain of salt. If you truly care about a news organization getting the facts correct and fairly representing all political candidates (especially when it's something as important as a presidential election), then I suggest that you cancel your subscription, refuse to advertise with them and boycott anyone who does buy ads in The Clanton Advertiser. This is the kind of accountability a dishonest and irresponsible news organization deserves.
I will admit that this is personal for me. I delivered the Advertiser to over 70 households all over south Chilton County six-nights-a-week for over a year. I was not fired or laid-off but simply had to quit the job after gas prices increased to the point that I could no longer afford to make deliveries for their organization. Also, my father was the co-founder of the original newspaper that was bought in 1975 and became what is now The Clanton Advertiser. I am a long-time reader and resident of the small Alabama town that this organization is suppose to serve. On top of all of that I've been engaging in discussions on their new website which now allows people to comment on articles. There I've encountered the most disgusting opinions imaginable about Barack Obama and I'm proud to say that my participation has tamped down the fear-mongering and hate-filled rhetoric from those on the 'right' who used to be able to post without being challenged by anyone.
After sending yet another email demanding an answer for their irresponsible journalism, I received the following response from Managing Editor Brent Maze:
First of all, that one reason was not the only reason for endorsing McCain. It was the prevailing reason, and as I have said the factual inaccuracy you have numerously repeated on our site was probably just a poor choice of words. When you have limited space to put an endorsement in the paper, we can only limit our reasoning to that space provided. The reason why there hasn’t been a retraction or a correction is because we felt there was none needed, and yes this was discussed with our news staff. I seriously doubt that we changed anyone’s mind, and the question of Obama’s experience is a valid question. I’m not sure that four years of serving in Washington is enough time to learn what he needed. I’m not sure anyone truly knows what kind of legislation Obama will propose with the exception of his “redistribution of the wealth.”
Not only does he try to cover the fact that they plainly got it wrong about Obama's legislative record by giving a weak excuse for how badly the article was written, he is now parroting more Republican talking points about Obama!
I've removed part of his email dealing with one of my comments that was deleted since that issue has been resolved, but here is the rest of Maze's response:
I do not have a problem with you calling us out, but I do not appreciate being bullied by you or anyone else. You were trying to do that in a phone call earlier this week. Because of that reason, I have chosen not to run your letter to the editor. You or anyone else will not make threats about doing something if we don’t do the thing you demand. The only one that has the right to tell me how to do anything is my boss.
For the record, I was not bullying anyone. I simply let him know that there would be consequences if they refused to correct their mistake such as my writing on this blog and my canceled plans to advertise in their "newspaper." This is something that I'm sure they're not use to at all: accountability.
Of course I had to reply and included his boss as a CC, but my emails were 'bounced' back to me. Because the emails were bounced back to me, not at the same time but an hour apart, I'm pretty sure that they read my response and just bounced the emails so I'd leave them alone. How sneaky and dishonest is that?
Here is my reply to Mr. Maze (with a paragraph pertaining to my deleted comment removed):
What matters is that the only reason you gave for endorsing McCain in that article was based on a falsehood about Obama. What your staff really thought or were limited by space to print is irrelevant when what you actually published was plainly wrong. Whether it was a poor choice of words or not, you did indeed get an obvious fact wrong and I would think that as a journalist you would care about that. However, now that you are repeating more Republican talking points about him, I have a better idea of where you're coming from.
I do apologize if I came across too harsh in my phone call to you, but I was understandably upset and may have been a bit tense on election day for obvious reasons. Not only is it important to me that people get the facts right about Obama, it is just as important that a news organization presents both sides in a fair and balanced way. Unfortunately, you failed to do this and apparently are still unwilling to set the record straight. That is your right too, but with all due respect, it speaks volumes about your organization's journalistic integrity.
I'm willing to let this go now, even though I am not satisfied at all by your lack of an official response in print. I will hope that in the future you will take your responsibility to your community seriously and get the facts correct no matter what the subject or who it may favor. That's what journalists are suppose to do.
I know that The Clanton Advertiser is a small town paper whose priority is obviously (based on their name) selling advertising and that they are probably used to operating without scrutiny, but this kind of irresponsible and sloppy journalism should not go on anywhere without some kind of accountability. As an ardent Obama supporter, I am sick and tired of the falsehoods being spread about him, and the fact the the Advertiser refuses to even admit their mistake shows their obvious bias and a complete lack of professionalism. Just because they are located in a very pro-Republican county in a very pro-Republican state does not give them free reign to mislead their readers and never set the record straight just because the fact they got wrong was about a Democrat.
They truth is obvious: They lied about Obama and will never admit their mistake. Due to their lack of any published response, I now believe that it was their intent to deliberately mislead their readers about Obama's record. Because of this and their recent inclination to censor comments on their website for no good reason, I will no longer be participating on their website, will never advertise with their organization, or even read their sorry excuse for a paper.
I encourage anyone who reads The Clanton Advertiser to take everything they publish, regardless of who it may favor, with a huge grain of salt. If you truly care about a news organization getting the facts correct and fairly representing all political candidates (especially when it's something as important as a presidential election), then I suggest that you cancel your subscription, refuse to advertise with them and boycott anyone who does buy ads in The Clanton Advertiser. This is the kind of accountability a dishonest and irresponsible news organization deserves.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Barack Obama is the man, and now "The Man"
click for full size image
Illustration by Patrick Moberg
And no white folk, Obama is NOT your worst nightmare come true:
For those still pinching themselves: Yes we did!
Election Night 2008 Highlights
Illustration by Patrick Moberg
And no white folk, Obama is NOT your worst nightmare come true:
For those still pinching themselves: Yes we did!
Election Night 2008 Highlights
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Countdown to Change
January 20th, 2009 will certainly be a day to celebrate for two big reasons. President Obama and no more Bush!
My girlfriend whipped up this video today to celebrate.
For inspiration until then: Obama's election night speech.
My girlfriend whipped up this video today to celebrate.
For inspiration until then: Obama's election night speech.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
State Education Grades Compared to 2008 Presidential Election Results
It seems the best excuse people on the 'right' can come up with today for why John McCain lost to Barack Obama is that people were uninformed or mislead by the "liberal media." Or, in other words: They are stupid. This is a ridiculous argument. I'm not saying that all Obama voters are smarter than all McCain voters, but let's look at a comparison of the education system for states and how they voted in the 2008 presidential election.
According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce State-by-State Report Card on Educational Effectiveness .
And, according to the final electoral college map from MSNBC.
7 of 10 states with a "A" rating on academic achievement voted for Obama-Biden:
Massachusetts- Obama
Minnesota- Obama
New Hampshire- Obama
Vermont - Obama
New Jersey- Obama
Connecticut- Obama
Kansas - McCain
Washington- Obama
North Dakota - McCain
Montana - McCain
7 of 10 states with a "B" rating on academic achievement voted for Obama-Biden:
Ohio - Obama
Virginia - Obama
South Dakota - McCain
Pennsylvania - Obama
Wisconsin - Obama
Maine - Obama
Wyoming - McCain
Colorado - Obama
Nebraska - McCain
Iowa - Obama
8 of 10 states with a "D" rating on academic achievement voted for McCain-Palin:
Arizona- McCain
Tennessee- McCain
Georgia- McCain
Kentucky- McCain
Arkansas- McCain
Rhode Island - Obama
Alaska - McCain
South Carolina- McCain
Florida - Obama
Missouri- McCain
States with a "F" rating on academic achievement were split evenly 5 for Obama-Biden and 5 for McCain-Palin:
District of Columbia - Obama
Mississippi - McCain
New Mexico - Obama
Alabama - McCain
Louisiana - McCain
Hawaii - Obama
Nevada - Obama
West Virginia - McCain
California - Obama
Oklahoma - McCain
States with good educational systems overwhelmingly voted for Obama-Biden and states with poor education mostly voted for McCain-Palin. This comparison clearly shows that better educated people voted for Obama and poorly educated people voted for McCain. It is more likely that well educated people made an informed decision and were able to seek out the truth. It is also more likely that poorly educated people did not make an informed decision. So, maybe we can put this pitiful excuse that Obama voters are uninformed or were fooled by the media to rest now that we know the facts.
According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce State-by-State Report Card on Educational Effectiveness .
And, according to the final electoral college map from MSNBC.
7 of 10 states with a "A" rating on academic achievement voted for Obama-Biden:
Massachusetts- Obama
Minnesota- Obama
New Hampshire- Obama
Vermont - Obama
New Jersey- Obama
Connecticut- Obama
Kansas - McCain
Washington- Obama
North Dakota - McCain
Montana - McCain
7 of 10 states with a "B" rating on academic achievement voted for Obama-Biden:
Ohio - Obama
Virginia - Obama
South Dakota - McCain
Pennsylvania - Obama
Wisconsin - Obama
Maine - Obama
Wyoming - McCain
Colorado - Obama
Nebraska - McCain
Iowa - Obama
8 of 10 states with a "D" rating on academic achievement voted for McCain-Palin:
Arizona- McCain
Tennessee- McCain
Georgia- McCain
Kentucky- McCain
Arkansas- McCain
Rhode Island - Obama
Alaska - McCain
South Carolina- McCain
Florida - Obama
Missouri- McCain
States with a "F" rating on academic achievement were split evenly 5 for Obama-Biden and 5 for McCain-Palin:
District of Columbia - Obama
Mississippi - McCain
New Mexico - Obama
Alabama - McCain
Louisiana - McCain
Hawaii - Obama
Nevada - Obama
West Virginia - McCain
California - Obama
Oklahoma - McCain
States with good educational systems overwhelmingly voted for Obama-Biden and states with poor education mostly voted for McCain-Palin. This comparison clearly shows that better educated people voted for Obama and poorly educated people voted for McCain. It is more likely that well educated people made an informed decision and were able to seek out the truth. It is also more likely that poorly educated people did not make an informed decision. So, maybe we can put this pitiful excuse that Obama voters are uninformed or were fooled by the media to rest now that we know the facts.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
President Barack Obama!
I am so proud of America for rejecting the politics of divisiveness and fear-mongering and making a intelligent choice for the change our country desperately needs by electing President Barack Obama! Make no mistake, this landslide victory is a clear mandate by the people to finally have a government that effectively works for all of the people and to take us all in a bold new direction with a new leader who offers common sense solutions and an ability to unite our country like never before.
For those whose night didn't go like they had wanted it to, I hope you'll respect our democratic process and the majority of Americans who voted for Obama. I encourage you to support our new president in the difficult times ahead. There is no doubt that we will all need to work together to truly bring about positive change for everyone. If you believe in the spirit of our country and the principles on which it was founded, you will join us in celebrating this historic moment. This is not about one man or one political party, this is about all of us. One of my favorite patriotic phrases could not be more relevant than today: "United we stand, divided we fall."
To the many who have negative opinions about Obama I can promise you this: You will be pleasantly surprised. This will not be the partisan politics of the past. He will appoint those with differing political views to his cabinet and you will see that his policies are what's best for everyone without harming the principles that make our country so great. You will also learn that he is a decent and fair man whose judgment will protect us and our interests around the world. Mark my words, Barack Obama will be a terrific president.
Obviously I am an ardent Obama supporter but, believe me, I will to hold him just as accountable as I hold all of our elected leaders. The promises candidates make on the campaign trail are important, and I will expect him to follow through with all of his proposals to the best of his ability. This will be a difficult task, but I am confident that he will work with the brightest minds available to find the best way forward for our great nation. We can overcome the partisan gridlock in Washington. We can end the influence of corporate lobbyists and government corruption. We can turn our economy around and create new jobs. We can have affordable healthcare. We can reform our education system. We can responsibly leave Iraq in victory. We can destroy the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. We can end our dependence on foreign oil and protect our environment. We can have liberty and justice for all. We are the greatest country on Earth so, yes we can!
For Obama supporters, now is the time to celebrate! Relish in this watershed moment and enjoy yourselves. You deserve it, and we all deserve the real change that is coming for the United States of America.
For those whose night didn't go like they had wanted it to, I hope you'll respect our democratic process and the majority of Americans who voted for Obama. I encourage you to support our new president in the difficult times ahead. There is no doubt that we will all need to work together to truly bring about positive change for everyone. If you believe in the spirit of our country and the principles on which it was founded, you will join us in celebrating this historic moment. This is not about one man or one political party, this is about all of us. One of my favorite patriotic phrases could not be more relevant than today: "United we stand, divided we fall."
To the many who have negative opinions about Obama I can promise you this: You will be pleasantly surprised. This will not be the partisan politics of the past. He will appoint those with differing political views to his cabinet and you will see that his policies are what's best for everyone without harming the principles that make our country so great. You will also learn that he is a decent and fair man whose judgment will protect us and our interests around the world. Mark my words, Barack Obama will be a terrific president.
Obviously I am an ardent Obama supporter but, believe me, I will to hold him just as accountable as I hold all of our elected leaders. The promises candidates make on the campaign trail are important, and I will expect him to follow through with all of his proposals to the best of his ability. This will be a difficult task, but I am confident that he will work with the brightest minds available to find the best way forward for our great nation. We can overcome the partisan gridlock in Washington. We can end the influence of corporate lobbyists and government corruption. We can turn our economy around and create new jobs. We can have affordable healthcare. We can reform our education system. We can responsibly leave Iraq in victory. We can destroy the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. We can end our dependence on foreign oil and protect our environment. We can have liberty and justice for all. We are the greatest country on Earth so, yes we can!
For Obama supporters, now is the time to celebrate! Relish in this watershed moment and enjoy yourselves. You deserve it, and we all deserve the real change that is coming for the United States of America.
Election Day Playlist - VOTE OBAMA-BIDEN!!!
Here's some great music for Election Day.
Jimi Hendrix - The Star Spangled Banner
Jay Jay French and Friends - I Want Barack
Blind Melon - Change
Bruce Springsteen - This Land Is Your Land
Sam Cooke - A Change Is Gonna Come
The Who - Won't Get Fooled Again
David Bowie - Changes
Elvis Costello - (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding
Yes We Can
U2 - City Of Blinding Lights
John Lennon - Power To The People
Jimi Hendrix - The Star Spangled Banner
Jay Jay French and Friends - I Want Barack
Blind Melon - Change
Bruce Springsteen - This Land Is Your Land
Sam Cooke - A Change Is Gonna Come
The Who - Won't Get Fooled Again
David Bowie - Changes
Elvis Costello - (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding
Yes We Can
U2 - City Of Blinding Lights
John Lennon - Power To The People
Monday, November 3, 2008
Obama Hater's Reckless Endangerment Possibly Results in Obama Vote
I live in the heart of red-state Alabama so it was no surprise when our regular vinyl and wire Obama-Biden sign was stolen after only being up in front of our house for just over a week. However, what happened Saturday crossed way over the line. In broad daylight someone dragged our homemade Obama-Biden sign out into the middle of a busy highway recklessly endangering the life of anyone driving by at the time who could have either hit the sign or would have had to brake suddenly or swerve to miss it. Who would have known that the end result would be a undecided voter possibly making up their mind to cast their ballot for Obama?
First, this isn't any regular sign. It is fashioned from a large piece of plywood about four feet wide and has 2x4s on either side as a base so it will stand up straight. There was nothing controversial painted on my homemade sign, just the words Obama and Biden in blue and a big red check mark all painted on both sides over a white background for maximum visibility. Some free-speech hating coward thought it was perfectly okay to just drag it off our property and out onto a busy two-lane highway where the speed limit is 55 mph. Someone could have easily been killed in a automobile wreck if they had hit the sign or had to try to avoid it.
We live on the top of a hill overlooking a busy highway in a rural part of the state. I knew that putting out an Obama-Biden sign was risky since, not only are we vastly outnumbered here by Republicans, but the only location where it would be visible from the road is about 50 yards from our house so it would be easy to steal without us noticing. After our regular Obama-Biden sign was stolen last week my girlfriend and I decided that putting out our only remaining sign would be too easy for someone to grab so we created our own and we made it practically un-stealable. We painted a large and heavy piece of plywood about four feet long and created a stencil for the words Obama and Biden and a large check mark. My girlfriend is an artist so it was no problem for her to also create a stencil for Obama's logo in the "O" of "Obama" and we were proud of the result. So the plywood would stand up, I attached 2x4s on each side that were cut to the same length of the plywood. I'd guess that the entire thing weighs over 50 pounds so nobody could easily snatch it and run away. Our homemade sign had remained down by the side of the road for almost a week without incident.
All day Saturday I had been extra nervous about the sign since the election is drawing near and (if the polls are correct) it is apparent Obama will win. It was around 6pm when I heard a loud noise outside so I leaped off of the couch and looked out the front door to see my sign was now out in the middle of the road. I immediately went outside but I didn't see the creep who did it - only their car which was parked up the road a bit and unfortunately my view was obstructed. I yelled as loudly as I could for them to "get off my property you *expletive deleted*!" By the time I could grab a baseball bat for self-defense and run down our gravel driveway they were gone. I would have pursued them in my car but I had to drag the sign off of the road before some unfortunate passerby hit it. When I had completed doing this it was too late to go after them to try to get a license number. I was understandably furious. Not only was someone trampling on our freedom of speech, they were willing to put people's lives in danger at the same time.
The last thing I wanted to do is give in and remove my sign, but the next day I decided it wasn't worth it to keep it by the side of the road where any anti-Obama idiot could drag it out into the highway and possibly kill someone just because they disagree with my political beliefs. I moved it up on the hill where it is not as visible, but can still be seen. I've been warned by the authorities that I should watch out on election night and in the days following for more acts of vandalism now that our home has been marked as supporting Obama. I am not afraid because those kind of people that would do such a thing are nothing but cowards and they should also know that Democrats have guns too!
I am so disappointed that this is what it has come to in our society that people will do such despicable acts just because of our differing political views. I believe that this kind of hate is a direct result of the inflammatory rhetoric from the McCain-Palin campaign that has stirred up their supporters to believe that anyone who supports Obama must be an anti-American terrorist supporter. All of America should hold John McCain and Sarah Palin accountable for their divisiveness and fear-mongering on election day.
And now for the happy part of my story. As I did when our original Obama-Biden sign was stolen, I called the County Sheriff, not because I thought they could catch the perpetrator, but so they'd know what was going on and would look after the house when they could. The deputy that came out was an extremely nice fellow and we immediately got into a conversation about the election and he claimed that he was still undecided. His concerns about Obama were the tired old falsehoods that he won't respect the flag, etc. so I quickly set him straight by explaining Obama's reasoning for sometimes not wearing a flag pin, and I made sure he knew that Barack's grandfather (who helped raise him) was a WWII vet so there's no way he could have been brought up to hate America. We talked about the economy and I explained how Obama's plan favors the middle-class much more than McCain who wants to give more tax breaks to huge corporations and will leave out over 100 million tax payers. He indicated that he had heard the charge that Obama might be a socialist, and I dispelled this as typical fear-mongering from Republicans and proved how ridiculous a claim that was based on his tax policy and if you simply read the definition of the word it is just not true. We talked about Iraq, and even though he thought it was right for the US to go in there in the first place, he agreed we should now leave. I explained that McCain has no exit strategy for Iraq and Obama will bring home our troops responsibly. The deputy also agreed that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned and I made sure that he knew that McCain has said his Supreme Court nominees would definitely have to agree that it should be overturned and that Sarah Palin believes abortions should be illegal even in the cases of incest and rape. I also told him that by looking at how each candidate has run their campaign you can get a good idea of how they'll run the country. I explained how Obama's pick of Joe Biden for VP was a true country first decision in comparison to McCain's choice of Palin and how their campaign of divisiveness and lies about Obama has been dishonorable.
In the end the Sheriff's deputy gave no clear indication which way he'd vote, but I felt good about setting the record straight about both candidates and discounting the smears about Obama that he was concerned with. It was good to know there are some in my area who still have an open mind and aren't just blindly buying into the propaganda from the right. Will he vote for Obama? I don't know, but I will hope that this ugly incident will turn into a positive with the possibility of one more vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
First, this isn't any regular sign. It is fashioned from a large piece of plywood about four feet wide and has 2x4s on either side as a base so it will stand up straight. There was nothing controversial painted on my homemade sign, just the words Obama and Biden in blue and a big red check mark all painted on both sides over a white background for maximum visibility. Some free-speech hating coward thought it was perfectly okay to just drag it off our property and out onto a busy two-lane highway where the speed limit is 55 mph. Someone could have easily been killed in a automobile wreck if they had hit the sign or had to try to avoid it.
We live on the top of a hill overlooking a busy highway in a rural part of the state. I knew that putting out an Obama-Biden sign was risky since, not only are we vastly outnumbered here by Republicans, but the only location where it would be visible from the road is about 50 yards from our house so it would be easy to steal without us noticing. After our regular Obama-Biden sign was stolen last week my girlfriend and I decided that putting out our only remaining sign would be too easy for someone to grab so we created our own and we made it practically un-stealable. We painted a large and heavy piece of plywood about four feet long and created a stencil for the words Obama and Biden and a large check mark. My girlfriend is an artist so it was no problem for her to also create a stencil for Obama's logo in the "O" of "Obama" and we were proud of the result. So the plywood would stand up, I attached 2x4s on each side that were cut to the same length of the plywood. I'd guess that the entire thing weighs over 50 pounds so nobody could easily snatch it and run away. Our homemade sign had remained down by the side of the road for almost a week without incident.
All day Saturday I had been extra nervous about the sign since the election is drawing near and (if the polls are correct) it is apparent Obama will win. It was around 6pm when I heard a loud noise outside so I leaped off of the couch and looked out the front door to see my sign was now out in the middle of the road. I immediately went outside but I didn't see the creep who did it - only their car which was parked up the road a bit and unfortunately my view was obstructed. I yelled as loudly as I could for them to "get off my property you *expletive deleted*!" By the time I could grab a baseball bat for self-defense and run down our gravel driveway they were gone. I would have pursued them in my car but I had to drag the sign off of the road before some unfortunate passerby hit it. When I had completed doing this it was too late to go after them to try to get a license number. I was understandably furious. Not only was someone trampling on our freedom of speech, they were willing to put people's lives in danger at the same time.
The last thing I wanted to do is give in and remove my sign, but the next day I decided it wasn't worth it to keep it by the side of the road where any anti-Obama idiot could drag it out into the highway and possibly kill someone just because they disagree with my political beliefs. I moved it up on the hill where it is not as visible, but can still be seen. I've been warned by the authorities that I should watch out on election night and in the days following for more acts of vandalism now that our home has been marked as supporting Obama. I am not afraid because those kind of people that would do such a thing are nothing but cowards and they should also know that Democrats have guns too!
I am so disappointed that this is what it has come to in our society that people will do such despicable acts just because of our differing political views. I believe that this kind of hate is a direct result of the inflammatory rhetoric from the McCain-Palin campaign that has stirred up their supporters to believe that anyone who supports Obama must be an anti-American terrorist supporter. All of America should hold John McCain and Sarah Palin accountable for their divisiveness and fear-mongering on election day.
And now for the happy part of my story. As I did when our original Obama-Biden sign was stolen, I called the County Sheriff, not because I thought they could catch the perpetrator, but so they'd know what was going on and would look after the house when they could. The deputy that came out was an extremely nice fellow and we immediately got into a conversation about the election and he claimed that he was still undecided. His concerns about Obama were the tired old falsehoods that he won't respect the flag, etc. so I quickly set him straight by explaining Obama's reasoning for sometimes not wearing a flag pin, and I made sure he knew that Barack's grandfather (who helped raise him) was a WWII vet so there's no way he could have been brought up to hate America. We talked about the economy and I explained how Obama's plan favors the middle-class much more than McCain who wants to give more tax breaks to huge corporations and will leave out over 100 million tax payers. He indicated that he had heard the charge that Obama might be a socialist, and I dispelled this as typical fear-mongering from Republicans and proved how ridiculous a claim that was based on his tax policy and if you simply read the definition of the word it is just not true. We talked about Iraq, and even though he thought it was right for the US to go in there in the first place, he agreed we should now leave. I explained that McCain has no exit strategy for Iraq and Obama will bring home our troops responsibly. The deputy also agreed that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned and I made sure that he knew that McCain has said his Supreme Court nominees would definitely have to agree that it should be overturned and that Sarah Palin believes abortions should be illegal even in the cases of incest and rape. I also told him that by looking at how each candidate has run their campaign you can get a good idea of how they'll run the country. I explained how Obama's pick of Joe Biden for VP was a true country first decision in comparison to McCain's choice of Palin and how their campaign of divisiveness and lies about Obama has been dishonorable.
In the end the Sheriff's deputy gave no clear indication which way he'd vote, but I felt good about setting the record straight about both candidates and discounting the smears about Obama that he was concerned with. It was good to know there are some in my area who still have an open mind and aren't just blindly buying into the propaganda from the right. Will he vote for Obama? I don't know, but I will hope that this ugly incident will turn into a positive with the possibility of one more vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
My hometown paper endorses McCain, gets fact wrong about Obama
The Clanton Advertiser has endorsed John McCain for president. I have no problem with that, but their primary reasoning for why Obama is not their choice is just plain wrong.
The Advertiser has the right to endorse John McCain but they owe their readers to at least get the facts right!
Their primary reason for why Barack Obama does not get their endorsement contains the following factual inaccuracy:
Barack Obama has indeed been able to get legislation passed in Congress since he became a US Senator. In fact, 16 bills sponsored or co-sponsored by Obama have became law.
Here is a list of some of the legislation that is now a US law thanks to Obama:
The Lugar-Obama Non-Proliferation Act
S.2590 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
S.2125 The Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act
S.2488 OPEN Government Act of 2007
S. 2803 Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006
S. 707 PREEMIE Act
S. 906: Mercury Market Minimization Act of 2007
S.2617 Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2008
S.2135 Child Soldiers Accountability Act of 2008
S.1760 Healthy Start Reauthorization Act of 2007
S.1492 Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act
S.1276 Methamphetamine Production Prevention Act of 2008
S.793 Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 2008
S.431 KIDS Act of 2008
I don't know how the Advertiser got this easy-to-confirm fact wrong but anyone can learn the truth about Obama's record of passing bills into law by doing a little research online.
The Clanton Advertiser is being irresponsible by publishing this falsehood about Obama and I demanded that they print a retraction before election day. If they have any journalistic integrity at all they will do so as soon as possible.
McCain has shown that he has the experience necessary to get legislation passed in Congress. Obama hasn’t. In the years he has been in office, Obama hasn’t been able to get any legislation passed into law. If you can’t get any bills pushed through Congress to become law, then you can’t produce any change.
This is the reason why we believe McCain is the best man to lead our country for the next four years.
The Advertiser has the right to endorse John McCain but they owe their readers to at least get the facts right!
Their primary reason for why Barack Obama does not get their endorsement contains the following factual inaccuracy:
In the years he has been in office, Obama hasn’t been able to get any legislation passed into law.
Barack Obama has indeed been able to get legislation passed in Congress since he became a US Senator. In fact, 16 bills sponsored or co-sponsored by Obama have became law.
Here is a list of some of the legislation that is now a US law thanks to Obama:
The Lugar-Obama Non-Proliferation Act
S.2590 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
S.2125 The Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act
S.2488 OPEN Government Act of 2007
S. 2803 Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006
S. 707 PREEMIE Act
S. 906: Mercury Market Minimization Act of 2007
S.2617 Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2008
S.2135 Child Soldiers Accountability Act of 2008
S.1760 Healthy Start Reauthorization Act of 2007
S.1492 Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act
S.1276 Methamphetamine Production Prevention Act of 2008
S.793 Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 2008
S.431 KIDS Act of 2008
I don't know how the Advertiser got this easy-to-confirm fact wrong but anyone can learn the truth about Obama's record of passing bills into law by doing a little research online.
The Clanton Advertiser is being irresponsible by publishing this falsehood about Obama and I demanded that they print a retraction before election day. If they have any journalistic integrity at all they will do so as soon as possible.
Monday, October 27, 2008
An open letter to McCain-Palin supporters
For wingnuts with no sense of humor THIS IS SATIRE! geesh - it's always had a comedy tag.
Hi,
Are you the kind of person who watches The Colbert Report and nods in agreement with everything he says while wondering why everyone else is laughing their ass off? Does watching Tina Fey's impersonation of Sarah Palin piss you off? Do you still think Bush has done a 'heck of a job' and Democrats are responsible for everything bad that happens? Then you are out of touch, and you must be a McCain-Palin supporter.
We are one week from the most important election in our lifetime, so why is it that most of you still continue to believe the outrageous lies being spread about Barack Obama? It seems to me that you have formed your opinion of why John McCain should be president based on how bad you think Obama is from the false claims that he's a Arab Muslim terrorist baby killing socialist. Do you have any clue how stupid this sounds, or are those accusations just excuses that you use for not voting for the black guy? Hardly any of you can say why McCain would make a good president, but you sure know a lot about the people Obama barely knew and will easily ignore all of McCain and Palin's questionable associations. Hypocrisy is a way of life with you isn't it?
After Barack Obama is President, why don't you and all your right-wing extremist friends follow Sarah Palin back to Alaska, join the Alaskan Independence Party and secede from the United States? You all want your own fascist Christian theocracy that forces everyone to look, behave and believe just like you do, so this is the perfect solution. You can call your new country "Wingnutia".
You can write your own Constitution and laws without all the things that you seem to hate so much like freedom of speech, separation of church and state, due process and the right to privacy.
In Wingnutia, anyone and everyone who wants any type of gun can get one regardless of their background or mental capacity, so that should be fun - kinda like the wild west only with automatic machine guns and a lot colder.
Abortions will be totally illegal, so you'll have plenty of unwanted kids to fill your population. Many will be the result of incest so you won't be the smartest nation, but you like stupidity don't you because people are easier to control when they're idiots.
Nobody will ever question your leaders, so there will be no responsibility for any of you to bother to vote or even pay attention to what's going on - something you already seem to be good at. You can make Palin Queen of Wingnutia, and bow down to her and the corporations who will make you their slave at her behest.
Don't forget you can also shoot and kill any animal for any reason you want in Wingnutia and use up all the natural resources with no regard for the environment at all. Waging war will be an everyday aspect of life there when your leaders invade any country whose leaders look at them funny.
The best thing about your new country will be that you can continue to ignore reality without any pesky liberal intellectual elites proving you are wrong again and again with their annoying facts and truth.
If you choose to follow my advice, remember one thing. When Putin 'rears his head' - don't come asking for the USA to help. You've got your own foreign policy 'expert' as your glorious leader who can see Russia, so she must know what to do. Get Sarah Palin to deal with it because you're on your own.
Sincerely,
A proud, and fed up liberal.
Hi,
Are you the kind of person who watches The Colbert Report and nods in agreement with everything he says while wondering why everyone else is laughing their ass off? Does watching Tina Fey's impersonation of Sarah Palin piss you off? Do you still think Bush has done a 'heck of a job' and Democrats are responsible for everything bad that happens? Then you are out of touch, and you must be a McCain-Palin supporter.
We are one week from the most important election in our lifetime, so why is it that most of you still continue to believe the outrageous lies being spread about Barack Obama? It seems to me that you have formed your opinion of why John McCain should be president based on how bad you think Obama is from the false claims that he's a Arab Muslim terrorist baby killing socialist. Do you have any clue how stupid this sounds, or are those accusations just excuses that you use for not voting for the black guy? Hardly any of you can say why McCain would make a good president, but you sure know a lot about the people Obama barely knew and will easily ignore all of McCain and Palin's questionable associations. Hypocrisy is a way of life with you isn't it?
After Barack Obama is President, why don't you and all your right-wing extremist friends follow Sarah Palin back to Alaska, join the Alaskan Independence Party and secede from the United States? You all want your own fascist Christian theocracy that forces everyone to look, behave and believe just like you do, so this is the perfect solution. You can call your new country "Wingnutia".
You can write your own Constitution and laws without all the things that you seem to hate so much like freedom of speech, separation of church and state, due process and the right to privacy.
In Wingnutia, anyone and everyone who wants any type of gun can get one regardless of their background or mental capacity, so that should be fun - kinda like the wild west only with automatic machine guns and a lot colder.
Abortions will be totally illegal, so you'll have plenty of unwanted kids to fill your population. Many will be the result of incest so you won't be the smartest nation, but you like stupidity don't you because people are easier to control when they're idiots.
Nobody will ever question your leaders, so there will be no responsibility for any of you to bother to vote or even pay attention to what's going on - something you already seem to be good at. You can make Palin Queen of Wingnutia, and bow down to her and the corporations who will make you their slave at her behest.
Don't forget you can also shoot and kill any animal for any reason you want in Wingnutia and use up all the natural resources with no regard for the environment at all. Waging war will be an everyday aspect of life there when your leaders invade any country whose leaders look at them funny.
The best thing about your new country will be that you can continue to ignore reality without any pesky liberal intellectual elites proving you are wrong again and again with their annoying facts and truth.
If you choose to follow my advice, remember one thing. When Putin 'rears his head' - don't come asking for the USA to help. You've got your own foreign policy 'expert' as your glorious leader who can see Russia, so she must know what to do. Get Sarah Palin to deal with it because you're on your own.
Sincerely,
A proud, and fed up liberal.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Obama a socialist?
The McCain/Palin campaign wants you to think that Barack Obama is a socialist. That is a lie.
To understand this accusation we need to know exactly what socialism is. Let's look at the definition of the word according to Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
That doesn't sound like any of Obama's plans or policies to me, and believe me, I know them inside and out. His health care plan doesn't even require a mandate for coverage except for children. There is absolutely nothing in Obama's voting record resembling socialism either other than the recent bipartisan bailout bill which was also voted for by McCain. So, where did this accusation come from? They took one quote from Obama out of context when he was speaking with the now infamous "Joe the Plumber" and said:
That's right, that one quote about spreading the wealth around (taken out of context) is the basis for their entire claim that Obama is a socialist.
When Obama said it's good to "spread the wealth around" all he meant was that he's going to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 5% of Americans expire. This will shift some of the tax burden off of the middle class and increase income taxes for those making over $250K a year up a whopping 3%. That's it, not some grand sinister plan to destroy our capitalist democracy. It's a fair plan (the same as under Clinton), and when you look at the history of our tax system, Obama is actually to the right politically of Presidents Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and Eisenhower on how much the wealthiest Americans should pay in taxes.
Interestingly, socialists don't think Obama is a socialist:
Experts don't think Obama is a socialist. From McClatchy:
From the Chicago Tribune:
Even this very anti-Obama wingnut says Obama is NOT a socialist:
The claim that Obama is a socialist is just another fear-mongering technique to scare people into thinking that he is somehow anti-American and it is a despicable tactic. I have to say, it's no surprise from John McCain's dishonorable campaign that has been full of lies, smears and character attacks while ignoring the problems we face as a country. So, how about getting past the fear-mongering and try to focus on the real issues people? Have you ever heard the term "united we stand, divided we fall"? Then stop trying to divide our nation just to win an election with baseless accusations such as Obama is a socialist, because it is simply not true.
To understand this accusation we need to know exactly what socialism is. Let's look at the definition of the word according to Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
Socialism:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
That doesn't sound like any of Obama's plans or policies to me, and believe me, I know them inside and out. His health care plan doesn't even require a mandate for coverage except for children. There is absolutely nothing in Obama's voting record resembling socialism either other than the recent bipartisan bailout bill which was also voted for by McCain. So, where did this accusation come from? They took one quote from Obama out of context when he was speaking with the now infamous "Joe the Plumber" and said:
"It's not that I want to punish your success," the Illinois senator told Wurzelbacher. "I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too. My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. . . . I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
That's right, that one quote about spreading the wealth around (taken out of context) is the basis for their entire claim that Obama is a socialist.
When Obama said it's good to "spread the wealth around" all he meant was that he's going to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 5% of Americans expire. This will shift some of the tax burden off of the middle class and increase income taxes for those making over $250K a year up a whopping 3%. That's it, not some grand sinister plan to destroy our capitalist democracy. It's a fair plan (the same as under Clinton), and when you look at the history of our tax system, Obama is actually to the right politically of Presidents Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and Eisenhower on how much the wealthiest Americans should pay in taxes.
Interestingly, socialists don't think Obama is a socialist:
Brian Moore is the Socialist Party USA candidate for president who claims that Democratic presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama, is not a socialist as the McCain-Palin camp would have us believe.
Experts don't think Obama is a socialist. From McClatchy:
Favoring higher tax rates for the wealthy than for the less fortunate isn't socialism, and if it is, then the U.S. has been a socialist country for nearly a century, under both Democrats and Republicans.
"The answer is clearly no, Senator Obama is not a socialist," said Paul Beck, a professor of political science at The Ohio State University. "We've had a progressive tax system for some time, and both Republicans and Democrats have bought into it."
From the Chicago Tribune:
"Obama is about as far from being a socialist as Joe The Plumber is from being a rocket scientist," said Darrell West, director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "I think it's hard for McCain to call Obama a socialist when George Bush is nationalizing banks."
And this from Bruce Carruthers, a sociology professor at Northwestern University: "Obama is like a center-liberal Democrat, and he is certainly not looking to overthrow capitalism. My goodness, he wouldn't have the support of someone like The Wizard of Omaha, Warren Buffet, if he truly was going to overthrow capitalism."
Even this very anti-Obama wingnut says Obama is NOT a socialist:
Calling Obama a “socialist” simply isn’t logical. He doesn’t share the belief that industries should be nationalized by the government or even taken over by the workers as many American Marxists espouse. He may not be as wedded to the free market as a conservative but he doesn’t want to get rid of it. He wants to regulate it. He wants “capitalism with a human face.” He wants to mitigate some of the effects of the market when people lose. This is boilerplate Democratic party liberalism not radical socialism.
The claim that Obama is a socialist is just another fear-mongering technique to scare people into thinking that he is somehow anti-American and it is a despicable tactic. I have to say, it's no surprise from John McCain's dishonorable campaign that has been full of lies, smears and character attacks while ignoring the problems we face as a country. So, how about getting past the fear-mongering and try to focus on the real issues people? Have you ever heard the term "united we stand, divided we fall"? Then stop trying to divide our nation just to win an election with baseless accusations such as Obama is a socialist, because it is simply not true.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Oh, the humanity! - Adventures of a Obamavenger
Recently I've subjected myself to the dregs of humanity who spew the most hateful and outrageous lies about Barack Obama. I regularly get comments about Obama such as he "wants to take my guns" or he's a "Muslim supported by terrorists", a "baby killer", and the "anti-christ". Where do I find such filth, and better yet, why do I even bother with such uninformed idiots? My hometown newspaper's website recently added a comment system so users can add their thoughts to articles that appear in their online edition. As to why, I post there to make sure their right-wing propaganda does not go unanswered in case a casual reader believes the lies. So far, I've been attacked, called names, and lied about by the regular commenters there, and by what I suspect is many of their duplicate accounts. This is not surprising since the things they believe are so far 'out there', it's no wonder that their tactics would be just as extreme.
I won't stress anyone with any of the more disgusting attacks on Obama and my responses, but here's the latest post that frequent contributor "TheDude" posted to hijack an article to promote his delusional wingnut views.
The article was about getting ready to vote on November 4th. (I won't post the links to the website where my ongoing struggle with these people is taking place. I don't think it's right that anyone else gets involved because of my blog, and believe me, you don't want to deal with these asstards!)
The first comment on the article is from username "TheDude":
His buddy (or duplicate account) "TLS" chimed in the next day around the same time as the first comment.
TLS is referring to me ASE = AllSeeingEye
"TheDude" replied a few hours later:
I'm sick of dealing with this punk from past conversations, but I had told him this election is not about him or me, it's about the issues. So, I posted the following:
I know I'll just get flamed again, but I can't let their obvious lies and hypocrisy go unchallenged! There have been a few other people who post occasionally there in support of Obama, and I even got a message today from a nice lady thanking me for standing up for Obama. However, the McCain/Palin supporters are always the most ignorant, hateful and despicable people I've ever heard and their views (if they actually believe them) are simply not based in reality. Until people wake the fuck up or just stop using fear, hate and lies to form their opinions I will continue to post there as a Obamavenger™!
I won't stress anyone with any of the more disgusting attacks on Obama and my responses, but here's the latest post that frequent contributor "TheDude" posted to hijack an article to promote his delusional wingnut views.
The article was about getting ready to vote on November 4th. (I won't post the links to the website where my ongoing struggle with these people is taking place. I don't think it's right that anyone else gets involved because of my blog, and believe me, you don't want to deal with these asstards!)
The first comment on the article is from username "TheDude":
John McCain and Sarah Palin are TRUE Americans with the back-up to prove it. They don't associate with known extremists, terrorists, and corrupt lobbyists and individuals. I believe they will lead our country out of economic troubles and move us forward in cleaning up our environment, keeping us safe, and helping the U.S. become a self-sufficient, clean energy nation. Your gut ought to tell you that somethin' ain't right with the Obama, Biden ticket.
His buddy (or duplicate account) "TLS" chimed in the next day around the same time as the first comment.
ASE must not have seen this comment yet, or he surely would have attacked you :) For the record though, I agree with you 100 %!
TLS is referring to me ASE = AllSeeingEye
"TheDude" replied a few hours later:
You may be right, TLS ... or he's drumming up a comeback right now, or I have no credibility again and he is not gonna waste his time. DOH!
I'm sick of dealing with this punk from past conversations, but I had told him this election is not about him or me, it's about the issues. So, I posted the following:
First, just because someone has a different point of view than you do, it doesn't mean they're un-American. That is nothing but fear-mongering, and the Republicans are rolling out this disgusting tactic just in time to try to steal an election by scaring people into voting for them. Yes, they're that desperate to distract you from the fact that McCain has no clear vision or plan for the future of this country other than more of the same failed Bush policies.
"They don't associate with known extremists, terrorists, and corrupt lobbyists and individuals." ?
John McCain's associations:
Rod Parsley - extremist
John Hagee - extremist
Michelle Bachman - extremist (Claims liberals in congress should be investigated for being "anti-American")
Richard Quinn - extremist (white supremacist)
La Raza - extremists
The U.S. Council for World Freedom - extremists
Charles Keating - conviced felon (McCain was one of the "Keating 5")
G. Gordon Liddy - convicted felon (Watergate) and extremist
Campaign manager Rick Davis - lobbyist
Chief political adviser Charles R. Black Jr. - lobbyist
Senior foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann - lobbyist
Senior advisers Steve Schmidt and Mark McKinnon - lobbyists
Fund raiser Tom Loeffler - lobbyist
Economic adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer - lobbyist
Congressional liaison John Green - lobbyist
National finance Co-chairman Wayne Berman - lobbyist
RNC's liaison to the McCain campaign Frank Donatelli - lobbyist
Sarah Palin's associations:
Alaskan Independence Party - extremists (wants Alaska to secede from the USA - Palin sent them video messages as governor saying "keep up the good work!")
Todd Palin - extremist (former member of AIP)
Thomas Muthee - extremist (Sarah Palin's pastor who boasts of hunting witches)
Ted Stevens - indicted Alaskan Senator
When people attack Obama for his associations while denying McCain and Palin's, it is the height of hypocrisy! I don't have to attack, I just point out the truth.
I know I'll just get flamed again, but I can't let their obvious lies and hypocrisy go unchallenged! There have been a few other people who post occasionally there in support of Obama, and I even got a message today from a nice lady thanking me for standing up for Obama. However, the McCain/Palin supporters are always the most ignorant, hateful and despicable people I've ever heard and their views (if they actually believe them) are simply not based in reality. Until people wake the fuck up or just stop using fear, hate and lies to form their opinions I will continue to post there as a Obamavenger™!
My Obama/Biden sign was stolen
Last night some coward stole my Obama/Biden sign which had only been up just over a week. The only location I have on my property to put a sign that can be seen from the busy highway nearby is quite a distance from the house, so it's next to impossible to notice if someone is stealing my signs. I've tried to make my presence known by going out on the front porch regularly to look over my sign's location, but last night some jerk grabbed it without me knowing. Sure, it could have been mischievous kids or an Obama fan who wanted their own sign, but I seriously doubt it. Where I live (in the heart of red state Alabama) there are no other Obama signs anywhere. I've seen a few McCain/Palin signs up the road, and interestingly they're still there today after mine was stolen.
Let me just say that the kind of person who would steal a political sign because they support someone else is a despicable individual. I would never even consider taking someone's sign and infringing on their right to free speech. But, this is the country we now live in, where those with opposing views are attacked rather than respected.
To anyone who would steal ANY political sign: You are the worst form of coward there is, and a criminal. You might as well go and find a Veteran and spit in their face because by stealing a sign you are only infringing on someone's constitutional right to free speech, which that Veteran served their country to protect. There are plenty of countries where you wouldn’t be bothered with problems like free speech. Please choose one and move there. You don’t deserve to live here. Also, every time you steal a sign I will donate more money to Obama - so you are only helping him get elected President.
So, what will I do? Put up my last Obama/Biden sign to be stolen again? Nope. Set a booby trap so the thief will get a hand full of razor blades or a foot full of nails? Nah - I refuse to hurt even the idiots who would steal a sign (plus it would be illegal). Instead, I'm currently making my own homemade sign out of a very heavy piece of plywood that will be attached to a big 2x4. It will be much harder to steal or destroy, and anyone who tries will have to make a lot of noise to do so. I am also setting up video surveillance to catch a perpetrator's face or license number. Hopefully, this will end my sign theft problem, and I'll post pictures when my sign is complete.
Another alternative is to print my own signs and post them everywhere on our property. Here is a nice resource for Obama/Biden printable signs in PDF format.
Let me just say that the kind of person who would steal a political sign because they support someone else is a despicable individual. I would never even consider taking someone's sign and infringing on their right to free speech. But, this is the country we now live in, where those with opposing views are attacked rather than respected.
To anyone who would steal ANY political sign: You are the worst form of coward there is, and a criminal. You might as well go and find a Veteran and spit in their face because by stealing a sign you are only infringing on someone's constitutional right to free speech, which that Veteran served their country to protect. There are plenty of countries where you wouldn’t be bothered with problems like free speech. Please choose one and move there. You don’t deserve to live here. Also, every time you steal a sign I will donate more money to Obama - so you are only helping him get elected President.
So, what will I do? Put up my last Obama/Biden sign to be stolen again? Nope. Set a booby trap so the thief will get a hand full of razor blades or a foot full of nails? Nah - I refuse to hurt even the idiots who would steal a sign (plus it would be illegal). Instead, I'm currently making my own homemade sign out of a very heavy piece of plywood that will be attached to a big 2x4. It will be much harder to steal or destroy, and anyone who tries will have to make a lot of noise to do so. I am also setting up video surveillance to catch a perpetrator's face or license number. Hopefully, this will end my sign theft problem, and I'll post pictures when my sign is complete.
Another alternative is to print my own signs and post them everywhere on our property. Here is a nice resource for Obama/Biden printable signs in PDF format.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The best videos of the Presidential election yet!
On Thursday night, Barack Obama and John McCain both attended the Alfred E. Smith dinner which is known for the humorous speeches and political luminaries who attend.
Obama's speech was one of the funniest things I've heard in a long time. He roasts McCain, himself, others, and jokes about everything that's been going on in this presidential election campaign.
McCain was funny too, and is very classy at the end when talking about Obama. Well done Sen. McCain!
There are more parts of their speeches from the dinner on YouTube for both Obama and McCain, but I thought these two were the most entertaining. With such a stressful election this time, it was really good for me to see both candidates lighten up for a night.
Obama's speech was one of the funniest things I've heard in a long time. He roasts McCain, himself, others, and jokes about everything that's been going on in this presidential election campaign.
McCain was funny too, and is very classy at the end when talking about Obama. Well done Sen. McCain!
There are more parts of their speeches from the dinner on YouTube for both Obama and McCain, but I thought these two were the most entertaining. With such a stressful election this time, it was really good for me to see both candidates lighten up for a night.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Meet "Joe the Plumber"
In the final presidential debate last night, John McCain threw a citizen into the spotlight when he mentioned "Joe the Plumber" - a real person who recently met Obama and asked him why his proposed tax plan would keep him from buying a company.
Here is the video of that meeting:
Obama deserves credit for being honest with the guy when he told him if he makes over 250K his taxes will increase. He could have pandered to him, but he didn't. He outlined his plan and how it will actually benefit him. Now that is some "straight talk" if I've ever heard it.
For the record, I'd like to mention that when Obama told Joe he'd "spread the wealth around" - Obama means he'll take the tax burden off the middle-class by getting rid of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (that McCain initially opposed but later voted for). That is his plan, not any new revolutionary socialist ideal.
McCain must have heard something different from that meeting since he brought up Joe so many times in the debate. I think he wanted to make it seem like poor Joe won't be helped by Obama's plan that he wanted to paint as socialist.
But who is this guy and which plan will really benefit him more? Let's Meet "Joe the Plumber" shall we?
From the reporting that's come out just this morning I've learned the following:
• His real name is Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher (No wonder they just use "Joe") and he's from Toledo, Ohio.
• His name was misspelled in the Ohio voter registration database. This is one reason people worry about voter disenfranchisement with the purging of voter rolls since they are such a mess to begin with.
• He says he has no plumbing license and doesn't need one because he works for someone else.
• He is a registered Republican and McCain supporter and not undecided.
• Joe currently does not make more than 250K a year, so Obama's tax plan will actually benefit him now. As Obama points out, that means it will be easier for him to save to better afford to buy that company.
• If he does buy that business and makes more than 250K a year his taxes will increase by only 3% back to the level it was under Clinton. On health care, the company will still be classified as a small business and he'll get a 50% tax cut for his employees' health benefits. How does this keep him from buying that business? McCain will tax health care benefits for the first time ever.
• There is also evidence out there that Joe owes back taxes. Why does he care about tax plans when he doesn't pay his taxes?
• Last night he was interviewed by CBS and compared Obama to Sammy Davis Jr. with his supposed 'tap-dancing around the issues'. Not only was this subtly racist, he was obviously not watching the same debate that I saw. Obama had specifics on every issue and answered the questions in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. He plainly set the record straight with facts.
• Joe has been parroting McCain talking points in TV interviews.
• He believes, like McCain, that social security should be privatized. An idea that would have been disastrous if in place during our recent financial crisis.
• Also, it appears from one report that Joe may be related to none-other than Charles Keating! I think Joe's bias is showing.
Joe may love him some McCain, but I'll bet he's pissed now that he's in the center of a media circus and we're learning just who "Joe the Plumber" really is.
Here's a guy who basically came up to Obama and asked 'why should I vote for you if you're going to raise my taxes?' Obama didn't pander to him - he was honest when he told him that if he makes over 250K a year his taxes will go up 3% - to the same it was under Clinton. Even when he knew that Joe disagrees with him, Obama engaged him and outlined his ideas with details about how his health care plan will actually benefit him if he buys that company He also explains that if his policies had already been in place, it would be easier for Joe to save to afford to buy that company.
Isn't this exactly what we need right now in our President? Someone who is not afraid to tell the truth to a potential voter when his answer may not benefit them. Someone who will listen to and talk to those who may disagree with his point of view. Someone who speaks in specifics not generalities, and has common sense plans for our economy. Not someone, "that one".
Here is the video of that meeting:
Obama deserves credit for being honest with the guy when he told him if he makes over 250K his taxes will increase. He could have pandered to him, but he didn't. He outlined his plan and how it will actually benefit him. Now that is some "straight talk" if I've ever heard it.
For the record, I'd like to mention that when Obama told Joe he'd "spread the wealth around" - Obama means he'll take the tax burden off the middle-class by getting rid of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (that McCain initially opposed but later voted for). That is his plan, not any new revolutionary socialist ideal.
McCain must have heard something different from that meeting since he brought up Joe so many times in the debate. I think he wanted to make it seem like poor Joe won't be helped by Obama's plan that he wanted to paint as socialist.
But who is this guy and which plan will really benefit him more? Let's Meet "Joe the Plumber" shall we?
From the reporting that's come out just this morning I've learned the following:
• His real name is Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher (No wonder they just use "Joe") and he's from Toledo, Ohio.
• His name was misspelled in the Ohio voter registration database. This is one reason people worry about voter disenfranchisement with the purging of voter rolls since they are such a mess to begin with.
• He says he has no plumbing license and doesn't need one because he works for someone else.
• He is a registered Republican and McCain supporter and not undecided.
• Joe currently does not make more than 250K a year, so Obama's tax plan will actually benefit him now. As Obama points out, that means it will be easier for him to save to better afford to buy that company.
• If he does buy that business and makes more than 250K a year his taxes will increase by only 3% back to the level it was under Clinton. On health care, the company will still be classified as a small business and he'll get a 50% tax cut for his employees' health benefits. How does this keep him from buying that business? McCain will tax health care benefits for the first time ever.
• There is also evidence out there that Joe owes back taxes. Why does he care about tax plans when he doesn't pay his taxes?
• Last night he was interviewed by CBS and compared Obama to Sammy Davis Jr. with his supposed 'tap-dancing around the issues'. Not only was this subtly racist, he was obviously not watching the same debate that I saw. Obama had specifics on every issue and answered the questions in an intelligent and thoughtful manner. He plainly set the record straight with facts.
• Joe has been parroting McCain talking points in TV interviews.
• He believes, like McCain, that social security should be privatized. An idea that would have been disastrous if in place during our recent financial crisis.
• Also, it appears from one report that Joe may be related to none-other than Charles Keating! I think Joe's bias is showing.
Joe may love him some McCain, but I'll bet he's pissed now that he's in the center of a media circus and we're learning just who "Joe the Plumber" really is.
Here's a guy who basically came up to Obama and asked 'why should I vote for you if you're going to raise my taxes?' Obama didn't pander to him - he was honest when he told him that if he makes over 250K a year his taxes will go up 3% - to the same it was under Clinton. Even when he knew that Joe disagrees with him, Obama engaged him and outlined his ideas with details about how his health care plan will actually benefit him if he buys that company He also explains that if his policies had already been in place, it would be easier for Joe to save to afford to buy that company.
Isn't this exactly what we need right now in our President? Someone who is not afraid to tell the truth to a potential voter when his answer may not benefit them. Someone who will listen to and talk to those who may disagree with his point of view. Someone who speaks in specifics not generalities, and has common sense plans for our economy. Not someone, "that one".
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Conservatives Blast McCain
In case anybody thinks that my posts here are all just my biased opinion, they should know that many conservatives and Republicans are jumping off the McCain/Palin bandwagon and some are even brave enough to denounce their inflammatory rhetoric. Here are their own words.
Joshua Trevino, co-founder of RedState.com, wrote on his blog:
Bill Kristol:
Republican Congressman Ray LaHood on Sarah Palin:
Republican Michelle Laxalt on Larry King Live:
Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican U.S. senator from Rhode Island:
National Federation of Filipino-American Republicans founder Perry Diaz:
Washington Post columnist George Will:
Former Republican Governor of Michigan William Milliken, who endorsed McCain during the primaries:
Former Repbulican governor of Wisconsin Tommy Thompson - When asked if he was happy with McCain's campaign he replied:
National Review columnist Christopher Buckley endorses Obama:
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker:
Joshua Trevino, co-founder of RedState.com, wrote on his blog:
Do I believe in John McCain? Not as much as I used to. Do I believe in Sarah Palin? Despite my early enthusiasm for her, now not at all. Do I believe in the national Republican Party? Not in the slightest — even though I see no meaningful alternative to it.
Bill Kristol:
It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s... ...The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic.
Republican Congressman Ray LaHood on Sarah Palin:
Look it. This doesn't befit the office that she's running for. And frankly, people don't like it.
Republican Michelle Laxalt on Larry King Live:
I'm sorry. This is not the Republican Party that Bill Buckley, that Paul Laxalt, that Ronald Reagan raised me on. And I don't believe the American people like this kind of dirty politics. If they can't win fair and square, they shouldn't trash the other guy.
Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican U.S. senator from Rhode Island:
Sen. Obama is the first Democrat I've ever voted for... ...As he geared up for this 2008 election, it became a different John McCain who was pandering to the base. That's what McCain is doing: dividing this country.
National Federation of Filipino-American Republicans founder Perry Diaz:
I endorsed McCain before the California primary believing that he was the right man for the job. I was wrong. His selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate and his decision a few days ago to resort to personal attacks on Obama's character and integrity run counter to my personal beliefs and core values. I have lost my respect for McCain and I believe that a McCain/Palin administration would only worsen the economic situation in the country.
Washington Post columnist George Will:
Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama... ...It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?
Former Republican Governor of Michigan William Milliken, who endorsed McCain during the primaries:
He is not the McCain I endorsed. He keeps saying, 'Who is Barack Obama?' I would ask the question, 'Who is John McCain?' because his campaign has become rather disappointing to me. I'm disappointed in the tenor and the personal attacks on the part of the McCain campaign, when he ought to be talking about the issues.
Former Repbulican governor of Wisconsin Tommy Thompson - When asked if he was happy with McCain's campaign he replied:
“No,” and he added, “I don’t know who is.”
National Review columnist Christopher Buckley endorses Obama:
This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that?
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker:
Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there... ...If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself... ...Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first. Do it for your country.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Why they want to be President
Both candidates' own words show the clear contrast between the two when it comes to why they want to be President.
The following is an excerpt from the book "Worth the Fighting For: A Memoir" (2002) by John McCain.
Barack Obama tells us why he wants to be President in a video statement sent to his supporters on January 16, 2007 to announce his candidacy.
I quoted this speech because it is the earliest example of Obama expressing why he wants to be President. Full text of his speech can be found here.
I'll admit that this isn't a very balanced article since I chose only one quote from McCain and a longer one from Obama, but I believe it is fair to show their own words to know exactly why they want to be President. I mean, come on, McCain admits ambition is why he's running for President and he thinks it's a 'prize'!
The following is an excerpt from the book "Worth the Fighting For: A Memoir" (2002) by John McCain.
I didn't decide to run for President to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be President because it had become my ambition to be President. I was sixty-two years old when I made the decision and I thought it was my one shot at the prize.
Barack Obama tells us why he wants to be President in a video statement sent to his supporters on January 16, 2007 to announce his candidacy.
Running for the presidency is a profound decision - a decision no one should make on the basis of media hype or personal ambition alone - and so before I committed myself and my family to this race, I wanted to be sure that this was right for us and, more importantly, right for the country...
...America's faced big problems before. But today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way. Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions.
And that's what we have to change first.
We have to change our politics, and come together around our common interests and concerns as Americans.
This won't happen by itself. A change in our politics can only come from you; from people across our country who believe there's a better way and are willing to work for it.
Years ago, as a community organizer in Chicago, I learned that meaningful change always begins at the grassroots, and that engaged citizens working together can accomplish extraordinary things.
So even in the midst of the enormous challenges we face today, I have great faith and hope about the future - because I believe in you.
And that's why I wanted to tell you first that I'll be filing papers today to create a presidential exploratory committee.
I quoted this speech because it is the earliest example of Obama expressing why he wants to be President. Full text of his speech can be found here.
I'll admit that this isn't a very balanced article since I chose only one quote from McCain and a longer one from Obama, but I believe it is fair to show their own words to know exactly why they want to be President. I mean, come on, McCain admits ambition is why he's running for President and he thinks it's a 'prize'!
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Report confirms Palin's illegal abuse of power
Troopergate has just blown up in the face of the McCain campaign. On Friday, a bipartisan committee of Alaska legislators voted 12-0 to release a report stating that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating state ethics law "by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper."
The report had four key findings, written by Stephen Branchflower, the chief investigator of the Alaska legislative panel.
The wingnuts are already trying to spin this as if she didn't break the law because the report finds her firing of Monegan "was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads." However, before that, the report plainly states: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39/52/110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act." - She may have had the constitutional right to fire him, but the reason WHY she did it was an abuse of her power that violates the ethics law, so she broke the law plain and simple.
Also get ready from propaganda from the right that this was a politically motivated investigation full of Obama supporters. The facts simply don't back this claim up. The committee was majority Republican and they agreed to look into this matter well before Palin was chosen as the VP candidate by McCain.
The "right" has already been saying that anyone involved in the type of personal matter between Palin, her sister and ex-brother-in-law would do the same thing. This is absolutely no excuse for abusing the power of your office when there are perfectly legal ways to deal with the problem if there is any truth to the allegations against State Trooper Mike Wooten.
Finding four is interesting because they conclude that Palin has not cooperated with the investigation as she's claimed. If she had nothing to hide, why not turn over the emails Sarah?
What does this say about John McCain and his choice of Palin for VP? Did he not know about the investigation? If not, she was not properly vetted. If he did know, did he at least look into it to see if there was anything to the allegations or did he just trust someone he barely knows at her word alone? Maybe he doesn't care because Republicans and corruption go hand-in-hand.
I knew as soon as Palin was picked that the McCain campaign was doomed. Now, it is confirmed. How can anyone in their right mind be comfortable with this person being a 72-year-old cancer survivor's heartbeat away from the presidency? It's bad enough she's completely unqualified for VP or (GOD FORBID) president. Now, the only experience she has of being governor of the 47th most populous state for 20 months is forever marred with an ethics violation because of an abuse of power! Does this sound like more of the same to anybody!?!
The report had four key findings, written by Stephen Branchflower, the chief investigator of the Alaska legislative panel.
Finding One
For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39/52/110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides
The legislature reaffirms that every public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.
Finding Two
I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooter was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.
Finding Three
Harbor Adjustment Service of Anchorage, and its owner Ms. Murleen Wilkes, handled Trooper Michael Wooten's workers' compensation claim properly and in the normal course of business like any other claim process by Harbor Adjustment Service and Ms. Wilkes. Further, Trooper Wooten received all the workers' compensation benefits to which he was entitled.
Finding Four
The Attorney General's office has failed to substantially comply with my August 6, 2008 written request to Governor Sarah Palin for information about the case in the form of emails.
The wingnuts are already trying to spin this as if she didn't break the law because the report finds her firing of Monegan "was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads." However, before that, the report plainly states: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39/52/110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act." - She may have had the constitutional right to fire him, but the reason WHY she did it was an abuse of her power that violates the ethics law, so she broke the law plain and simple.
Also get ready from propaganda from the right that this was a politically motivated investigation full of Obama supporters. The facts simply don't back this claim up. The committee was majority Republican and they agreed to look into this matter well before Palin was chosen as the VP candidate by McCain.
The "right" has already been saying that anyone involved in the type of personal matter between Palin, her sister and ex-brother-in-law would do the same thing. This is absolutely no excuse for abusing the power of your office when there are perfectly legal ways to deal with the problem if there is any truth to the allegations against State Trooper Mike Wooten.
Finding four is interesting because they conclude that Palin has not cooperated with the investigation as she's claimed. If she had nothing to hide, why not turn over the emails Sarah?
What does this say about John McCain and his choice of Palin for VP? Did he not know about the investigation? If not, she was not properly vetted. If he did know, did he at least look into it to see if there was anything to the allegations or did he just trust someone he barely knows at her word alone? Maybe he doesn't care because Republicans and corruption go hand-in-hand.
I knew as soon as Palin was picked that the McCain campaign was doomed. Now, it is confirmed. How can anyone in their right mind be comfortable with this person being a 72-year-old cancer survivor's heartbeat away from the presidency? It's bad enough she's completely unqualified for VP or (GOD FORBID) president. Now, the only experience she has of being governor of the 47th most populous state for 20 months is forever marred with an ethics violation because of an abuse of power! Does this sound like more of the same to anybody!?!
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Alabama Gov's Voter Suppression List Exposed
Individuals convicted of a felony in the state of Alabama have had an easier path to get their voting rights restored since 2003. However, the Alabama constitution bars those convicted of a "felony involving moral turpitude" from voting at all. "Moral turpitude" is is a legal concept in the United States that refers to "conduct that is considered contrary to community standards of justice, honesty, or good morals".
Republican Alabama Governor Bob Riley recently decided to add hundreds of crimes to the list of felony convictions that bar a person from voting based on his interpretation of "moral turpitude."
Previously the Alabama Attorney General had determined that 70 of the state's 575 felony crimes qualify as such crimes which was approved by the Administrative Office of Courts. Now, lawyers for the Riley administration claim some 480 of those felonies are crimes of "moral turpitude."
According to the Birmingham News:
Suddenly, in an election year, Riley has decided that he alone knows what crimes are of a moral turpitude and it's almost all of them. In a time when Democratic voter registration around the country (including the south) has outpaced Republicans two to one, this is an obvious attempt by the Republican governor of Alabama to suppress votes.
If you don't believe me, take a look for yourself at some of the crimes determined by Riley to be of a moral turpitude and that (if convicted) will bar a citizen from voting in Alabama. Both lists from the governor's office and the office of the attorney general can be found in PDF format here.
Here are just a few of Riley's moral turpitude crimes according to the Associated Press:
First, I don't even see how anyone could be convicted of flag burning since it's protected as free speech as determined by the Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson. The list also adds shoplifting as a crime that will deny your right to vote if convicted in the state of Alabama. That's right, shoplifting! Now, I agree that many of the crimes on Riley's list could be interpreted as being of a moral turpitude, but some are just ridiculous. This totally kills my plans to disrupt a funeral by setting an illegal brush fire. :P
The governor alone should not be making this determination, as the Anniston Star pointed out in a recent editorial:
Luckily, there's somebody fighting for our rights! The ACLU filed a lawsuit a few months ago against the state Alabama over this issue when the attorney general tried to add to the list or moral turpitude crimes.
The Associated Press writes:
The latest news on the ACLU lawsuit is is not good, according to the Associated Press, the judge may dismiss the case.
I'm surprised by the lack of reporting on this issue and the fact that people in my home state aren't outraged. I've had a few serious discussions about it on the comment board for my hometown newspaper, but other that that, very few are writing or talking about this.
One of the crimes the governor has on his list as a moral turpitude is the attempt to influence an election. Perhaps Bob Riley should have his right to vote taken away for his obvious attempt to suppress voters.
UPDATE: The Associated Press is reporting that today, October 10, 2008 the judge did indeed throw out the ACLU case against the state of Alabama.
If these allegations are true, I really wish the ACLU would get their act together. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find someone who has actually tried to register and were denied because of the voter suppression efforts going on which have been expanded by the governor. As far as I know, the ACLU has yet to file a suit based on the new moral turpitude crimes added by Governor Riley. I'm sure they'll have plenty of clients after voting day when thousands are turned away from the polls for some minor crime from their past, but then won't it be too late?
Republican Alabama Governor Bob Riley recently decided to add hundreds of crimes to the list of felony convictions that bar a person from voting based on his interpretation of "moral turpitude."
Previously the Alabama Attorney General had determined that 70 of the state's 575 felony crimes qualify as such crimes which was approved by the Administrative Office of Courts. Now, lawyers for the Riley administration claim some 480 of those felonies are crimes of "moral turpitude."
According to the Birmingham News:
A statewide computer system for the past 11 months has been noting convictions for more than 400 crimes that Gov. Bob Riley's administration deemed to be felonies of moral turpitude - even though officials with the Administrative Office of Courts said they were assured by Riley's office only a shorter list of 70 felonies developed by the attorney general's office were being checked.
Suddenly, in an election year, Riley has decided that he alone knows what crimes are of a moral turpitude and it's almost all of them. In a time when Democratic voter registration around the country (including the south) has outpaced Republicans two to one, this is an obvious attempt by the Republican governor of Alabama to suppress votes.
If you don't believe me, take a look for yourself at some of the crimes determined by Riley to be of a moral turpitude and that (if convicted) will bar a citizen from voting in Alabama. Both lists from the governor's office and the office of the attorney general can be found in PDF format here.
Here are just a few of Riley's moral turpitude crimes according to the Associated Press:
But the governor's legal aides also classified about 370 other crimes as involving moral turpitude, including attempted arson, breaking and entering a vehicle, attempted burglary, criminal mischief, possession of burglary tools and burning a U.S. flag or cross.
The list also includes absentee balloting fraud, cruelty to a dog or cat, domestic violence, forgery, killing livestock illegally, leaving the scene of an accident with an injury, disrupting a funeral, ethics violations and conspiring to set an illegal brush fire.
The Administrative Office of Courts said the governor's office has no legal authority to classify so many crimes as involving moral turpitude.
First, I don't even see how anyone could be convicted of flag burning since it's protected as free speech as determined by the Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson. The list also adds shoplifting as a crime that will deny your right to vote if convicted in the state of Alabama. That's right, shoplifting! Now, I agree that many of the crimes on Riley's list could be interpreted as being of a moral turpitude, but some are just ridiculous. This totally kills my plans to disrupt a funeral by setting an illegal brush fire. :P
The governor alone should not be making this determination, as the Anniston Star pointed out in a recent editorial:
Maybe Gov. Bob Riley is right. Maybe a person should be denied the right to vote if they are convicted of disrupting a funeral, caught attempting a burglary or are found to have engaged in criminal mischief. If these are felonies, and if the law is interpreted narrowly, then that is what should happen.
But is this a decision the governor's office should make?
Apparently not. After months of denying that the list was being used by registrars in that way, the governor's office admitted that it erred by allowing this practice. However, the governor's office dismissed as "absurd" the charge that this was "part of some conspiracy to prevent people from voting."
This page takes the governor at his word. However, conspiracy or not, people were told that they could not vote when apparently they could. And with the presidential election less than a month away, the office of the Secretary of State is trying to find out the extent of the problem and see what can be done to rectify it, if anything.
It's good that the Secretary of State is trying to address this issue. However, the problem will not go away until the Legislature clearly defines what "moral turpitude" is when it comes to denying anyone the right to vote and then lists the crimes that fall into this category.
Luckily, there's somebody fighting for our rights! The ACLU filed a lawsuit a few months ago against the state Alabama over this issue when the attorney general tried to add to the list or moral turpitude crimes.
The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Alabama filed a lawsuit today challenging the state's voter disenfranchisement laws and practices as unconstitutional. According to its state constitution, Alabama may deny voting rights to individuals who have been convicted of felonies involving "moral turpitude." Although this term is not defined, the constitution clearly states that only the legislature can decide which felonies qualify under this category. In its lawsuit today, the ACLU charges that the state is disfranchising thousands of Alabamians under a much broader category of convictions than is permissible under the constitution, relying in part on an unlawful opinion issued by Alabama's attorney general.
The Associated Press writes:
The ACLU filed the lawsuit in July on behalf of three ex-felons who want to vote in the Nov. 4 presidential election. One of the three had actually tried to register in Jefferson County, but was never given a form because a registrar told her she couldn't vote.
The ACLU had hoped to turn the lawsuit into a class-action case on behalf of ex-felons statewide and clear up the confusion over voting rights.
At issue is a law passed by the Legislature that says felons who committed crimes of moral turpitude can't vote, but other felons can. The law does not classify which crimes are in each category.
The latest news on the ACLU lawsuit is is not good, according to the Associated Press, the judge may dismiss the case.
Voter registrars could have to wait awhile longer to learn which felons can vote — and just what constitutes "moral turpitude" — because a judge said Wednesday she may dismiss a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union over the issue.
With voter registration at record levels, county voter registrars have been struggling to figure out which ex-felons can sign up and which can't.
During a hearing Wednesday, Montgomery Circuit Judge Tracy McCooey told ACLU attorneys she is troubled that the ACLU's three plaintiffs filed suit before they filled out voter registration forms and were officially rejected by county voter registrars.
"You are asking me to have a role I shouldn't have," McCooey told the attorneys. She said she would issue an official ruling soon.
I'm surprised by the lack of reporting on this issue and the fact that people in my home state aren't outraged. I've had a few serious discussions about it on the comment board for my hometown newspaper, but other that that, very few are writing or talking about this.
One of the crimes the governor has on his list as a moral turpitude is the attempt to influence an election. Perhaps Bob Riley should have his right to vote taken away for his obvious attempt to suppress voters.
UPDATE: The Associated Press is reporting that today, October 10, 2008 the judge did indeed throw out the ACLU case against the state of Alabama.
A Montgomery judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union over registering ex-felons to vote.
Circuit Judge Tracy McCooey said Friday the ACLU's clients lacked legal standing to sue. Two had not tried to register to vote. The third client had attempted to register, but had not exhausted possible appeals in probate court before going to circuit court.
If these allegations are true, I really wish the ACLU would get their act together. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find someone who has actually tried to register and were denied because of the voter suppression efforts going on which have been expanded by the governor. As far as I know, the ACLU has yet to file a suit based on the new moral turpitude crimes added by Governor Riley. I'm sure they'll have plenty of clients after voting day when thousands are turned away from the polls for some minor crime from their past, but then won't it be too late?
I believe in hope, not hate in 08!
I just submitted this as a letter to the editor of my local newspaper. In case it's never published, it has been posted here for posterity.
In my opinion, John McCain is running the most dishonorable and sleazy campaign for president ever. He won't say it to his face, but McCain's surrogates' words and their advertising has been filled with smears and lies intent on destroying Barack Obama's character. At recent rallies, McCain and Sarah Palin supporters have been heard shouting the words "terrorist" "treason" and "kill him" in reference to Obama. This is a direct result of both candidates' inflammatory rhetoric, and neither McCain or Palin have said anything to denounce such hateful behavior.
Is this what we want from the next president and vice president of the United States of America, those who inspire hate rather than hope?
In all of Barack Obama's speeches and statements he has always expressed his belief that our country can come together and work for a greater future for ALL Americans. He inspires hope that we can do better and he knows that we can do it as the greatest nation on Earth. Obama inspires hope that we can overcome our economic troubles, have affordable health care, and use the right strategy for the war on terrorism by proposing specific and detailed plans to help the middle class and to go after those who were actually responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Obama is the personification of the American Dream who came from humble beginnings in a single-parent home and has dedicated his life to public service, and that gives me hope. He inspires hope by just being who he is at this time in history, and the amazing story of his life.
Barack Obama himself put it best in this quote from the 2004 Democratic National Convention:
People have a very clear choice on November 4th. The question is, will they go with hope or buy into the lies and hate in 08?
UPDATED with video added. This wasn't created by me, but I found it after writing this, and thought it was very appropriate. You have to sit through a minute or so of some McCain supporters' hate speech then it's all good.
In my opinion, John McCain is running the most dishonorable and sleazy campaign for president ever. He won't say it to his face, but McCain's surrogates' words and their advertising has been filled with smears and lies intent on destroying Barack Obama's character. At recent rallies, McCain and Sarah Palin supporters have been heard shouting the words "terrorist" "treason" and "kill him" in reference to Obama. This is a direct result of both candidates' inflammatory rhetoric, and neither McCain or Palin have said anything to denounce such hateful behavior.
Is this what we want from the next president and vice president of the United States of America, those who inspire hate rather than hope?
In all of Barack Obama's speeches and statements he has always expressed his belief that our country can come together and work for a greater future for ALL Americans. He inspires hope that we can do better and he knows that we can do it as the greatest nation on Earth. Obama inspires hope that we can overcome our economic troubles, have affordable health care, and use the right strategy for the war on terrorism by proposing specific and detailed plans to help the middle class and to go after those who were actually responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Obama is the personification of the American Dream who came from humble beginnings in a single-parent home and has dedicated his life to public service, and that gives me hope. He inspires hope by just being who he is at this time in history, and the amazing story of his life.
Barack Obama himself put it best in this quote from the 2004 Democratic National Convention:
I'm not talking about blind optimism here -- the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don't talk about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. No, I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too. Hope in the face of difficulty. Hope in the face of uncertainty. The audacity of hope!
People have a very clear choice on November 4th. The question is, will they go with hope or buy into the lies and hate in 08?
UPDATED with video added. This wasn't created by me, but I found it after writing this, and thought it was very appropriate. You have to sit through a minute or so of some McCain supporters' hate speech then it's all good.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
"That One" - McCain's Disrespect and Gaffes
McCain's performance in the 2nd presidential debate was an embarrassment. He showed some serious disrespect for Obama, and certain gaffes give great insight into the REAL John McCain.
Probably the oddest and startling moment was when McCain called Obama "That One."
How disrespectful and dehumanizing! He has a title and a name, it's Senator Barack Obama, and McCain, you better get use to his soon-to-be NEW title: President Barack Obama! I believe the American people want a certain level of common courtesy between their candidates for president. They've both earned their position from votes of the people, and deserve to show respect for each other as peers out of respect for all Americans.
McCain also later refused to shake Obama's hand one final time.
As you can see, McCain touches Obama on the shoulder, and as he turns around he offers his hand directly to McCain who refuses to do the same, so Obama pivots and shakes Cindy's hand instead. An obvious sign of disrespect for Obama. I'm not sure what McCain thinks he's accomplishing from this attitude, I guess it's his strategy to make Obama look unimportant, but it ends up making McCain look like a total ass.
My personal favorite moment of the night was a lighter one after the questions were over at the end of the debate. Both candidates shook hands then stood together at center stage where they temporarily blocked the view of the teleprompter for the moderator Tom Brokaw. I believe that what Obama and McCain did next was the perfect example of their contrasting styles and could be an indication of how they will act as president when confronted with a problem.
When Brokaw told them they were "in my way of my script" Obama reacted quickly and he calmly stepped aside, smiled and waved. McCain took a second or two to react while clapping and then scurried off stage as quickly as possible in a hunched over manner. The result? Obama = smooth, McCain = erratic.
I don't usually over-analyze things like this, but when I first saw it, McCain's reaction caught my attention as unusual. Be sure to watch it several times focusing on Obama and McCain separately, and let me know what you think.
Overall McCain came off as the angry old man and Obama, as usual, was Mr. Cool. There was no "game-changing" moment for McCain and he knew it as he left the building well before Obama who continued to meet people in the audience. Obama has the momentum and will be our next president in a time of great turmoil. As I write this, financial markets all over the world are falling sharply because of the economic crisis. Things are about to get bad...real bad I'm afraid.
The choice for REAL change is clear. We must vote for "That One."
Probably the oddest and startling moment was when McCain called Obama "That One."
How disrespectful and dehumanizing! He has a title and a name, it's Senator Barack Obama, and McCain, you better get use to his soon-to-be NEW title: President Barack Obama! I believe the American people want a certain level of common courtesy between their candidates for president. They've both earned their position from votes of the people, and deserve to show respect for each other as peers out of respect for all Americans.
McCain also later refused to shake Obama's hand one final time.
As you can see, McCain touches Obama on the shoulder, and as he turns around he offers his hand directly to McCain who refuses to do the same, so Obama pivots and shakes Cindy's hand instead. An obvious sign of disrespect for Obama. I'm not sure what McCain thinks he's accomplishing from this attitude, I guess it's his strategy to make Obama look unimportant, but it ends up making McCain look like a total ass.
My personal favorite moment of the night was a lighter one after the questions were over at the end of the debate. Both candidates shook hands then stood together at center stage where they temporarily blocked the view of the teleprompter for the moderator Tom Brokaw. I believe that what Obama and McCain did next was the perfect example of their contrasting styles and could be an indication of how they will act as president when confronted with a problem.
When Brokaw told them they were "in my way of my script" Obama reacted quickly and he calmly stepped aside, smiled and waved. McCain took a second or two to react while clapping and then scurried off stage as quickly as possible in a hunched over manner. The result? Obama = smooth, McCain = erratic.
I don't usually over-analyze things like this, but when I first saw it, McCain's reaction caught my attention as unusual. Be sure to watch it several times focusing on Obama and McCain separately, and let me know what you think.
Overall McCain came off as the angry old man and Obama, as usual, was Mr. Cool. There was no "game-changing" moment for McCain and he knew it as he left the building well before Obama who continued to meet people in the audience. Obama has the momentum and will be our next president in a time of great turmoil. As I write this, financial markets all over the world are falling sharply because of the economic crisis. Things are about to get bad...real bad I'm afraid.
The choice for REAL change is clear. We must vote for "That One."
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Presidential Debate Round 2 - Initial Impressions
Barack Obama wins another debate hands down! My initial impression is that Obama had the answers with specifics for his vision of our future, and once again John McCain had nothing but generalities and no new ideas. The topics were a rehash of the first debate so we didn't get a lot of new information from either candidate. There were little fireworks, although McCain obviously wanted to pick a fight, and there was certainly no "game-changer" for McCain. He did refuse to go harshly negative, leaving the dirty work up to Palin and his surrogates. A cowardly decision by McCain.
From my notes here's the general message as it came across to me from both candidates over the course of the entire debate:
Obama - I get it! I understand. Here's what I'll do. Here's how we do it! (with specifics) We will do this together! (and he explained how) I can prioritize. These are the facts. Health care. Tax breaks. Real front of War on Terror. Solutions. McCain has poor judgment. McCain = Bush (both backed up with facts)
McCain - America is great. We can do it! I know how! Obama is bad. Obama doesn't understand. Look at our records. Reform. Earmarks. Spending. Drill. Slogans. Generalities. No specifics other than his past record.
I'll may or may not post more when the transcript is released, but anyone who objectively watched this debate has to see that Obama clearly won and absolutely nothing happened to slow his momentum. People want answers with specifics and plans for the future, not attacks and lies from your surrogates while you only spewed generalities about the important issues that affect our lives in such a dramatic way. McCain insults our intelligence by simply asking us to trust him even when he's running a dishonest campaign and has lost all credibility. Obama respects everyday Americans and shows that by giving them answers and solutions with specifics that amounts to TRUE "Straight Talk" and his policies consist of ideas that give us TRUE "Country First" decisions.
From my notes here's the general message as it came across to me from both candidates over the course of the entire debate:
Obama - I get it! I understand. Here's what I'll do. Here's how we do it! (with specifics) We will do this together! (and he explained how) I can prioritize. These are the facts. Health care. Tax breaks. Real front of War on Terror. Solutions. McCain has poor judgment. McCain = Bush (both backed up with facts)
McCain - America is great. We can do it! I know how! Obama is bad. Obama doesn't understand. Look at our records. Reform. Earmarks. Spending. Drill. Slogans. Generalities. No specifics other than his past record.
I'll may or may not post more when the transcript is released, but anyone who objectively watched this debate has to see that Obama clearly won and absolutely nothing happened to slow his momentum. People want answers with specifics and plans for the future, not attacks and lies from your surrogates while you only spewed generalities about the important issues that affect our lives in such a dramatic way. McCain insults our intelligence by simply asking us to trust him even when he's running a dishonest campaign and has lost all credibility. Obama respects everyday Americans and shows that by giving them answers and solutions with specifics that amounts to TRUE "Straight Talk" and his policies consist of ideas that give us TRUE "Country First" decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)