All Political Posts Go Here!

[GoS]

On a separate note, I have an idea.

Since the economy, politicians, politics in general, TV, movies, music, modern literature, and the environment are going down the tubes, why don't we take major action. To save all of these things, I propose that we suspend the constitution (even the Bill of Rights), the elections, the democratic government, basically all laws and regulations (including Habeas Corpus and the Geneva Convention) and replace it with a monarch. This person would re-write all of the laws and stuff and have complete control (think 1984). Then, he would tell us what to watch (and whether or not to enjoy it), who to vote for, what is right, where/when to spend our money and how much, who could write and who can't, who is guilty and innocent (so we wouldn't have to worry about OJ, take 2), if global warming is real or not, what cars to by, where to work, etc., etc., etc. Wouldn't that just be amazing?

Just an idea.

Or, for a challenge, why don't we try to think of something that isn't going down the tubes. All I've got is LB's solo career.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by GoS

Okay, so Mr. Ayers realizes that Obama is a good person and tries to help him out. Ayers cannot be 100% psycho-crazy-terrorist, he is a distinguished profesor at a university. That means that he is trusted to teach kids, as well as respected. I think that if Obama made Ayers his campaign manager or something, than yes this would be and issue. Let me spell this out for you: There is no conspiracy! Obama is not a socialist/communist/Maoist/Marxist. Never has been, never will be.

I'm not suggesting a conspiracy. Obama is just dishonest about his relationship with Ayers, period. Did you look at the educational program that Obama gave Ayers $50,000,000.00 for? You might change your mind on what Obama's philosophy is. I do agree that he's not a socialist, communist, maoist, or marxist, he is a classic fascist. A fascist is someone who uses the government to establish populist equality. That is Obama pure and simple.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by ashton

When people provide numbered lists that are clearly talking points that they certainly didn't think of themselves, it would seem logical that they would identify the source of their canned response. Perhaps they know better, however and this would be the equivalent of asking Polly why she wants a cracker. Polly likely doesn't really know.

Uh, actually I did post that myself. I gleaned the information from several articles and summarized it.

[ashton]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Uh, actually I did post that myself. I gleaned the information from several articles and summarized it.

Uh, that would be a complete lie. A simple google shows your summary on numerous sites. Miraculously, they all use the exact same words.

Thank you for today's stolen thoughts.

[strandinthewind]

His point in this opt ed is THE point that "that one" (I mean really - why not just sing "BLACK MAN BLACK MAN, where have you gone to a la



) ought to make.

Commentary: Why Ayers case is risky for McCain-Palin

By Roland Martin

CNN Contributor

Editor's Note: A nationally syndicated columnist and Chicago-based radio host, Roland Martin has said he will vote for Barack Obama in November. He is the author of "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith" and "Speak, Brother! A Black Man's View of America." Visit his Web site for more information.

(CNN) -- During the Democratic primaries, I wrote a column for CNN.com about how easy it is for any candidate to tar and feather another about their associations with less-than-acceptable figures.

Sen. Hillary Clinton tried to blast Sen. Barack Obama for unsolicited comments made by Nation of Islam leader Minister Louis Farrakhan, and folks like Fox News' Sean Hannity were happy to run with it, saying it was evidence that the junior senator from Illinois was unfit to be president.

But critics like Hannity never bothered to raise the issue of former Republican vice-presidential candidate Jack Kemp praising Farrakhan for his focus on self-help. Not only that, nearly everyone in the media was afraid to bring up the fact that Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell had high praise for Farrakhan when Rendell was mayor of Philadelphia, even as the Muslim leader sat just 20 feet away!

Again, blasting one person's associations can come back to bite you.

We now see Gov. Sarah Palin and the McCain campaign trying to stir the pot by invoking William Ayers, a 1960s radical who was a major figure in the Weather Underground, a group that bombed the Pentagon and committed other unspeakable acts of terrorism against their own country.

Palin has been hammering home the point on the campaign trail that Obama and Ayers were friends, "palling around" the Windy City, even though the Weather Underground committed these crimes when Obama was just a child. And never mind the fact that Ayers and Obama were involved in a multimillion-dollar education grant that was funded by a right-wing Republican, media magnate Walter Annenberg. Do you hear any of them castigating this late Republican pillar?

The McCain camp, along with their right-wing media comrades, want to convince you that Obama should not have decided to serve with Ayers, who was named the Citizen of the Year in Chicago in 1987 for his education work, and who is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Now, if someone was seen as an acceptable figure by business, political and education figures, many of whom support both Democrats and Republicans, should Obama be faulted for sitting on a board with the guy?

So, let's use that same logic and apply it to McCain.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Chicago who serves as one of the national co-chairs for Obama, told me on The Tom Joyner Morning Show that if we are to use the association tag as evidence of a candidate being unfit for president, what about McCain serving and working alongside people with virulent bigoted pasts like Sens. Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd?

Do we have evidence that these individuals committed specific acts against African-Americans during Jim Crow? No. But we do know that their hateful words, and willingness to uphold laws that were absolutely anti-American, did not represent the best of this nation.

Thurmond ran for president as a Dixiecrat in 1948 with a platform of maintaining segregation. Based on Helms' policies, he didn't see blacks as full Americans.

Bombing the Pentagon is horrible and indefensible. But declaring yourself a patriot while you speak such hateful and venomous words against your own countrymen, who just happen to be black, and then trying to oppress them, is just as indefensible.

So, did McCain work with them? Did he not speak with them? Should McCain have declared that he would not work alongside these men because of their past? Should the self-described maverick who believes in integrity and character have taken the honorable stance of resigning from the Senate to protest these hateful characters serving in the U.S. Senate?

No. And this is why this association argument is so weak and impotent.

For goodness' sakes, Byrd was once a member of the Ku Klux Klan, a domestic terrorist organization!

Now, if Ayers was involved in these despicable acts today -- or Byrd and his late Senate colleagues -- then it is fair game.

But no candidate should have to be held responsible for the actions of someone else that took place years ago.

I fundamentally believe that this is nothing but a smokescreen and effort to ignore the real issues we face. Nobody should care about any of this when they are losing their jobs and having their homes foreclosed and finding themselves unable to afford to send their kids to college and to get access to health care.

What I find to be more deplorable is to hear McCain advisers say they want to turn the page to anything but the issue number one -- the economy.

If that kind of talk is coming from the camp of a guy who wants to be president, then that is something to be afraid of -- not a candidate's association with Ayers, or Thurmond, Helms or Byrd.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...ref=newssearch

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

. . . And to yourself and others that scoffed at me and underestimated when I first mentioned this a couple years back and said he was unelectable etc . look where he is now.You left out another reason why you are voting for Obama..in this last debate McCain truly looked like he had one foot in the grave and another on a bananna peel .If by some slim chance he does win you know what that would mean.

I never scoffed

But, had the exoomy not chosen this exact time to tank, Obama would not be in the significant lead he has now. So, there was a little luck involced and it likely would have gone to Hillary as well. Also, if Hillary had gotten the nomination, McCain almost certainly would not have chosen Palin, who was chosen for her "ability: to attract some women pissed off at Hillary not getting the nomination.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I never scoffed

But, had the exoomy not chosen this exact time to tank, Obama would not be in the significant lead he has now. So, there was a little luck involced and it likely would have gone to Hillary as well. Also, if Hillary had gotten the nomination, McCain almost certainly would not have chosen Palin, who was chosen for her "ability: to attract some women pissed off at Hillary not getting the nomination.

The thing about Obama is that he's never been elected on his own merits and because his opponent wasn't on the ballot. The first race he ran, he won because he got his opponent thrown off the ballot, the second time was because his opponent dropped out and was replaced by Alan "The Joke" Keyes, this time he's running against Bush, who is also not on the ballot.

Also, the "that one" remark isn't racist. It's kinda pathetic that people are calling it that. Clearly he meant candidate if you look at the previous sentence. But, if you want to pull out the over-used race card, keep doing it, it just makes Obama look like a whiner.

[GypsySorcerer]

It's obvious that the "That one" remark had racial overtones. I mean, the McCain campaign has been making thinly veiled references, but basically their message is "Do you want that black Muslim extremist as President?"

And did anyone notice how patronizing McCain was to the young black man who asked about Fannie and Freddie? "You've probably never heard of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before."

[vermicious knid]

As long as we're reading minds, it was obvious that when Barack Obama said "we've got to solve this problem short term", he was using the word "short" as a despicable slur against amputees. And when he said "You've got cross-border attacks against U.S. troops". the "cross" was meant as a meanspirited jab at crossdressers and all GLBT Americans. I mean, it was obvious.


x infinity.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

It's obvious that the "That one" remark had racial overtones. I mean, the McCain campaign has been making thinly veiled references, but basically their message is "Do you want that black Muslim extremist as President?"

And did anyone notice how patronizing McCain was to the young black man who asked about Fannie and Freddie? "You've probably never heard of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before."

These campaigns are keen on innuendo - all of them. Every single black person I heard talking about the debate today and some white people took "that one" to be a racial jab. That is too much coicidence for me no matter the sentence stuture. Also, notice McCain said "that one" but then said "me" instead of "this one" to refer to himself, which would have been the consistent phrasing At best, it should how culturally ignorant, out of touch and completely unaware McCain is. But, IMO, it was intentional and played into the hands of Palin, who is implying in no uncertain terms that Obama is a Black Muslim Extremist/Terrorist.

Here is the exchange - judge for yourselves (emphasis supplied) :

There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies. And it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one," McCain said, gesturing toward his rival. "You know who voted against it? Me.

"That one" might have worked if McCain had said "You know [which Senator] voted for it?" "that one" -- but he instead used the term "who," which does not really go with "that one" as evidenced by McCain's use of me in reference to himself instead of "this one"

In the end, McCain's assertion or implication in tying Obama to W and Cheney was incorrect, to wit:

The Return of the Oil Slick

McCain recycled a misleading claim from Sen. Hillary Clinton’s primary campaign,
charging Obama with voting to give “billions” to oil companies:

McCain: By the way, my friends, I know you grow a little weary with this back-and-forth. It was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies, and it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me.

McCain is referring to the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which Obama did in fact vote for. Clinton raised this same charge against Obama during the Democratic primaries. It was misleading then and it’s equally misleading now.

In fact, according to a Congressional Research Service report, more tax breaks were taken away from oil companies than were given. Overall, the act resulted in a small net tax increase on the oil industry:

Congressional Research Service: The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT05, P.L. 109-58) included several oil and gas tax incentives, providing about $2.6 billion of tax cuts for the oil and gas industry. In addition, EPACT05 provided for $2.9 billion of tax increases on the oil and gas industry, for a net tax increase on the industry of nearly $300 million over 11 years.

As we said last year, the bill did contain $14.3 billion in tax breaks, but most of those went to electric utilities, and nuclear, and also to alternative fuels research
and subsidies for energy-efficient cars, homes and buildings – not to the oil industry.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...bate_no_2.html



As for that kid, he was asking a question about the economy. I guess gramps thought that did not include Fannie and Freddie - at least Phil Gramm was paid another $100,000 to think that

In the end, all people have had tangential bad associations in their lives. The minute someone throws that stone, the minute their own past will come to haunt them. Again, McCain and his family being completely in bed with Keating is far worse than Obama being on a board with Ayers, who committed no crime while on that board. McCain was very lucky to get the reprimand of "poor judgement" from the Senate and damn lucky the he paid up the reimbursement for the plane rides or the House would found him guilty, which he was. I mean he "suddenly" realized he should have paid for all that private air travel

[Sorceress]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

It's obvious that the "That one" remark had racial overtones. I mean, the McCain campaign has been making thinly veiled references, but basically their message is "Do you want that black Muslim extremist as President?"

And did anyone notice how patronizing McCain was to the young black man who asked about Fannie and Freddie? "You've probably never heard of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before."

Yes--it was totally patronizing. Of COURSE the guy had heard of Fannie and Freddie--he asked the question!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Sorceress

Yes--it was totally patronizing. Of COURSE the guy had heard of Fannie and Freddie--he asked the question!

When I saw that I thought two things, either McCain actually being patronizig or McCain is trying to be warm and cute and show he can connect with the youth of today. If it was the latter, he failed miserably.

[ajmccarrell]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081009/...ge/voter_fraud

Obama has long been associated with Acorn and in fact, Acorn was supposed to receive pork from the bailout bill. They are trying to steal Missouri for Obama.

By BILL DRAPER, Associated Press Writer
19 minutes ago



KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Officials in Missouri, a hard-fought jewel in the presidential race, are sifting through possibly hundreds of questionable or duplicate voter-registration forms submitted by an advocacy group that has been accused of election fraud in other states.

Charlene Davis, co-director of the election board in Jackson County, where Kansas City is, said the fraudulent registration forms came from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. She said they were bogging down work Wednesday, the final day Missourians could register to vote.

"I don't even know the entire scope of it because registrations are coming in so heavy," Davis said. "We have identified about 100 duplicates, and probably 280 addresses that don't exist, people who have driver's license numbers that won't verify or Social Security numbers that won't verify. Some have no address at all."

The nonpartisan group works to recruit low-income voters, who tend to lean Democratic. Most polls show Republican presidential candidate John McCain with an edge in bellwether Missouri, but Democrat Barack Obama continues to put up a strong fight.

Jess Ordower, Midwest director of ACORN, said his group hasn't done any registrations in Kansas City since late August. He said he was told three weeks ago by election officials that there were only about 135 questionable cards — 85 of them duplicates.

"They keep telling different people different things," he said. "They gave us a list of 130, then told someone else it was 1,000."

FBI spokeswoman Bridget Patton said the agency has been in contact with elections officials about potential voter fraud and plans to investigate.

"It's a matter we take very seriously," Patton said. "It is against the law to register someone to vote who does not fall within the parameters to vote, or to put someone on there falsely."

On Tuesday, authorities in Nevada seized records from ACORN after finding fraudulent registration forms that included the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys.

In April, eight ACORN workers in St. Louis city and county pleaded guilty to federal election fraud for submitting false registration cards for the 2006 election. U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway said they submitted cards with false addresses and names, and forged signatures.

Ordower said Wednesday that ACORN registered about 53,500 people in Missouri this year. He believes his group is being targeted because some politicians don't want that many low-income people having a voice.

"It's par for the course," he said. "When you're doing more registrations than anyone else in the country, some don't want low-income people being empowered to vote. There are pretty targeted attacks on us, but we're proud to be out there doing the patriotic thing getting people registered to vote."

Republicans are among ACORN's loudest critics. At a campaign stop in Bethlehem, Pa., supporters of John McCain interrupted his remarks Wednesday by shouting, "No more ACORN."

Debbie Mesloh, spokeswoman for the Obama campaign in Missouri, said in an e-mailed statement that the campaign supported any investigation of possible fraud.

According to its national Web site, the group has registered 1.3 million people nationwide for the Nov. 4 election. It also has encountered complaints of fraud stemming from registration efforts in Wisconsin, New Mexico, Nevada and battleground states like Michigan, Ohio and North Carolina, where new voter registrations have favored Democrats nearly 4 to 1 since the beginning of this year.

Missouri offers 11 electoral votes; the presidential candidates need at least 270 to win the election.

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Obama Group Defrauding Missouri

Hey, so you're not going to address your plagiarism?

[nickay]

I saw this clip on You-Tube and i thought is was funny, so I thought i would share it with ya'll. It is similar to another thread that was posted ,but I really was unsure where to place it . So I hope its on the right thread . I hope ya'll see the humor in it as I did .




I also so this one



I think they need to hire some else to write there speeches