Politics, Barack Obama

Past-E-Mail: Various Topics: Politics and Religion, Ketchup or Gravy: Politics, Barack Obama
Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 08:39 pm:

Cincinnati radio station WLW (afternoon) talk show host Bill Cunningham has begun to demean Barack Obama and today he compared Obama to Hitler. Obama is popular in this tri-state area of Indiana, Ohio,and Kentucky where the right-wing conservative radio station has a large audience.

Cunningham has a history of exaggerating, and of creating division among the black and white, and poor and middle-class and wealthy neighborhoods of Cincinnati. Perhaps it is time for concerned citizens to file complaints about Cunningham's behavior with WLW management.

Anyone have thoughts about this that they would like to share?

By Michael Du Long (Mikie) on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 09:34 pm:

Matt regardless of how you feel about this Cunningham he has the right to spew his hate as much as you do to tune his station off. He will probably get a raise if a bunch of liberals complain about him. It means that he has an audience and that is why managemnt of the radio station keeps him on. The people that you want to complain to are the advertizers on his show. If enough people complain he will change his tune or be removed from the stations lineup.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 10:04 pm:

You are right Mikie, I had thought of suggesting a boycott of Cunningham's advertisers but there is a close-knit group of right-wing conservative Republican business people and wealthy patrons who control much of what the Cincinnati media puts out and such a boycott would have little effect. They are connected with the people who have been buying up smaller Midwest radio and TV stations who have instituted programming that reflects only right-wing conservative views. This effort is even larger now than what took place prior to the 2004 election, and that effort had much to do with Ohio being one of the states responsible for Bush's winning a second term as president.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, January 13, 2008 - 11:22 am:

Matt, how would you feel if Cunningham was talking about the RIGHT? Would you still want him off the air? Like it says, Free speach,.
And some times we don't like it
Gene in Wayland

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, January 13, 2008 - 11:54 am:

I don't know anyone who could be compared to Hitler. But yet a Democractic Senator referred to my and your President as Hitler.,Then he should also be removed.Remember Matt, both sides go at it the same way.
Gene in Wayland

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 01:48 pm:

The issue of Barack Obama’s possible Muslim past has re-emerged with conflicting reports about the presidential candidate’s childhood in Islamic Indonesia.

The controversy was initially touched off in early 2007 when several media outlets reported that Obama had attended a radical madrasa, or Islamic school, when he lived in Indonesia.

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs quickly countered with a statement: “Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian.”

The reports about the radical madrasa turned out to be false. But in March 2007, Gibbs amended his previous statement, telling the Los Angeles Times: “Obama has never been a practicing Muslim,” the key word being “practicing.”

Obama, his Kansas-born mother and Muslim stepfather moved to Jakarta, Indonesia’s capital, in 1967, and Obama lived there from ages 6 to 10.

The Times sent a reporter to Jakarta to investigate Obama’s childhood years there, and published an article on March 16 that included these details:

A close boyhood friend of Obama, Zulfin Adi, said Barack “was a Muslim. He went to the mosque.”
Obama’s first-grade teacher at a Catholic school, Israella Dharmawan, said: “Barry (Barack’s nickname) was Muslim. He was registered as a Muslim because his father was Muslim.”
In the third grade, Obama transferred to a public school, where he was also registered as a Muslim. At the school, Muslim students attended weekly religion lessons about Islam.
In his autobiography, “Dreams From My Father,” Obama mentions studying the Koran and describes the public school as “a Muslim school.”
More recently, Middle East Forum director Daniel Pipes wrote on FrontPageMag.com that his research led him to conclude that “Obama was born a Muslim to a non-practicing Muslim father and for some years had a reasonably Muslim upbringing under the auspices of his Indonesian stepfather.”

But on Jan. 2, the liberal organization Media Matters for America (MMfA) took issue with Pipes’ report, criticized him for relying too heavily on the Times article, which it claimed was “disputed,” in an effort to “revive Obama-Muslim falsehood.”

Media Matters cited a March 25 article by Kim Baker in the Chicago Tribune that challenged several assertions in the Times story. Barker wrote that boyhood friend Adi “was not certain” about his statements regarding Obama’s childhood and that he “only knew Obama for a few months.”

The Media Matters Web posting stated: “Additionally, the Tribune reported that ‘interviews with dozens of former classmates, teachers, neighbors and friends show that Obama was not a regular practicing Muslim when he was in Indonesia.’”

Media Matters also said that “Pipes did not note that Obama’s Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, has been described in the Tribune as ‘much more of a free spirit than a devout Muslim.’”

Pipes fired back with a FrontPageMag.com article on Jan. 7, titled “Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam.”

Pipes asked if any of the information from the Chicago Tribune article refutes “my analysis, as MMfA contends. It raises questions about two details in the Los Angeles Times account — the accuracy of the Catholic school’s registration form and the reliability of Zulfin Adi as a source on Obama. But on the larger issue of Obama’s religious practices during his Jakarta years, it confirms the Times account.”

Pipes concludes: “Therefore, what MMfA calls the ‘Obama-Muslim’ falsehood’ is in fact confirmed by both articles as truthful and accurate.”

And he adds: “All this matters, for if Obama once was a Muslim, he is now what Islamic law calls a murtadd (apostate), an ex-Muslim converted to another religion who must be executed. Were he elected president of the Untied States, this status, clearly, would have large potential implications for his relationship with the Muslim world.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 06:53 pm:

Good to see you back David, You didn't have to write a book, just kidding
Gene in Wayland

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 07:39 pm:

The following Senators voted against making English the official language of America.
91% of American citizens want English officially designated as our language.
The worst thing four of these wanted to be our President,Two are still trying.


What language could they possibly want?

Gene in Wayland

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 08:15 pm:

Gene in Wayland...Let me make it clear that I am not a liberal, but it bothers me when radical right-wing or left-wing talk show people demean decent politicians and public figures for the purpose of keeping and/or increasing their listening audience. I wouldn't mind one bit if Cunningham was critical of Republicans, as Limbaugh and Hannity have been lately.

It is unfortunate that much of Cunningham's listening audience believe his exaggerations and opinions; most of the wise citizens of Cincinnati and environs regard him as nothing but an ambitious "wind-bag" who has contributed much to racial unrest and related problems in Cincinnati. Local area moderate Republicans do their best to avoid being identified with him and his radical right-wing rantings and demeaning rhetoric.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 08:42 pm:

Matt! You know how to stop him, I know you do, you DON'T listen to him. Why complain about a guy you can shut off. When I get sick off things Rush says I turn the dial.
Gene in Wayland

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Monday, January 14, 2008 - 09:43 pm:

Matt what is a Right Wing Conservative?
You referred to Republicans as that twice.
What do you think it really means.
I know all Democrats are not liberals.
Gene in Wayland

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 09:40 am:

Zube, it is my observation that the right-wing conservatives and left-wing liberals usually identify themselves with their respective national political affiliation-i.e., the Republican and Democratic parties-in their conversations, activites and voting. I suppose you could say that is because they aren't nationally organized as political parties. I agree with you that all Democrats are not liberals, and I would add all Republicans are not conservatives. Perhaps it is time for the moderates of both parties to gain more control over the U.S. government.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 09:46 am:

Please excuse my error in addressing my reponse to Zube, I meant it for Gene. There are various sources for defining what a Right Wing Conservative is, only a little research is requred.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 01:21 pm:

Well it is good to be back.Some may wish so others may groan.I am ready to let it rip,and that dose not stand for rest in peace.So get ready to spend afew minutes here with me.It will take some SISU.

While so many of the candidates are worrisome, my biggest concern centers on the voters. More than ever before, the voters seem to be signaling that they want more government,much more government. They want the government to provide them with health care. They want the government to provide them with a comfortable retirement. They want the government to provide them with jobs. If they don’t qualify for the jobs, they want the government to train them. They want the government to educate their kids and get them out of their mortgage binds. They want the government to take ever more money from the pockets of people who have worked harder and smarter, and who lived their lives more responsibly, and then spend that money on them.

Above these citizens an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood, but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood, it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness, but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that,it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances, can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? Subjection in small affairs manifests itself every day and makes itself felt without distinction by all citizens. It does not make them desperate, but it constantly thwarts them and brings them to renounce the use of their wills. Thus little by little, it extinguishes their spirits and enervates their souls.

This is Alexis de Tocqueville, died 149 years ago, and when he writes -- it would be one thing if the Nanny State prepared people for adulthood and manhood, but it doesn't. It wants to keep us perpetually childlike. They, the government, want to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of happiness. They want to provide for our security, they foresee and secure our needs, they facilitate our pleasures, conduct our principal affairs, direct our industry, regulate our houses and homes, divide our inheritances. Can all this not take away from us entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? By the way, it doesn't take government to make this happen. Oprah Winfrey has made it happen for many in her audience, the Oprahfication. We expect this on the left, but there are Republican candidates who are now running under this basic idea, life is too complicated, we're going to fix it for you, we're going to make you happy, we're going to make you dependent, and we're going to make everybody equal, and we're going to divide up your inheritance. And we're going to regulate your homes, as in, where you can and can't smoke, what you can and can't do with your land, what kind of car you can and can't drive, and we might even regulate the thermostat to tell you how cold and warm and hot and so forth you can and can't be.

Then we're going to tell you what kind of lightbulbs you can and can't use. We're doing all this for your pleasure. We're doing all of this for your own good. One of the tenets of his book here is to spot the pitfalls of democrat societies. Remember, we're not a democracy, we're a representative republic, and that also is being attacked as well. This will resonate with a lot of people, especially during primary time, because primary time, folks, is not really where elections are devoted to substance. They're devoted to perception and image and feel-good type things. When you get to the presidential election, contrary to what the libs like to say, contrary to what the Media like to say, presidential elections are about issues. But will that change? Who knows. The point is, the antidote for this is conservatism, and there just isn't anybody on the front burner that is explaining and leading with these principles.

Instead, way too many people are trying to water them down and redefine them so as not to have to deal with them. It's hard, Conservatism is hard, Conservatism does not baby people. It doesn't do what de Tocqueville was describing here. It doesn't keep you a perpetual child. Conservatism doesn't try to find a way to keep you happy. Conservatism is about making yourself happy and productive and fulfilled and making sure that there are as few obstacles in your path to all that as possible. But liberalism, Nanny Statism, why, it's easy. It's the most gutless choice you can make. Just tell everybody you care about them, understand that they can't survive against the odds and they're going to punish the people who do. We're going to try to make everybody equal, and we're going to make sure you're as happy as you can be, and we're going to make sure that you don't do any damage to the country, you don't do any damage to the planet, you don't do any damage to the neighborhood, you don't do any damage to your house. If you engage in fraudulent or mistaken practices that cost you econonically, don't worry about it, no harm, no foul, because you were too stupid to know what you were doing in the first place, so we will fix it and make you indentured servants of ours, constantly owing us in the government for whatever pleasure and happiness you find in life, and that will keep you dependent on it and will keep you looking everywhere but yourself for contentment, for happiness, for satisfaction, and for pleasure. That, my friends, is what de Tocqueville talking about,and now me. That's what liberalism is, and it pains me to say, we have Republicans running on the same premise for the presidency in this campaign.

Thank you for reading. Have a nice day,and let's see what Michigan sez today.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 03:13 pm:

Let's see, there is a way to summarize Dave's lengthy commentaries in a few words: "So, what's new?"

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 05:03 pm:

Thank you Matt , My nick name is ZUBE, it comes from my last name, Guys started that when I lived in Munising.
Gene in Wayland

By Snowman (Snowman) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 06:30 pm:

Any word about the voting today in Michigan? By the way, nice post David Hiltunen. Wish we had more of a choice.

By Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013) on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 07:44 pm:

Let's see, there is a way to summarize Dave's lengthy commentaries in a few words: "Copy and Paste'

By maija in Commerce Township (Maija) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 09:20 am:

Romney and Clinton

By Kathy P. (Katiaire) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 09:33 am:

Welcome back, david.
Even if you do copy and paste...and I'm not saying you do...you provide some thought provoking ideas.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 10:22 am:

I am quite disappointed in the vote, but I suppose it is to be expected.

"If pigs could vote, the man with the slop bucket
would be elected swineherd every time,
no matter how much slaughtering he did on the side."
Quote by:Orson Scott Card

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 11:33 am:

If you are disappointed in the Michigan Primary vote, you have the press, at all levels and type (national and local, broadcast TV, radio, and newspaper) to thank, whichever side you might be on. Our local newspaper published an editorial, suggesting that there was no reason to vote at all in this primary, in part because the Democratic National Committee stripped Michigan of all of its delegates, and the Republican National Committee stripped Michigan of half of its delegates, as punishment for moving up its Primaries, too early in the season. That editorial (published by an associate editor, not their editorial board), suggested that you might as well stay home. Or, if you go to vote, to switch and vote in the other party's primary, either to screw up the Republican primary or as an anti-Hilary protest. It was published the morning of the day of the New Hampshire Primary. Honestly, that editorial made me angry, whatever side I might have been supporting. I think it was un-American. We have the right to vote. We should use that right, to support the candidate that we think will do the best in that office. On the other hand, you might blame our Governor, who apparently vetoed a bill that would have moved our Primaries back where they belong, so we would not lose so many delegates. Or, you might blame the two national parties, for trying to strip Michigan of its delegates in the first place, etc.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 02:06 pm:

The blame belongs to 2 very arrogant national organizations. What right does either parties national organization have to dictate when you can hold your primary.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 03:48 pm:

Marianne Y (Marianne):
"We have the right to vote. We should use that right, to support the candidate that we think will do the best in that office."

I would argue that each of us should use that right however we choose, possibly including as suggested in the editorial, if that is our preference!

Once upon a time (well actually several times) in a state that was then overwhelmingly controlled by one political party, I have voted in that party's primary, in effort to help that party choose the candidate least likely to win in the the general election, thereby, in a backhanded way, increasing prospects for my party's candidate.

I actually had to declare that as "my" party when initially registering to vote. No big problem though, as I could still vote for my true party's candidate in the general election.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 03:49 pm:

Pytavey, if you thought that the United States Electoral College was a strange, possibly archaic method of choosing our President and Vice President1 that process doesn't hold a candle to the truly bizarre, absolutely insane way we choose the various party's candidates for those offices! Witness the absurd debacle in Michigan this week.

1 In the general election, you really do not in fact vote for the candidates for the offices of president and vice president, but for a slate of "electors", who are under no legal obligation to cast their vote for the person(s) whom they have pledged to elect!

On at least 158 occasions so-called faithless electors have indeed voted for candidates other than those to whom they were pledged!

Note also that:


Twenty-four states have laws to punish faithless electors. While no faithless elector has ever been punished, the constitutionality of state pledge laws was brought before the Supreme Court in 1952 (Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214). The court ruled in favor of the state's right to require electors to pledge to vote for their party's nominee, as well as to remove electors who refuse to pledge. Once the elector has voted, their vote can only be changed in states such as Michigan and Minnesota, where votes other than those pledged are rendered invalid. In other states, a faithless elector may only be punished after the fact. As stated in the ruling, electors are acting as a function of the state, not the federal government. Therefore, states have the right to govern electors. The constitutionality of state laws punishing electors for actually casting a faithless vote, rather than refusing to pledge, has never been decided by the Supreme Court.

Fortunately, such faithless electors have never changed the otherwise expected outcome of the election. At least not yet!
Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 05:28 pm:

Hmm, "copy and paste", how ironic, sounds like Romney and Clinton.

By Kathy P. (Katiaire) on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 - 06:11 pm:

In top form today, Snowman.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, February 1, 2008 - 04:26 pm:

Has anyone been paying attention to Obama and H. Clinton's recent show of friendliness? Do they stand a chance to be elected president and vice-president if they run for office as a team? Which do you prefer as the candidate for president? Why?

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 08:23 am:

Marianne Y (Marianne)
We have the right to vote. We should use that right, to support the candidate that we think will do the best in that office.

You might not think that everybody should vote just because you have the right after you hear this. One woman that I know (not the brightest bulb by any means) voted for George in the first election because of one thing. His wife was a teacher and so he'd be good for the schools. She knew nothing else. People who know absolutely nothing about any of the candidates should not be allowed to vote. You should have to take a test to be able to vote in my opinion. It doesn't have to be hard, just a simple test to see if you know anything about the candidates. That was all she knew about any of them. It's sad.

By k j (Kathiscc) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 08:43 am:

And then there are those that vote the straight party ticket- no matter who is on it.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 08:58 am:

Marianne, you make some good points. With reference to your comment about the school teacher, it has been my experience that many people in the education profession, such as high school and college teachers, have a rather limited knowledge of matters outside of their specialized education and profession and they don't seem to realize it.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 09:00 am:

My above comments should have been addressed to Deb. Sorry for this error. Marianne makes some good points also.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 10:49 am:


Right you are!!!

By Tom (Tom) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 11:49 am:

Matt, you are full of B--- S---! The idea that educators area living in ivory towers is dumb.
K - 12 teachers know more about what is going on outside the classroom than most people. They are dealing with the druggies, insolence, etc., everyday. Those on the "outside" only see their families and work place.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 12:00 pm:

That's very interesting, Deb S. States in the south used to require voters-to-be to pass a test before they were allowed to vote. That was a literacy test, which would essentially accomplish what you are advocating. The Supreme Court ruled long, long ago that requiring voters to pass a test in order to vote, was Unconstitutional. (BTW, I have no clue where you got that one data point on voting for President Bush solely because his wife was a teacher. I think that was a one of a kind data point, if indeed it was true at all.)

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 12:03 pm:

Matt, this woman wasn't a school teacher herself. She just voted for George because his wife is a former teacher/librarian, etc. She thought that George would do a good job because his wife was so smart. COME ON!!!!! People like this should not vote. We give people the right to vote who know absolutely nothing about what's going on in the world even. They're living in their own purple skied world and don't even read up, listen to the news, nothing. They just vote because it's their right. It's hogwash!!!!!

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 12:08 pm:

I know, Marianne. This woman heard she was a school teacher and so figured that George would do a great job for the schools. This is the point I'm making. This woman knew absolutely nothing about anybody but this was her reasoning for voting for George. And at one point, it was said that Laura had been a school teacher/librian for a time. She took this info and ran with it. Needless to say, she and I had many "talks". I tried to get her to read up on some of the candidates but she had hers picked out.

By Tom (Tom) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 12:12 pm:

Remember that in the south the literacy tests were established to stop blacks from voting.
I agree that there should be some criteria to vote.
I often wonder if voting is an entitlement or a privilege. The ease of registering to vote is one of the problems. In both Milwaukee and Chicago dead people have voted for decades because it is so easy to falsify registration. Probably occurs elsewhere.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 12:47 pm:

Tom, that is not only true for Chicago (I had not heard about Milwaukee), but it was certainly true throughout Lyndon Baines Johnson's lifetime in Texas, for the elections that he ran in, all the way up to the President of the United States. He had dead people voting for him from his very first election to Congress in Texas. The same was true for Louisiana and their infamous Huey P Long. In Washington state, in 2004, a woman had her dog registered to vote, to prove a point about their King County (I think that is Seattle). She was pretty upfront about it. She had a pawprint on the absentee ballot, in place of the voter's signature. And, that vote was counted! She eventually was charged with something, and her sentence was reduced to some amount of community service. These are good reasons why laws have been enacted, requiring picture ID's to vote, at least in some states, including Michigan as of Jan 1, 2008, to try to put a stop to that nonsense.

I think that the first thing that has to be done is to be sure that the person voting is actually who they say they are, and that they are legal citizens on the United States. Anything else pales in comparison to those two items. You can't have one person voting 7 or 8 times, under different names. That has been going on for far too long! Legitimate citizens who are alive and actual legal residents of a district have a right to vote, once and only once in any election. One person, one vote!

By k j (Kathiscc) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 03:46 pm:

I also think they should give a test to voters before they are allowed to vote. But then, I think they should give a test to people who want to get married, people who want to have children, etc. If you are too dumb to pass the test, you don't get to do it. Whatever "it" may be.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 07:04 pm:

k j, especially people who want to reproduce. In my opinion, this is a serious problem. But that's me. I totally agree with you.

By FJL (Langoman) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:19 am:

What is this,"testing people before they vote". If that would to occour, the Democrates would never gain office......LOL

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:49 am:

Deb , what advantage would a test do. the candidates always sayI beleive in this and I beleive in that, and I promise to do this and I promise to do that. So you take a test and say will I know this about Joe Blow ,so I will vote for him.then he or she becomes President, and do you know of one President that has kept his word, I can't think of one.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 12:02 pm:

You still should have half a brain before getting to decide who's going to run the country for crying out loud. True they break their promises, but people who know absolutely nothing, but vote for somebody because he's good looking, or whatever the reason, should not be allowed to vote.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 12:27 pm:

I am curious to know just what it is you want to have tested. Are you looking for literacy, or that they agree with some liberal or conservative ideas, Democratic or Republican thing? I venture to say that whatever it is that you might want to test for would be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, as the literacy test already has been. Are you going to disqualify people simply because they disagree with you?

By the way, my special needs son does better on Jay Leno's tests (I think they are called Jay Walkers), than any of the people that Leno shows, for what that's worth.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 01:25 pm:

I never said it would ever happen, I just said it should! Yes, literacy would be my first priority. If they can't even read, what's the point? Also, teach them how to use their ballots. Florida comes to mind. Not that I think the people of Florida were to blame for one minute.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 01:44 pm:

Just to sit down an argue your political view with someone on the opposite side of the fence, like we do here, gets my vote to vote. There has been so many great views to read since this page came along. Thanks to us all behaving ourselves, who'd a thunk it would last?

By Kathy P. (Katiaire) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 02:17 pm:

It seems to me the American people are going to get exactly what they deserve. The polls all say we are tired of the money sucking war in the Middle East, illegal immigration and the poor performance of the economy AND yet the votes all go in the opposite direction. Go figure.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 02:47 pm:

Deb S.,
I can appreciate your opinion, but what Marianne states is true. It's unconstitutional, and for a good reason. If one votes for a candidate simply because of good looks or charisma, then I would agree fully with you, but one does not have to be literate or well-read to have wisdom. There are millions of folks that meet the criterion for literacy, but the country is split philosophically just the same. Who are the most correct in their selection? Whether literate or not, everybody has life experiences that dictate their political leaning. My late mother-in-law never had proper schooling as a child, yet she was one of the wisest persons I've known. When people vote, I believe they vote their 'heart', the sum total of their life's experience, based on what party/candidate may be the best for our country at the time. And that is good, for it is designed to keep those elected sensitive to the needs of the people. Doesn't always work, but a democracy isn't perfect either, but is better than the alternative where 'the folks' don't have any say. I agree with David H. Who'd a thunk it? People from all walks of life with different political persuasions meet on these forums and vent, presenting good argument to support their view, yet I haven't seen anyone walk across the aisle. And that is good. In my opinion, this is the strength of America, not a weakness. All citizens having a say with one vote. However, I also believe that too much power in one person or party is not good. It is best to have nearly equal representation for both sides.....and most important, those elected honor and safeguard the U.S. Constitution, for it is the only 'glue' that keeps this country from falling apart.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 04:13 pm:

There you go Deb, on that so called Florida thing , you wanted Kerry so bad. It sounds like you want a test for people now before they vote only because of Bush, in other words the people who voted for Bush were some what illiterate.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 05:40 pm:


If you go to this link it will explain why some of us has absolutely no use for "W". He belongs to a very powerful and unprincipled family.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 05:43 pm:

Nope, not what I meant. But supposedly they didn't know how to push the chads, or whatever they were called, through all the way. I believe I said I didn't blame the people of Florida at all. Read a little closer. Maybe if they were educated about pushing them through all the way, things would have been different. Not that I believe Bush won Florida anyway. I'm just saying there are ways to educate people. That was an example. I didn't say the Bush voters were illiterate, you assumed. I wonder why you would do that? And I believe the Florida fiasco happened when Gore was running, not Kerry. It was the Ohio fiasco when Kerry was running. At any rate, I think that just because we're given the right to vote, doesn't mean that we should. I'll use my son as an example. He's 21 years old, nearly 22. He doesn't follow it at all and knows nothing about the candidates. Should he just listen to who I tell him to vote for? The answer to that would be no. He should at least know a little something on his own before voting before just going there and voting for whoever sounds like a good name, or is Democratic, or is Republican. People need to be educated before they should be able to vote. I have no answers as to how this could be accomplished, but I wish there was a way.

Heikki, I appreciate your opinion. It was very well said. I don't always get across what I'm trying to say.

David H., who'd of thunk it is right? We're all pretty darn civil on this site and it's wonderful.

Kathy, you too are right. I think we're going to get more of the same. Sad.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 06:43 pm:

I just read it David. Thanks for the link. Some people will never get it anyway though.

By k j (Kathiscc) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 07:21 pm:

Thought you might know where this guy can get a job, or maybe some of you could give him one.

This individual seeks an executive position. He will be available in January 2009, and is willing to relocate.
Law Enforcement: I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the Influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's License suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.
Military: I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a Drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
College: I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.
I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas, in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil In Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money. With the help of my father and our friends in the oil Industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
-I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
- I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
- I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American History.
- With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by over 500,000 votes.
- I am the first president in U.S. History to enter office with a criminal Record.
- I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
- I spent the U.S. Surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
- I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S.History.
- I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
- I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
- I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. Stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues every month.
- I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. History. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.
- I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
- I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most Corporate campaign donations.
- My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. History, Enron.
- My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
- I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip-offs in history.
-I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. History and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed.
- I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. History.
- I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
- I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any president in U.S. history.
- I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States government.
- I've broken more international treaties than any president in U.S. History.
- I am the first president in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
- I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
- I refused to allow inspectors access to U.S. "prisoners of war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.
- I am the first president in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).
- I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any president since the advent of television.
- I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
- I garnered the most sympathy ever for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
- I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.
- I am the first president in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community.
- I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families in wartime.
- In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.
- I am the first president in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
- I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.
- I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice.
-All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
-All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
-All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20520

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 07:34 pm:

Hey, I knew the answer after the first sentence. Great read though. I wonder how many people will find excuses for all of these blunders.

By k j (Kathiscc) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 07:47 pm:

I believe it is why people should get tested before they vote.

By k j (Kathiscc) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 07:53 pm:

Oh, by the way- the word nuclear should be changed to nucular as the buffoon does not know how to pronounce it.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 08:00 pm:

The first thing I checked was whether or not you spelled it correctly, lol!!

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:01 pm:

The "resume" above is hilarious from the standpoint of "shotgunning" to death any semblance of truth. LOL! I received this several years ago via email, and could tell at a glance it was all BS. Just for starters, GW wasn't a cheerleader at college. He played rugby. He didn't reside over the worst stock market crash since the Great Depression. That happened on Black Monday in 1987. I remember it happening. When several glaring errors exist in any list such as this, all the rest is suspect. Someone took a great deal of time to debunk this whole list and it includes many references for each item. Please everyone, check it out. All the references can't be wrong unless there is collusion of gigantic proportions going on.
Editor's note: Link removed due to language not being "family friendly". See substitute link in Heikki's post below.

I can only shake my head. ;-)

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:09 pm:

A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61):

If we're discussing powerful and unprincipled political families, let's not forget the Kennedy Dynasty. Beginning with Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr. and later his sons. Activities like:

  • Manipulating the stock market, supporting Adolph Hitler, conspiring with the mob in smuggling alcoholic beverages into the US during prohibition, and otherwise. Antisemitism.
  • Driving off the Dike Bridge into the channel between Chappaquiddick Island and Martha's Vineyard, leaving a passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, to die while himself leaving the scene of the accident.
  • Dallying with damsels, further mob connections.
1. Click ® How the Kennedy Empire was Built … and Other Scandals
2. Click ® Wikipedia: Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr.
(Re Wikipedia: The usual caveats apply.

P.S.: Does this post pass the Heikki test?
FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:17 pm:

Ooops, unfortunately much of the language contained in the link posted by Heikki seems to be more than a tad crude and perhaps unsuitable for dissemination to PastyCam readers!

By G. Tasky (Gtask51) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:35 pm:

Here's a pic of the guy that wasn't a cheerleader.


From a CNN article years ago. link below

"He went to an elite prep school in the East, Phillips Andover. George Sr. had been a baseball star wearing the Andover "A." Bush also played baseball, but mostly made his mark as a cheerleader for the teams. Then, like his father and grandfather, he went on to Yale."


rah rah sis boom bah....Go Georgie!!

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:36 pm:

First of all, I better have my spelling correct or I will here it from the experts.
Whatever your politics, however you lean, however you fell about the War on Terrorism,, this report should open some eyes. IF YOU ARE OPEN MINDED.

Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, the sacrifice has been enormous. In the time peroid from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 through 2006, we have lost over 3000 military personnel to enemy action and accidents.

As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics. The annual fatalities of military members while serving during[not necessarily in] armed forces conflicts from 1980 through 2006

1980....2,392 [Carter Year]

1981....2,380 [Reagan Year]
1984....1,999 [Reagan Year]
1988....1,819 [Reagan Year]
REAGAN years [1981-1988] 6,198 deaths

1989....1,636 [George H.W. year]
1990....1,508 [George H.W. year]
1991....1,787 [George H.W. year]
1992....1,293 [George H.W. year]
George H.W. years [1989-1992] 6,224 deaths

1993....1,213 [Clinton Year]
1994....1,075 [Clinton Year]
1995....2,465 [Clinton Year]
1996....2,318 [Clinton Year]
1997....817 [Clinton Year]
1998....2,252 [Clinton Year]
1999....1,984 [Clinton Year]
2000....1,983 [Clinton Year]
CLINTON years [1993-2000] 14,000 deaths

2001....890 [George W. Year]
2002....1007 [George W. Year]
2003....1,410 [George W. Year]
2004....1,887 [George W. Year]
2005....919 [George W. Year]
2006....920 [George W. Year]
GEORGE W. years [2001-2006] 7,033 deaths

If you are confysed when you look at these figures, so was I
Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest confliets in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clintons Presidency,when America wasn't even involved in a war?
The Answer is YES
Why do so many of them march in lock step to twist the truth?
The point here is that our mainstream media continues to spin these figures [for liberal politcal gain] Nothing more, its all about politics and the libs are famous for turning American against American for a vote

Ensure you do your homework before you place your vote

Gene in Wayland

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:41 pm:


Yes, the Kennedy Empire is what it is. I don't think there are many persons/families that gathered much wealth without bones in their closets. But here's an interesting side note re: the old man, Joe Kennedy: He was infamous for manipulating the stock market prior to its crash. He would "hole up" for a month at a time in swank hotels and study ticker tapes in order to sell short, etc. Imagine what he could have done with a computer those days. LOL!! At any rate, the SEC didn't exist yet, so manipulators such as he (and there were others) had a field day. After the crash and when FDR became president, an initiative to 'square away' the securities exchange began. FDR enticed Joe Kennedy to head up the formation of the Securities Exchange Commission, knowing he (Joe) had reached that point in life where material goods had little meaning in his life, and public recognition/acceptance was paramount. FDR was foxy. He knew it took a crook to catch a crook, but he took much criticism from his advisors. After some arm twisting and explaining the 'facts of life', they saw it his way. Old Joe did a bang-up job, and the SEC we know today is his legacy.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:49 pm:

G. Tasky,

It was at Yale GW played rugby. 64-68. Was a rah-rah-sis-boom-bah at Andover, but the 'resume' doesn't mention Andover. It mentions Yale. Gotta stay on point here, eh? ;-)

By G. Tasky (Gtask51) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 09:51 pm:

Heikki did you read and check those links? The article and links seems to be proving the truth about the Resume, not debunk it.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:01 pm:

FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash)
You are correct but I not defending the Kennedys, there is a lot of folk trying to defend "W" actions and you can't and still tell the truth. There is more truth to the resume than fiction and that is a very sad statement. IF President Clinton had tried to run our country, the way "W" has run our country, the Republican congress would have impeached him at the very least. One last little caveat, the Kennedy Dynasty hasn't done near the damage to our country's well being and the Bush Clan is not done doing the damage yet. I don't defend despicable behavior by anyone regardless of party, hence my post calling Presidents of both, Dems and GOP,liars.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:05 pm:

Methinks the link posted is within PastyCam guidelines since the strong adjectives describing the 'resume' do not show on this page. Besides, to those having no interest, it matters not. To those that do, they'll understand. ;-)

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:08 pm:

i think a same as you on the links that I read

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:20 pm:

You weren't supposed to READ the links. LOL! Wassa matta w/you, anyway? I shoulda known I clicked on the wrong one when I saw all those cuss words. The list doesn't even parallel the 'resume'. Here's the one I should have clicked on that addresses the 'resume' point for point. It's in .pdf format and starts on page 11.

Click Here

Thx for actually reading it and bringing to my attention (another senior moment). I sure hope I haven't been instrumental in exposing the wrong eyes to such foul language for no reason at all. Gettin' close to bedtime.....zzzzzzzz

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:41 pm:


Misteaks I make from time to time,
arranging words that fall in ryhme.
It may not be me age methinks, but
two parts vodka, one part lime.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:52 pm:


Me thinks if that the biggest mistake anyone of makes everything will be all right with the world.

By G. Tasky (Gtask51) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:58 pm:

Heikki, no problem. Gotta be fair, right? Speaking of a senior moment, your eyes must still be pretty good. As you seem pretty good at splitting hairs.

Not that it matters if he was or wasn't a cheerleader at Yale as most stories seem to be about his partying at Yale. Then again most of us are glad that our college escapades are not front page fodder.

Though we can't all agree on who our leaders should be. There is something we can do.

1 Timothy 2:1: I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone--
2:2: for kings and all those in authority.......

Good night all.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:16 pm:

G'night, Chet. G'night, David.
G'night, Grampa. G'night, John Boy.
G'night, all. Enjoyed your company.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 12:13 am:

Alot of S-chit-chat-ing going on here! I know if I don't like it go away - faraway LOL

I forgot now who asked about gas price I will take as a excuse to say yes to high gas price!!

My reason I would love to see gas at the pump cost$6.00 a gallon, I ask you to guess why it would be something,that just might fix the problem,before I tell you why.....

Why I say? So it will be cheaper to use our own.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 06:23 am:

What should we do with all them pennies,we have a big bottle of? Be worth more to melt them down,and sell for copper.Cost more to make them then what they are worth. Zinc & nickel to. But if you get caught, how long is to long to spend in Prison. Good going girl to Amy Whinehouse, you rock!

By Heikki (Heikki) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 06:45 am:

Good point, David H. At this moment there is a boom town being resurrected in Texas....the city of Andrews. I'm sure there are more that don't make the news. It is the going rate on crude that makes it economically feasible once again. Did you know that when an oil well goes 'dry', 2/3 of the oil is still left and hasn't been economical to get out by other means? Read that several years ago in an industry magazine, so it must be at least fairly accurate, huh? For years we have been lured to sweet crude in Saudi Arabia because domestic oil couldn't compete with cost. Now, with China and India adding to the demand, the increased price everybody pays is making reopening of old wells feasible, along with drilling for new deposits.....at least in Texas, as far as I know. Get all those wells on line along with refinery expansion and other exploration, and we can get out of the mideast perhaps. I know the word 'oil' is a synonym for 'evil' in some minds, but like it or not, without it....at least at this place in time...we'd wither on the vine. Then there would be plenty to scream about. I'm all for alternative energy sources, expansion of domestic oil supplies, bio-fuel, and more nuclear power, because the troubles in the mideast are all about oil. If we weren't so dependent on mideast oil, we'd be asking the question, "Saddam Hussein? Who was he?" This is why it cracks me up when Bush-bashers claim it's all about oil companies and investors getting richer. Well, they do, but the primary reason is to assure our economic life's blood continues to flow uninterrupted. We didn't learn much in 1974, so gotta pay the fiddler now.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 07:29 am:


By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 09:00 am:

I luv you Heikki! Dose anyone call you Henry or Hank? You are first to be awarded [Valentine For The Day] in my book.So nicely done.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 10:07 am:

David H.,
Glad you agree. Heikki is nickname for Heikkilä.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 03:01 pm:

I would guess that what Tom said a few days ago in response to my statement about the education profession very likely is appropriate for his personal circumstances. I live in a part of the midwest where what I said applies to large schools and colleges in major cities. Tom's unfortunate use of the term B---S says a lot.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 08:27 am:

Thx for removing the incorrect link previously posted on this thread. Sure would be handy if we could edit our own postings after they are posted. Sometimes one doesn't catch an error during the preview step. I belong to a website club hosted by MyFamily.com, and that permits editing of postings by those who made the posting. Prudently, it also permits the site administrator(s) to edit all postings to weed out persistent bad actors. Just a thought. Don't have any idea if the PastyCam program would have that feature. At any rate, thanks for being alert. That site was baaaaaad!

By Tom (Tom) on Wednesday, February 13, 2008 - 01:22 pm:

My term B S simply means you are talking from the bias of not knowing inside the institutions of learning. All people live in the real world. CEOs, farmers, factory workers, etc.
Presenting ideas in the classroom does not remove one from that real world. Ideas do temporize how a person looks at society.
My part of the mid-west cannot be much different than yours. I must admit the scuttle butt I get from my family in Ohio supports your view regarding educators not living in the real world. I guess I must have been living on some other planet these past 30+ years.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Monday, February 18, 2008 - 01:01 pm:

This seems to be an epidemic.
Handled so smoothly, every time, it almost seems scripted.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 - 10:13 am:

Tom, thanks for clarifying your use of the term B S. Having served on a school board in a rural area that has a consolidated school system not far from a major city, I observed the education standards, student achievement, parental participation, etc., from that perspective. I agree with what you said about people who live in the real world, the classroom, etc.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 - 02:32 pm:

Hello, here is some more plagiarism and or copy and paste stack of stuff by yours truly. Russ why worry about? Use the Prayer as you wish. The Plagiarism Police won't come way out there. Heck I have called the Cable people many times to report theft of their cable near me, one can plainly see it happening, they don't do nothing about it.

Theresa Brunk as you know from here, posted a fantastic piece of work on the joke page today. You must take the time to go there and read it. It should have been put on this page, as I don't see it as a joke! I remember getting the same in a e-mail some years ago. I wonder who the original author is? Sounds like it could have been me, in my days before Re-Hab. I don't remember. Who squealed on Obama I wonder?

You liberals hate Bush, but a lot of your hatred is cause you don't think he can talk. He embarrasses you. The president of our country can't say "nuclear. The president of our country just can't speak. He starts and stutters and it just embarrasses you. I'm not exaggerating this, it has been said here. I think one of the reasons that there is such a dramatic devotion to Barack Obama is he can talk.

A note on plagiarism: When my name is above the things I post here and submit although it appears like I am. I am not claiming ownership of the work. If through carelessness or design I have blurred the lines between what's mine and what was taken from others, I wasn't thinking of it as stealing intellectual property. Plagiarism is risky and counterproductive to those who are public figures. It harms their intellectual and moral development.I don't have any of those things

Controversy has erupted in the Obama campaign. He has been accused of plagiarism now by Howard Wolfson, who is one of Hillary's big-time campaign advisors. Jim VandeHei at The Politico will soon post that Howard Wolfson has called this plagiarism. The plagiarism is of Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts. During Deval Patrick's campaign for governor of Massachusetts, he, too, was accused by his opponent of making a bunch of nothing speeches. Great words, flowery lingo, inspiring, uplifting, elevating rhetoric, but devoid of substance, and now Obama has been accused of copying him.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, February 20, 2008 - 04:50 pm:

Then there are politicians who use words from FDR's speeches, such as, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself".

How much time do you think is spent looking at this site for plagiarists? Perhaps a few word changes and/or paraphrasing is sufficient for a meaningful comment.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Wednesday, February 20, 2008 - 08:47 pm:

I agree. 'It's no big deal'(to borrow Obama's comment on latest plagarism charges) when one copies/pastes on informal forums such as this. Who really cares? If there was something to gain such as money or publicity, it would be a different matter. I'm not a Obama supporter, but those are some really cheap shots being taken at him. That's a sure sign of desperation by his opponent. Not very classy at all. In fact, I'm getting to like the guy. Just don't care for his political ideology.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Thursday, February 21, 2008 - 12:00 pm:

I don't care for his positions at all. He is yet another pushing a collectivist agenda.
I get an uneasy feeling every time he speaks, and it is made worse watching the masses buying it, without analyzing what he is saying.

Say What, Barack?
by Paul R. Hollrah, Lincoln Heritage Institute Senior Fellow

It is worth the read.
It is only right to question those that aspire to Power.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 09:50 am:

This is real good that Hillary picked up a few more states, That's what Rush has been pushing, maybe a lot of republicans crossed over this time, Now Hillary and Obama have a few months to destroy each other.
Gene in Wayland

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 10:10 am:

You let the Cat out of the bag Gene! But you are right,many crossed over just for that reason. It is going to be as exciting to watch as a train wreck,or short skirts here soon.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 10:41 am:

Do the people really beleive all the things that Hillary and Obama said they are going to do if they get that office,It is hard to remember all they have said there going to do,of course with her ''35'' years of change,she will have the answer if the phone rings at 3:00 am, It will no dought be some women calling for slick Willy.
It is going to be fun to watch.
Gene in Wayland

By k j (Kathiscc) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 07:06 pm:

If the choice becomes Obama or McCain, I'll stay home and let you all decide the lesser of the 2 evils. At least I could summon up a vote for Hillary. I hope she wins it, only because there is no way I could vote for either of those other 2. I wanted Edward's, who left for the 'good' of the party.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 07:27 pm:

Kathi, Those are exactly my sentiments. I was sick when Edwards dropped out of the race as I thought he was the best candidate running for either side. However, lately my fear has been that I won't even vote for the first time in my life. I would NEVER vote for either McCain or Obama. Obama has people chasing after him like he's some kind of god or something. It's scary if you ask me. And McCain is just getting what we've already got and that's surely not worked. Thankfully, Hillary pulled a few out. Now we'll see if they decide to include Michigan and Florida. If she's in the running, I just might vote. Not that I'm so gung-ho on her either. I just think she's the best of the 3 left. I still wish a miracle would occur at the convention and they would nominate Edwards!!

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 07:48 pm:

Deb S.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 09:52 pm:

Thank you David!!!

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Thursday, March 6, 2008 - 10:02 pm:

Forgot to tell Gene that while Hillary and Obama are beating up on each other, Bush will drag McCain down with him. How on earth can he go to the White House for support when most people are totally against him now? That's okay. Hopefully it'll be good for the Dem's.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Friday, March 7, 2008 - 08:49 am:

Well it seem that the Democrats have this Election.
Whether Obama or Clinton makes no difference, the wars will continue, Government will grow larger and more intrusive and taxes will be increased.
McCain has no chance against them. He is an Idiot and could not debate them without appearing even more stupid than his record shows him to be. The Bush endorsement is the "Kiss of Death" to his campaign. Good Riddance. It seems that the GOP is deliberately losing this election. They offer nothing but more war and less freedom.
The Collectivist agenda will continue to destroy what is left of the United States Constitution.
Individual Liberty, Private property, Free Enterprise, and sound monetary policy are incompatible with their plans.
It will get much worse before it gets better.
The Democrats will tax us to death, for our own good, They will rape the Constitution for our own good,and will solidify the plan for a North American Union. All for our own good.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, March 7, 2008 - 09:23 am:

Oh come on Deb, you know you don't want either one of those Democrats in, just like Mitt said, she has no experience,she hasn't even run a corner grocery store,well I'm sorry, she does have "35" years of change. George will be good for McCain, He can keep the people laughing, he's also a pretty good dancer.YOU are going to miss him when he's gone. When it comes time to vote, you just vote for McCain.
Gene in Wayland

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Friday, March 7, 2008 - 09:36 am:

You're a funny guy, Gene. You're right. I don't want either of them in there. I wanted Edwards in there. But it's really hard for me to laugh at stupidity, and to me, that's all Bush was and is. Miss him?? Like I said, you're a funny guy. I wouldn't vote for McCain if he was the only person running. I was thinking about Mitt, but I believe he darn near drove Massachusetts into bankruptcy, didn't he? Was it Massachusetts? I thought it was. There were so many of them, I can't keep them straight.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, March 7, 2008 - 09:43 am:

Well Deb I thought I could convince you , but I guess not

By Heikki (Heikki) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 08:01 am:

Let's keep the record straight concerning Mitt Romney. Upon entering office as the governor of MA, Romney faced a projected $3 billion deficit, but a previously enacted $1.3 billion capital gains tax increase and $500 million in unanticipated federal grants decreased the deficit to $1.2 billion. Through a combination of spending cuts, increased fees, and removal of corporate tax loopholes, by 2006 the state had a $700 million surplus and was able to cut taxes. During Mitt's last year, he vetoed 250 items of the proposed state budget......and all were overturned by the legislature. Accordingly, many taxes/fees were increased to make ends meet. I wouldn't say Romney is responsible for the nickname "Taxachusetts", but rather the liberal culture that dominates. Massachusetts, like other states, was in deep fiscal 'doo-doo' when Romney took office. I think the people of MA were looking for a "messiah" to bail them out. Well, it worked to a point, but one can't save people from themselves, eh? Romney is a brilliant person and was my first choice this election year, but I guess he doesn't have the charisma or the ability to voice empty phrases like the three empty suits now in the running. We will get what we deserve.

By FJL (Langoman) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 08:35 am:

Why don't all of you Edwards fans just write-in his name on the ballot.

By Tom (Tom) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 09:06 am:

Thanks for the update on Romney, Heikki, saved me the time from doing the look up about him.
He has set up a health insurance program requirement that is being studied. Requires everyone to have med insurance by some date. But NOT paid for by the taxpayers. If more state take their own initiative to do programs like Mass then the feds can keep their nose out of things. The dems are now calling CEOs to testify about the bum loans their banks made and questions about their salaries. They don't dare call for them to be reduced as that would be the end of "capitalism" as we know it. Market economies is the latest term to describe it.
However, left leaning liberals always want to interfer with free choices and failures.

By Kathy P. (Katiaire) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 12:13 pm:

I was sorely disappointed when Romney dropped out of the race. I think he had a lot to offer.
My second choice was Edwards.
The press has done a fine job in determining who will be running this year. They picked a couple of favorites and gave them all the coverage.
As far as I'm concerned there isn't a candidate left worth a vote...just more of the same.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 01:33 pm:

I too thank you for the update on Romney. I actually like the guy. He was a serious consideration of mine. Too bad the good ones dropped out of the race. It'd be nice to have the best of 2 worlds and see if we could mix and match. Perhaps we could all just get along. Well, most of us anyway.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 02:16 pm:

I wonder if anyone who is for the direction our country has taken(very right-wing-I don't need any help, so I don't want anyone else to be able to get some help, philosophy, as well as if you have something I want, you just take it) squares with anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus. My reading of the "Good Book" says it doesn't fly very far! Our present government lies ad nauseum and that doesn't cause their lies to become truth as they would have us believe! My Mother was a peace advocate who ran into a lot of hateful opposition when we lived in the UP and later when she lived in Florida and it looks like it hasn't change a great deal since. Just for the record, when my mother fell and broke her ankle in Helsinki, it cost her less then 10 dollars to get it fixed. The Finns in Finland apparently have more compassion for people then a lot of American have. Again,I ask, where does this present behavior square with the teachings of Christ, which an awful lot of American claim to follow. Notice please, not one word of whether Republican or Democratic leanings, just human(kindness)leanings! I now step down from my SOAP BOX!!

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 02:30 pm:

David, Apparently you didn't hear George when he said that he had God on his side. Puhleeze!!

You make some good points. I hope people are going to read this.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 03:55 pm:

Here is some thing many will think is nasty & name calling I have to write.
I can not understand in the first place why anyone would want Edwards to run our Country! And then turn around and say Romney you considered too. To me that is comparing apples to oranges!
And why does Hillary's campaign try to compare Barack Obama to Kenneth Starr? Two reasons why I think so are; one, Hillary knows that those who would vote for her are less intelligent than Obama voters; Second, those voters are too young and too stupid to react to a comparison to Adolf Hitler.How would you like to be running for office knowing that your chances of success depended on the most ignorant voters out there? Please, I can not put it any nicer then that, so forgive me before hand.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 04:57 pm:

Since this is the most active thread today and we've strayed a bit off topic, just thought I'd add this to the mix:


It is extremely surprising that the Arab financed TV in Dubai would allow this to air. Be sure and watch this, it is so powerful I have no doubt she now has a very large price on her head.

She is one impressive woman. Here is a powerful and amazing statement on Al Jereeza television. The woman is Wafa Sultan, an Arab-American psychologist from Los Angeles. I would suggest watching it ASAP because I don't know how long the link will be active. This film clip should be shown around the world repeatedly! As far as I'm concerned, she speaketh the truth.


By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 05:40 pm:

By what I could see of it, it was a good video. But it kept cutting in and out and we could hear her, but not read what she was saying. I think you are right. They will be after her.

And David, it's very easy to look at 2 different candidates with very different ideas and try to decide who you really like and what you like about each candidate and what you don't like about each candidate. People do it all the time.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 05:51 pm:

Heikki- Tanks for the link- There is an awful lot of truth to what she says

By Snowman (Snowman) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 05:55 pm:

Doing a little tip-toe in and a little tip-toe out. Hillary is anti-union and sat on the Walmart Board. Barack is backing the unions. Okay, I'm outta here, let the tomatoes fly.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 06:50 pm:

Heikki, what a great film to watch, powerful message,She sure is putting a nose around her neck, she has a lot of backbone.
How I wish Mitt would have stayed in.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 07:34 pm:

Technically, Mitt is still in. He only suspended his campaign, not terminate it. At least that's the last I heard. Dunno his reasoning. Perhaps he knows something we don't know. This has certainly been a strange presidential campaign.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Saturday, March 8, 2008 - 07:46 pm:

The same is true with Fred Thompson, as far as suspending their campaigns. I understand that at least part of it has to do with being able to hold onto campaign funds and to continue to have control over them in the future, and possibly for future campaigns, etc. I am guessing for the next part, but it could have something to do with having more control over the party's platform, at convention time, as well.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Sunday, March 9, 2008 - 06:38 am:

I wonder if anyone (or how few) actually vote for positions and policies. Or if it is just appearance and personality.
Does anyone examine the record of these people? Does anyone look at history?
I will admit that I am disgusted at the Lies and Manipulations of both the politicians and the press.

Here is some food for thought.

Analysis © 2007 - 2008 by G. Edward Griffin. Updated January 28

Would you rather be a Neoconservative or a Progressive? That is a trick question. The trick is in the fact that, although there may be differences between the rhetoric and short-term agendas of these groups, their long-term goals actually are the same. They may differ over how to fight a war in the Middle East but not over the right of the President to wage such a war empowered by the UN instead of Congress. They may differ over what kind of speech should be forbidden ("subversive" speech vs. "hate" speech, for example) but not over the right of the government to forbid it. They may differ over how fast to bankrupt the nation to provide benefits for its citizens but not over the assumption that providing benefits is what governments are supposed to do. They disagree over tactics, timing, and style, but not objectives. They fight for dominance within the New World Order, but they work together to build it. That is because both groups have embraced the underlying ideology of global collectivism.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Sunday, March 9, 2008 - 11:25 am:

… food for thought …

I hasten to add, be sure to click the link provided above by Peter Osmar (Pcosmar), as the quoted paragraph is only an introduction!

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 - 10:55 am:

Regarding Tom's comment about "the end of 'capitalism' as we know it", perhaps calling for CEO's salaries to be reduced would end some of the rampant (and often amoral) greed the U.S. is known for world-wide. It is not only a CEO whose efforts produce profits for a company, for without other managment people and lower-level salaried employees and hourly workers nothing would be produced that would generate profits. And, shareholders deserve a commensurate portion of the profits in return for their investment in such a company.

By Tom (Tom) on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 - 12:08 pm:

How would you justify setting the wages that CEOs make and not others? Actors, sports figures, etc.?
Once you open that can of worms you must look at all kinds of "greed." I looked up that word not too long ago. Having something in excess of needs.
Who is going to be so god-like and determine who needs what? I remember the wages set in the USSR. The professionals were rewarded the least. Jobs like truck drivers and train engineers where highest and so were factory workers. Thus there weren't enough of the engineers, etc., to make much in the way of advances in their over society. The space program advanced due to the pressure of government to have people work in that field.
I don't think we want people like Pelosi or Reid
telling us what our income should be---do we?
Who would tell them that they have too much?
No one.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 - 01:39 pm:

It appears that I should have made it clear that my comments regarding the "end of 'capitalism' as we know it" were meant to be relative only to the greed exhibited by CEO's in the U.S. The Bible covers greed quite adequately; devout Christians understand what greed means and their lives are conducted accordingly. I don't think citizens of the U.S have anything to worry about regarding someone telling them what their income should be; economic justice usually prevails in a free society such as is enjoyed in the U.S. A "god-like" person to say "who needs what" is not needed when there are plenty of professional people (and pseudo-professional people) who would have you believe that only they know "who needs what".

By Tom (Tom) on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 - 03:58 pm:

But how do you restrict the curtailment of CEO's income to only them? And which ones? Set some arbitrary amount that is the tops?

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 - 08:19 pm:

I don't like getting into a "who knows what" discussion on this site, however, I am aware of corporate boards (directors) that have taken action in reponse to shareholders' protests regarding exorbitant CEO salaries and bonuses. Being a shareholder of a world-wide corporation, along with other shareholders I was given an opportunity to vote for certain limits on a CEO's salary and bonuses with satisfactory results, including the resignation of a greedy CEO. Economic justice prevailed in this case and others where shareholders were not afraid to voice their opinions to the board of directors.

As a member of the school board of a rural consolidated school system, I participated in successful efforts that were taken to get rid of greedy, over-paid, school officials. It was no surprise that the overall grades of the school rose not long after that action.

Capitalism works well until greed takes over. Greed can be found in many forms, the costs are not always easily seen until someone suffers.

By Dave Bennett (Montanaslick) on Sunday, April 6, 2008 - 09:58 pm:

Barack, Bill and Hillary were all in Montana this past week and all the people were in such a stir. A state that was home to the Unibomber, the Freemen, Capital Killer and the Militia should not be so surprised to attract more liars, theifs, and moral misfits to its midst.

P.S. I am a displaced Michiganite that lived and worked in Da yoop fer a spell. And I do know where is the bridge.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 - 10:50 am:

..."Capitalism works well until greed takes over. Greed can be found in many forms, the costs are not always easily seen until someone suffers."...

Right on! Not being an advocate of excessive social policies nor of pure capitalism, I have to agree CEO's who have bailed out of failing companies with millions in their pocket is a clear sign our world is upside down. We should be applying the 'rule of the sea' to business, where the captain goes down with his ship.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, May 8, 2008 - 09:47 pm:

Hillary Clinton eked out a narrow victory over Barack Obama in the Indiana Democratic primary, but top Obama aides say Obama would have won if it were not for conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.

David Axelrod, Obama’s top strategist, told reporters that he attributed Clinton’s lead in Indiana to Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” — his campaign to have Republicans cross over and vote for Clinton to prolong the nomination fight and damage the Democratic nominee.

Exit polls appear to back up Axelrod’s claims. Results of the Indiana exit poll found that that 17 percent of primary voters said they would vote for Republican John McCain over Clinton in the general election. And 41 percent of those voters still cast a vote for Hillary in the primary, according to the Baltimore Sun.

Citing these figures, the Obama campaign sent an e-mail to reporters Tuesday night asserting that 7 percent of the votes in Indiana could be attributed to the “Limbaugh effect.”

This is from Newsmax.I find this interesting,don't you?

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, May 12, 2008 - 09:45 pm:

Hillary Clinton will eke out another narrow victory over Barack Obama tomorrow in the WV. Democratic primary due to “Operation Chaos”

I belive that moderates and independents are Democrats.Because, by definition,if someone or some organization is not conservative,it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate,not independent, it's going to be liberal,because liberalism is easy. Liberalism takes no intellectual application. Liberalism is all about how you feel. Liberalism is all about making yourself feel good about yourself while you don't solve anything. Liberalism is all about thinking you're better than everybody else. Liberalism is all about thinking you're smarter than everybody else. Liberalism is all about ignoring every failure of liberalism and asking instead for your good-hearted intentions to be examined and credited.

By k j (Kathiscc) on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 - 08:26 am:

David, David, David. Liberalism takes no intellectual application? You know what? I'm not even going to go there. If I did, I'd be thrown out of here so fast, it would make your head spin.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - 12:11 am:

Well was I right? She blew him away in WV. with votes she will not have in the Fall.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - 08:51 am:

"Operation Chaos" is just another political activity that neo-con Limbaugh labeled and attached himself to after it began. It has been my observation over many years that people who heed what he says lack ability to think for themselves, and his radical right-wing rabid rhetoric causes more trouble than good. It appears to me that his remarks about Obama show a cleverly crafted cover over his racist attitude.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - 10:12 am:

Liberalism takes no intellectual application, as was just applied.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 04:11 pm:

Lest readers of my comments be misinformed, I have been a registered Republican for over 50 years. Years ago I was a Republican precinct committeeman, and was a member of a local Goldwater presidential campaign committee and other Republican committees. I regularly receive bulletins, etc,. from the RNC; I recently filled out and returned a survey form to the RNC in which I represent several hundred other area Republicans.

In this area of the midwest, Republicans do not necessarily ascribe to the radical right-wing nor left-wing political views. The Republican party in general is returning to what it once was, more moderate than radical, more conservative than liberal. Extensive radical right-wing and left-wing propaganda to the contrary is just that, and in most cases it is self-serving propaganda. Ignorance of this fact is a good example of the gullibility of voters in general, and some viewers of this site.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, May 16, 2008 - 08:14 am:

With reference to the last sentence in my above comments, some "commentators" are included.

Regarding "Operation Chaos", over 50 years ago it was a practice for some Republican and Democratic party campaign committees in this part of the Midwest to advise registered voters to switch parties in an effort to help elect certain candidates for local, state, and national offices. The campaign committees I served on did not want this practice publicized.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, May 29, 2008 - 07:59 pm:

What do you think caused the Great Depression in U.S. history?

The severe economic crisis supposedly precipitated by the U.S. stock-market crash of 1929. Although it shared the basic characteristics of other such crises.The Great Depression was unprecedented in its length and in the wholesale poverty and tragedy it inflicted on society. Economists have disagreed over its causes, but certain causative factors are generally accepted. The prosperity of the Roaring Twenties was unevenly distributed among the various parts of the American economy(the have & the have not's)-farmers and unskilled workers were notably excluded—with the result that the nation's productive capacity was greater than its capacity to consume. In addition, the tariff and war-debt policies of the mean,nasty,rich Republican administrations of the Nineteen Twenties had cut down the foreign market for American goods.

Finally, easy-money policies led to an inordinate expansion of credit and installment buying and fantastic speculation in the stock market.

I think government involvement with this easy money credit was the cause of it's length.

By Peter Osmar (Pcosmar) on Friday, May 30, 2008 - 09:52 am:

David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn)

"" In addition, the tariff and war-debt policies of the mean,nasty,rich Republican administrations of the Nineteen Twenties had cut down the foreign market for American goods.""

I would also remind you that it was W Wilson (D) That gave us the Federal Reserve, Turning the entire economy and monetary policy over to Private Bankers.
The war debt was also his, as he got us into WW 1.
He also gave us the Income Tax, The War on Drugs the War Industries Board,etc.
Many of the problems in the last 80 yrs. and today can be directly traced to Wilson's policies.

By Helen (Heleninhubbel) on Monday, June 16, 2008 - 06:44 pm:

All a person has to do is research ..... and you will be able to seperate fact from fiction.
The problem is people are to lazy maybe, or they don't want to believe what they find out, or the government couldn't possibily be doing us wrong......just gimmie, gimmie, gimmie.

This is no longer a country of freedom like it once was.

People better open their eyes before this election. Do you really know what a Muslim stands for....DO YOU Really. Look at Europe and see......can't change those facts one little bit.

Sad the left media doesn't report news like they should......

With a Muslim there is no other way but theirs...

America better open their eyes....close their boarders and inforce their laws......we are in trouble............

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - 09:15 am:

After doing some research and reviewing the comments on this site regarding Obama, I find a racial bias undertone in some of the anti-Muslim comments similar to that exhibited by right-wing radio talk show hosts. I am a bit perplexed why some folks want to connect Obama to the Muslim religion when it has been more than adequately proven that his is not a Muslim. Perhaps strong prejudices close some folks minds to the truth?

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - 10:38 am:

Helen you are so right, the Muslim religion is already taking over Europe.
Matt, anytime any thing is said about a black person, it's called racial, I don't see anything racial in some of these post. Remember, he's half and half, is that racial. Don"t defend him.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - 04:03 pm:

Helen (Heleninhubbel):
"With a Muslim there is no other way but theirs... "

Funny thing, but I've seen the same attitude among a number of "Christian" denominations as well: "Ours is the only right religion, and all those that aren't members of our church are going to a very hot place (and that isn't the Arizona desert).

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 12:57 pm:

(Where oh where to put this, here or over on the jokes thread? Decisions, decisions!)

Just think, if Sen. Obama is elected, the good 'old USA will become an Obama Nation!

(Pronounced "abomination")!

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 11:47 pm:

Obama--- Osama.... the difference is just a little bs....

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 08:30 am:

****Funny thing, but I've seen the same attitude among a number of "Christian" denominations as well: "Ours is the only right religion, and all those that aren't members of our church are going to a very hot place (and that isn't the Arizona desert).****

For someone to say: "Our church or our way is the only way"...is misrepresenting Christianity. You can tell people about the news of Jesus Christ and how he saves but it is ultimately up to YOU the individual to determine where you stand with God. Going to church alone is not going to get you to heaven.
As for Muslim religion...It is not a two way street with them...Muslims ( and I'm speaking more in terms of arab countries )are able to come over here to America and live, build mosques, set up Muslim communities, run Muslim oriented businesses, carry the book of Quaran and freely worship Allah as much as they want and no one gives a hoot here...BUT...if you go to Saudi Arabia and try to build a Christian church, carry a Holy Bible around and try to spread the message of Jesus over there you will be tried, jailed, or even ultimately killed for it...

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 01:14 pm:

Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21):

That would be "Qur'an" (Arabic: القرآن‎ al-qur’ān — sometimes transliterated as Qur’ān, Koran, Alcoran or Al-Qur’ān).

"if you go to Saudi Arabia and try to build a Christian church, carry a Holy Bible around and try to spread the message of Jesus over there you will be tried, jailed, or even ultimately killed for it..."

Certainly that seems accurate for the extreme fundamentalist variation on Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia (Wahhabism).

Although it's been over five decades since my early study of comparative religions, as I recall, "true" Islam is at least tolerant of Jews and Christians, "People of the Book" (ahl al-kitāb), in the Qur'an, as opposed to their considerably lesser tolerance of "infidels".

It has been reported that some Wahhabist books and pamphlets teach that Muslims should reject absolutely any non-Muslim ideas and practices, including political ones. Wahabis have even labeled many other major Muslim groups, such as Sufi and Shi'a Muslims, as apostates!

There clearly seem to be an abundance of extreme (hopefully only "fringe") elements of Islam of late, including the extreme "Islamist" jihadists, whos beliefs distort and defile "true" Islam.

(Of course there are no "extreme fringe" wacko pseudo-Christian "cults", are there?)

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Friday, July 25, 2008 - 12:34 pm:

Yes, there are extreme sides to every religion but as for Christianity here in the U.S. and in the parts of the world dominated by Christians, the chances of Christianity extremism putting your life on the line as a Muslim are far less of a risk and that form of extremism is far more rare...but it has happened...no denying...however, it's still a far more riskier business to practice Christianity in Arab / Muslim dominated countries...Just as it was risky in the reign of the Roman empire 2000 years ago....

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 12:57 pm:

Barack Obama has been running his campaign in the style of a revolutionary. Just how radical and liberal Obama is has been well hidden by the campaign. If you haven’t heard about his friendship with the leaders of the radical group, the Weather Underground, you can thank the media. Just how radically left this man is can be seen in what company he keeps. Obama is friends with William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, the Weather Underground terrorists of the 1960’s.

William Ayers is a professor at the University of Chicago in Illinois. This is old news of course. But today has News that Barack Obama was Chairman of this Underground group. Now the Media is not going to run with this, that those records are sealed. How many wish there could be a do over?

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 05:50 pm:

P.S. I forgot to include this to my above post.


With a writ to aid Chicago’s public schools, the Annenberg challenge played a deeply political role in Chicago’s education wars, and as Annenberg board chairman, Obama clearly aligned himself with Ayers’s radical views on education issues. With Obama heading up the board and Ayers heading up the other key operating body of the Annenberg Challenge, the two would necessarily have had a close working relationship for years.Ya think?

By Snowman (Snowman) on Thursday, August 21, 2008 - 06:04 pm:

It does not matter which one steers the helm of this Titanic!!!

G.W. and Cheney have gotten us into such a huge "Quagmire" that we as a country will NEVER recover from it in OUR lifetimes!! And if Bush keeps upsetting Russia, even our kids babies won't see any recovery (if you get my nuclear drift!)

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, August 22, 2008 - 10:34 am:

Snowman, How is Bush upsetting Russia, Bush didn't go into Georgia, Russia did, remember??
it's only days ago. Is it because Bush is backing Georgia,or should we back Russia.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Friday, August 22, 2008 - 11:56 am:

Back in the USSR Looks like some folks wish it was still there, and not to be broken into pieces!
FREEDOM some here can't handle to much of it.Men mostly, now that they had to grow up and go out on their own it is freighting to them.Miss Mommy Dear.So they take a Wife, but nay the Women wanted a Husband not their Mother-in-laws child to care for.In comes Government to pray on the poor soul, and the term (Cradle To The Grave ) is born. Around and around it goes that only a Conservative knows. You would think people had enough of ( Silly Love Songs ) Ya think?

By FJL (Langoman) on Friday, August 22, 2008 - 12:59 pm:

Looks like in some minds G.W. gets the blame for everything. But thats what tunnel vision does to one...........

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Friday, August 22, 2008 - 01:25 pm:

Eugene Zuverink (Zube):
"How is Bush upsetting Russia …"

With his plans to install a missile shield in Poland?
Click: Missile shield in Poland?

Recent events in Georgia would seem to demonstrate the merits of such a missile shield, no?

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, August 22, 2008 - 02:09 pm:

FRNash, I know thats the reason, so now Putin is going to sob about that. So Bush is suppose to say , OK if your going to be mad about it,we won't do it then.you just send your missiles up and we will get the surprise when it happens like 9/11.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, August 28, 2008 - 09:23 pm:

William Ayers. Do you know what this man did in the sixties? He has no remorse and states he wished he could have done more. Barack Obama was eight back then at that time, but he knows what his friend of today is all about. Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown, dose this bother you? Can you pull the lever for the guy who launched his career at William Ayers home? And Obama has threaten TV Stations,if he wins he will see to it that they will lose their FCC License if they air this stuff. Just the kind of guy we need eh?

By Heikki (Heikki) on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 07:17 am:

Obama doesn't want voters to know too much about this or about his former mentor in Hawaii, Mr. Davis. Also, isn't it strange "Mr. Change" picked "Mr. Insider" as his running mate? It simply amazes me how a stadium full of people were served Kool-Aid in Denver last night. Some say Obamassiah blessed all the drinking fountains just before his acceptance speech. That act and that act alone is proof he must be "The One".

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 09:11 am:

Just watching that guy puts my stomach in knots!!! Me thinks we're in trouble! "Obamassiah", clever. And I think many people are thinking it too. Here I thought I was the only one.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 02:33 pm:

Gotta love it folks. Not more than 5 minutes after John McCain announced his new running mate, Sarah Palin, our wonderful Liberal slanted media and the Obama campaign immediately slammed and brought up the question about her qualifications to be “second seat” to the front seat. Whew!...If that’s not like the pot calling the kettle black!...Sorry, no racial overtones meant there!...Where on earth do they have the right to knock her down when their boy, (B.O.) who was nothing more than a project manager for a cheesy Chicago south side district for some time, then went on as a “junior” Senator to the Illinois Senate and then on as Senator to Washington for Illinois all the while merely sitting there for the most part voting “present” on issues while Palin sat in her seat in Alaska tackling issues head on and sidestepping nothing! Enough about her for the time being...
Who says this guy is qualified to lead? The George Soros’ and the Oprah Winfreys’ that helped to fund his campaign? Obviously if anything has been proven in this years electoral race, it’s that with enough money and backing you could get Bugs Bunny nominated. Until his “get known” speech 4 years ago during the last election, no one knew of or anything about this guy and now he is in line for the front seat?
In light of the past few posts, here, how awful to think that he ( B.O.) would even consider William Ayers as even an acquaintance let alone a friend or that prior to B.O.’s final push for the nomination would even have a link to the New Black Panther party on his website? It don’t surprise me no matter how much he tries to wash himself of Jeremiah Wright.
As our wonderful Congress with the 9% approval rating took vacation earlier this month, the Black Congressional Caucus ( B.O. belongs to as well ) helped to spearhead a charge to get a ruling for a formal apology for slavery that happened over some 150 years ago...I don’t know about you but not even anyone in our Government today, is old enough to be responsible for something that happened 150 years ago. Not even Dingy Harry Reid! What a waste. That’s not all. This formal apology opens the door for many frivolous lawsuits and taxpayer dollars wasted justifying this cause. The NAACP, ACLU, Black Panther Party, and other special interest groups will have a field day with this stuff.
Laugh now and say “naw!” but when B.O. gets elected, it’s coming and he’ll be glad to let it happen! They may as well clear some of the historical rooms of the White House out to set up offices for this cause. The opposition from hate- mongering white supremacist groups and radical groups from both sides will also push this thing and cause controversy and civil unrest like that in the 60's...Not as bad but it’ll be there and for what?
I am neither an Obamassiah maniac or a McCain supporter...heck for that matter I’m writing in Paris Hilton!...LOL...I am more concerned about the Congress and Senate race than the presidential stint at this point. We need to get some of those do nothing slugs out of there and get rid of Nancy “I look like I just saw a ghost” Pelosi. For the first time in a long time, I’m more than concerned about my country. I’m actually very scared for it!...

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 03:08 pm:

Well said, Eddie. I thought the same thing when they started knocking Sarah. I don't know her or anything about her but am willing to find out. Who is Obama & his supporters to say how little experience she has? I am not a supporter of either of these candidates and am trying to figure out who I would feel comfortable "writing in", because I don't want to vote for either of these guys.
Slavery, kind of like what "we" did to the Indians all those years ago. We are not responsible for that either but continue to pay. When will THAT ever stop?
I am very scared for our country also, and have been saying so since it was obvious that BO would become our candidate. Lovely!!!

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Sunday, August 31, 2008 - 11:29 pm:

What kind of problem would it cause if Paris Hilton got 7% of the vote.Write in that nice kind Finish guy P.Buuk-ka-nen..Before you toss your vote away,Please take a look at Libertarian Party.

One heck of a good read Eddie, and you are still a young man.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Monday, September 1, 2008 - 08:02 am:

Ditto to the above comments, Eddie. With all this focus on the Executive Branch, we tend to ignore the importance of that big house that has such a profound effect on our lives. However, we also have this dual-hat position called the presidency that will be filled by NObama or McCain, no matter who is written-in, even if it's Heikki Lunta. I'll take my chances with McCain as Commander-in-Chief rather than the alternative, thank you.

By S. Hill (Azfinn) on Monday, September 1, 2008 - 01:25 pm:

Interesting and thought-provoking posts. After working in a political office for quite a few years (under several administrations both Republican and Democrat), here's my two cents worth: it makes a HUGE difference (good or bad--I've seen both) who elected officals surround themselves with, both as advisors and as key appointments. It can really make or break how well things are handled. Officials don't handle much directly themselves, but their key people operate according to their "agenda." In this presidential election, who McCain and Obama have chosen as their VP certainly tells something about them. I am interested in who these candidates have as their advisors and wish we knew who they plan to appoint, including their respective cabinets. Most politicians say what they think people want to hear to get their votes. Who they surround themselves with is much more telling........

By Heikki (Heikki) on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - 07:11 am:

Very good point (Azfinn). Since both platforms are championing reform/change, in order to make good their objective it is imperative their running mate be the first member of the team to exhibit those characteristics. The selection of a proven reformer by McCain is consistent in that respect. On the other hand, even though Biden has warmed a seat in the Senate for nearly his whole work life, he has never exhibited those properties. In fact, one could argue he has been an enabler to the status quo, one of those responsible for the latest Congressional approval rating of 9%. Another important consideration is character. Ever since American politics morphed from being the art of compromise to the art of deception, honesty has become a casualty. Biden had made the list long ago for dishonesty. I cannot see him as an agent for change.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - 09:27 am:

Here's an interesting viewpoint concerning federal government: (Cannot provide attribution as it was received via e-mail unattributed.)

The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers' Party. Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers.
John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a
lawyer, and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984
went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every Democrat vice
presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law
school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in
each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald
Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican
nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.
The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The
Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create
wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who
immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America . And, so we have seen
the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing
their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws
passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn
precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an
awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to
view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties,
then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some
Americans become 'adverse parties' of our very government. We are not all
litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a
republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts,
and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial
decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all
parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but
that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the
most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the
Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.
When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other
means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then
the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue
America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning
to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real
reform, or real hope in America . Most Americans know that a republic in
which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected
judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we
cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders.
Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore
declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to
our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society
and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the
mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - 02:07 pm:

****What kind of problem would it cause if Paris Hilton got 7% of the vote.Write in that nice kind Finish guy P.Buuk-ka-nen..Before you toss your vote away,Please take a look at Libertarian Party.****

I would David, but I was so fed up with both the Republican ticket and the Demoncrat ticket in 1992 and voted for independent Ross Perot and all that did was put the percentage in Clinton's favor. I do like Pat Buchanan. I always have like to listen to him.I would rather have my vote not count at all than to use it to sway another party that I'm not for.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - 11:38 pm:

Ross Perot; Don't anyone FEEL bad if you voted for this Little General ! Yes it put Clinton in, which was some fun years to watch..

IT sure was a interesting viewpoint concerning federal government Mr. Heikki And because you (Cannot provide attribution as it was received via e-mail unattributed.) That is what good friends do. I loved reading that. More on SARAH PALIN other then what my friend Russ wrote on the other page. I am so glad he picked her. Some of you may have NOT heard of her before. Shame on you, you are not on the Cutting Edge. But that is W's fault. Which Ban Wagon are you riding on now that we jumped off of Big Oil's. How much for a barrel today? How much down a gallon? Here in TN. been $3.49 for weeks.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 04:13 pm:

From all available evidence, Barack Obama arose from a rather humble background, although his parents met while attending the University of Hawaii at Manoa(?), where his father was a foreign student.

After attending local schools in Jakarta until he was ten years old. Obama then returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents while attending Punahou School (a Private Preparatory Day School!) from the fifth grade in 1971 until his graduation from high school in 1979. (Tuition at Punahou Schoolis $16,675 for the 2008-2009 school year, not including optional and mandatory fees.)

Where does one from such a "humble background" find the funds for such international travel, and to attend such a prestigious private school? Doting and independently wealthy maternal grandparents?

Following high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Also, presumably not cheap. One must wonder how he could afford such a pricey education. 'Tis fine that he was able to do so, but was this not quite a financial challenge for one of such a "humble" background? Doting maternal grandparents again?

After graduating from Columbia in 1983, then worked for a year at the Business International Corporation and then at the New York Public Interest Research Group.

After four years in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago, where he was hired as director of Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman, and Riverdale) on Chicago's far South Side, and worked there for three years from June 1985 to May 1988.

He must have saved up quite a bunch of coins during that period of employment, 'cuz he apparently had sufficient funds by mid-1988, to travel to Europe for three weeks and then for five weeks in Kenya, where he met many of his Kenyan relatives for the first time, then he entered Harvard Law School in late 1988, graduating with a Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991.

Foreign travel? Harvard? Sounds like that should have cost a princely sum. I would feel more comfortable about that if I understood how one in his circumstances might afford that.

I certainly do not fault Obama for his accomplishments, and he is unquestionably one of the most articulate politicians to come along in some time (and it should come as no surprise that I certainly do respect that!), but a glib tongue doesn't necessarily equate with wisdom!

Although I am a bit puzzled at how he was able to afford such a rich education, I acknowledge that I might be just a tad jealous. Coming from a middle class Detroit automotive background, I felt fortunate to just be able to attend Michigan Tech with my parents help and two part time jobs after twelve years in the Detroit Public Schools (before they went down the toilet).

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 04:14 pm:

I am also a bit troubled about those who Barack Obama associates with (or has associated with).

Not only his former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, or his dealings with Tony_Rezko, or his acquaintance with the former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.

But also his acknowledged (in his autobiographical Dreams from My Father) "friend and adviser" from his years in Hawaii, Frank Marshall Davis. One must wonder what manner of political mush was this "mentor" filling the mind of this brilliant but perhaps vulnerable student in his formative years?

See also, from Accuracy in Media: Obama’s Communist Mentor.

Should that leave me a bit uneasy about this presidential candidate? Well, it does!

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 09:43 pm:

My ongoing research has revealed a few clues as to Barack Obama's maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham. They perhaps were not independently wealthy, although Madelyn didn't fare too badly, having started working at the Bank of Hawaii in 1960, she was promoted to be one of the first female bank vice presidents in 1970.

P.S.: Check the picture of Stanley Dunham in the above link. I can definitely see a resemblance!

With my interest in genealogy, I found this little incidental genealogical item in the above article of interest:

Stanley Dunham (Barack Obama's maternal grandfather) is (was) a fourth cousin, twice removed, of President Harry S Truman, and he is also a seventh cousin, once removed, of Vice-President Dick Cheney!

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 10:28 pm:

As to Barack Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr.:

Obama Sr. was awarded a scholarship in economics, and at the age of 23 he enrolled at the University of Hawaii, then two years after Barack Obama was born, Obama Sr. was accepted at Harvard for graduate study (on another scholarship?), and moved to Massachusetts while Ann and their son remained in Hawaii. He received a Masters degree (AM) from Harvard in 1965.

On his return to Kenya, Obama Sr. was hired by an oil company and then served as an economist in the Ministry of Transportation, and later became senior economist in the Kenyan Ministry of Finance. So he was hardly the impoverished resident of some hut in Africa, as he has been depicted by some, although his last days may have found him so situated.

In 1965 Obama Sr. wrote a paper titled "Problems Facing Our Socialism," (!) published in the East Africa Journal

Hmm, yet another source of Barack Obama's political perspective? (Although he had not seen his father since age 10.)

By Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013) on Thursday, October 16, 2008 - 12:14 pm:

I thought the debate of October 15th was decidedly for McCain. Obama looked flustered at times and grabbing for words to explain his policies. It looked like he was more on the defense than offensive mode.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Thursday, October 16, 2008 - 03:16 pm:

From PBS Frontline: Choice 2008: Barack Obama's mother and father met at the University of Hawaii, while studying Russian!

Now let's see, Barack Obama's mother and father met while both were studying Russian, they let Barack develop a close relationship, "almost like a son", with a known communist -- and member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), who Barack himself later refers to as a "friend and adviser", then Barack later moves to Chicago and associates with a former domestic terrorist and self proclaimed "small 'c' communist", who in an interview published in 1995, characterized his political beliefs at that time and in the 1960s and 1970s thus:


"I am a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist ... [Laughs] Maybe I'm the last communist who is willing to admit it. [Laughs] We have always been small 'c' communists in the sense that we were never in the [Communist] party and never Stalinists. The ethics of Communism still appeal to me. I don't like Lenin as much as the early Marx.

… and who later, in a The New York Times interview in 2001 said "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough".

Meanwhile, three years after abandoning is wife and son, Barack Obama's father wrote a paper titled "Problems Facing Our Socialism," that was published in the East Africa Journal …

Now even a graduate of the Jethro Bodine School of Cypherin' (c.f. The Beverly Hillbillies) should be able to add two plus two and identify the common thread in Barack Obama's background and upbringing.

Should all this leave me a bit uneasy about this presidential candidate? Well, it does!
Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013) on Thursday, October 16, 2008 - 03:55 pm:

Don't forget the guzinta's that were taught at Jethro Bodine School of Cypherin' (Like 4 goes into 8 - two x's)
Once one guzinta the Communist Party you are in for life....

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Thursday, October 16, 2008 - 05:15 pm:

From a blog, entitled: New Black Thought, by Eddie Huff, on Tuesday, September 09, 2008: Obama vs. Palin- Whooda Thunk It.

'Tho perhaps a bit extreme, I am sharing this here 'cuz it appears to be quite an interesting perspective, apparently from a black man!(?) Make of it what you will.

Quoted in part [emphasis and text colors are his, while a few comments and typo corrections are mine]:


"Barack Obama's economic policy (socialist, tax the rich and anyone who thinks they want to become rich), international policy (weak and accommodationist), social policy (abort here, abort now, early and often; let any one marry or not, whomever they will, wherever they will), energy policy or lack of one (do not drill, do not build new refineries, do not mine more coal, no new nuclear plants) essentially are all talk but no plan at all.
Obama's plan calls for larger government, and more federal control over education, health care, energy, communication and almost every other area. His promises are based upon the same populist ideas that Lenin proposed in Russia and Hitler proposed in Germany. Neither ended well. I know I am going to hear about that one, but most people do not even know what the word Nazi means. It stand [(sic) -FRN] for the National Sozialist Partei, NAZI shortened[1], or the National Socialists in English. Hitler's message was the same populist one attacking rich the powerful and the existing government, promising to restore pride and hope, and to bring change. He brought that change and Germany has still not recovered from the shame. These are losing positions when clearly and fairly compared to the GOP positions on the same issues. Those behind Barack Obama think that Lenin, Stalin and Hitler just did not do it right. They are smarter and they will get it right.
The GOP message needs to be the following.
Freedom means nothing is [if? -FRN] you are not free. The Democrats and the Obama campaign promise a group or class freedom, but unless we are all free as individuals ( rich & poor alike), that class freedom means nothing. If the government decides who gets what, how and when that is not true freedom. Individual freedom also carries with it individual responsibility. That is what we need to seek. True individual freedom and true individual responsibility.
Let's get that message of true, personal and individual freedom and individual prosperity out in these next few months."

[1 Actually, The Nazi Party, was officially: The National Socialist German Workers' Party, (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, abbreviated NSDAP), while the abbreviation "Nazi" derives from the German pronunciation of the word Nationalsozialistische as: "Na(t)zional…".]
David Soumis (Davesou) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 - 05:50 pm:

didn't realize this thread was here...thanks FRNash of pointing it out.
First, let me just say I am not an Obama supporter.
Now, so you perfect capitalists, or whatever you are, can get the flames on me, I think this country could use a bit of socialism right about now.
Every man for himself isn't too cool a thing, or very humanitarian, in my opinion.

Public schools are socialist, are they not?
I see absolutely nothing wrong with giving everyone an equal education...emphasis on equal. Everyone should have the "right" to health care. If its government controlled, so be it.

I would be all for my tax dollars going for health and education instead of bailing out rich banker and greedy mortgage companies. They're basically crooks. And I would surely support my tax dollars going for health and education instead of war and killing.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 - 06:25 pm:

if you read about socialism and communism, You will find a lot of good ideas from each. Just as there are ggod ideas in democracy, capitalism, etc.
The trick is to form your country with a mixture so its not going extremist in any one direction.

Communism as practiced in Russia and now China, is not representative in full of what the original communism was to be. It was more towards equality than dictatorship and totalitarian control. those are extremeist governments, as was Germany under Hitler.

Right now in the US, we have capitalism run amuck. And we also have a government practicing socialism as it trys to bring the banks and loan companies under control.

Having mentors and teachers from any one of the persuasions besides democracy, is a good thing. A well rounded opinion. You can't be for or against something if you don't know the true preceps to it. Just like the BS that flies about Obama, be it for or against him, you need to dig a bit to find the real truth. Some of the above, is more than likely not totally true. Some of it is exaggerated.

None of us know the real deal with Obama and Bill Ayers. If it was as Obama says, it was a totally innocent encounter, trying to achieve something for the community. Thst Rev Wright statement about Not God bless America but God •••• America...if you consider what America has done to black people, and to the native Americans, can't you see why that statement is totally true, especially to them, and should echo true to all of us if we are at all humane and believe in equality, justice, and freedom for all Anmericans and all people. This country destroyed the Native American culture and society. It did pretty much the same to the African Americans, their humanity and dignity, their place i society was diminished, even after, they were freed at the end of the Civil War. They haven't garnered all that much back even after their right to vote was granted in 1964. All of the hardships that blacks now suffer are surely not the result of their lack of motivation, as many people profess. When your face is pushed into the gutter for so long, and you have nothing for so long, and you are treated by a large part of society as a second rate citizen for so long, what can anyone expect? The inner city schools are a travesty. All you have to do is look at the demographics..look at the numbers...the number of blacks in prison, the wages they earn, their unemployment rate, etc etc..infant mortality..

There are a couple of ways of looking at things. You can just look at the good stuff...for instance, I should just ignore everyone economically under me. America is great !!. I have 3 cars, a couple of TVs, make a fairly decent wage, have a house, healthcare benefits, had a real good education, attended college, did 14 years in the military doing my part for the country, etc etc...life is grand, and for me it is.

Then you have the other 50+million that don't have it so good, for them this richness has passed them over. Why? Are they all lazy no good bums that don't deserve anything and deserve everything they have? I seriously doubt it.

Yes, the USA is a mighty rich and powerful country, with a lot of very good things going on, but there are also some very serious problems in this country. Its up to all of us to see what they are, to recognize them, and acknowledge them, and do something about it. We need to stop ignoring the problems as if they don't exist. To walk in someone else's shoes for awhile and understand.

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 - 07:13 pm:

David Soumis:
Thanks for you two recent posts. I totally agreement with them both. Ignorance is truly bliss for a lot of Us Citizens who can't or won't face our history face on. TANKS AGAIN for your POSTS!!

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 - 07:36 pm:

Welcome aboard, David Soumis (Davesou), I was actually missing your input and was wondering where you were! I didn't want this to be a one-sided debate!

Ditto to A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61).

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 - 11:51 pm:

There are plenty of rich people, achievers if you will who just can't wait to be taxed in order to spread the wealth around. Bless them! After all what comes easy to the rich achievers can be made up over again by working even harder yet. Give up the America Dream of having the biggest piece of the pie so others can have a taste of the sweet stuff. If you take a look it was Liberals who caused most, if not all of the problem's we have today! Now the very same people who caused it, want to fix it. They might have something there! Who better to fix it then those who broke it. Food for thought, I think not.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 12:17 am:

Some of my background that you probably don't need to know, but, here it is, anyway:

I regret to say, here in such a public forum, that during my formative years in elementary school, and to some degree in high school, I began to feel embarrassed to realize how bigoted my parents were. Even if they weren't out broadcasting their feelings in public (as I am now!). You wouldn't believe some of the absolutely horrid and unfounded things they said about "black folks". (Although I assure you that was not the term they used!)

I had my little "epiphany" in a high school geometry class, taught, as it happens by a tall, statuesque, attractive (she would easily have put Condi Rice to shame), always stylishly dressed, brilliant, inspirational black woman. (In Detroit, in the mid to late 1950s, no less!)

I seriously regret not tracking her down in later years to thank her for lighting the fire that eventually lead to my choosing Mathematics as my major field of study in college, and ultimately to a 40+ year career in digital computers. So here's a belated …

"Thank you, Minetti Breman, wherever you are!"

FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 12:23 am:

I must admit that I too was somewhat captivated by Barack Obama's silver tongue.

I certainly do not fault Sen. Obama for his accomplishments, and he is unquestionably one of the most articulate politicians to come along in some time. (As I seem to have a reputation as this forum's resident spelling, grammar and "literacy" wonk, it should come as no surprise that I certainly do respect that!) In fact that inspired my search into "Who really is Barak Obama".

Yes I have at least one of his books — his autobiographical "Dreams from My Father".

At first I felt that his candidacy was a strong indication that perhaps finally race was on its way to become a non-issue in the US political scene. This due to Sen. Obama, along with some other folks, examples: J. C. Watts, (Jr.), Condi Rice and Colin Powell (Although I have now lost all respect for him! A career military man whose service (1958-1993) spanned the last 30+ years of the "Cold War", and this is his "best advice"?) who have in recent years shattered the prevailing and pathetic caricature of the black politician, as represented by the likes of Jesse Jackson (Sr.), Al Sharpton (Jr.), Charlie Rangel, William J. Jefferson, Maxine Waters, Alcee Hastings, Sheila Jackson-Lee, and others.

(Although I actually like Charlie Rangel, to some degree; if only 'cuz he's a very wily old weasel with a sense of humor and a clever wit!)

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 12:24 am:

However, I really do take offense at some glib tongued, self-styled, latter day "Robin Hood" proposing to punish achievement, and penalize success in order to redistribute the wealth to the lazy, the indolent, those who believe they are "entitled", some of whom only lay about with little better to do than breed like aphids while being supported by the "gummint".

Speaking of "facing history", if we have forgotten how well this worked for the former Soviet Union, then perhaps we'd better brace ourselves, comrades, for the coming implementation of the...

10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (To punish achievement and redistribute wealth.)
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. (You've heard Obama's plan for increasing the inheritance tax?)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. (You're with us, or you are a rebel!)
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Oops, are we headed there already?)
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Some citizens will be moved to collective farms in those waste-lands.)
8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. (No, you won't have a choice of where you will live, comrade,the state will decide for you!)
10. Free education (indoctrination) for all children in public schools... (nurseries, and day care centers, too).

"From each according to his ability,
to each according to his need!"

Of course each of you will toil at your state-assigned tasks at the peak of your ability, to ensure that you make your production quota — never mind that the elimination of that evil capitalist notion of a profit motive will remove any reason for you to perform at any more than the barest minimum level of effort that you can get away with. (Just like a "government employee"? Oh that's right, that's what you will be!).

Oh, and need? Don't confuse your wants with your needs, comrade! In order to eliminate selfish greed among the peasantry, your needs will of course be determined by the state.

Housing? Why no, you have no need for a single-family dwelling -- no dacha for you, comrade! A small, stark three-room apartment in a multi-story state apartment building in a public housing development will serve the needs of your extended family. (Does Cabrini Green come to mind?)

Transportation? Well of course you will have access to the state supplied public transit system, You will have no need for a private vehicle. Okay, perhaps while we are building out that complete public transit system we might be able to allow you the use of a fine used Trabant, I understand there is a surplus available in the former (failed, oops!) German Democratic Republic.

Medical Care? Not to worry, you will be eligible for free medical care at a state clinic where you can sit and socialize in the toxic, contagious environment of the public waiting room for several hours to see a nurse. Can you choose your own doctor? Are you kidding?

Day care? Education? No problem, The state day care centers, nurseries and schools will conveniently take your little darlings off your hands at every opportunity, in order to more effectively fill their vulnerable minds with appropriate state propaganda from the earliest opportunity to the last! (Kinda like Barack Obama spending so much time in his youth with his "friend and adviser" Frank Marshall Davis. See how it works?)

With a BO win, and a strong "coattail effect" yielding an even greater Democratic majority in the House, and maybe a firm Democratic majority in the Senate, this country will really be at risk of becoming an "Obamanation"!

A glib tongue doesn't necessarily equate with wisdom!
David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 01:46 am:

Frank...you made me cry. My parents didn't use the N word often. But family who came home to visit Dollar Bay, MI. the U.P. (where it was all White people and I went all thru school with out knowing a person of another color. Family from major cities did. So I learned the word young. What is the proper term for today for a Black person? Whatever, I have Black in my family today. A Son & a Daughter who both are 24 right now for another month until my youngest baby girl out of 3 turns 25 around Thanksgiving. I have never been in my adult life with prejudices because of skin color. But what Frank posted above is also the way I feel. so thank him like I am doing if you agree. J.C. Watts, I love that guy. Alan Keys a great man also. Walter Williams a very fine gentlemen.

With the fear of sounding kinky, I will say I like your tounge out there in PHX,AZ. And can't wait to read what will come,if anything at all.

By Heikki (Heikki) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 09:04 am:

Ya oughta write a book, Frank! I was going to comment on these latest posts but you have said it all with great insight, clarity, and historical perspective. Like many other Yoopers, I never saw a black person in real life until age 13. My father used to root for Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Robinson, Archie Moore, etal., during fight nights on the radio. While in military tech school, had a good friend and roommate named Jimmy Borders who hailed from Florida....who happened to be black. That was my first encounter in getting to actually know a person of color. My 'epiphany', as they say. One of my favorite NCOIC's overseas was a MSgt Kearney....a black man. We learned to love him. Before MLK Jr. ever spoke those immortal words urging all to judge a person not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character, my lesson was learned in the military. There are persons of color that would make great leaders I would be inclined to vote for, but BHO is not one of them. After all these weeks and months of his campaign, the study time put in trying to really know him (and there is much more to learn, regretfully), I simply don't trust the man....still. McCain is not anywhere near 'great', but I trust him to not sell the USA down the river in some quest for world admiration. As for Colin Powell, I am sadly disappointed. I really like the man. The first word that came to mind when he announced his endorsement for BHO was 'ingrate'.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 - 12:43 am:

The Daily Mining Gazette, and the Grit. Two great Grade School and up job's for a young man learning how to run a business. If just one of them Paperboy's would have grown up to be a real Journalist, like it once was when the Editor made sure the truth was being told. The stories were written the actual way it happened, not manufactured to make more sales.

What has BHO's sister said about him? I am behind in my news/study.

I belive there was some editing done to my I cried post above, if I remember right? I can understand why, tattoos can be offensive to many.I am sorry for that extra work it caused.

Thank you Deb S. we can agree to disagree now and then. Your cousin Dave S. thinks his words out an I enjoy reading his post's.He is typical of many pacifist's if he don't mind being called one? Dave S. does not remember me from his Uncle's barber Shop in Houghton, but I only needed a Butch cut not to often, less often then Dad thought. I was only trying to save Dad afew dollars so he could buy extra quarts of Edalewiser (sp) brew by letting my hair grow long, until those Hip kids came along and spoiled that idea. Dad was afraid I might become one of those radical's like Abbie was in 1972 in Chicago. But back on track, Dave S.you was in there more often looking at the view thru the window then I was, and geez you can't remember everybody.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 - 06:41 pm:

Hey David H ..
I remember your name..but I can't remember you...it's strange...
I used to like looking out those binoculars that were in the window.
Plus it seemed we had to get a haircut about every other week or something. Used the butch wax to hold the front up :)
It seemed like haircuts were pretty cheap back then.
Isn't it strange too how folks politics goes in different directions?

I take no offense to being called a pacifist. I've been called a lot worse, believe me. But I'm only a pacifist until I need to defend myself. I surely wouldn't allow someone to kick my butt without putting up a bit of a fight. Its just I don't believe in killing very much..like death penalty, war, abortionists, and so forth. It seems the other cheek would be hurting pretty bad if you keep turning and let someone keep wacking it :)

Also believe in military defense, as in defending the homeland. Preemptive strikes...no. National security and interests by controlling resources militarily..no.

In my opinion, we should have had action like we did during the Manhattan Project or the space program to get ourselves off the oil dependency. Most of the crap we've gotten into in the last 30 years wouldn't have happened. Where is the real effort right now even? lots of talk, very little action.

I'm actually pretty conservative in many of my views. Where I may differ with a lot of people, is that I'm very willing to allow others to express themselves, and I try to listen to what they are saying. I also will change my opinion or beliefs if I realize something I believe is wrong.
To me, if you're only willing to go down one path without being able to entertain other's opinions, you have a big problem. Its one of the big things I don;t like Bush for..his either for us or agin us philosophy..his unwillingness to talk to perceived enemies. You can never come to terms if you don;t talk it out. Suppose you could just bomb the smithereens out of a country, and thing we've won, but the little terrorist people are planning something pretty quickly. It never ends.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 - 09:18 pm:

What should be a no brainier to figure out, is that this entire class of people. of all type of race, whose lives have been stunted, whose ambitions have been destroyed, whose own realization of their own dreams has been destroyed, much less their realization have been created by the Democrat Party. This degree of dependence, this degree of un-productivity, this degree to which people's lives, in their own minds, are miserable and they've got no way out, has been created by the very party that has sought all these years to be their benefactors. So now we face the situation where, in a lot of people's minds are some really serious issues -- national security and so forth, the kind of country we're going to be, maybe become a third World one, don't matter at all to this class. All that matters is, "We've got an economy in bad shape and we need change!"

"We need people that are going to continue to give me what I have here." The Democrats have created this, and the dirty little secret is, they've done it on purpose. They have sought to take people who otherwise would have been productive and could have realized their dreams,or at least came close, could have used whatever ambition they had and they destroyed all that for the express purpose of making them wards of the state, owing their existence to the Democrat Party. And then the same party that did this comes out and claims to be their champion, claims to be the only ones who care about them and is going to fix their circumstance. It really just disturbs me to see how this has happened, because this country produces and has produced millions of great people, millions of hardworking Americans.

These millions of the hard working people are the people that make the country work, and there are millions of them that could be part of that group who have just been dispirited and dissuaded from even trying. I'm talking about everybody that thinks they're in poverty or lower middle class because Republicans have been in power for too long and the Democrats are going to fix all of this. It's the Democrats that have brought this about, on purpose, for the sake of their own ascension to power! The idea that these are the people who are the most tolerant and compassionate among us, really offends me. I become outraged. Because these are people who, as I say, have had their futures taken away from them.

You know, it's not hard to do that. We're all born pessimists. We're all born needing leadership
and need to learn to discipline our self so somebody else doesn't have to. Most people don't have self-discipline. It takes effort to be optimistic. This is why parents and the right kind of teachers and friends and so forth that are optimistic are so important. Anybody can hang around and tell you that you can't do something. Anybody can tell you that you have an excuse for not becoming what you could be. It's always somebody else's fault! That's easy to accept! It's very hard to look at yourself and say, I am a lazy bum with a bum leg or this or that is wrong with me I can't do any better. That's why you need people like me around you who will inspire you and motivate you.

The Democrat Party, when's the last time they inspired anybody in a positive way? In the last six, seven years, everything out of their mouths has been the epitome of doom and gloom and the apocalypse. They have sought defeat of their own country and the military in Iraq. They have sought to create in the minds of as many Americans as possible we're already in a recession and depression and it's going to get worse. They're telling people that the greatest days of America are over and it's going to be different from now on. They have done everything they can to frighten, panic, and scare people. to keep them in a constant mode of crisis, with no happiness in their lives and no contentment.

It's gotten to the point now where those who are unaffected by the onslaught of Democrats in the media who are content , who are working, who are seeking to improve their own lives and the lives of their family are resented now. They're said to be out of touch. They're said to be people that are insensitive. So Obama comes along and says, "We got to spread the wealth around," meaning: we're going to take from these people who are unfairly producing more for themselves than they need, and then we're going to hand it out. We're going to hand it out to the group of people who the Democrat Party has specifically taught how not to be productive. Yet, they get the credit for having all this compassion and love for people whose lives they've damaged, in some cases greatly.

Last week both campaigns were given briefings as part of the advance transition process. They were given briefings on international threats, and obviously Biden heard it and took what he heard into a couple campaign appearances. I know this of Joe, he likes to let you know that he knew in advance by saying certain things ahead of time, for example," Obama will be tested early." Maybe riots? In sports riots break out over a win most often, but this Election could cause one either way. Should we have riot Police present, or would that just provoke it? Let's pray the transition goes well no matter who wins.

By maija in Commerce Township (Maija) on Wednesday, November 5, 2008 - 01:46 pm:

As Senator McCain said: the people have spoken and they have spoken clearly.

By Smiling Johnny Boy (Johnthebaptist) on Thursday, November 6, 2008 - 04:17 pm:

Yes. 56 million people said clearly: NOBAMA

By Snowman (Snowman) on Thursday, November 6, 2008 - 06:55 pm:

John boy, you must be eating a lot of crow. How's it taste dude?

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 07:25 pm:

Barack Obama is the man for me, sure wish you bigots out there could see.

Hope you all share peace and love on Thanksgiving day, sure wish you could all see my way. Peace.


By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 07:32 pm:

Now we're bigots???????????????? I guess we can all share peace and love on Thanksgiving day as long as we see things your way. SHEESH!

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 07:58 pm:


By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 08:11 pm:

O K Snowman, your man won, but don't get to high and mighty, he hasn't done anything yet,he's not the President ---YET I wish him well, but he is soon to find out what its all about.
Happy Thanksgiving to all.
Bigots ???

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 08:41 pm:

You can say he has done some thing already. He is filling his cabinet faster then any President Elect has every done, and with people who have a long history of raising your taxes.Here ye SOWNMAN.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Wednesday, November 26, 2008 - 09:41 pm:

I think if you're a progressive, or even a peace person, the folks he's picking don't fit the bill.
A lot of insider economic people as well.
Its going to be an interesting ride. I don't see any change as far as the people he's choosing..all insiders and ex-clinton people for the most part. Pretty consewrvative people as well.

I wouldn't be singing too much yet.

By Sandy G (Artessss) on Thursday, November 27, 2008 - 01:57 am:

I don't think Obama or any other president elect will get much done in 4 years. Too many of our leaders are trying to fight the system to be set free from the mess they left. I've never watched so many fall from their high positions than I have in the last 8 years; much being left to judges and juries to decide. I don't mean only democrats are free and clear of illegal actions; but far too many republicans have cast dark shadows dimming the deep seeded pride our younger would-be leaders should grow upon. We need to make sure all (both parties) our leaders live according to the positions they hold!

By Sandy G (Artessss) on Thursday, November 27, 2008 - 01:59 am:

Happy Thanksgiving and Blessings to ALL!

By Tom (Tom) on Thursday, November 27, 2008 - 11:57 am:

Obama has surrounded himself mostly with old Dems from years past. That sure doesn't signify change! These days Obama is saying a lot of comforting words at his news releases. More of the something for everyone theme. Even the coming higher taxes.

By Michael Du Long (Mikie) on Thursday, November 27, 2008 - 04:59 pm:

I am not an Obama fan, but lets give him a chance to show us what he can do. I hope he can turn the economy around.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 10:10 am:

The following quotation by Teddy Roosevelt makes quite clear what he would have thought of the current radical right-wing conservative radio and television talk-show hosts, and perhaps some of you who post comments on this site.

"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again... who spends himself in a worthy cause, who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly."

By FJL (Langoman) on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 11:11 am:

Couldn't have said it better. The man in the arena, "GEORGE W. BUSH"...................FJL

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 01:04 pm:

I like that quote a lot.
Doing something, taking the risk, instead of just flapping your lips.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, January 2, 2009 - 08:21 am:

Remember when the "man in the arena" (Bush) said "mission accomplished"? It appears that he dared greatly and took a risk by making such a statement.

By FJL (Langoman) on Friday, January 2, 2009 - 09:01 am:

"Mission Accomplished" refers to the successful removal of Sadam's government, and only that......FJL

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 04:00 pm:

This is a bit tardy, as we are only a few fleeting days away from becoming the new "Obamanation", but I only discovered it this morning, when I found it posted on johndee.com.

Note that the author says:


"I wrote this blog and posted it on another website October 20th 2008:"

The message at the following link addresses the state of the national economy at that time and offers some opinions both as to earlier events that may have lead to the present "economic mess", as well as some opinions on what is likely to occur moving forward as we move into the new era of "Obmamanomics" (c.f. "Reaganomics")

For what it's worth, I consider this to be the most cogent analysis I have read in quite some time, and extremely well written, to boot!

Click → By yamalaris on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 08:21 pm:

I can't recommend it too highly!
FJL (Langoman) on Sunday, January 18, 2009 - 01:08 pm:

A good read FRNash.... Thanks..........FJL

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 03:31 pm:

Concerning the present political climate and the recent election outcome, "opinions" have much to do with the credibility of what critics/authors say and write. Subsequent essays and monologues by "revisionist" authors (esp. history), and entertainers like the current right-wing and left-wing talk show hosts, tend to agree with critics' unfounded and mostly biased opinions when there are opportunities for financial and political rewards.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 05:35 pm:

in my opinion, even though I did vote for Obama, I think a lot of people are going way overboard in their feelings about him. They're acting like he's the savior, and up to this point, he hasn't done anything yet....other than the fact he is pulling people together, giving them hope, a path.

If he can do just a bit of what people think he can do, is it enough?

The letdown will be enormous for this country if he can't pull something together, and fast.

By mickill mouse (Ram4) on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 - 08:40 pm:

This is getting off the course of Obamas' speech and him becoming the President Of the U.S.A.

I have a problem with his mother's side of (him) not being mentioned- his white mother-side of him. It was all about his 'african' father. His african dad, from what I understand, left him. His mother did leave him with her parents, but his mom left from cancer and his white grandparents raised him. His white mother or his white grandparents were not mentioned. not by the public, any of the newscasters through his campaign, it was always about his 'African' father. HE DID HAVE A MOTHER WHO WAS WHITE.

I am sorry. His grandparents were mentioned when his grandmother became ill. His mother was mentioned, but not as much as his father.

O.K. enough- it just gets to me.

Lets say a prayer and wish him well. like my mom use to say, Bless them and release them.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 - 09:51 pm:

That's exactly what I've been saying all along, mickill mouse. Everybody goes on and on about his black heritage, but nothing's ever mentioned about his white. I don't think it's as historical a day as they're making it out to be. The man is not completely black. The media got him elected, in my opinion. I'm tired of the whole thing, but I wish him well. I still think we're in trouble.........AGAIN!!!!! And I hope I can eat those words.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 10:18 am:

The word "mulatto" is defined as "the offspring of a black and a white parent". Anyone have a notion why it is no longer used?

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 12:26 pm:

Sixty years ago if you were born to a biracial family it did not matter that you were half white, you were basically considered black. These biracial people were made to ride the back of the bus and were turned away at "white" diners, stores and parks. Now one of those people has remarkably become the 44th president of the United States of America. This is proof that the American people, no matter what color, have put all of their biased opinions behind them. History has been made and I am proud to say that I was one of the people that made it happen.

By mickill mouse (Ram4) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 12:42 pm:

This country has come so far that it is more acceptable to come from a biracial family and heritage, but why was one race of his (Obama) heritage not acknowledged? I do mean his mother.

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 03:25 pm:

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 03:19 pm:
.....as I was saying, and I will not give up, great post Maija.

How can anyone not want to discuss our 44th president? He has made history. Okay, let's see, I must have gone back in future, this must be 1940.

Also, here's what this section is for, look at the top;

This area is for other friendly conversation.
Please read our Acceptable Use Policy.

This IS friendly conversation, there is no one being badgered, there is no, "one on one" conversation. I would really appreciate an explanation and this time, make it the truth. Shame on you for not recognizing a black man as the leader of our country.

Hmmm, think I'll go back in the archives to see what was posted the day Bush was inaugurated, for the second time. No, that was not slander against our 43rd president.

Poor Barack, can't even express our "inauguration comments", aren't we off to a good start.

I will copy this post and save it for the Political section if it winds up deleted

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 05:55 pm:

well, has a post been removed? There is some missing info it appears.

Anyway, the term mulatto I guess offended certain people. Was that the start of political correctness? I'm not really sure why being called a term would offend someone unless the actual meaning of the term was derogatory, its root meaning.

I actually saw quite a bit of information on Obama's mom during the campaign, and during the inaugural. The thing is, though, the media concentrated on the black side of things. During reports and events, they constantly showed black people crying, cheering, etc. The media made it to what it became.
Looking at Obama, he obviously exhibits more black characteristics than white ones, so it is a pretty simple mental exercise to refer to him as black, because his appearance is, his speech is, his actions are. Kind of like that duck phrase: "When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." (the probable actual quote where the current phrase came from).

Now looking at the fact that Obama is now the 44th President, and is biracial, but basically for all intents and purposes, black, is actually a great thing for this country. Perhaps we can now actually begin to see some rights begin to take shape. Equal rights.

Snowman stated, "This is proof that the American people, no matter what color, have put all of their biased opinions behind them".

I think, unfortunately, that this statement is not even closely true. I can't offer any substantive proof, but just the fact he was elected, doesn't make it so. Nearly 60 million people voted for McCain, plus the other candidates, and 35% of eligible Americans did not vote at all. I guarantee that there are millions upon millions of people in the country that are as prejudiced as they were back in 1850, 1900, or 1950. The difference is that more Americans are now at least accepting the fact that there are different races living here, and live with it to a greater extent than before. They may not like it any more than before.

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 06:15 pm:

David, sad situation since this country was built from all types, colors and religious sects. People seem to be content with the same old ritual, this, to me, is a sign of living in the past. It is really hard to adapt and to change but I think now is the time to do it. Put all of your differences behind you, this is America. This is the year 2009 not 1949.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 06:41 pm:

snowman, you know what I'm saying...I see it every day..hear it. Read it.

Check out the new Clint Eastwood flic, Gran Turino. This is what it is. He did finally understand, but I see so many people like that character, its unbelievable.

I lived in Madison Wisconsin for 20 year though, and I will say Madison was a pretty cool town. People did get along. Rarely had racial problems of any kind, although, like most cities, things were a bit segregated as far as housing. Like people tend to flock together. It is far more comfortable, isn't it ?

By Snowman (Snowman) on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 - 06:52 pm:

Yep David, comfort is like ignorance. Sure wish there was comfort without "closing the blinds".

By maija in Commerce Township (Maija) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 08:15 am:

Change is usually a turtle race. But one wins in the end!


By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 10:07 am:

Snowman, the history of the U.S. shows that the federal government was planned and formed by WASPs of mostly wealth and social position. Transcending this heritage has taken years of training and educating a growing population of diverse races. I have no doubt that there still are many people of that WASP lineage of wealth and social position who will never accept Obama as president. With the help of right-wing talk-show hosts, they will try to discredit him and his administration in the same manner they tried to discredit him during his campaign for the presidency.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 11:58 am:

Matt Karhu (Matt_k):
"… people of that WASP lineage of wealth and social position …"

Interesting, I never thought of it quite that way:
"… people of that WASP (= Wealth And Social Position) lineage!

By Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 01:20 pm:

WASP = White Anglo-Saxon Protestant
And Joanie is back she just posts under an alias

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 02:26 pm:

Is it called history because they say a black man is our new President, He's not a throughbread, He's as much white as he is black, so let's call him our White President.Give his Mother some credit.
The media is making Obama, and the media destroyed Bush.
The comments he made in his inaugural speech about the former administration was uncalled for.Wait until your taxes go up 20% then we will see what the comments are.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 03:07 pm:

Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013):
"WASP = White Anglo-Saxon Protestant "

I knew that!
I just thought it was interesting that the same acronym also fit the phrase that Matt Karhu (Matt_k) used!

Eugene Zuverink (Zube):
"… they say a black man is our new President, He's not a throughbread (sic) …"
[White, whole wheat or rye?] <grin>

That's probably a manifestation of the repulsive old One Drop Rule, from long years of institutionalized slavery, that still refuses to die.
Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Thursday, January 22, 2009 - 05:22 pm:

I was hoping someone would notice that the acronym WASP can apply to "wealth and social position". It is my observation that thoughtful and wise people are among those who read and post comments on this site. Keep up the good work. Thank you.

By Shirley Waggoner (Shirlohio) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 09:12 am:

Zube, amen to your post! It has always appeared that liberals (media included) have an in-born right to bash conservatives, but watch how they yell if the shoe gets put on the other foot. I have a feeling that (Prez) Hussein Obama is going to be off-limits to criticism of any kind. BTW, speaking of his kinfolk, did you notice how the media downplayed what Obama's grandmother said...that she "attended his birth in Kenya"!?

By Heikki (Heikki) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 09:41 am:

The more things CHANGE, the more they stay the same.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 10:17 am:

Zube, I, too, liked what you had to say. However, I will not pretend to be a fan of Bush. Never was and never will be. And it started long before he got elected. I didn't like him from the beginning.

I'm also sick of everybody downplaying Obama's white heritage to suit their own purposes.

Shirley, I think the bashing goes both ways for the most part. I've disliked both Rep & Dem presidents. I've also liked both Rep & Dem presidents. However, you're right. It will not be "politically correct" to say anything to or about him. It's been this way from the beginning. The media dare not say anything negative about him because he's a "black" man. However, they were able to bash all of the rest of the candidates to their little heart's content. It's a sad state of affairs out there. When are they going to wake up and realize that this man is half black and half white. Tiger Woods realizes it for crying out loud!!!!! Be proud of both sides of your family. They made you who you are.

That said, I wish him well and hope he can do what he wants to do and proves us all wrong.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 12:47 pm:

That B.O. is black and white was not a reason for the fact that I didn't vote for him. Race was never a factor... I would've voted for Condi or Colin had either ran as a Republican.
I did not want to vote for McCain either but my reason for doing so was because I was and still am so sick of the liberal slanted media and how they're always beating up on people and protecting whom they only see fit...
They fill peoples' brains with liberal propaganda and lies to sway the vote. Anyone that denies that is simply naive.

Unfortunately for many, race did play a part in why they voted for B.O....

I am willing to wait and see how he does as a Prez...I'm not going to discount him totally only because I know that your only as good as the people you build around you as advisors. He can't do any worse than George. I voted twice for GW and did'nt agree with alot of his ideas either.
We're all in it together whether we like our new Prez or not...I totally despise the Demoncrat wheels like Nancy LOOK-LIKE-I-JUST-SAW-A-GHOST Pelosi, Dingy Harry Reid, UpChuck Schumer, Barbara Boxerface, Al Not-So-Sharpton and Dianne FreakinFrankenFeinsteinn in the House and Senate much more than I do B.O. himself... Those people are even more of a public enemy.
It's because of political chimps like these people that words used by Dingy Harry to the troops in Iraq himself make my thoughts to B.O. and his supporting cast clear:


By FJL (Langoman) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 05:04 pm:

Eddie Allen: Nice list you posted but you forgot one of the biggest coggs, Barney {the Fife} Franks. They don't come more "arrogant."

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 05:40 pm:

Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21):
Speaking of "FreakinFranken …"

I guess we're all still waiting for this shoe to drop, eh?

1. Democrats.senate.gov, January 21, 2009: [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid Statement on Al Franken.

2. AP, January 21, 2009: Franken says Minn. law lets him join US Senate now.

3. Minneapolis StarTribune, January 22, 2009: Franken's request to dismiss Coleman suit is denied.

Al Franken, potentially a US Senator from Minnesota? Incredimus!

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 06:08 pm:

the taxes would have gone up 20% even with a Reublican president. You can't give away 3 trillion dollars and wonder where its coming from without raising taxes on somebody.

Liberal versus Conservative media...it must be how your slant is..to me, the media sways towards the conservative camp. That's why the liberals started AIR America...to try and offset some of the conservative air blitz.

AL FRANKEN...a very smart guy, have to be to come up with all the comedy stuff he does...he is a liberal, though, obviously...

By Shirley Waggoner (Shirlohio) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 06:48 pm:

Davesou, when I referred to the 'liberal' media, I was talking about NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC and National Public Radio. In other words the networks that report the 'unbiased' (as they claim) news. I was not referring to 'talk radio'. However, speaking of that media, seems liberals (Cuomo, H. Clinton, Franken, to name just three for now) have not been too successful in holding their own against the conservatives. Wonder why?

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 07:03 pm:

why ?

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Friday, January 23, 2009 - 09:42 pm:

Here in the Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky area of the midwest, most conservative TV and radio stations claim to be fair and unbiased. I don't recall such a claim being made by spokesmen or representatives of National Public Radio and PBS and their network stations. I think that the frequent accusations by local and nationally syndicated right-wing talk-show hosts that NPR and PBS are part of the liberal media are an effort to please their sponsors more than for any other reason.

"Follow the money" is a popular bit of advice offered frequently by right-wing conservative talk show hosts. Observation over a period of years shows the sponsors' connection to the right-wing agenda and political candidates. It won't surprise me that, as a result of the failure of these right-wing conservative talk-shows hosts to influence enough voters to elect a Republican for president, those sponsors will cease sponsoring their shows. Perhaps more local stations will then find something just as entertaining and "less filling" (with B.S.).

Maybe "Trade-e-o" will make a comeback on local radio stations. Maybe the stations will showcase some real music by the "big bands" of years long past. Maybe my old dance partner is available...

By Heikki (Heikki) on Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 12:30 pm:

..."Hmmm, think I'll go back in the archives to see what was posted the day Bush was inaugurated..."



By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 10:32 pm:

Many of you who know me and Barbie know she being white was married and divorced to a black man. They had two children who are today 24 and 25 so they are like President Obama,half white half black. So are called mixed, but look more black then white, and they call themselves black for that reason. One is male and the other female. They both married into the white race, and have kid's of there own. So now these children were made to be called one quarter black three quarters white one would say. These kid's look white. When I got with Barbie her children were 4 and five in 1989, I call them my kid's too, and I am Papa to their children. We used to get the looks back in 1989, mostly from the black folks. Also Barbie was a Foster Mom to a all black baby boy back then. When she got divorced they came an ripped the little boy from her arms because not enough black around for him. Times have changed alright. Except for Barbie's Father who is 80 or so. Now he loves his grandkid's and his great grandkid's, but he uses the N word like he grew up to know being from the South. He don't mean any hate when he uses it,and he mostly uses it to describe one of the Wrestler's he is talking about, or a black movie star in front of us. We tell him not to use that term but he forgets because it is built into him and we realize that. But like I said he is 80 years old and folks like him are dying off. We talk politics around here, but I know these young mixed adults of ours here and their white spouse's voted for Obama for the only reason he is Black, as many did. And I can't wait to tell them where they went wrong when the time comes they see there income get taxed and America going down hill, and their children will pay the price for the mistake they made. So do I want Obama to fail. Yes, I do want his policies to fail if he is going to implement a far-left agenda.

I am hearing many say, Well, we want him to succeed, and prominent Republicans! Yes, we want him to succeed.They must be drinking the Kool - Aid too. They have no guts to stand up for what their beliefs are because they're afraid of criticism. They're afraid of being called racists. They're afraid of not having gotten with the program. Success can be defined two ways. I really don't know about this new President. I've had and got my suspicions and they're pretty close to convictions, but I am going to have to wait to see what he does.If he turns out to be a Reagan,if he adds Reagan to his recipe of FDR and Lincoln,and if he does cut some taxes,if he does not eliminate the Bush tax cuts, I would call that success. So yes, I would hope he would succeed if he acts like Reagan. But if he's going to do like FDR did,if he's going to do The New New Deal why would I want him to succeed? Ok he is my president. The fact that he is historic is irrelevant to me. It don't matter at all. If he is going to implement a far-left agenda which I think he already decided with a $2 trillion in stimulus will cause growth of government? I wrote about this before and I still think the intent here is to create as many dependant Americans as possible looking to government for their hope and salvation. If Obama gets nationalized health care,it's over! We're never going to roll that back. That's the end of America as we have known it, because that then is going to set the stage for everything being government owned, operated, or provided. Why would I want that to succeed? I don't believe in that. That's not how this country is going to be great in the future,it's not what made this country great. So I shamelessly say, No! I want him to fail if his agenda is a far-left collectivism,some people say socialism, as a conservative why would I want socialism to succeed? I don't know where what he wants to try has worked. It didn't work in the Soviet Union. It doesn't work in China. They're having to become more like us in China in order to survive. It hasn't worked in Cuba. It didn't work when the Pilgrims arrived. They tried socialism. Pilgrims had a plot of ground, they shared what they produced, and the slackers figured out they didn't have to produce anything to get goodies. So William Bradford said, "The heck with this," and he said, "Okay, you get to keep everything you produce, and you're not sharing it." So everybody had to work. They were really giving thanks to God for the lesson that socialism failed. It has never worked. The New Deal didn't work. Hoover was president through the Depression for one year. FDR prolonged the depression for seven or eight years, and yet he's given credit for ending the Depression. It didn't happen! World War II ended the Depression. The New Deal didn't work and this New New Deal, it won't work either. If it dose I will poop my pants, because it will be the first time that it works, but it never has, and I don't think this is going to break the record. Do you?

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Sunday, January 25, 2009 - 08:26 pm:

David, it was bold of you to reveal so much of your personal life, and that explains much of what you say on this site. It also seems like you haven't really listened to or read all of what Obama has proposed in recent days with respect to dealing with the recession. I think you should take a deep breath, relax, and reread everything possible on the matters Obama has covered, and then see what you think about him.

I and most of my close relatives would not likely be here today were it not for FDR and what he accomplished during his presidency. If anyone could have done better, where were they?

How many of you were listening to Limbaugh when he said he hopes Obama will fail? Limbaugh is a disgrace to his vocation, and because he was of no help in getting McCain and Palin elected, he very likely will lose some of his sponsors. A few days ago Limbaugh and Hannity boasted that they aren't affected by the recession, that their contracts provide them with a very good income, etc. Surely they know that their contracts are subject to keeping a certain number of sponsors and listeners. Have you noticed that they don't mention their Arbitron ratings anymore? Hm-mm.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, January 26, 2009 - 12:08 am:

I have listened or read all of what Obama has proposed in recent days with respect to dealing with many things. I will take issue with the closing of Club Gitmo in Cuba in one year from now. And how Obama had to turn to a Aid or lawyer to ask if that is correct, when he was the one that wrote the dang thing. Never done before.

You said close relatives would not likely be here today were it not for FDR and what he accomplished during his presidency. And that is a fair statement to make. I am sure many can say that including myself. I recall talking to my Uncle Harry about FDR, and he told me never to say anything bad about FDR in front of him no more. Yes, it was good for them back then. But it still didn't work for ever, we still have a lot of poor people today.

I was listening to Limbaugh on Thursday when he said he hopes Obama will fail? I have the same hope for the same reason. One just cannot be a hard core Conservative and think any other way, which is not easy at times, the core of values will lead you to what is right not what's best for me now, how do you want your kid's to grow up, like the MTV crowd?

I have not noticed that they don't mention their Arbitron ratings anymore? They are bragged about all the time.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Monday, January 26, 2009 - 10:02 am:

Good work, Dave. It appears you have been paying attention to what Obama, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al, have been saying. I must have not been listening when Limbaugh and Hannity gave their listener rating numbers (if they did).

Another subject you commented on: I had friends who admitted that they were 1/2, 1/4, or 1/8 black. Some initially claimed they were all white but I noticed that they stayed out of the sun as much as possible, others claimed to be part Cherokee. I eventually learned that this is common in the part of the country that encompasses southern Indian and Ohio, and Kentucky and Tennessee. A few had dark-skinned children and that became the subject of some neighborhood gossip.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 05:47 pm:

*****I was listening to Limbaugh on Thursday when he said he hopes Obama will fail? I have the same hope for the same reason. One just cannot be a hard core Conservative and think any other way, which is not easy at times, the core of values will lead you to what is right not what's best for me now, how do you want your kid's to grow up, like the MTV crowd?*****

As a long time Conservative myself, I believe that David has hit it on the head... It is about core values.
It's also about monitoring exactly what people are willing to trade in terms of civil liberties and freedoms. It is what counts in the long run...Being a Conservative does not always mean that you completely agree to everything "right wing"...I'm not in total agreement with Rush when he says he wants to see Obama fail...Rather I would rather see him want to come to terms with what matters at the core beliefs of what made our country great from the beginning.
Yes, this country is in a world of hurt, but there's too much finger pointing going on when all of us have a bit to blame for all ourselves rather than put the heat on just a few individuals.

I believe that Obama will shake up some things and do some good for the country in terms of economic help, however, if that means eventually catering to radical special interest groups and reformists (like gun control freaks, pro choice abortionists, gay rights, atheists and the like as examples) then what's the use?
In more recent times, the "leftists" have been more about tolerance, concessions, exceptions, trend setting, and other kinds of "change" all in the name of trying to exercise "diversity"...

An example is like "MOVEON.ORG" that was founded on the cause of getting past the scandal surrounding Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky and "move on" to other issues...I don't know about what others feel but why would anyone want to put their faith and donations into an organization that is in other words covering up for a high profile liar and adulterer?

It's things like these that will insure that I'd never trade my core values as a Conservative. Please don't stereotype Conservatives with Republicans because it's getting pretty old! Just my opinion, hope I didn't offend anyone...Peace...

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Sunday, March 15, 2009 - 09:06 pm:

According to Politico.com.

The latest one contends that many top officials in Obama's administration are involved in a clandestine global cabal bent on creating a one-world government that supersedes the United States.

For decades, conspiracy theorists have viewed the Bilderberg group, an international organization made up of political, financial, academic and military heavyweights that comes together annually to discuss world affairs, as similar to the Trilateral Commission or the Council on Foreign Relations -- two groups comprised of influential movers and shakers who, some say, control world events from behind the scenes.

And now, some in the Obama administration who have taken part in Bilderberg conferences in the past are gaining attention for their alleged involvement in a secret bid for worldwide domination.

Who Is a Bilderberg?

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. Economists Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers and Paul Volcker have participated in Bilderberg conferences has only added fuel to the fire. Richard Holbrooke and Dennis Ross are a Bilderberger.
Past participants have included Margaret Thatcher, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, King Juan Carlos of Spain and top officials of BP, IBM, Barclays and the Bank of England,met at Turkey’s Golden Dolphin Hotel,in 1975 with former media mogul Conrad Black.This administration is infested with members of a shadowy, elitist cabal intent on installing a one-World Government.

The group, which takes its name from the Dutch hotel where it held its first meeting in 1954, exists solely to bring together between 100 and 150 titans of politics, finance, military, industry, academia and media from North America and Western Europe once a year to discuss world affairs. It doesn’t issue policy statements or resolutions, nor does it hold any events other than an annual meeting.

The video sharing website YouTube alone is home to thousands of Bilderberg-related videos.

Ron Paul said this;

The one thing that concerns me is that the people who surround Obama or Bush generally come from the same philosophic viewpoint and they have their organizations – they have the Trilateral Commission, the CFR [Council on Foreign Relations] and the Bilderbergers, and they’ve been around a long time. And my biggest concern is what they preach: Keynesian economics and interventionism and world planning.

While it's easy to dismiss the Bilder-busters as cranks, these voices have a way of making themselves heard on the margins of the debate in ways that can prove to be a real, if minor, distraction to Obama’s political team. Bill Clinton had trouble shaking rumors that he was behind a shady criminal syndicate operating out of the Mena airport. George W. Bush was sometimes portrayed as the puppet of clandestine Middle Eastern oil interests.

Obama’s selection of numerous Bilderbergers for key posts “certainly would verify their suspicions,” said Paul, referring to fears of the group’s influence.

“And I don’t think it’s just Obama. Whether it’s the Republicans or the Democrats – Goldman Sachs generally has somebody in treasury. And the big banks generally have somebody in the Federal Reserve. And they’re international people, too. And they’re probably working very hard this weekend, with the G20. And they get involved in the IMF. But that is their stated goal. They do believe in a powerful centralized government and we belive in the oppsite.

Once more that was Ron Paul. Most of us on here
belive in the oppsite, right?

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Sunday, March 15, 2009 - 11:12 pm:

well, maybe I'm up for a little conspiracy theory or two...it wouldn't surprise me one bit, especially the way things continue to go and the apparent direction. There is no doubt that it doesn't matter if its a republican or democrat...it just goes in the same direction...maybe a bit of a different path, but it appears to lead to the same place.

If that place is one world government, one currency, all controlled by some big economic cabal, with 6 billion workers, it wouldn't surprise me.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 10:02 am:

With that being said...It is just another sign of the end times when the world becomes one united as a global government with one main currency. Most nations will continue to operate independently but their livelihood will depend much on this one currency and their power is superseded by a higher power as David H. was saying. This is the stage that is set for the coming of the AntiChrist. If Obama's speech in Germany last summer about building bridges means anything to you...

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - 01:25 pm:

President Barack Obama claimed during his Wednesday night press conference that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance.

A simple check with the U.S. Census Bureau would have told him otherwise.

Obama said: "This is not just about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance."

That assertion conflicts with data in the Census Bureau report "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007." The report was issued in August 2008 and contains the most up-to-date official data on the number of uninsured in the U.S.

The report discloses that there were 45.65 million people in the U.S. who did not have health insurance in 2007.

However, it also reveals that there were 9.73 million foreigners — foreign-born non-citizens who were in the country in 2007 — included in that number. So the number of uninsured Americans was actually 35.92 million.

And of those, "there were also 9.1 million people making more than $75,000 per year who did not choose to purchase health insurance," CNSNews stated in a report based on the Census Bureau data.

That brings the number of Americans who lack health insurance presumably for financial reasons down less than 27 million.

The Census Bureau report also shows that the number of people without insurance actually went down in 2007 compared to the previous year — from 47 million to 45.65 million — while the number with insurance rose from 249.8 million to 253.4 million.

The next Census Bureau report disclosing health insurance data, with 2008 numbers, is scheduled to be released in August, and could figure in the healthcare reform debate.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Friday, September 11, 2009 - 05:58 pm:

It has been 8 months now since Obama won the election. (Not that long) Because so many of you hated Bush you voted this man into office. Afew of us tried to warn those of you who wanted this man what you were going to get. Is there one person out there yet who now thinks we were right?

If illegal aliens aren't going to be covered, then why does he include the 10 to 12 million uninsured illegal aliens in the number of the uninsured when he's promoting ObamaCare?

I was in shock when Joe Wilson shouted out,"You lie." I was shouting the same thing. It was not the right place to do that, I'll give you that much.

The following is what Presdident Obama should of said in his address this week if he was to tell the truth. Stand up and appluad this left wingers.

By cutting waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare which of course is a government run entitlement program we'll be able to fund expanded health care without waste, fraud, and abuse. And of course we support Medicare. It's the Republicans who hate Medicare. We're only cutting over $500 billion from the already bankrupt program because there are other people, apart from our seniors, who need health care, too. Everyone has to sacrifice, particularly mom and dad, granddad, grandmom. But they won't mind. That doesn't mean, of course, we're going to ration care. We would never do that. We love our seniors.

"These are scare tactics by the special interests who always oppose reform. No, we're going to cut Medicare because we support Medicare, and we're going to cut benefits to seniors because we love our seniors. And what's all this talk about the government taking over health care? More fearmongering by the special interests! No, what's going to happen is that we will oversee the insurance companies to make sure they don't cheat and rip you off. That's right. The same politicians and bureaucracy that stole trillions from the Social Security trust fund to pay for ever more spending -- and the same politicians and bureaucracy that stole trillions of dollars from the Medicare trust fund -- will use their carefully honed skills and experience to ensure that the private insurance companies treat you fairly.

"And what we will do is tell these companies who must be covered -- which is anyone who asks to be covered-- we're going to tell 'em what they have to charge and we're going to tell 'em that they have to cover preexisting conditions. We're going to tell 'em what they can't charge. We're going to tell 'em what benefits they have to offer -- and if they fail to do exactly what we say, we're going to have to close 'em down to protect you. That doesn't mean, of course, that you have to change your insurance company. We would never tell you to drop your insurance if you like it! No. What we're going to do is put your insurer out of business. See the difference? And as you know, we are here to change Washington. We want to use free market language to massively grow government.

"We want to increase competition by destroying it. We want to grow jobs by killing employment. Our stimulus recovery is going just as planned. Real unemployment is now at 16.8% and rising. This is how we save the economy from the brink: By killing jobs, killing home ownership, and killing private property; by creating trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars in new debt. This is how we will create a stable dollar, a prosperous economy. This is how we will grow businesses, increase home ownership and so forth. And if we don't it's Bush's fault anyway because I inherited all this! So don't you understand? I'm in the process of destroying your country. I don't like it at all. I don't like this Constitution. It wasn't written for me. I never had a chance to vote for it. I've been saddled with it and my people, saddled with it and my party's been saddled with it and we hate this Constitution!

"This Constitution doesn't tell us what we can do to you. All this Constitution tells us is what we can't do to you, and we want the Constitution to tell us what we can do. Not only to you but for you. I don't like this at all. And I haven't liked it and my college professors haven't liked it and my parents didn't like it and none of my friends liked it. Bill Ayers didn't like the Constitution. Jeremiah Wright doesn't like the Constitution. My gang at ACORN doesn't like the Constitution, and I'm gonna fix it -- and I'm doing it right in front of your eyes while I'm telling you the opposite of what I'm doing. I'm destroying your economy. I am foreclosing on your house. I have taken over two of the three big automobile companies. I'm going to make sure you can't eventually drive the car you want. And I'm doing all this to restore the economy so that we never have a down cycle like this. I'm doing all this to save the planet from climate change.

"I'm doing all it is so that you will have good jobs and good health care. You won't have any money unless you turn to me for it. It's essential that despite talking like a capitalist that we leave no industry free to actually make profits, because profits are the tool of the special interests -- who, after all, don't care about you as much as we do in this administration. We know what you need better than you do. We know how to manage your affairs and your finances better than you do. This is why we've nationalized the banks, the mortgage industry, the student loan industry, and soon the energy companies and the health care industry. We, after all, aren't driven by the profit motive. We're driven by the public interest, and we know what's in the public interest better than you do.

"That's why it's time to stop all this talk, stop all this bickering, stop the games and just shut up when I'm speaking and instituting my hope-and-change agenda. My agenda is your agenda whether you know it or not whether you accept it or not -- and it's going to be forced down your throat whether you want it or not. Now, I've tried very hard to work with Republicans. My door is always open to them. But they refuse to accept my agenda. They seek to sabotage real reform and real change and hope. They keep talking about empowering individuals to make their own health care decisions. The Republicans keep talking about cutting taxes for middle-class families so they can buy their own insurance.

"The Republicans keep talking about expanding health savings accounts much like IRAs and 401(k)s so that families can save some of their own money tax-free to prepare for catastrophic illnesses and increasing competition by enabling insurance companies to compete for business across state lines. Do you believe that idiocy from the Republicans? Do you believe that stuff? Individuals can't be trusted to do the right thing. We all know that. People are foolish. The only thing they should be free to do is make enough money so that we can confiscate 50, 60, 70% of it via taxes. In fact this whole nation filled with the notion of individual rights and limited government is nothing more than a racist invention of white slaveholders.

"And let me repeat this again: The whole notion of individual rights and limited government is nothing more than a racist invention of white slaveholders known as the Founding Fathers. We know that our Founding Fathers were racists. We never agreed to their Constitution. Did you vote for it? No. It was imposed on us from one generation to the next. So forget about it or else our agenda of redistribution of wealth and big centralized government will be obstructed by something as inconsequential as the highest law in the land which we don't respect; which we didn't vote for; which we think is a sham; which we think is racist, sexist, bigoted, and homophobic. The first thing I could do if I had a chance is rip the Constitution to shreds. Now, I know we're not to the point where I can do that yet in front of you.

"So I'm going to do it while you can't see me doing it all the while telling you, 'I support what you support." Now, we need to nationalize the health care system as fast as possible, and the reason is that we have so much more hope and change to get to in our agenda before the next election. We need to get back to cap and trade so we can manage virtually every business and household in the country, so we can begin the long neglected effort to limit and then shrink how much wealth is produced in this nation. We are 5% of the world's population; we use 25% of the world's resources. We are stealing from the poor of the world, and we have done this since our interception. We are immoral and unjust and we are imperialists. As global citizens, we must change our ways.

"We must do our fair share to participate in the world's poverty. We are too rich, and I'm in the process of making sure that will not be said about this country in the future. The standard of living, when I get through here, will plummet dramatically. That's only fair! We need to pay a penalty for usurping so much of the world's resources. Poverty exists in the rest of the world because of us and our Constitution -- which I didn't vote for and I didn't get a chance to vote for, and if I have my say about it, I'm going to rip it to shreds before I leave this White House. We must make ourselves poorer! We must learn to suffer through the misery that other societies impose on themselves. We're going to call this 'going green' so that you think that we're 'saving the planet,' but what we're actually doing is making you poorer.

"We are going to rob you of your wealth and the opportunity to earn wealth, because when we say 'going green' it conjures images of polar bears and flowing creeks and fields and flowers. It's time to return to simpler times anyway, agrarian times. The Industrial Revolution wasn't all that great anyway. There was more racism and slavery in the Industrial Revolution and more pollution and disgusting destruction of the planet. This is just part of our progressive agenda, an agenda for the modern era. It's time we moved forward into the past. It is time to make tomorrow our yesterdays. It is time to surrender yourself to the greater good. You must make sacrifices! We are, after all, a community of one -- and I am The One who will lead you to the Promised Land."

That's what that speech was last night. That's what's in this man's heart. That is what's in this man's mind.

This was composed by the man with talent on loan from God, Mr. Rush Limbaugh.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Sunday, September 13, 2009 - 12:55 pm:

No comment on the above?

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Sunday, September 13, 2009 - 02:57 pm:

that's a real long read, especially when the first 2 or 3 paragraphs are pure ••••••••.

I will give you one thing, though ... it doesn't matter which politician is in office, a Republican or a Democrat. The path is the same as you (Rush), describes..the destruction of this country.

Its time for an independent, third party of AMERICANS to take over government. Not those corporate, new world order, hijackers that are taking us all for a ride.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Sunday, September 13, 2009 - 06:00 pm:

I don't speed read,so I timed myself. Took me just about 10 min.

I do not believe what you said David S. that it doesn't matter which party is in office. The Democrat Party moves so much faster down the path of The New World Order.Republican party is not very good at that, or many other things these days. This is our,the People's government. Some folk's vote for the best looking person to run it, while some care and research how that person came about to have the chance to be voted on. What good or bad things would come out of a One World Order? Would many like to see just one kind of money worth the same where ever you go on this Planet? And be able to have free health care where ever you go,just as long as 60% to 70% or more of your income goes to taxes,so you will have enough to drive the vehicle they want you to have,to eat the food that they say good for you? Seems to me there are many of you out there,by the things you say write, and the way you vote you'd gladly follow that path.

You do realize that the above composed by Rush,is the truth what our Presdient Omaba,and his party would love very much to tell you, this is what they want for the people.The scary thing about that to me is,so many of you want this too.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Sunday, September 13, 2009 - 10:37 pm:

I don't want it David. Unlike you, I don't believe it to be true of all Democrats, however. I do believe it's what this particular president is after. I hope it doesn't come to pass.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 02:42 am:

It's what the far left of that party wants,Deb. And most of them are far out there. Please I do not need to name afew,do I? Most Democrats who vote along party lines,do not know what they are getting.It should start to become much clearer what the Democrats want to do to you,as they are doing for you.Take a good long look. They want you in there pocket,so they can steal your pants off you.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 07:14 am:

Its amazing to me how far we are divided in what we think. Maybe the most ever in the history of this country.

What is wrong with having universal healthcare for all Americans? What is wrong with having equal opportunity for education for all Americans ?

Right now, the insurance companies are getting rich off sick people. Health coverage is terrible. I have insurance and still can't afford to go to the doctor, or dentist.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 07:18 am:

the bottom line right now is the bottom line. The corporations won't be happy until we're all living like Mexican peasants, and our government, Republicans and Democrats, are playing right along. They're busting the unions, taking away our benefits, reducing our pay, we're losing our houses, and our jobs are gone. Our money is going to the big bankers and financiers.
Oh happy days

By Cindy Barga (Hoosiergirl) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 08:55 am:

The insurance companies are getting rich. We pay over $5,000 per year, with a $1500 deductible per person for a family of three. This is on top of what my husband's employer kicks in. Right now I am being treated for degenerative disc disease and six bulging discs in my back.So far the bills for the office call to my family physician, back x-ray, and the MRI are over $3000, and I haven't even been to the spine surgeon yet. That appointment is on Thursday. My wish for health care reform is this....Please make the cost of health care affordable. Why does a fifteen minute office visit have to cost well over $100. Why did my back x-ray have to cost $785, not to mention the MRI being over $2000? Prescription drugs are also way over priced. We also have to worry about whether or not our health care providers are in our companies "network", and if not they will not cover the cost as they would if the provider was in the network.

By Tom (Tom) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 11:21 am:

I find a number of the comments on this page in conflict or very short sighted.
Why are medical tests so high? MRI equipment is very expensive-----no one is going to invest in that equipment unless there is some hope of paying for the financing and earning a return for the risk of doing business.
A doctor's fee doesn't just go to him. I mentioned on another page or perhaps this one---the doctor's fee must cover the cost of operating the entire clinic/office. Nurses do want pay raises, too.
Technicians also want pay increases as do the custodial staff. So the fee charge must contribute to all those costs.
Regarding corporations wanting drive the consumer into some kind of poverty does not fly. If such a thing were to happen who would buy a corporations product/service? So they certainly don't want the consumer to "disappear."
All products/services face the same challenge-------sell a product/service at a price many/most consumers can pay.
Price of a car must pay towards all the people who are involved in the manufacture------right down to the custodial staff at the factories and administrative facilities.
Our bank employee in Minnesota wants a salary increase as does our employee of the State of Michigan.
In economics it has been said for decades, "prices are flexible upwards but rigid downwards."
I hope this is not too much of a rant.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 05:19 pm:

What is wrong with having universal healthcare for all Americans,asked David S. There is nothing wrong with having that.It would be nice not to pay for anything. A lot of people are hungry too,so let's have universal health food care. All you can eat healthy food buffets complements of our federal government with thanks to the tax payers. I don't think nobody would mind having free health care, or free meals. We just can not come together on how it should be paid for Dave.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 08:50 pm:

wow .. a lot to cover..I'll start at the end ...
Paying for healthcare ... get out of Afghanistan and Iraq. done.

the healthcare is not free for everyone. More than likely if you are under a specific income threshold, depending on family size, etc, you may not pay in, but otherwise, you're going to have to pay some additional tax. Probably a few hundred more a year. But as Cindy states up above, they are already paying thousands per year, so taxes going up a bit plus the billions gained from getting out of the wars, would be a lot better. I'm not as bad off as she is, paying in about $3000 per year for my wife and myself, plus the deductibles. In addition, a lot of the procedures are only paid 80%, etc, so it adds up quick.

Cost of medical care ... I happe to work for a very large healthcare organization. At least in our company, they've been cutting costs for quite a few years. We have electronic records already, digital xray, etc. Purchasing is done as a group, so the discounting is high.
Equipment. Yes its expensive, but the cost is recouped, even for an MRI, in about 2-3 years. Short term costly, after the cost is paid for, its nice revenue. Of course the techs, and everyone involved need to be paid. The costs are not really at the hospital level in all cases, a lot of the cost is from the insurance companies.

Driving us into poverty. Right now, the corporations are eyeballing all those people over in India and China. Their incomes are rising, while ours are falling. Global economy -- they don't need to depend on us in the good ol USA for their income any more, and if they can diminish what we're being paid by reducing our benefits and paychecks, they're only driving up the profits. Just the vast numbers of customers overseas in Asia more than offsets our losses.

The company I previously worked for closed down 2 factories. all the employees lost their jobs. When the annual business perspective came out, they were bragging about the fact they had 20% profit and the dividends rose. In the meantime nearly a thousand people had no job, no healthcare, nothing.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 - 07:53 pm:

"Affordable" Not one Politician has said what "Affordable" is.. Is it ten dollars a month, forty dollars a month, one hundred dollars a month, whats it going to be. If a person has no job, no money it dosen't make any difference if it's ten dollars a month they can not "AFFORD" it. So is it our great leaders plan to buy it for them. Out of this so called 46 million people who do not have health care there are many who CAN afford it but chose not to. My daughter and husband are two people who chose not to have it and they can well "afford" it and there are many like them. I think this 46 million is really blown up. There is no reason this should be put on the tax payers tab.
This so called leader has already "QUADRUPLED" our debt in six months .H ow much futher can we go.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 - 08:14 pm:

I managed a German owned company for a number of years and spent a lot of time back and forth to Germany and herd a lot about there health care over there. If you want to take about 50% of your paycheck home then you should be in favor of Obamas plan

By 4WDGreg (4wdgreg) on Saturday, September 26, 2009 - 12:33 am:

If we want to expand health care coverage in the U.S. we can do so by reducing costs. One way to do that is to have Chinese teenage girls replace all the doctors and nurses and work for a few dollars a day. It works for Walmart.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 2, 2009 - 04:20 pm:

What did Obama think when he and his wife and Oprah went to Denmark to push for the Olympic games that they would bow down to him. What business did he have going over there in at least two planes. Do we have any idea what that cost the tax payers, I would like to know
It's funny Chicago was the first voted out. This guy is going non stop, be good if he spent a little time in Washington and took care of the economy and the war.

By mickill mouse (Ram4) on Friday, October 2, 2009 - 05:33 pm:

If Obama was not from Chicago, would he still have gone on behalf of another city. I think we all know why Oprah went.....

You are right. He seems to be everywhere and a lot of times a person has no idea what he will be doing next, or flying off to. It is to bad he does not sit down in front of the t.v. and explain his health care reform to put peoples mind at ease. It reminds me of something my mom use to say about some things, 'It just keeps your head spinning'

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Friday, October 2, 2009 - 06:57 pm:

Two planes? That just counted Air Force One & the 757 Michelle flew over on, none of the auxilliary planes for the motorcade, helicopters, security details, et al, nor the financial cost, nor, speaking their language, their carbon footprints...

Add to that, Obama should have been here, talking to his Generals, that he put in place, figuring out the economy disaster, not to mention the health care fiasco.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 2, 2009 - 07:36 pm:

I am sure a lot of the people that voted for Obama are having second thoughts. I am still waiting to here what "AFFORDABLE" means.
Your right Marianne, I forgot about the other planes. Can you even imagine what that cost.
SOOOOOO where is he off to tommorow.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 - 07:38 am:

WOW! I haven't been here in a while. Looks like a lot of us are wondering what's going on with this president. I'm so glad Chicago got turned down. Would have been nice to have it in the US, but not his city!!!!!!!!!! Must have hurt his ego big time!!!!

By Tom (Tom) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 - 10:30 am:

One thing we must remember is that Obama has not worked for a private sector organization much at all. He is accustomed to some level of govt funding whatever he did and that continues into his presidency. Spend all the time. To top it off his economic adviser is Larry Summers, a believer in govt control of economy. I wonder when the time for the tax increases will arrive? We cannot spend in excess of our federal govt revenues much longer. It will take a decade to get our federal finances back in order.
Not that the Repubicans didn't spend, but, this much?

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 - 11:17 am:

I read that Obama has spent more in the first six months of his Presidency, then all others have spent in their entire Presidencies, plus.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 - 11:32 am:

don't forget the value of the dollar isn't as much. convert all numbers to a certainty..what, maybe 1968 dollars? or something like that.

The cost of everything is way higher as well.

"By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 -
11:18 am:

I read that Obama has spent more in the first six months of
his Presidency, then all others have spent in their entire
Presidencies, plus. "

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Saturday, October 3, 2009 - 11:47 am:

I don't believe anybody in this country is dying because of a lack of health insurance. They are 45,000 people a year dying we are told. The Democrat Party is obsessed with death. But are with life? NO! Abortion, euthanasia. Liberty? No. Slavery. Subordination to government. Pursuit of happiness? Not possible. I've yet to meet a happy liberal. They're angry, deranged lunatics. They don't want to enjoy life. If they become a vegetarian, everybody else must become one! If a conservative becomes a vegetarian, fine, whatever you want to do with your life is fine, you want to eat meat, go ahead. If a liberal buys a Prius, everybody has to buy a Prius! If a conservative buys a Prius he's made fun of by his friends, and eventually sells it.

Good health does not give you immortality. We die. Sometimes you die in an auto accident. Doesn't matter. Elijah Cummings is out there saying in his constituency, blacks are dying because they don't have health insurance I would like for him to produce one death certificate of one of his constituents that says, Cause of death No health insurance. I want to see it! I want a parade. I want to see the caskets. I want to see the cemetery. I want to see the graveyard. I want to see the tombstones of all of his constituents who have died because they had no health insurance. They throw these numbers around which are absurd. So show us the cemetery! Show us the death certificate. If you don't want to do that, just give us the case examples. Say, "Person A, B, C here passed away because they didn't have health insurance meaning they got really sick and they didn't get covered, didn't get any treatment. Did they go to the emergency room? Because it's a federal law you have to be treated when you go in there. These people lie through and through. It's all they know how to do.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Sunday, October 4, 2009 - 11:32 am:

read this all you pious ones. I've felt this way myself for a long time. If you profess to being Christian, you should be helping those less fortunate than yourselves. In this ocuntry where there are so many wealthy people, and especially considering 80% profess to be religious, it blows my mind that most of you here want to ignore your fellow man, and belittle the fact they don't have health insurance, pick yourself up by your bootstraps mentallity. its pure ••••••••

For Those of You on Your Way to Church This Morning ...a note from Michael Moore

Sunday, October 4th, 2009


I'd like to have a word with those of you who call yourselves Christians (Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Bill Maherists, etc. can read along, too, as much of what I have to say, I'm sure, can be applied to your own spiritual/ethical values).

In my new film I speak for the first time in one of my movies about my own spiritual beliefs. I have always believed that one's religious leanings are deeply personal and should be kept private. After all, we've heard enough yammerin' in the past three decades about how one should "behave," and I have to say I'm pretty burned out on pieties and platitudes considering we are a violent nation who invades other countries and punishes our own for having the audacity to fall on hard times.

I'm also against any proselytizing; I certainly don't want you to join anything I belong to. Also, as a Catholic, I have much to say about the Church as an institution, but I'll leave that for another day (or movie).

Amidst all the Wall Street bad guys and corrupt members of Congress exposed in "Capitalism: A Love Story," I pose a simple question in the movie: "Is capitalism a sin?" I go on to ask, "Would Jesus be a capitalist?" Would he belong to a hedge fund? Would he sell short? Would he approve of a system that has allowed the richest 1% to have more financial wealth than the 95% under them combined?

I have come to believe that there is no getting around the fact that capitalism is opposite everything that Jesus (and Moses and Mohammed and Buddha) taught. All the great religions are clear about one thing: It is evil to take the majority of the pie and leave what's left for everyone to fight over. Jesus said that the rich man would have a very hard time getting into heaven. He told us that we had to be our brother's and sister's keepers and that the riches that did exist were to be divided fairly. He said that if you failed to house the homeless and feed the hungry, you'd have a hard time finding the pin code to the pearly gates.

I guess that's bad news for us Americans. Here's how we define "Blessed Are the Poor": We now have the highest unemployment rate since 1983. There's a foreclosure filing once every 7.5 seconds. 14,000 people every day lose their health insurance.

At the same time, Wall Street bankers ("Blessed Are the Wealthy"?) are amassing more and more loot -- and they do their best to pay little or no income tax (last year Goldman Sachs' tax rate was a mere 1%!). Would Jesus approve of this? If not, why do we let such an evil system continue? It doesn't seem you can call yourself a Capitalist AND a Christian -- because you cannot love your money AND love your neighbor when you are denying your neighbor the ability to see a doctor just so you can have a better bottom line. That's called "immoral" -- and you are committing a sin when you benefit at the expense of others.

When you are in church this morning, please think about this. I am asking you to allow your "better angels" to come forward. And if you are among the millions of Americans who are struggling to make it from week to week, please know that I promise to do what I can to stop this evil -- and I hope you'll join me in not giving up until everyone has a seat at the table.

Thanks for listening. I'm off to Mass in a few hours. I'll be sure to ask the priest if he thinks J.C. deals in derivatives or credit default swaps. I mean, after all, he must've been good at math. How else did he divide up two loaves of bread and five pieces of fish equally amongst 5,000 people? Either he was the first socialist or his disciples were really bad at packing lunch. Or both.

Michael Moore

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Sunday, October 4, 2009 - 11:39 am:

support of Obama...he is our president...
being happy that Chicago lost the Olympic bid becasue Obama is from Chicago and supported it, is just wrong..period. Its an American honor to have the Olympics in our country.
Chicago can better spend its money on its own problems that building Olympic venues, so its probably better they did not get the bid, but it would have brought in a lot of money, even to distant cities like Madison Wisconsin, which would have had events there as well.

I am have no problem stating that Obama is no different than Bush as far as getting things done. He supports the war effort, which is wrong, has not rescinded the PAtriot Act which is unconstitutional, and is on the same road as past presidents, including Reagon, Clinton, and both Bushes. They have and are, destroying this country and giving it to the rich corporate greed mongers.

for those of you against universal health care, you must be OK and have healthcare, so why should you care about anyone else, yes ??

By A. David Archibald (Yooperatheart61) on Sunday, October 4, 2009 - 11:48 am:

David Soumis:
Spot on!!!

By Tom (Tom) on Sunday, October 4, 2009 - 12:57 pm:

Why not read that part of the bible where Jesus is supposed to have said: "forget the poor, they will be with us always."
What do you suppose he meant? Of course being a book of hearsay the Bible isn't particularly accurate.
Funny how an economic system that is so cruel creates the highest living standard even comparing the poor of the world??? People are equal only in the eyes of God and the law. In real life we are not. Some are gifted with super intelligence and other physical attributes.
Remember the experiment in Harmony, Indiana several hundred years ago now-----perhaps not that long. Equal share of income regardless of contribution in the form of labor failed. Those who contributed the most did not like that situation and rebelled. The system broke down. There was at least one other attempt at a perfect society in that line and it too failed.
I wonder how much of his wealth Michael Moore shares with the less fortunate?

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Sunday, October 4, 2009 - 04:03 pm:

I'll ask him ..

Tom ponders "I wonder how much of his wealth Michael Moore shares with
the less fortunate"?

By Cindy Barga (Hoosiergirl) on Monday, October 5, 2009 - 04:54 pm:

David Soumis...Thank you for posting that.

By FJL (Langoman) on Monday, October 5, 2009 - 05:25 pm:

2006-The top 5% of U.S. income tax filers paid 60% of all federal income taxes...The top 1% paid 40% of the 60%. The top 50% paid 97% of all federal income taxes. That leaves 3% paid by the remaining 50%........

By Tom (Tom) on Monday, October 5, 2009 - 08:32 pm:

And, FJL, they want to hit them for more.
What are they trying to do? Kill the golden goose of free markets??

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 11:54 am:

"support of obama... he is our president" says David Soumis. If Hugo Chavez was our President would you say the same thing.Just because Obama is our President we have to support him? If we support him it means we believe in things he is doing and what his beliefs are. I can't do that David. If you profess to be a Christian I don't see how you can back him. He "Obama" backs abortion and abortion is murder.A young girl was just sentenced to 18 to 50 years for second degree murder. She kept her pregnancy secret and then killed the child. Is there a difference
He is tied to the corrupt Acorn who helped him get this job.He quadrupled our debt in about seven months. Did you say the same thing when Bush was President? Michael Moore is another subject. Do you ever here of this blow bag passing his money around.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 12:33 pm:

How about asking Dave Soumis how much he supported George W. Bush when he was President, more than just as an after thought? That would be more to the point than Chavez. If Dave Soumis did not fully support George W. Bush as President, then he has no right to ask anyone else to support B. Obama as President.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 06:23 pm:

good question ... I did not mean support Obama as you read into it..a bad choice of words on my part...I meant I didn't think it right to cheer the fact Chicago didn't get the Olympic bid just because Obama is from Chicago and tried to get the games there. This is a common sentiment from a lot of right wing Republicans.

And NO, I could not support GWB in most instances, as he and the administration at the time, including Congress, had us in a war, supported torture and other atrocities, pretty much blew away the Constitution with the Patriot Act, and a lot more, such as trying to overturn a lot of the environmental bills that we worked so hard to put in place, using Natioanl Parks and lands for mining and oil exploration, and so forth. However, I do not believe the liberal rhetoric was as nasty as what is coming from the right wing.

In my opinion, I still think the Bush administration and probably most of the Congress should be brought up for war crimes and impeached.

For all you guys, I think Obama is actually on the same warmongering path, and should be thrown out as well. As a typical politician, he said a lot and has done nothing he promised to do.

Now you see an Ann Coulter banner right here...so its pretty obvious the leanings of this site and most of you kind folks. She's about the most vile person I've seen in a long time, right next to Limbaugh and Beck.

You see, I'm a dreamer. check out the Zeitgiest Movement or the Venus Project ... now that deal is way out there, but life would be so much simpler :) I'm not really a capitalist, at least not in the present form. Even you guys must remember when it was OK to have a 5% profit margin, even take a loss once in awhile. It isn't possible today. My last company was laying off people, closing plants, when they had a 20% profit margin. Look at Walmart. Won;t give their employees a dollar raise even though they had 17 Billion profit. Pure crap.
Who was it, Nixon, that had revenue caps and all that ?
I could be a Republican if it was like it was 40 years ago,. The whole attitude has gotten so rotten, its hard to fathom it. Vile, spewing constantly...

Where's the love ?

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 07:08 pm:

David S when will you forget about George Bush. You had eight years to run him in the ground and you are still at it. Take a break David.It doesn't sound like you are getting behind "YOUR" president. You voted for Obama, so don't run him down. You said "WHERE'S THE LOVE"? It doesn't sound like you have any.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 07:23 pm:

Sorry, Zube, but it'll take a long time for a lot of us to "forget about Bush". He did a lot of damage to this country and most of us were more than ready for him to be GONE!! However, I could never get behind Obama either. I to this day can't believe how many people blindly followed him just because they were ready to be done with Bush. It amazes me!!!

By FJL (Langoman) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 09:36 am:

Let's look at Walmart. "17 billion dollar profit" you say. Who shops there and why?

"5% profit margin" wasn't enought for the stock-holders. And who are the stock-holders?

The minute areas in the very few National parks considered for exploration were in remote and never to be used sections. The enviormental blindness in action again....

The monday-night quarterbacking of the Bush administration"s alleged "war crimes and atrocites." Nice to sit back in a country, safe for the past 8 yrs. of terrorest acts and criticize decisions made because of an act of war...

There is nothing wrong with "dreaming" but eventually one will wake up.......

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 09:44 am:

I'm with you FJL

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 09:50 am:

Now Deb you get some sleep, Bush is gone. Try to forget him. I can't hardly remember what he looks like.

By Tom (Tom) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 11:12 am:

Why don't any of you react to FJLs listing of who pays taxes?? Are you in that 50% who pay 3%?
You don't care to comment?

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 02:28 pm:

Hey what if all this is intentional? Take a good look to see there is a track record of over 75 years of these failures that even the stupidest people can learn from. It's not that they don't want to learn the truth. It is about control. Obama,and his people want power,they want as many people dependent on the government as possible and have a different belief system.Their intentions may be good as many think.I don't give a hoot about their intentions because their intentions have failed miserably in this country and all over the world.The people that run our country now have a much closer proximity and they're much closer to the world's tyrants and dictators than they are closer to the people who founded the country.This is not accidental.They have chosen to do it in this way.This is the ideology that they have chosen.This is what's best for them.And you're going to learn this if you stay focused interested as time goes by as we older folk's have.David S.your a little older then me what happened to you? Trust me,you still have time to learn that the Left are not innocent idiots.They are dangerous, devious central planners who have designs on everybody's liberty and freedom.That's what matters most to them because that's where they derive their power.

If the rich thought the system couldn't protect them they would cash in there chips and start on a spending spree to make sure all the money they have is gone before the Left takes it from them, and the last check they would write would be to the IRS, and it would bounce.

So many of you, Dave S. David A.and Deb rag on George W. Bush and the institutions and traditions that made this country great.You got to see it is the Left that has purposely set groups of Americans against each other!Men versus women, black versus, white minority versus majority, gay versus straight, all by design to create chaos, never contentment,never happy. Did those of you who went on passed High School that had professors, see them ever happy or were they always constantly wringing their hands and enraged and mad at whatever was going on back then in years gone by? Still today they are unhappy,angry,and miserable like you who support the Left.You and them don't smile much. Nothing about you or them that could make me want to join you.The Lefts power didn't come because of their intelligence.The opposition party laid down and nominated somebody that didn't have a chance in you know where.

America is made up of two groups of people, and both groups are represented by leaders that seek to win power to implement their ideas.The people who are running the country now are from a group that does not believe in the founding of this country.They are opposed to the way the country was founded.They believe the country was founded by white racists across the pond who are also sexists, bigots, colonialists and imperialists. They believe that the United States' superpower status militarily and economically is the greatest threat to world peace and the climate! And it's their job to make you think that.Where is the love you ask? You and them don't have a love for this country as the people who post here like myself and others,( don't want to leave anybody out) who cherish the founding,and the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and understand what it is! We are begging you to understand that the greatness of this country is due to the freedom of its people to be and do whatever they wish to the best of their ability.
You think that has led to an unjust and immoral country with racism and bigotry, the majority tromping all over the minority every day since we've been founded and it's something you think must be fixed by being a Leftist.It is not that you dislike America,you dislike America as it was founded.You want to remake it and you want to change it. You are misguided in that you think your helping the human condition by getting rid of racism, sexism, bigotry but in fact the Left practice racism, sexism, and bigotry in the process, they simply pollute the decency of the country.

Standard unemployment in this country,is approaching 17% we are told.It's 9.8 because that 17% includes people still looking for a job and those who have given up looking and no longer receive extended unemployment benefits.Job loss is a concern to us all.The loss of entry level training that could affect the young for the rest of their working lives.If young people cannot get these jobs today and start learning how to work in the workplace at a job, their productivity as productive members of the workforce is going to be delayed.If cutting taxes would cause job creation to start, if cutting taxes would cause the economy to rebound, if cutting taxes would lead businesses to grow and invest and hire workers,would you Left Liberals cut taxes like us on the Right want to?

Now this is the message we want to teach those the other side of the fence.

If you profess to be a Christian I don't see how any of you can not come to learn here. Your faith really should not even enter into politics.

What more can be said? But I am sure some will think of something eh. Thank you for reading this and try to put a smile on your face today.

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 03:59 pm:

As has been noted before (in the Politics and Health care: Should every U.S. wage-earner be required to have health care insurance? threads),


"Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart, and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."

-Winston Churchill

It just may be that I have recently found a corollary to that idea (politically speaking, a scary thought!):


"Anyone who is over the age of 65, and has suffered coronary arrest (i.e. death), only to be resuscitated, on medicare's tab, stands a good chance of becoming a socialist!"

I say this after experiencing cardiac arrest(!) — at the Emergency Department admitting desk at John C. Lincoln North Mountain Hospital in Phoenix — on August 5, 2009. (It couldn't have happened at a better location!) The Medicare (Part B) claim(s) for my "resurrection" were as follows:

Amount charged
Medicare Approved
Provider Paid

The good news: I had a follow up appointment with my cardiologist yesterday. The EKG exam showed … Normal EKG!
The doctor said: "From that, you'd never know you had a heart attack, never mind a cardiac arrest!"

Now back to the hospital next week for another heart catheterization, and one or two more stents, this time in the the left circumflex and marginal arteries. This should be a fairly trivial exercise, just a bit more difficult navigating through the various arterial branches to the target site. Probably two days in the hospital at most.

If this keeps up I could indeed become a socialist! (Perish the thought!)

Tom (Tom) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 04:14 pm:

David, I must correct you on a point. Very few college professors are running around wringing their hands and crying. Mostly they either keep what they are thinking to themselves or have civil discussions about their differences.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 05:07 pm:

Well maybe not in the classroom as much these days, it may differ state to state, but the one's I toss empty beer cans into their bathtub with them do from UT.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 05:28 pm:

Great job David H.And you did that without a "TELEPROMPTER" Wonderful speech.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 07:42 pm:

bush who ?

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 07:59 pm:

I'm with you David H.. And you made that speech without a "TELEPROMPTER" Great job

By FRNash/PHX, AZ (Frnash) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - 08:00 pm:

David Soumis (Davesou):
"bush who?"

Good one, David!

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, October 8, 2009 - 01:13 am:

Not with a Teleprompter, can't talk let alone type that fast, but with that voice reckon thing types what it hears & records. But if you were on the Right side would of known this, while the left is thinking about Michale More or less, who by the way is a great guy, and he really dose believe in all he sez. To him it is not about the money. But with $200 in his pocket he made his dream come true. Don't vote on things that will end up changing his / hers dreams, of someday leaving the U.P. in the peak of color season to pursue a dream. Can't understand what got Mikey thinking this way. Answer's please. And who knows about the "Saturday Live gig? Is that show the new here's Johnny? Cause on his show when he made fun of you, you wasa toast eh? Carson knew how to get the drift on which way the wind was blowing, before the funny joke was made.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, October 8, 2009 - 08:59 pm:

Attention please.

Is this a hoax, or did this really happen at Cobo Hall? Please, someone tell me it just not so!
Heard here on WNOX Knoxville,TN. radio news

Ken Rogulski of our affiliate there, WJR. Detroit Free Press: "'Cobo a Scene of Desperation.' -- Social service agencies are bracing for more troubles. The economic tsunami washing over metro Detroit swept its casualties to the doors of Cobo Center on Wednesday in the form of 35,000 people so desperate for help with mortgage and utility bills that threats were made, fights broke out and people were nearly trampled." This is Obama's America. This is what happens with socialism. You think these are long lines now, these brainwashed kids in that song on CNN talk about the long lines that are out there, you people haven't seen long lines at the emergency room until Obamacare gets implemented.

"Some were treated by emergency medical workers on site," as they showed up to pick up Obama money. "It was one of the most dramatic signs to date of how deeply joblessness and the home foreclosure crisis have pushed people from the lower and middle ends of the economic scale to seek help wherever they can. City officials said a total of about 65,000 people over the past few days have gotten applications -- due next Wednesday -- for a share of $15.2 million in federal stimulus money to help people avoid foreclosure or quickly rebound from homelessness." But get this. "Ultimately, as few as 3,500 people may receive the help." They think they got riots now, 3,500 people out of 65,000 filling out applications for this? Here's a portion of Ken Rogulski reporting on WJR in Michigan, two people here in line for Obama cash.

ROGULSKI: Why are you here?

WOMAN #1: To get some money.

ROGULSKI: What kind of money?

WOMAN #1: Obama money.

ROGULSKI: Where's it coming from?

WOMAN #1: Obama.

ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it?

WOMAN #1: I don't know, his stash. I don't know. (laughter) I don't know where he got it from, but he givin' it to us, to help us.

WOMAN #2: And we love him.

WOMAN #1: We love him. That's why we voted for him!

WOMEN: (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing) End of story;

Do you mind if I laugh? I think it's fine to laugh. It's so fricking sad. Obama giving us money from his stash, that's why we love him, Barack Hussein Obama Here's the report from yesterday October 7, 2009

ROGULSKI: Did you get an application to fill out yet?

WOMAN: I sure did. And I filled it out, and I am waiting to see what the results are going to be.

ROGULSKI: Will you know today how much money you're getting?

WOMAN: No, I won't, but I'm waiting for a phone call.

ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?

WOMAN: I believe it's coming from the City of Detroit or the state.

ROGULSKI: Where did they get it from?

WOMAN: Some funds that was forgiven by Obama.

ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?

WOMAN: Obama getting the funds from... Ummm, I have no idea, to tell you the truth. He's the president.

ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.

This is the model citizen in Barack Obama's vision. These people are model citizens. These are the people who would be wealthy and rich today were it not for the fact that the achievers of this society since this country was founded stole everything they had. And so Obama looks at these people as victims of an unjust and immoral country, and by God, he's going to make sure that they think he's making it all good for them. And they all do. Dumb, uninformed, shockingly, saddeningly stupid, the model citizen for Barack Obama and the Democrat Party.

Maybe this post will be removed before to many people get to read it. Because I am really running out of ideas to put this any nicer!.

Who think's that if more people were working, if they had jobs and a reduction in taxes that maybe one would have some disposable income to help the needy? Your charitable deductions are about to be in your past. No charitable deductions are going to be allowed before much longer under Obama. Is it part of the plan? Should we replace charity with government? I know this is very cold-hearted to say, but this is easy for many to say, if people had jobs they wouldn't need charity. This was what the stimulus was supposed to be for I thought. Do you think the average person thought it was for charity, and welfare? Did you think that's what the stimulus bill was for?

This is what you get with socialism. Nobody gets anything and those who get whatever, don't get very much of it. All socialism kills the engine of production. And we're witnessing it happen right before our very eyes in our beloved state of Michigan. I yoosta love that cheese, didn't you? You who are old enough should at least remember your grandparents letting you have some.

Sixty five thousand people showed up, 3,500 people will got applications. What a good payday for the scam artists outside Cobo Hall charging 5 to 20 bucks for these fake copies of applications when the real copy is free. This makes me laugh, but is good to know that there still is entrepreneurism in Detroit. You got to find a positive somewhere, but not easy to do these days. What say you? Is this for real? Alot of question marks I entered.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Thursday, October 8, 2009 - 10:48 pm:

Obama and socialism have absolutely nothing to do with the fact these people do not have jobs.

The jobs are now in China, India, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea, and other areas that pay nothing and do not have EPA rules. This gives the big corporations higher profits. It puts people here out of work. They then lose their houses...they don't have any income, what do you expect?

Perhaps if they had a decent education system they wouldn't be so stupid as you suggest.

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, October 8, 2009 - 11:27 pm:

Perhaps if inside of my but cheeks had teeth, I could eat out it too.

And I say," Obamaa along with socialism absolutely has everything to do with job loss. I thought you were past that, but tell why and a how?

Who do you think Obama would bring back to life if he could?
..>>> I'd bet Carl Marx

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 02:28 am:

Who wants to bet on Stalin, you want it Zube?

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 07:08 am:


Obama awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 07:22 am:

must be a communist plot to take over the world, all this peace stuff, with Obama leading the way.

In response to above post, If being socialist is trying to help your fellow man, then I must be a socialist. I do not understand how you can say socialism is what is causing the joblessness. That makes no sense to me at all. Why is helping

By FJL (Langoman) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 08:05 am:

WOW!!! 2009 Nobel Peace Prize......And all nominations were in by mid-feburary. Six weeks into his term as President. Excuse me while I catch my breath........This may take a while...

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 10:19 am:

The dead line for nominations for Nobel Peace Prize is "FEB 1" and he took office Jan 20.
What did he do in 10 days. What a set up.
Who is on that board.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 10:44 am:

David H, We and our children and grandchildren haven't seen the half of it yet. thats how stupid this whole thing is. "The money came from his stash" Some of them don't have a clue whats going on, just give me the money.
What is happening to our America. David Soumis why are you backing this guy, can't you see the way he wants to take this country. Unemployment keeps going up, he says people are going back to work and that is an absolute lie. Who is this man, where did he come from, we don't know do we .

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 10:55 am:

David Soumis, Why does Obama go to other countries and apologize for the United States.
We have nothing to apologize for. We hand out money and help to how many countries, and he is apologizeing for us.??

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 11:35 am:

Who is on the board? The one's who got off the board from Club Gitmo's water boarding.

Glad to see you are on the road to recovery David S.You are on your way up hill along the path to improving your quality of life, a very narrow path at that. And further up the when healed it starts to get more and more so with alarms that will beep loud inside the head like as if you walked out of a drug store with out paying for a item. Yes, the brain has a built in mechanisms' like a GPS that let's you know you stepped out of line, and guides you back on your way. Only this one path has it. The one you are coming off of don't, it's like a corn maze without a end, just taking yourself back where you been. Don't walk alone, come join us. We don't have free kool-aid, it is out of Season. However for a donation of 100 dollars will get you apple cider, add another five for a doughnut. All proceeds go to a not profit organization of our choice.

By Tom (Tom) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 11:48 am:

Remember, Feb 1 was date nominations had to be in. The reviewing of candidates continued until yesterday. Using most current information, not the few weeks Obama was in office .
The pundits think the awarding of the prize to Obama is a political warning to the US. Do not revert to Bush's tactics.
Much dissent over this award. Nothing is out of the realm of politics anymore.
Another thought. A country cannot change to something like socialism in a matter of months. It would be a long term process.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 12:21 pm:

But Tom, 10 days in office, why would his name even come up for nomanation. Something strange here.

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 12:47 pm:

From what I've read, even the leaders of Hamas & Israel think it is "too soon", that he "hasn't done anything yet", at best it could be based on his intentions, now what precedent has there been, based on "intentions" to win the peace prize before? That was not the intent of the Prize, when it was started. From most of what I have read, this was meant as yet another slap in the face from the Peace Prize committee to the Bush Administration, after Carter's 2002 & Gore's wins. The Peace Prize committee is strictly out there to try influence U.S. & World politics, at least this year.

By William P. Aubin (Dasfliger) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 01:02 pm:

Mike Du LOng, are you related to Theresa Dimet?
I ask because she was married to my cousin Gene from Lake Linden.

By Antonio Rodolfo Dias (Rodolfo) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 01:07 pm:

I do not care if the president Barack Obama is a
Muslim or Christian, provided that it is a
government that will help poor countries take care
of the American people well and protect the
environment, and be submissive to God's will, Allah
or whatever you want, it is what matters

By William P. Aubin (Dasfliger) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 01:09 pm:

There will be no Nativity Scene in Washington this year!

The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a Nativity Scene
in the United State’s Capital this Christmas season.
This isn't for any religious reason.

They simply have not been able to find Three Wise Men in the
Nation's Capitol.

A search for a Virgin continues.

There was no problem, however,
finding enough ••••• to fill the stable.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 07:28 pm:

i will say I see no reason to award Obama the nobel peace prize. He has done nothing, at least outwardly, except to ease the US stance a bit and try to get at least talking going on, which is a step, but not enough to win the prize, in my opinion.

Even a reporter for
The Nation, which is a pretty loberal magazine, wonders about it ..

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 07:40 pm:

David H, It sounds like Soumis is starting to mello, I think he is coming around to our side, it's about time don't you think.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 08:16 pm:

like a fine wine ...

maybe its that pic of Ann Coulter floating there all the time, and she's free

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 09:33 pm:

No surprise to me The Nobel Peace Prize Committee (suicide bombed) itself with its continuing leftward tilt in awarding the prize to President Barack H Obama Along with Al Gore, Carter, now Obama, and soon Bill Clinton, all leftist sellouts. We all can see a pattern here, right common ground. Little old me and my buddy George Bush liberates 50 million Muslims in Iraq, my role model Reagan liberates hundreds of millions of Europeans and saves parts of Latin America. Did we get any awards? No none at all. Some of us who post here could of made the short list with a great chance to get it, with the way they give speeches in there post's, by writing, trashing there own country.That's the kind of stuff that wins a prize. We should of nominated a few of our favorite liberals off Pasty here. After all it's worth as much as whatever prizes they are putting in Cracker Jacks these days.

Many are starting to see a pattern, many of them are older people who vote. We on the Right, anyone of us, are here 24 / 7 with open arms to give a hug welcoming you to a GOP.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 9, 2009 - 10:46 pm:

how's this:

Warmonger Wins Peace Prize

By Paul Craig Roberts

October 09, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to become reality.

“War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.”

I would add, “Lie is Truth.”

The Nobel Committee has awarded the 2009 Peace Prize to President Obama, the person who started a new war in Pakistan, upped the war in Afghanistan, and continues to threaten Iran with attack unless Iran does what the US government demands and relinquishes its rights as a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.

The Nobel committee chairman, Thorbjoern Jagland said, “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.”

Obama, the committee gushed, has created “a new climate in international politics.”

Tell that to the 2 million displaced Pakistanis and the unknown numbers of dead ones that Obama has racked up in his few months in office. Tell that to the Afghans where civilian deaths continue to mount as Obama’s “war of necessity” drones on indeterminably.

No Bush policy has changed. Iraq is still occupied. The Guantanamo torture prison is still functioning. Rendition and assassinations are still occurring. Spying on Americans without warrants is still the order of the day. Civil liberties are continuing to be violated in the name of Oceania’s “war on terror.”

Apparently, the Nobel committee is suffering from the delusion that, being a minority, Obama is going to put a stop to Western hegemony over darker-skinned peoples.

The non-cynical can say that the Nobel committee is seizing on Obama’s rhetoric to lock him into the pursuit of peace instead of war. We can all hope that it works. But the more likely result is that the award has made “War is Peace” the reality.

Obama has done nothing to hold the criminal Bush regime to account, and the Obama administration has bribed and threatened the Palestinian Authority to go along with the US/Israeli plan to deep-six the UN’s Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes committed during Israel’s inhuman military attack on the defenseless civilian population in the Gaza Ghetto.

The US Ministry of Truth is delivering the Obama administration’s propaganda that Iran only notified the IAEA of its “secret” new nuclear facility because Iran discovered that US intelligence had discovered the “secret” facility. This propaganda is designed to undercut the fact of Iran’s compliance with the Safeguards Agreement and to continue the momentum for a military attack on Iran.

The Nobel committee has placed all its hopes on a bit of skin color.

“War is Peace” is now the position of the formerly antiwar organization, Code Pink. Code Pink has decided that women’s rights are worth a war in Afghanistan.

When justifications for war become almost endless--oil, hegemony, women’s rights, democracy, revenge for 9/11, denying bases to al Qaeda and protecting against terrorists--war becomes the path to peace.

The Nobel committee has bestowed the prestige of its Peace Prize on Newspeak and Doublethink.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Monday, October 12, 2009 - 06:35 pm:

It is a completely and utterly a joke that B.O. gets the Nobel peace prize....PEACE?...What kind of PEACE has he created?.... since when do you honor the award for something that someone "might" do?...Let's track BO's record:

1) Let's see...The situation and danger to our troops has become more escalated in Afghanistan...
....but B.O. hasn't even gave it thought as to what he should do about sending more troops let alone even talked to Gen. McChrystal about only twice in the last 6 months!

2) Hmmmm....The Taliban is making an extreme push in Pakistan right now with mass car bombings and campaigns to topple the Pakistani Government....
....but B.O. says we should concentrate more on AlQaeda than the Taliban. Well that's a nice thought but did one ever stop and think what the world would be like if the Taliban ever got ahold of one of Pakistan's nukes?

3)Ohhh.....North Korea is back at it firing short range missiles again....
....but B.O. hasn't given any response to that.

4) Ouch!....Iran is closer than they ever were to obtaining a nuclear bomb and had been firing long range test missiles as well! Mahoumad Ahmadinejad hates the USA more now than ever...
...but B.O. just said:
"We'll just get together with the International Community and sanction you! Now leave me alone...I got other things to do like make a money making bid for the 2016 Olympics ( another joke ) for my home boys and get my feeble health care reform ram-rodded through!"

Yea that sounds like real winning PEACE accomplishments!...Jeez!...

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 01:09 pm:

I don't fell guilty, I didn't vote for Obama because I didn't know who he was, but we sure are finding out.

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - 06:47 pm:

Eddie, that's pretty much exactly how I felt. I just looked at my husband and asked him how in the world that guy could get the nobel peace prize. It is a total joke!!!!

I didn't either, Zube, pretty much for the same reason.

By Theresa R. Brunk (Trb0013) on Thursday, October 15, 2009 - 04:26 pm:

This just in: Obama wins the Heisman Trophy after watching a college football game!

By Deb S. (Usedtobeayooper) on Thursday, October 15, 2009 - 07:19 pm:

Theresa, Thanks for making my night. I laughed so hard at that one. The sad thing is it wouldn't surprise me at all.

I heard that he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize 12 days after taking office. How can that possibly be? I guess anything's possible with this guy.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 09:38 am:

Theresa, that's the best one yet. You know that could happen after what did happen.Were living in a crazy world.
Great pictures today and every day

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 11:10 am:

Deb, that's what it's like when you're popular and have the star power to carry you through...

I really pray that B.O. finds middle ground and stops trying to "transform" our nation to what "he" thinks it should be and get away from the thought process that everything is all "wrong" with the United States...

It worked for Bill Clinton!...

When's the last time, if ever, you ever heard B.O. say something about what a "great" country that the United States is?....

By Tom (Tom) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 12:07 pm:

Who nominated B.O. for the Nobel? That would be interesting to know.
Sad that so many Americans voted for "change" but had no idea what the change would be. Astounding amount of federal debt is what they wanted? And sometime in the not too far future a hefty tax increase on everyone?

By Marianne Y (Marianne) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 12:48 pm:

On the Nobel Peace Prize: I don't know who nominated Obama. But, heard last night that the Chm of the Peace Prize Committee was one of the few behind Obama, in the beginning. He apparently had to twist more than a few arms to pass it.

As far as his trying to "transform" our nation, he apparently gave a rousing speech to supporters out in California yesterday, telling that that he's not tired yet, that once he gets health care passed, he's going on & on, including the infamous cap & trade, & all his other shenanigans. It's not enough what he's trying to do with Health Care, the public option. No clue just how on earth he thinks he's going to pay for any of it. I guess he doesn't care about keeping Dems in Congress in 2010. Either he doesn't care, or he hasn't thought that far ahead yet.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 08:29 pm:

It just said on TV our deficit is at 1.4 TRILLION. When you spend more than you take in, guess what, We are a bankrupt country. How can we be called the richest nation, And now this num skull wants to borrow another 13 BILLION to give to us seniors, he is nuts in the head. They said the last time it was this bad was 1945. Some of you will still blame it on to Bush.

By David Soumis (Davesou) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 08:38 pm:

you guys need to check this out

very interesting how the debt works. We're a wartime economy. Also note the red developed by the republicans. nuff said. And YES .. BO is staying in the red too.

bottom line..we're in a lot of crap

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 16, 2009 - 10:51 pm:

David S , that chart only shows through Feb .If it would show through this date Oct. it would be more than 120%. He is taking us to noware land.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Friday, October 23, 2009 - 10:17 am:

I guess everyone is sick of griping about Obama, I guess were not going to change him here, and he's not going to change on his own.

By Tom (Tom) on Friday, October 23, 2009 - 10:47 am:

We can still state observations-------if any.
Maybe everyone is waiting with bated breath this health bill. Quite the stir in the House of Reps trying to count up enough votes to move the legislation forward.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Saturday, October 24, 2009 - 11:00 am:

I agree Tom.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Saturday, October 24, 2009 - 03:47 pm:

Oh, they'll get their votes alright...The big difference between now and a few months ago is that they had that confusing 1100 page bill out there for public deciphering but now that there's been so much flak over it they've decided to go behind closed doors to make these bills up and then throw them upon you...

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k) on Monday, October 26, 2009 - 09:00 am:

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9)

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 - 07:48 pm:

Now this brilliant President of ours is going to Copenhagen next month to talk about greenhouse gases that he knows nothing about and then to Oslo to accept the nobel peace prize "FOR WHAT"
This guy spends more time outside of the United States than he does inside,As deep in debt as we are he just flies around the world for what. We thought Clinton flew out of the country alot, this guy is much worse. Chalk it up to the "TAXPAYER"

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, January 28, 2010 - 09:22 pm:

That was the worst State Of The Union speech I have ever heard. Did he even say what it was? It was I this & I that, something like 93 I's in first 5 min.

Is there anyone out there who can now see what many of us were painfully telling you what would happen is this man became our President? Not to say I told you so, but to thank you for seeing the light.

By FJL (Langoman) on Saturday, January 30, 2010 - 09:09 am:

A post after the election stated that "many of us
respect Pres. Obama for his lack of arrogance."

His State of The Union Address was arrogance to the
extreme......Those that don't think so had better
hit replay....FJL

By Heikki (Heikki) on Saturday, January 30, 2010 - 10:29 am:

Encouraging bipartisanship while dissing a branch of government and speaking down to opposition equal madness. We have a pathological narcissist to contend with for 3 more (long) years.


By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Saturday, January 30, 2010 - 04:24 pm:

BO our President didn't have anyone to grease the skids for him this time.Let's see how well the Messiah can handle a punch, compared to past President's???

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, July 15, 2010 - 09:25 am:

We are living through the pathetic death throes of socialism as a viable political philosophy. It is failing and imploding everywhere around the world where it has and is being tried.This series of wicked, unconstitutional experiments from the New Deal to the "Big F-ing deal,is about to collapse under its own weight.It's why you Obama voters are so unhappy.You wanted checks in the mail. You didn't want health insurance premiums to pay. You thought checks were coming! You thought free this was coming,you thought free that was coming, and then you thought happiness would follow. You wanted your student loans forgiven, not taken over by the government that will put you in jail if you don't pay up. You wanted free cars! You got in Toyota's and you purposely hit the gas pedal claiming you hit the brakes, trying to get money out of Toyota. You are the Obama voters, the American left trying to make the quick buck without having to work, thinking everything was going to be given to you. You didn't want Cash for Clunkers. You wanted free cars. You wanted free houses, not a discount on the mortgage you were tricked into. You wanted free houses. Barack Obama was elected due to his ability to tell Americans to go to •••• in such a way that a majority of you actually looked forward to the trip, but now reality has changed things. Will just one of you Obama voters write here saying you make a mistake. If I would of been wrong about all that i said & wrote about him on here, I would say sorry.

By a m hill (Lvcamnotes) on Thursday, July 15, 2010 - 06:01 pm:

david, i've never disagreed with you. during the
the 2008 election campaign, obama informed the nation exactly what he was up to. re-distribution
was foremost on his mind. that equals socialism,
marxism, communism, nazi-ism - whatever -- they're all failed models. his arrogance is unfaltering. look at
all the 'czars' appointed to important posts
in the massively growing federal government.
appointing czars is a trick to bypass congressional approval.

and one of the later disappointments is the
rash of racist decisions made by attorney general holder.
i guess it shouldn't be surprising because i
can't get out of my mind obama's racist comments
during professor gates' encounter with the
cambridge police.

By Eugene Zuverink (Zube) on Sunday, July 18, 2010 - 08:32 am:

Plain and simple David,many many are having buyers remorse!!

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Sunday, July 18, 2010 - 02:38 pm:

It is as many critics said it was from the beginning...He's an empty suit...

Everyone that follows this man loyally and believe in all that he says and does, don't realize it but it's like sitting on a bluff poker hand...
It looks like a winner, it has the potential to be a successful win by bluff but when you lay all the cards out and look at the contents of it, there isn't really anything there of any substance.

What will really bolster B.O.'s legacy as a worthwhile President would be to take a page from Bill Clinton's playbook...and that is to have the American people vote out all the fools and fleebs in the House and Senate and put Conservatives in charge.
Then if he was smart, he would move more to the center as Clinton did and he'd get a lot more done in a positive fashion, however, I think he's too stubborn to do that and he will be sunk after November just by chance if the Right happens to take back over the House and Senate.

The Democrats are doing things that the last administration attempted... band aid politics, except the Left is cheering and boasting about how well everything is starting to rebound.

My analogy of that is like handing someone a yummy looking cake with yummy looking frosting all over it and telling them: "you can have this yummy, mouth watering cake if you just come to my side"...
You buy into it, take your cake home and when you cut into it, you find out that it's a cow manure pie underneath...
I don't know...is that a weird way of explaining it?

By FJL (Langoman) on Monday, July 19, 2010 - 04:58 pm:

If it look's like a cow pie and smell's like one, it's...............???

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, August 2, 2010 - 01:10 pm:

Arizona's immigration law, why doesn't this ruling surprise me with a Clinton Appointed, leftist liberal judge? What ever happen to enforcing the laws, following the constitution, interpreting the law as written? Judges should base decisions on the rule of law, not on their partisan political beliefs and affiliations. Our country is being viciously attacked from within by a severely ruined legal system and because our judges, instead of interpreting the law, interject their own moralities and activist beliefs, good and bad, into legal decisions made. I still say a revolution is needed. Change will obviously never come about through supposed 'democratic' processes."

By Tom (Tom) on Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 02:24 pm:

Ok, David H, what kind of revolution do you wish?
It always puzzles me that some Congressmen/women
don't understand the word illegal. Especially when it precedes the word immigrant.
No one ever mentions that if immigration was controlled properly that those low paying jobs would have offered higher wages to get our young people, students, etc., to work. We would not have
to allow those illegal immigrants in to do those jobs.
Why aren't employers who employ illegals given fines? That is what is supposed to happen.

By a m hill (Lvcamnotes) on Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 06:38 pm:

ok, tom, there has been an awful lot of discussion
on immigration lately, especially since the
administration has cemented its position. near as
i can figure, the party that grants amnesty to
illegal immigrants will be richly rewarded in
5 years with political votes. that's why no-one
will stand up to illegal immigration -- no matter
what it costs citizens. the costs can be considerable: health care, war with drug cartels,
an increasing stream of immigrants, an increasing
drain on the us's resources such as water (which
many states cannot provide) and housing and the
list is endless.

as throughout our history, our choice is to
be humane (invite all of mexico to the us)
or to look out for our own. mexico cannot
survive in its current political situation.
glad all of you
will be making your choice and not me.

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Tuesday, August 10, 2010 - 12:25 pm:

It is said that both political parties are interested in granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. I'm more inclined to believe that Republicans are in it for the "good for business" aspect and Democrats for controlling voter base.

It has been talked about today on the radio that more than 60,000 babies were born in Texas alone last year by illegal immigrants.

Most of you not living near or around border states don't see the initial impact and drain that it has on the State's economy. You will however, feel the overall strain on the nation's economy.
People are getting sick and tired of the drug trafficking and the cartel that exploits and smuggles their very own people.
Illegal Immigrants locked up in the County jail here in Houston account for about 40% of the locked up jail population.

Enough is enough!

By Tom (Tom) on Thursday, August 12, 2010 - 11:13 am:

Just reread the US Constitution. No mention about immigration at all. So Congress has the responsibility to establish those laws. I understand that a bill ls currently moving through Congress but I don't know the particulars. Since there are some serious re-elections coming up I am guessing that it won't be much of a bill.
What a bunch of sad sacks we have in Congress.

By FJL (Langoman) on Monday, August 16, 2010 - 09:08 am:

Subject: Quote for the day.
Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way that you can understand. This quote came from the Czech Republic.
"The danger to America is not Barach Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgement to a depraved doctorate willing to have such a man for their President. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not bind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their Prince.".........
Some one over there has it figured out...FJL

By FJL (Langoman) on Monday, August 16, 2010 - 09:23 am:

The last part to the previous quote..
"The Rebublic can survive a Barack Obama, who is after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President."......

By Eddie Allen (Glocktologist21) on Monday, August 16, 2010 - 11:10 am:

That is correct...At some point the "man" will be long gone but the mind set of the people will remain. That is the biggest danger to a collapse of the Country. When people get fed up with the ways and the foolishness of our politicians then you will begin to see progress. Returning to the basics to what once made this Country great will go a lot further than "transforming" so to speak.

Help change the attitudes and perspective of the American people and then you really and truly have HOPE AND CHANGE!

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Tuesday, August 24, 2010 - 12:23 pm:

"People unfit for freedom -- who cannot do much with it - are hungry for power. The desire for freedom is an attribute of a 'have' type of self. It says: leave me alone and I shall grow, learn, and realize my capacities. The desire for power is basically an attribute of a 'have not' type of self." American writer and philosopher Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

"The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience." --French Algerian author Albert Camus (1913-1960)

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Monday, November 1, 2010 - 07:06 pm:

One 82-year-old lady loves Obama and she may have a very good point. She says that Obama is amazing, and is rebuilding the American dream! She gives us an entirely new slant on the "amazing" job Obama is doing, and she says that she will... thank God for the President. Keep reading for her additional comments and an explanation.

When discussing Obama, she says:

1. Obama destroyed the Clinton Political Machine, driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's presidential aspirations - something no Republican was ever able to do.

2. Obama killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - no more Kennedys trolling Washington looking for booze and women wanting rides home.

3. Obama is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes! Dennis Moore had never lost a race. Evan Bayh had never lost a race. Byron Dorgan had never lost a race. Harry Reid - soon to be GONE! These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed. By the end of 2010, dozens more will be gone. Just think, in December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In the last two election cycles, they had picked up 14 Senate seats and 52 House seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party. However, in just one year, Obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the House - if not the Senate - back to the Republicans.

4. Obama has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Sadly, every generation seems to need to re-learn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. Obama is bringing home the lesson very well:

Liberals tax, borrow and spend.

Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America .

Liberals want to take over the economy.

Liberals think they know what is best for everyone.

Liberals are not happy until they are running YOUR life.

5. Obama has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one year, he has rejuvenated the Conservative Movement and brought out to the streets millions of freedom loving Americans. Name one other time when you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America !

6. Obama, with his "amazing leadership," has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other industries have failed, faded, or moved off-shore.

7. In all honesty, one year ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not afraid of the economy, but afraid of the direction our country was going. I thought, Americans have forgotten what this country is all about. My neighbors and friends, even strangers, have proved to me that my lack of confidence in the greatness and wisdom of the American people has been flat wrong.

8. When the American people wake up, no smooth talking teleprompter reader can fool them! Barack Obama has served to wake up these great Americans!

Again, I want to say: "Thank you, Barack Obama!" After all, this is exactly the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!!

November 2nd is HUGE!!!!

By David Hiltunen (Davidcorrytontn) on Thursday, April 14, 2011 - 08:53 am:

Someone tell me that everything I ever said, posted here about our President, & warned you about, how wrong I was... Rush Is Right.. How many of you are new listeners to his show?

President Barack Obama’s plan to cut the federal deficit is nothing more than a “sales pitch” for the expansion of government and a rewrite of history to prove America’s greatness stems from the redistribution of wealth, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh charged.

The conservative broadcaster was commenting on Obama’s afternoon speech at George Washington University that laid out his plans for cutting the deficit.

Obama called for lowering deficits by $4 trillion over the next 12 years through reductions in the growth of Medicare spending, defense cuts, and changes in the tax system to eliminate loopholes.

“So basically what we’re getting from the regime is a sales pitch and history revision,” Limbaugh said. “We are hearing that America’s greatness only began with the redistribution of wealth; Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid … and a sales pitch to can this government get even bigger because he is now defining economic prosperity as more and more government involvement in everybody’s lives.”

He added that “if we don’t succeed in stopping this, and the next real opportunity to stop it obviously is the 2012 election, if we don’t succeed the country is going to unravel.”

Limbaugh broadcast the president’s address live during his program and interjected commentary as Obama spoke. At various points, Limbaugh said, “he doesn’t believe this,” “a sales job for an expansion of government,” “I can’t take much more of this.”

Limbaugh particularly took issue with Obama’s remarks that the tax cuts and spending increases enacted under President George W. Bush bore much of the blame for the deficit problem.

“He said this deficit, our economic circumstance, is all because of George W. Bush, George Bush started two wars and cut taxes and that’s why we are where we are today and that’s why we are paying the price,” he said. “He referred to the Bush tax cuts as trillions of dollars of unpaid for tax cuts. Only a Stalinist type central planner could look at tax revenue that way.”

Limbaugh said he could not imagine how letting people keep more of their money could be looked at as a net cost to government.
Limbaugh also said the recent budget deal negotiated between Obama and the GOP has energized the president.

“I can tell you by the tone of this speech he does not think he got snookered on this budget deal,” Limbaugh said. “He is confident as he can be, he is almost arrogantly condescendingly confident here.

"He knows he’s got the Republicans wrapped around his little finger. He knows that the Republicans in Washington are not on the same page as their voters and frankly that has always been one of my fears that the Republican leadership is stuck back in the year 2000 while our voters, you, me, the tea party, the rest of the public is in the now. “

Read more on Newsmax.com: Rush: Obama Speech 'Sales Pitch' for Govt Expansion
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Powered by:  
Join Today!
Each day the Pasty Cam has 2 areas to post messages: 
  • Cam Notes - comments related to today's picture and discussion
  • What'sUP - other topics, conversation and announcements
  • *** Please use the appropriate forum ***
    Here's a list of messages posted in the past 24 hours
    See our guest photo gallery for more great views from the U.P.

    Add a Message

    A user/password combination is now required to post messages to Cam Notes. Registration is free. Click here to register or maintain your I.D.

    Home | Pasty Cam | Contest | Order Now | Bridge Cam | Past-E-Mail | GP Hall of Fame | Making Pasties | Questions