Thursday, September 18, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Respect
John McCain deserves our respect no matter what party you are affiliated with. There are very few people that have made the sacrifices this man has made for his country. I remember a time not so long ago when he was hailed by liberals and a thorn in the sides of conservative Republicans. Now, because he happens to be running for president against a well-spoken, cult-like, black candidate he is reviled by democrats as much as any republican ever was. There was a time he was seen as bi-partisan and one of the few in Congress who truly tried to work across party lines. Now, the Obama camp is basing their campaign on trying to convince voters he would be just a replica of George Bush. Guess what people...McCain was not the first choice of many republicans because he wasn't conservative enough..because he wasn't enough like Reagan and Bush. Romney dropped out too soon and by the time Huckabee started to gain ground most republicans had given up and didn't even vote in the primaries believing the media when they reported that nobody else really had a chance.
The Obamas' lives, while interesting, ambitious and commendable can't hold a candle to the lives Cindy and John McCain have led. They have something the Obamas do not. A long history of proven sacrifice for their country and others. For that reason alone they deserve our respect.
The Obamas' lives, while interesting, ambitious and commendable can't hold a candle to the lives Cindy and John McCain have led. They have something the Obamas do not. A long history of proven sacrifice for their country and others. For that reason alone they deserve our respect.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
"There's no reason not to respect her and I believe she's qualifed to be the Vice-President"- Joe Biden (9-2-08)
* With her years of executive experience and many accomplishments for the people of Alaska, Governor Sarah Palin is more prepared than Barack Obama to be President of the United States. She's made decisions, taken action, and faced accountability.
* When Barack Obama was a community organizer, Governor Palin was serving as a local chief executive.
* When Barack Obama was voting present 130 times on the most contentious issues of the day, Governor Palin was taking on corruption within her own party and stood up to the special interests, lobbyists, big oil companies and good-old boy network.
* When Barack Obama was voting with the Democrats 97% of the time, Governor Palin was standing up to members of her own party and passed a landmark ethics reform bill.
* When Barack Obama was requesting nearly $1 billion in earmark spending, Governor Palin was championing reform to end the abuses of wasteful earmark spending. She put a stop to the "Bridge to Nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million.
* Governor Palin has a record of accomplishment that Barack Obama simply doesn't have. She has spent her time in office shaking up government in Alaska. Barack Obama has only passed one bill as the lead sponsor.
* Governor Palin is an energy expert. She is the chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, a multi-state government agency that promotes the conservation and efficient recovery of domestic oil and natural gas recourses. She also served as Chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission overseeing energy development on state lands in Alaska.
* Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has seen approval ratings of over 80 percent.
* When Barack Obama was a community organizer, Governor Palin was serving as a local chief executive.
* When Barack Obama was voting present 130 times on the most contentious issues of the day, Governor Palin was taking on corruption within her own party and stood up to the special interests, lobbyists, big oil companies and good-old boy network.
* When Barack Obama was voting with the Democrats 97% of the time, Governor Palin was standing up to members of her own party and passed a landmark ethics reform bill.
* When Barack Obama was requesting nearly $1 billion in earmark spending, Governor Palin was championing reform to end the abuses of wasteful earmark spending. She put a stop to the "Bridge to Nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million.
* Governor Palin has a record of accomplishment that Barack Obama simply doesn't have. She has spent her time in office shaking up government in Alaska. Barack Obama has only passed one bill as the lead sponsor.
* Governor Palin is an energy expert. She is the chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, a multi-state government agency that promotes the conservation and efficient recovery of domestic oil and natural gas recourses. She also served as Chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission overseeing energy development on state lands in Alaska.
* Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has seen approval ratings of over 80 percent.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Fact Check
Obama said he could "pay for every dime" of his spending and tax cut proposals "by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens." That's wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well.
He twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, saying, "When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources." Actually, McCain said in 2003 we "may" muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.
He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of "working" families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain's plan at 66 million and finds that Obama's plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.
Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..."
Obama noted that McCain's health care plan would "tax people's benefits" but didn't say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.
He said McCain, far from being a maverick who's "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.
Obama said "average family income" went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn't correct. An aide said he was really talking only about "working" families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.
Analysis
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accepted his party's nomination Aug. 28, speaking before more than 84,000 people in Denver's Mile High football stadium. Some of his comments were worthy of a ref's yellow flag.
Not Quite Every Dime
Obama reassured voters that he can pay for all his spending proposals:
Obama: Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime – by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow.
This is misleading. Even by his own campaign's estimates, closing corporate loopholes and tax havens won't pay for all of Obama's new plans. In July, the campaign told the Los Angeles Times that they estimate the yearly cost of their proposed tax cuts at $130 billion. They put revenue from closing tax loopholes at just $80 billion. Obama also proposes to raise taxes to pre-Bush levels for families earning more than $250,000 a year and singles making more than $200,000, yielding additional revenue. But he didn't mention that in his speech.
But Obama's claim is misleading on another level. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, "without substantial cuts in government spending" Obama's plan – and McCain's, too – "would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years." Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor told FactCheck.org that the Tax Policy Center's analysis "fails to take in account Senator Obama's spending cuts, including ending the Iraq war." That's true, but Obama's proposed cuts are dwarfed by the Tax Policy Center's projected deficits. Obama's new spending programs might be completely offset by new revenue and spending cuts. But overall spending will still exceed overall revenue, and the nation would face at least 10 more years of annual deficits.
Afghan Muddle
Obama twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, incorrectly implying that McCain saw no need for more troops there.
Obama: When John McCain said we could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11.
Actually, McCain said in 2003 that the U.S. "may" muddle through, not that we could or would. He also said he was very concerned about a rise in al Qaeda activity there. He said then that he was "guardedly optimistic" that the government could handle it.
Health Care Half Truths
Obama gave only half the story when he described a feature of McCain's health care plan:
Obama: How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people's benefits...
McCain proposes to grant families up to a $5,000 tax credit to use for health benefits. The flip side of that proposal, which McCain seldom if ever mentions, is that the value of employer-sponsored benefits would also become taxable.
Party Hearties
Obama painted McCain as a Republican partisan who's supported the unpopular President Bush consistently:
Obama: And next week, we'll also hear about those occasions when he's broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush 90 percent of the time.
It's true that McCain's voting support for Bush policies has averaged slightly above 89 percent since Bush took office, according to Congressional Quarterly's vote studies. But it has ebbed and flowed. It reached a low of 77 percent in 2005. Last year it was 95 percent. By comparison, Obama's own record of supporting Bush policies has averaged slightly under 41 percent since the senator took office. However, Obama's voting record is no less partisan than McCain's. He has voted in line with his party an average of nearly 97 percent of the time. The truth is that neither candidate can claim a strong record of "breaking with his party" if Senate votes are the measure.
He Didn't Mean It
Obama also pulled some sleight of hand when he stated that "the average American family" saw its income "go down $2,000" under George Bush. That's not correct. Census figures show average family income went down $348.
As it turns out, when Obama said "average family income," he didn't mean "average," and he didn't mean "family," either. An Obama aide says he was really referring to median income – which is the midpoint – and not to the average. And Obama was talking only about "working families," not retired couples.
For all families, median family income actually inched up under Bush by $272.
Source: Factcheck.org
He twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, saying, "When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources." Actually, McCain said in 2003 we "may" muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.
He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of "working" families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain's plan at 66 million and finds that Obama's plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.
Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..."
Obama noted that McCain's health care plan would "tax people's benefits" but didn't say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.
He said McCain, far from being a maverick who's "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.
Obama said "average family income" went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn't correct. An aide said he was really talking only about "working" families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.
Analysis
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accepted his party's nomination Aug. 28, speaking before more than 84,000 people in Denver's Mile High football stadium. Some of his comments were worthy of a ref's yellow flag.
Not Quite Every Dime
Obama reassured voters that he can pay for all his spending proposals:
Obama: Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime – by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow.
This is misleading. Even by his own campaign's estimates, closing corporate loopholes and tax havens won't pay for all of Obama's new plans. In July, the campaign told the Los Angeles Times that they estimate the yearly cost of their proposed tax cuts at $130 billion. They put revenue from closing tax loopholes at just $80 billion. Obama also proposes to raise taxes to pre-Bush levels for families earning more than $250,000 a year and singles making more than $200,000, yielding additional revenue. But he didn't mention that in his speech.
But Obama's claim is misleading on another level. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, "without substantial cuts in government spending" Obama's plan – and McCain's, too – "would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years." Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor told FactCheck.org that the Tax Policy Center's analysis "fails to take in account Senator Obama's spending cuts, including ending the Iraq war." That's true, but Obama's proposed cuts are dwarfed by the Tax Policy Center's projected deficits. Obama's new spending programs might be completely offset by new revenue and spending cuts. But overall spending will still exceed overall revenue, and the nation would face at least 10 more years of annual deficits.
Afghan Muddle
Obama twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, incorrectly implying that McCain saw no need for more troops there.
Obama: When John McCain said we could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11.
Actually, McCain said in 2003 that the U.S. "may" muddle through, not that we could or would. He also said he was very concerned about a rise in al Qaeda activity there. He said then that he was "guardedly optimistic" that the government could handle it.
Health Care Half Truths
Obama gave only half the story when he described a feature of McCain's health care plan:
Obama: How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people's benefits...
McCain proposes to grant families up to a $5,000 tax credit to use for health benefits. The flip side of that proposal, which McCain seldom if ever mentions, is that the value of employer-sponsored benefits would also become taxable.
Party Hearties
Obama painted McCain as a Republican partisan who's supported the unpopular President Bush consistently:
Obama: And next week, we'll also hear about those occasions when he's broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush 90 percent of the time.
It's true that McCain's voting support for Bush policies has averaged slightly above 89 percent since Bush took office, according to Congressional Quarterly's vote studies. But it has ebbed and flowed. It reached a low of 77 percent in 2005. Last year it was 95 percent. By comparison, Obama's own record of supporting Bush policies has averaged slightly under 41 percent since the senator took office. However, Obama's voting record is no less partisan than McCain's. He has voted in line with his party an average of nearly 97 percent of the time. The truth is that neither candidate can claim a strong record of "breaking with his party" if Senate votes are the measure.
He Didn't Mean It
Obama also pulled some sleight of hand when he stated that "the average American family" saw its income "go down $2,000" under George Bush. That's not correct. Census figures show average family income went down $348.
As it turns out, when Obama said "average family income," he didn't mean "average," and he didn't mean "family," either. An Obama aide says he was really referring to median income – which is the midpoint – and not to the average. And Obama was talking only about "working families," not retired couples.
For all families, median family income actually inched up under Bush by $272.
Source: Factcheck.org
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Questions For You
1) Does Sarah Palin have ties to Terrorists? (No, but Obama is a friend of Ayers)
2) Did she have an affair while in office? (No, but Clinton and JFK did)
3) Has she taken money from donors who were wanted on criminal charges? (No, but Hillary Clinton did from Norman Hsu).
4) Has Sarah Palin accepted donations from foreign military leaders. (No, but Bill Clinton did in 1996).
5) Has she pardoned convicted drug dealers? (No, but Clinton did-Nicholas M. Altiere, Chris Harmon Bagley, Scott Lynn Bane, Roger Clinton, Jr.,Richard Wilson Riley Jr.,among many others....)
6) Did Sarah Palin lie to a grand jury about having an extra marital affair? ( No, but Bill Clinton did).
I think you see where I am going with this.
If the best the Democrats can do is stoop to new lows and attack Palin's 17 year old daughter then they are feeling the heat and getting desperate.
2) Did she have an affair while in office? (No, but Clinton and JFK did)
3) Has she taken money from donors who were wanted on criminal charges? (No, but Hillary Clinton did from Norman Hsu).
4) Has Sarah Palin accepted donations from foreign military leaders. (No, but Bill Clinton did in 1996).
5) Has she pardoned convicted drug dealers? (No, but Clinton did-Nicholas M. Altiere, Chris Harmon Bagley, Scott Lynn Bane, Roger Clinton, Jr.,Richard Wilson Riley Jr.,among many others....)
6) Did Sarah Palin lie to a grand jury about having an extra marital affair? ( No, but Bill Clinton did).
I think you see where I am going with this.
If the best the Democrats can do is stoop to new lows and attack Palin's 17 year old daughter then they are feeling the heat and getting desperate.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
Unlikely Comparisons
Two posts in one night! I can't help it. There's just so much to say.
My husband and I just had an interesting conversation and I had to write about it. He is Mexican and can't vote and for the most part doesn't engage heavily in politically charged discussions.
He told me about a coworker who is also a Mexican native but now a U.S citizen. She brought up the subject of the elections and asked him who he was voting for. He can't vote but asked her the same question. She said Obama and my husband asked her why. She really couldn't come up with a qualified answer and her pressed her on it. He wanted to know what she saw in him. My husband offered that he liked listening to Obama and actually found himself quite engaged hearing him speak. He agreed that he is very charismatic and is able to energize large crowds. But, once he is done my husband said he asks himself "wait...what did he really say? What conclusions did he come to? What was the purpose of his speech?" and then realizes how empty his words were. His coworker listened but my husband could see that she wasn't convinced. He reminded her of President Vicente Fox of Mexico.
Vicente Fox ran for president during a time in Mexico in which people were downright weary of the ruling party, the PRI, which had been in power for 76 years. Fox energized the people of Mexico and brought them together. He was charismatic, a phenomenal public speaker and was able to move masses with his words. For the first time in 76 years a new party came into power and the people were excited, emotional, optimistic and hopeful. CHANGE was the ongoing theme of Fox's campaign. He promised change. Change from the current administration. Promises to move forward into a new time and new era. Change, change, change! He was able to accomplish something outstanding by being elected. Voters waited in line for hours to be able to vote. In spite of widespread corruption and voting irregularities (putting it mildly) Fox won. It was an amazing time to be a Mexican citizen. It was a new era. The problem was, Fox never really said anything substantial all those months of campaigning. He repeated his mantra of "change" much like Obama is doing now.
Many today regard Fox as a weak, ineffective president whose administration was as corrupt as any previously. I can't mention his name in our home without seeing smoke rise from my husband's head.
I won't go into details here about Fox's administration but if you are interested there is a great article about Fox's unfulfilled revolution at the link below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/26/AR2005062601235.html
As my husband was relaying this conversation with his coworker to me I started to feel so proud of him. Like Glenn Beck my husband is a thinker. I appreciate his points of view because they are so well-formed, well-founded and unforced. He is able to support all of his opinions with sound arguments and he tends to be unemotional.
I think if Obama becomes president he will walk into the White House his first day on the job and think "oh shit, what do I do now?" I suggest he have McCain's number on speed dial.
My husband and I just had an interesting conversation and I had to write about it. He is Mexican and can't vote and for the most part doesn't engage heavily in politically charged discussions.
He told me about a coworker who is also a Mexican native but now a U.S citizen. She brought up the subject of the elections and asked him who he was voting for. He can't vote but asked her the same question. She said Obama and my husband asked her why. She really couldn't come up with a qualified answer and her pressed her on it. He wanted to know what she saw in him. My husband offered that he liked listening to Obama and actually found himself quite engaged hearing him speak. He agreed that he is very charismatic and is able to energize large crowds. But, once he is done my husband said he asks himself "wait...what did he really say? What conclusions did he come to? What was the purpose of his speech?" and then realizes how empty his words were. His coworker listened but my husband could see that she wasn't convinced. He reminded her of President Vicente Fox of Mexico.
Vicente Fox ran for president during a time in Mexico in which people were downright weary of the ruling party, the PRI, which had been in power for 76 years. Fox energized the people of Mexico and brought them together. He was charismatic, a phenomenal public speaker and was able to move masses with his words. For the first time in 76 years a new party came into power and the people were excited, emotional, optimistic and hopeful. CHANGE was the ongoing theme of Fox's campaign. He promised change. Change from the current administration. Promises to move forward into a new time and new era. Change, change, change! He was able to accomplish something outstanding by being elected. Voters waited in line for hours to be able to vote. In spite of widespread corruption and voting irregularities (putting it mildly) Fox won. It was an amazing time to be a Mexican citizen. It was a new era. The problem was, Fox never really said anything substantial all those months of campaigning. He repeated his mantra of "change" much like Obama is doing now.
Many today regard Fox as a weak, ineffective president whose administration was as corrupt as any previously. I can't mention his name in our home without seeing smoke rise from my husband's head.
I won't go into details here about Fox's administration but if you are interested there is a great article about Fox's unfulfilled revolution at the link below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/26/AR2005062601235.html
As my husband was relaying this conversation with his coworker to me I started to feel so proud of him. Like Glenn Beck my husband is a thinker. I appreciate his points of view because they are so well-formed, well-founded and unforced. He is able to support all of his opinions with sound arguments and he tends to be unemotional.
I think if Obama becomes president he will walk into the White House his first day on the job and think "oh shit, what do I do now?" I suggest he have McCain's number on speed dial.
Consider this
cult
Pronunciation: \ˈkəlt\ Function: noun Usage: often attributive
1: formal religious veneration : : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
2: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
3: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
4 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work; b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion
Does the last definition remind you of anyone?
Ask any Obama devotee/follower/worshipper what Obama stands for or what he plans to do if he becomes president and they will struggle to provide an answer beyond repetitions of the sound bites and rehearsed, mindless phrases we have heard over and over again. Ask the same person to name one single political accomplishment of Barack Obama... They won't be able to do it. He has NO record. Ok, well, he has a record. But it's a record of not voting on important issues. Barack Hussein Obama has not voted more times than he has. That's the equivalent of never participating in class. He is supposed to be the voice of the people of Illinois who elected him to office and yet he has neglected to adequately represent them by failing to show up and vote. Shouldn't his constituents be angry? If my representatives, who I elected, fail to show up and speak on my behalf I would be justifiably angry.
I end this post with a comment by one of my foreign students who is for all purposes an unbiased onlooker of this election year in the U.S. Without knowing my views (as a teacher I stick to the curriculum) he made this observation about Barack Obama; "He speaks in slogans".
Well put.
Pronunciation: \ˈkəlt\ Function: noun Usage: often attributive
1: formal religious veneration : : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
2: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
3: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
4 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work; b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion
Does the last definition remind you of anyone?
Ask any Obama devotee/follower/worshipper what Obama stands for or what he plans to do if he becomes president and they will struggle to provide an answer beyond repetitions of the sound bites and rehearsed, mindless phrases we have heard over and over again. Ask the same person to name one single political accomplishment of Barack Obama... They won't be able to do it. He has NO record. Ok, well, he has a record. But it's a record of not voting on important issues. Barack Hussein Obama has not voted more times than he has. That's the equivalent of never participating in class. He is supposed to be the voice of the people of Illinois who elected him to office and yet he has neglected to adequately represent them by failing to show up and vote. Shouldn't his constituents be angry? If my representatives, who I elected, fail to show up and speak on my behalf I would be justifiably angry.
I end this post with a comment by one of my foreign students who is for all purposes an unbiased onlooker of this election year in the U.S. Without knowing my views (as a teacher I stick to the curriculum) he made this observation about Barack Obama; "He speaks in slogans".
Well put.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
