The American Spectator

Appleby| 10.31.08 @ 6:19AM

Always blame the proletariat -- the apparatchiks are *just following orders* and are never to blame for anything, and the Nomenklatura are too busy stuffing money down their pants and inside their bras to know what to do about anything.

But the proles have the duty to return the ruling classes to their seats around the endless cash pot and to shut up and do as we are told.

We who live in Kanukistan (albeit we are Americans) can show you where that leads, if you want to step across the border and ask us. Do not let them turn the USA into a pale copy of us.

Jacky| 10.31.08 @ 7:11AM

Remember to Vote!

Send message and work hard to help McCain/Palin. See, we cannot be over confident in this because the media will try to say two things, so people will stay home and not vote by over confident or defeated.

1) That the race is closer and that McCain can win.

2) That Obama is wining big time and he will make is big win speech at the Chicago Park Nov. 4
People can be sad and retreat by this news!

Remember is not over & is over! Voting for McCain/Palin in NOV 4.

God is blessing America!

Roy Carlson| 10.31.08 @ 8:29AM

McCain campaign quote for today:
"I will not permit a defeatist at titude to raise its ugly head in this command. We are going to win this son of a bitch."
Command Sergeant Major Neil Ciotola
spoken at the start of the Surge in Iraq, July 3, 2007
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/07/command-sergean.html

Thomas| 10.31.08 @ 9:15AM

Mr. Carlson quotes Command Sergeant Major Neil Ciotola as saying, at the start of the "Surge" in Iraq: "I will not permit a defeatist attitude to raise its ugly head in this command. We are going to win this son of a bitch."

I am truly surprised by that statement. Apparently, I was wrong in thinking that the government-monopolized, union-run educational system in this country is so incredibly effective that it graduates virtually no one whose self-esteem, courage and strength of conviction remains intact!

Thank you, Sergeant Major, for your unswerving devotion to our country and thank you, Mr. Carlson, for calling attention to this admirable American soldier.

Annette| 10.31.08 @ 9:21AM

Excellent article. I think that the mainstream media, the media elites, whatever we decide to call them, are the big loosers...they are the fatal cancer in this country!! What a mess they have made of all of this...and they continue to dig themselves in. I believe that the American people will speak about many things on Tuesday with their vote...and it will be a resounding win for John McCain AND Sarah Palin...and a resounding rejection of the Media elites on both sides!!! They american people are too smart for all of this!!

Michael Roush| 10.31.08 @ 9:40AM

Prominent Republicans have denounced Sarah Palin. Why? The most obvious answer is the one I have yet to see in TAS - they were mugged by reality. The GOP has been hijacked by its most extreme right wing members who have governed through their puppet, W., for the past eight years. Things haven't turned out too well -- a foreign policy in shambles, an economy ruined. Maybe these dissidents are simply trying to reclaim the GOP for moderates, if any of these people still exist. And maybe they see in Sarah Palin not only as an unqualified VP candidate, but also as another puppet in the mold of W. Keep an eye on the meeting that is supposed to take place in Virginia a day or two after the election.

Rita| 10.31.08 @ 9:42AM

Quite possibly the dumbest thing every written. Sarah Palin is so stupid, she couldn't spell DOG if you spotter her the D and the G.

Rita| 10.31.08 @ 9:44AM

Amanda said: "I think that the mainstream media, the media elites, whatever we decide to call them, are the big loosers..."

Clearly, she's a product of the "No Child Left Behind" educational system. It's "loser," moron.

Ghasltyone| 10.31.08 @ 10:06AM

*reads through Obama Rules comments*

*face palm*

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 10:15AM

Obama Rules said:"The dependancy on foreign oil can be traced directly to B-actor and C-president Ronnie Reagan.

He is the dimwit who in 1985 refused to raise the miles per gallon standard for American cars; in fact, he LOWERED it from 27.5 mpg to 26 mpg.

Up until that point, under Nixon, Ford, and Carter, the mpg standard had risen gradually from around 11 mpg to 27.5.

Had Reagan kept up with the miles per gallon increases, by the year 2000, we would have zero need for foreign oil. Today, more than half of our oil is imported."

Hey, where can I read up on all these mpg stats you just posted? Are these straight from Al Gore's Myspace page perhaps?

Please post a link to these statistics.

marymcl| 10.31.08 @ 10:23AM

@ OBAMA RULES "The liberal Democrats of America will continue to fight for the true meaning of those words until the cancer that is the fascist conservative Republican is destroyed. "

So the plan is to "destroy" all those whose prejudices are different from yours? Sounds like the essence of fascism to me. Thanks for the warning, Einstein.

And let's hear it for Rita the Spelling Queen. Too bad she can't think too. Some children just had to be left behind, huh?

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 10:34AM

Obviously Obama Rules needs to go read up on the actual "definition" of Fascism, since he seems to have absolutely no clue what the word means.

He must be hitting Rosie O'Donnells blog spot pretty hard lately.

Greg C| 10.31.08 @ 10:43AM

Nothing is over until we decide it is. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!!

Animal House
John Belushi

Bill Sr.| 10.31.08 @ 10:44AM

The current and continuing Hate Bush political campaign being run in the name of Barack Obama is at it again.

So what was it this time? The rant was that Iraq and its new democratic government has acquired a large financial surplus due to its sale of oil. The peaceful candidate of unity and compassion was practically screaming his outrage indicating that we as American with our high gasoline prices have at great financial expense been turning former Saddam Hussein’s bloody dictatorship into a healthy democracy while we are struggling with our own economy.

And that is true. However his perspective is not one we should share nor desire from any candidate wanting to be our next president.

Obama (who still claims to be a Christian) continues holding the position on the war on terrorism, particularly in Iraq against the “Butcher of Baghdad”, as unnecessary. Our nearly complete and obviously successful victory there apparently does not impress or please him. So which is it? Is he unhappy with our victory or the fact that women can now vote, little girls can now go to school, persecution of Christians is not as ramped, the government can now rebuild a peaceful economy instead of more palaces for their dictator, and the terrorist who tried to take over the country following the defeat of Saddam Hussein have been driven out?

As an American citizen you are free to decide for yourself whether the war was justified or not. Personally, given the fact the U.N. (as it typically is) was getting nowhere trying to get Saddam to conform to its sanctions imposed after the Gulf War combined with the intelligence coming out of the Middle East regarding his arms buildup and his history of bloody rule, I agreed with the vast majority of our public officials in both parties that we could no longer stand by while the people were being oppressed, raped, and slaughtered by this despot and his sons.

Moreover, as a Christian, aside from the inevitable loss of life in any war, I and most Americans can take heart in the fact that life for the Iraqi people under their new democratic government provides great “hope and change” for them (as Obama believes the world needs). So he wants to “lead the world” to a better tomorrow, well the job is done for him in Iraq. Our brave soldiers did it for him even though he refused to support their mission and reluctantly granted them the equipment to do the job. (And he wants to be their commander-in-chief?)

In summary, Americans should be proud that we were able to “rescue” the people of Iraq from years of social enslavement and civil disunity established by Saddam Hussein and his ruthless regime. We have sent a message to the world that terrorism and its supporters and allies will not be permitted to overtake civilized society one country at a time. Also that fear and intimidation by blood thirsty religious zealots will be met with unrelenting retaliation and the full support of freedom loving nations who cherish “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and value freedom by defend them for all men against those who would selectively limit or deny them based on race, religion, culture, political preference, or geographic location.

This should be the perspective of Americans, especially Christians, who stand behind banners of “hope and change”, and compassion. All who wish for a “united world” for peace need to thank god for the United States of America first.

Stop and think for a moment if you have been around for fifty years or so or have actually read a factual history of the twentieth century. Without the strength and courage we have graciously and willingly been able to afford the world in time of its need these last one hundred years, there possibly would be no democracy or free societies here or in Europe or in Asia or any place on earth.

We Americans have defeated or repelled numerous dictators and despots who wished to impose their personal will upon the people and/or spread their tyranny to other regions of the world and being a “Judeo-Christian nation” we helped rebuild many of the enemy’s infrastructures for them. We’ve never used force without fair warning as has been the strategy of those who attack us. There is one other nation in the world today, a democracy in fact, which is free and lives by the same principles as us and uses the similar tactics to defend her borders. They too are constantly threatened by hostile regimes lead by dictators who are intent on destroying their faith and culture. Yes, is it not ironic that with faith in God and a steadfast desire to live in freedom and peace with the world little Israel is also a target for terrorism?

If you don’t agree, I would not question your political judgment but I would suggest that you examine your conscience and ask yourself if the world would be better off today had it not been for Americans over the past century giving their lives around the world to maintain individual freedom, justice for the oppressed, and economic opportunity for victims of fallen dictatorships.

God Bless America
And the Brave Soldiers
Who Stand by Her

Loshooligan| 10.31.08 @ 10:45AM

I love this guy Obama Rules. Anyone who can spew this much BS with a straight face has got to be a leftist. Every post he does is about conservatives being fascist. Didn't we already solve your problem in a previous comment section? See Obama Rules thinks that anyone that is counter to his points of view are automatically a fascist. The real problem is that he can not really identify a fascist because he is one. Preach tolerance [for his point of view] practice hate is his motto. When you really start to hit him with fact, he will quickly reach his itellectual capacity. He runs out of platitudes, and will resort to calling you names. Obama Drools is nothing more than a comment section bully. An E-thug with no balls.

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 11:06AM

Obama Rules stated: "According to this analysis, and I quote, "Republican-blocked standards would have reduced oil imports 1.5 million barrels a day, saved consumers billions."

See, this is where you get real information, not available on propaganda news outlets like Fox News.

http://globalwarming.house.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases_2008?id=0028 "

WTF dude. I thought we were talking about Reagan and how he lowered the MPG standards? [as YOU stated] Then you post another link talking about how much oil we "could" have saved if Republicans didn't block legislation in 94'?

How did we go from 1985' to 1994'? Again....from your 1st link, how was that Reagan that lowered the fuel standards? Please explain.

Rita| 10.31.08 @ 11:16AM

marymcl | 10.31.08 @ 9:23AM
"So the plan is to "destroy" all those whose prejudices are different from yours? Sounds like the essence of fascism to me. Thanks for the warning, Einstein. "

Isn't this exactly what the (faux) Christian extremist are doing right now? These right-wing, wouldn't-know-Christ-if-he-walked-right-up-to-them, value-less, moral-less idiots are trying to take this country straight into the dark ages and they are using fear and lies to do it.

Here's a clue - "Republican" and "Christian" are mutually exclusive terms.

"And let's hear it for Rita the Spelling Queen. Too bad she can't think too. Some children just had to be left behind, huh?"

And why exactly can't I "think," Mary? Is that really your best argument? You're too stupid to come up with a coherent sentence so you just hurl something idiotic out there. Do you work for John McCain's campaign?

wordwolf| 10.31.08 @ 11:18AM

Obama Rules (rules? There are no rules, at least that apply to Democrats) thinks he's very clever when he writes:

"Greg C:

"So, the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor now? When did this happen...?

"Another conservative who has no clue about history, or anything else for that matter. "

Thereby only dating himself as having been born after 1978 and the release of "National Lampoon's Animal House." Not to mention exemplifying the tendency of radicals and fools of all sorts to believe that the world came into being on their birthday, and that the past teaches nothing.

Come to think of it, that explains not only the Obamamania phenomenon, but quite a bit about Obama himself...

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 11:20AM

Rita,

The joke's on you. You're the only one in this comment section that got self-owned.

Your original post = Epic Fail.

Rita| 10.31.08 @ 11:23AM

Just keep telling yourself that, Ghastly. You're yet to string five words together that make sense.

Oh, and by the way - "Epic Fail?" Really? Are you 12?

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 11:23AM

Obama Rules,

Take your time coming up with a response regarding [Reagan's] lowering of the MPG standards, I'll be anxiously awaiting here for your next comical response...I have all day.

marymcl| 10.31.08 @ 11:45AM

Rita! I had no idea you were a Champion of the True Christ as well! Yikes!

And no, I don't work for the McCain campaign. Being religious nuts and all, they looked askance at my cloven hooves and politely declined my help. But I'm voting for them anyway. Go figure.

Ghastlyone| 10.31.08 @ 11:56AM

Obviously [like a typical leftist] when you read a comment or an article that you disagree with [between the foaming at the mouth and violent convulsions] only certain words here and there jump out at you. Your reading comprehension skills aren't the best are they?

So now we have gone from 1985 with Reagan lowering the MPG standards [as you stated], to 1994 with how much we "could" have saved in oil, back to SS numbers and illegal mexicans working for slave wages? Wow.

david| 10.31.08 @ 12:20PM

The excited voters flock to Obama and he is rediculed with mocking crys of "Messiah." But when ecstatic voters flock to Palin calling her the blessed hope of party why isn't she scorned as a false Messiah.

Fawnridge| 10.31.08 @ 1:23PM

"Obama Rules writes "The dependancy on foreign oil can be traced directly to B-actor and C-president Ronnie Reagan".

How stunning that someone could actually make that untrue statement, in public, and reveal their complete ignorance by doing so, without so much as a trace of embaressment. Only a government-run, union controlled education system could produce that level of intellectual mediocrity.

For your information, Obama Rules, those of us who were unable to buy gasoline during the Arab oil embargo of the early 1970's recognize the pathetic ignorance underlying your juvenile remark. Actually, tens of millions of us, upon reading your statement, would instantly recognize you for the fool you truely are, for America was, in fact, utterly dependent upon the importation of foreign oil long before before Reagan was ever elected President. The Arabs themselves proved that quite conclusively to all those who recall the "out of gas" signs which blanketed the service stations of America during that frightening time, and who also recall that the Democratic Party controlled Congress both before and after that event.

james23| 10.31.08 @ 1:36PM

An excellent piece. There are two things that unite PA conservatives like nothing else: supporting Sarah; and bashing the cowardly elites who have made it their mission to destroy her. The "cancer/vulgar" gang in Washington are on the way out; while Sarah has a bright future.

The Real Obama Rules| 10.31.08 @ 2:05PM

Fawnridge, am I supposed to take your post seriously? Where is your counter-argument? Where is your defense against the facts that I have presented?

You wrote: " . . . America was, in fact, utterly dependent upon the importation of foreign oil long before before Reagan was ever elected President. "

I never claimed that America wasn't dependent on foreign oil before Reagan was elected President.

I wrote that " . . . up until that point, under Nixon, Ford, and Carter, the mpg standard had risen gradually from around 11 mpg to 27.5. Had Reagan kept up with the miles per gallon increases, BY THE YEAR 2000, WE WOULD HAVE HAD ZERO NEED FOR FOREIGN OIL. Today, more than half of our oil is imported."

However, as this link proves . . .

http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_report_detail.aspx?id=38584

. . . Reagan LOWERED the mpg standard from 27.5 mpg to 26 mpg.

Read for yourself:

"There were frequent attempts to raise the standards further, but each was stymied. In the mid-1980s, the Reagan administration actually lowered standards to 26 mpg for cars and 20 mpg for light trucks, and a 1990 effort to raise standards by 40 percent by 2000 was defeated by a Senate filibuster. Congress prevented the Clinton administration from raising light-truck standards by passing a rider in 1995 that effectively took away its authority to do so. With the rise of sport utility vehicles, fleet- wide-average fuel efficiency dropped through the 1990s. The Bush administration raised efficiency to 27.5 for cars and 22.2 for light trucks."

Additionally, in 1994, and I quote, "Republican-blocked standards would have reduced oil imports 1.5 million barrels a day, saved consumers billions."

As evidenced by this link:

http://globalwarming.house.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases_2008?id=0028

"The Select Committee staff report details the oil, consumer and national expenditure savings America would currently be enjoying had Republicans passed a 35 mile per gallon standard as the Democrats did in 2007. The report examines the years 1994, when the Clinton administration began to formulate a new fuel economy proposal, only to be blocked by a new Republican-led Congress from advancing the proposal; and 2001, when the Republican Congress first allowed a vote on a fuel economy proposal, authored by Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee."

I've backed up everything I've said with factual information, including links and research.

You have no links or factual statements to back up yours; instead, as a typical Republican, you attack the person, not the message, by calling me "the fool you truely [sic] are," one of "intellectual mediocrity."

What's next? In lieu of factual counter-arguments, will you proceed to call me anti-American perhaps? A socialist? A commie? All of the above?

Please, save me from a pitiful response.

Bud| 10.31.08 @ 2:09PM

Bill Sr - outstanding commentary, sir!

You write: "Stop and think for a moment if you have been around for fifty years or so or have actually read a factual history of the twentieth century. Without the strength and courage we have graciously and willingly been able to afford the world in time of its need these last one hundred years, there possibly would be no democracy or free societies here or in Europe or in Asia or any place on earth. "

This is precisely what get in the craw of the leftist trolls who've chosen to infest this web site. The U.S.A. and the state of Israel have been the primary bulwarks against those who yearn for a Utopian socialist workers' paradise.

Sagi| 10.31.08 @ 2:30PM

Rita | 10.31.08 @ 8:42AM
Quite possibly the dumbest thing every written. Sarah Palin is so stupid, she couldn't spell DOG if you spotter her the D and the G.

Rita | 10.31.08 @ 8:44AM
Amanda said: "I think that the mainstream media, the media elites, whatever we decide to call them, are the big loosers..."

Clearly, she's a product of the "No Child Left Behind" educational system. It's "loser," moron.

Rita~
It's spotteD, not spotteR, moron. Pathetic when you don't have an arguement and resort to being the spell check police on a message board.

Lisa P.| 10.31.08 @ 2:35PM

Sarah Palin, Governor of the great state of Alaska, is more qualified to be PRESIDENT, let alone VICE President, than Baroque Insane Oblahma, community "organizer", and the MSM knows it and thus has been trying, without success, to destroy her since her introduction on August 29th. McCain/Palin will win on November 4th, and there WILL be riots--gird your loins.

truthie| 10.31.08 @ 2:55PM

Oh, geeeeez. Not this again. Don't you people have lives? This nasty back and forth solves nothing. And please don't use foul language, AmSpecBlog deserves better. Go outside and look at the beautiful day, say or do something kind for someone else. Take a moment to thank God or the 'universe' for your extremely good fortune being an American. God bless all of you, even you liberals, and God bless America.

Dirty Dave| 10.31.08 @ 4:25PM

If Reagan made on error on the fuel standards, it is keeping them in the first place. It's none of the government's business what mileage a car I drive gets. That is a decision for me and the rest of the market to make. Americans like big cars. So what?

Any problem we are having with oil is not an mpg issue. It is an issue of a government that won't let legitimate businesses drill for new oil. If the government would stand down and let the drilling take place as dictated by a free and open market, we would have never had this discussion. We would have all of the oil we need and want produced here.

megapotamus| 10.31.08 @ 4:28PM

There is no good reason for there to be federal CAFE standards at all. Reagan reduced them? Good. If we were pumping our own oil instead of crying about the supposed plight of the albatross we would have no need for oil from outside North America. The Leftwing vermin who come here spouting nonesense and insult in equal measure are to be ignored and reviled. If their St Barack does manage to lie, cheat and steal himself the Presidency there will be no disguising the disaster that follows. To hell with each and every anti-American puke out there. You know who you are. Try to vote just once, will you? Just for this election?

Caroline| 10.31.08 @ 6:46PM

Sarah Palin is the MAIN reason I am voting for McCain this Tuesday. I would walk over broken glass to vote for that woman.

tiredofBHO| 10.31.08 @ 6:56PM

Obama Rules,
While I agree with Ruthie, megapotamus and Dirty Dave win the day. God put oil, gas, coal, and uranium in the ground because he loves us. We should be polite and accept his gift. He certainly didn't want us to uglify the earth with windfarms.

Rita, I think there might be a mispelled word in there somewhere to let you feel superior. Congratulations.

Back to the point at hand, the crybabys whining about Palin are not disgusted, they are scared, and rightly so. She is an affront to the status quo. I would turn this country over to her in a moment. Anyone that can argue lawyers are best is a poor student of history.

Catherine| 10.31.08 @ 7:08PM

Wish we had an ignore button... sick of Obama Drools.

straightrazor paulie| 10.31.08 @ 7:40PM

Governor Palin scares the crap out of the left - an attractive woman who took on the established network and won. Senator McCain scares the crap out of the rest of the world - if anyone out there was holding hostages right now, they'd be back on American soil fast enough to keep the massive retaliation from falling.
Let's see, a VP who is distrustful of government, and a Commander in Chief who the rest of the world is unwilling to screw with.... Sounds like a dream team to me.
Don't forget: say what you want about George W, but the war on terrorism is still an away game. 7 years later, and it's still an away game. Sounds like protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States to me.

jonnyb| 10.31.08 @ 10:13PM

It so refreshing to read an article that is not tainted with media biase. I am sick and tired of having "The Messiah" (quote by Louis Farrakhan) rammed down my throat and we conservatives are to tolerate this but once one of us even dares to question the BO, or even his associates or how he plans to run this country into the ground we are attacked. So much for teaching tolerance, you liberals need to practice what your trying to teach but that will never happen.

Bo has a history of sharing his ideas to change and rewording the Constitution of the United Staes to his liberal ideas. So much for "We the people"......His version "The Government Will Provide All Your Needs.....

I notice now that BO is now trying to win by a landslide according to some news articles and that some reporters (John King) say that the race is all over for McCain but I think it way to early to count your chickens before they hatch.

I want a President and VP who believe in this country and the American people. A leader who aspire like me to better ourselves. No leader is perfect and McCain may have its faults but that doesn't mean we hand over our freedoms to someone, likeBO, who is always negative about the american people or down on this great country. Just look at all the quotes and articles that surround Obama. If he had his way he would take this country and put us out of misery as you would a dying animal.

You may call me what you want or try and distort what I say. I voted for MCain/Palin already and darn proud of it. So much for all early voters being democrats. It's also interesting to note early California voting is neck in neck between republicans & democrats. Isn't this supposed to be a given democratic state?

Again, I like to thank you for all you who are supporting McCain/Palin. Its refreshing to know that there are far many out there that love and cherish this country as I do.

God Bless the Great Nation!!!!!

Jackie Aprile| 10.31.08 @ 11:24PM

great column and well said. If this election has proven something is that Moderate Republicanism is an absolute failure. Maybe those three idiots can go form a party with the likes of Jim Leach, Christine Whitman, that jerk Hagel, and that idiot from Rhode Island. Good riddance creeps

Tim R| 10.31.08 @ 11:54PM

Hey, Obama Rules. It's great that you think so highly of yourself that you are oblivious to the indisputable fact that you may be the biggest moron in the comment section. By the way, if you can put aside any pretensions of modesty, would you consider yourself or B. Hussein Obama the real "Messiah?" Just wondering.

Tim R| 11.1.08 @ 12:17AM

I believe it was William F. Buckley, Jr., possessed of infinite wisdom, who once proclaimed his wish to be governed by the first 200 names in the Boston telephone directory rarther than by the entire faculty of Harvard. In essence, this is the main point of the column. Ordinary, hardworking Americans understand that Gov. Palin, grounded in reality and having succeeded on her own terms, represents the true values and aspirations of the people. Those who live in the rarefied bubble of the Washington and New York cocktail circuit have disdain for the little people who work hard and achieve success without help from powerful connections. Palin challenged a corrupt establishment within her own party, and beat them senseless.

Palin's the person I trust to do what is best for the country. I have little use for the political snobs of any persuasion. Let David Brooks continue his charade of being a conservative. After all, his column runs in the New York Times, and only leftist elitists read the drivel in that highly overrated publication.

To be sure, the political climate is not terribly inviting for Republicans this year, but at least McCain and Palin represent a break from the past and appreciate the enduring principles of how to forge a strong economy and keep America safe from its enemies. It's time for a reality check if anyone thinks Obama will be anything other than a weak leader and a social engineer tinkering with economic schemes that will surely put most of us in a deep financial funk for years to come.

Contrary to the noxious attitude of the sleazebag Rev. Wright, I say not only God Bless America but God save us from massive stupidity.

Catherine| 11.1.08 @ 1:28AM

Newt was on FOX and said that one day this week Sarah Palin and Joe Biden were in small towns in Ohio.

Sarah pulled 20,000.

Joe pulled 800.

Abortionismurder| 11.1.08 @ 6:50AM

Rita | 10.31.08 @ 8:42AM
Quite possibly the dumbest thing every written. Sarah Palin is so stupid, she couldn't spell DOG if you spotter her the D and the G.

At least she knows when human life begins.

Donald Drapier| 11.1.08 @ 7:32AM

In 2002, George Will wrote a column praising Jennifer Granholm shortly after her election to Govenor of Michigan and lamented the Constitutional prohibition against naturalized citizens becoming President. Now he is critical of Sarah Palin. With that resume, he should be able to find a gig at the Huffington Post after the Washington Post folds.

Sigh| 11.1.08 @ 7:47AM

I think it's become "our side" vs. "their side". Political discourse has degenerated to a Disney movie where the opposing team has to be scripted as mean bullies so that it's alright to hate them. The compliment, of course, is that "our side" is always good, even perfect. This idea is so deeply ingrained that otherwise intelligent Republicans endure horrific, mind-numbing logic contortions to convince themselves Sarah Palin is a reasonable candidate. They do this to avoid the cognitive dissonance of betraying their team, when it can be avoided so much more simply by admitting their side isn't infallible.

Tim| 11.1.08 @ 12:38PM

I will say this:

McCain will owe his stunning victory to five key factors:

1. His sacrifice to Country and the love and thanks from Millions of Americans that will come home to roost on Nov 4.

2. Millions of Hillary Clinton Supporters

3. Joe the Plumber

4. Sarah Palin's average American face that rings Hard Work, Patriotism, Mom and Apple Pie

5. Dick Morris and his great help at getting Rev Wright back on the air in six States this week--end
reminding people on just how radical Obama's closest friends are and were.

tiredofBHO| 11.1.08 @ 1:39PM

Sigh | 11.1.08 @ 6:47AM::
Those are some pretty big words you are using there. That must mean you are one of them there intellectuals. Obviously not one of the first 200 names in the Boston phone book. Cogratulations.
I think you and people like you are who most of us are talking about.
Well you can keep your Harvard credentials by pulling the lever for the Savior.
Join Rita in correcting my spelling.

geokstr| 11.1.08 @ 2:37PM

Amazing, isn't it?

The One says "Get in their face", and the lefty moonbats are all over conservative sites. Just in case "Obama Rules" and the other loons don't know it, they ban anybody to the right of Ted The Swim Champ Kennedy on Kos, HuffPo, and other leftist sites, apparently because they are afraid of having their inhabitants exposed to other thoughts.

By the way, Obama Rules, is this the only site you've been assigned to pollute by Mr. Soros? And does he pay you by the little droppings you leave, or do you give him a group rate discount?

Harry| 11.1.08 @ 3:43PM

Long ago I had something resembling respect for George Will...for all of the talk by both sides about elitism, they have become those they criticized. G. Will is a pompous, elitist, fool who unabashedly thinks that he is smarter than the rest of us.

Come on! If he was really a conservative, why is he bashing the McCain/Palin ticket? Maybe he's worried about his spot around the table with the rest of the boneheads that chat it up with George SoundsLikeAnIdiot!

Obama Rules...get a job and stay away from the bong, dude!

Catherine| 11.1.08 @ 4:02PM

Wonder what Mr. R.S. McCain will say or do in the event of a McCain victory?

How about Noonan, Parker, Will, and the other elite bubbleheads? Fall on their swords?

Not after a slice of humble pie!

Scott| 11.1.08 @ 11:03PM

The DUMB woman from the DUMB rural, hick state of Alaska is gonna be high-tailing it back to her igloo.
AMEN!

ruth| 11.1.08 @ 11:16PM

Scott, thank you for your intelligent, thoughtful post. Moron.

David Govett| 11.2.08 @ 12:22AM

Remember, if Obama wins, Democrats expect you to lie down for four years and lick your wounds. Those who love America will do the opposite: Redouble your efforts to rid Congress and the White House of liberal Democrats.

truthie| 11.2.08 @ 12:26AM

That's what I'm talkin' about!

Thomas Aquinas| 11.2.08 @ 12:40AM

"Life is so easy in a Republican world. Nothing is ever your fault."

It's interesting that "root causes" vanish as explanations when it comes to Republicans. But if it were Al Qaeada, it's "root causes." At some point liberals have to hold non-white non-Christian people responsible instead of thinking of them as inferiors who are driven by "root causes." It's time liberals start treating everybody with the dignity and respect they accord Republicans.

Tim| 11.2.08 @ 10:11AM

Yo Scott,
News Flash,
That Lady from Alaska has got more "grey matter" in the bottom of her three inch heal than you were ever born with.

No disrespect intended to you or any other mental midget. Afterall, you can't help it!

However, I thought it was important to point out the obvious on this beautiful Sunday Morning before the election just in case you can't figure it out by simply looking in the mirror.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 10:20AM

It's unfortunate that some criticism of Governor Palin has been hostile, but much of the criticism she has received has been merited by her apparent lack of knowledge about the world outside Alaska.

Witness the two clowns able to fool the governor and her staff on Friday. There she was, possibly the next vice president or even president, yucking it up with a man she clearly believed to be the president of France.

Never, never have I witnessed anything like that recording. I am embarrassed for Gov. Palin, and I feel a little sorry for her.

However, the president should be able to tell a prank call from one made by the chief executive of our oldest ally.

Didn't she have any preconditions before sitting down to talk with the French president?

Did she really believe that a head of state would call a VP candidate before she'd been elected? Did she really believe that call would include an invitation to go hunting?

I don't think Sara Palin is stupid. However, she is clearly ignorant of how the world works. She could learn about the world. My fear is that like George W. Bush she's not interested in learning about the world.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 10:22AM

Be it said. When she learned she'd been fooled, the governor responded graciously and with a good sense of humor. That took guts and character. A point for her column. But the event itself I'm afraid is just devestating.

Tim| 11.2.08 @ 10:50AM

Tom, you make a valid point.

However, Palin, before August 2008 was primarily focused on Alaska and it's issues and not on the world's complex problems or it's various leaders other than of course the "Energy" issue which is her strength.

Prank Calls made in the heat of the final week-end of a campaign mean nothing to me. It's like phony calls to Banks as occured a couple of week's ago which forced the FBI to go on full alert.

Now, if we were to find out that as Governor of Alaska she received routine prank calls at 3:00 A.M. and she was always duped into believing them as truth and acted in an irrational manner than obviousely that would be a horse of a different color.
I am certain that if that had happened we would have heard about it in September/2008.

There is enough proof that shows that she has done much more good for Alaska and it's citizens than has been widely reported.

But the other key point that you make is that she has "Guts and Character."
Let us think about this for a moment.

I have, and to me that trumps her current light resume regarding world leaders.

If we are asked to give Obama (a presidential candidate) a pass on his lighter resume, then naturally it goes without saying that giving a Vice Presidential candidate like Palin a similar pass is not only in order but the fair thing to do.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 11:55AM

Tim

Fair enough. I guess some people like me just wonder whether there is anything -- anything at all -- Sara Palin could do or say that would make you question her ability to be an effective president.

The enthusiasm -- understandable enough -- for her at rallies an among the base seems strange to some of us because it seems immune to the kind of questions raised by the Couric interview or things like this recent prank.

You might say the say thing about Obama supporters, who conservatives often imagine blindly following their leader like cultists.

Insofar as these conservatives might be interested in learning something new, I'd say this:

Obama was tested or vetted more than any single candidate in modern memory. If not be 25 national debates with some of the best politicians in the business (including McCain and Clinton). He's been poked, probed, and prodded by every major news organization in the country. He's been out there, doing press conferences (which Palin refuses to do) and interviews.

You might say that all of this has been conducted by a sympathetic press. I think that's to misunderstand how the press operates. But it's also simply inaccurate factually since so many of us were Clinton supporters. Obama was not our first choice or the idol of our dreams. He's just our candidate -- the guy we think would make a good president. Not a messiah or a savior.

And there are plenty of things Obama has said or done that have made many of us question his readiness. Only this questioning has literally taken place in full public view for more than TWO YEARS, in which time any possible criticism of the man has been aired (if you'll forgive the pun).

SO -- there's certainly no dishonor in voting for a war hero. And if you like Palin, more power to you. But I just don't think she's got what it takes to govern us -- in part because she can't speak well. I just don't think she can articulated the complicated ideas that you need to be able to articulate in order to lead well. (See last 8 years for what I mean.)

Again, it's all good. But guess who's coming to dinner.

ruth| 11.2.08 @ 12:03PM

TPaine, I am glad you think that it was a positive that Governor Palin responded with grace and humor to the phone prank. I didn't think liberals could even recognize those two qualities. I question the purported brilliance of your messiah, though, after reading that he was unaware of the 'status' of his impoverished, illegal alien auntie. Talk about family values. Just devastating.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 12:42PM

Ruth --

Only "liberals" question your candidates, not your candidates' aunts or cousins. With one exception, we have not been engaging in the lame "guilt by association" game this time around. (Some people tried it with Palin's daughter, but I think they were smacked down by good people on both sides of the isle, and there has been relatively little of that sort of thing lately.)

If you think the actions of Obama's aunt somehow disqualify him to be president, fine. I don't know what on earth could persuade you to think differently.

Obama is by all accounts a good, responsible husband to his wife, and a good father to his children. That's more than I can say for many politicians in both parties, and I think that about acquits him of any anti-family values charges you might want to fling at him.

aware| 11.2.08 @ 1:45PM

Obama Rules...
That Reagan toned down MPG rules is a valid charge but you fail to take some things into account in your sweeping "BY THE YEAR 2000, WE WOULD HAVE HAD ZERO NEED FOR FOREIGN OIL. " statement. One of those things is the market, i.e. consumer preference. The buying public has had the option of buying high mileage cars all this time but instead has flocked to the Suburbans, Yukons, and F-350s. Like it or not that is what sells and those who prefer such gas hogs certainly pay a big premium for the privilege in the form of high prices and big gas bills. This is more than enough disincentive to keep me and many others from buying one. If there happen to be those who don't value the limits of money as I, it's their business. What would you advocate... banning such choices? And as time goes by and perceptions change won't that mean additional banning not contemplated now?
I may be wrong but you seem to be, aside from impressing the Rubes with your enlightenment, advocating the capricious and arbitrary use of State power to achieve some desired result. You do realize that a State with such power will give the results of the party in power and that might not always be your party.

Groucho Marx| 11.2.08 @ 4:00PM

Take it from a real Marxist: Obama's going to win big.

But you guys on the right seem so demoralized! You should take it as a compliment that when your guy hurls insults at Obama, it seems phony.

What you do is this: get out of town for a while. Let the Democrats try to deal with the fantastic mess the Republicans have created. There hasn't been one like it in seventy five years!

Debt, deficits, plague, unemployment, war, and squalor everywhere the eye can see.

Years of mismanagement, incompetence, and corruption gumming up the proper workings of government agencies ....

Good Lord. Who needs it? You guys got the right idea. Don't be too obvious about it. Throw this thing. Divert attention with some wild accusations and a gorgeous woman from the final frontier. Slip out the back door.

Let the Democrats try to clean up this mess. No one could succeed at that, but they'll take the hit for building up government revenues again and getting the nose of the plane at least something like level.

Then you guys can come back and have another big frat party at tax payers' expense. Maybe even another war, if you're lucky.

Bon appetite. And keep the aspidistra flying!

ruth| 11.2.08 @ 4:26PM

How can you tell when a liberal is lying? His lips are moving.

Tim| 11.2.08 @ 5:25PM

Tom,
I actually respect Obama's many talents and gifts which include the fact that he is a very good organizer and can deliver a stump speech. He is real good. Take it from a former union organizer like myself.

The issue with Palin's ability to "Lead Us" would only come into play if McCain dies in office which despite his age will perhaps live to be as old as his Mom who I believe is 96.

That said, the choice for President is between McCain and Obama.

While I totally agree that the second in command has got to be ready to lead in the event of a death of the president the fact remains that Biden's many routine gaffs would be problematic if he were to take over for Obama.

Wars have started over spoken mis-understandings more than once.

Obama's ability to be charismatic is a very good quality.

However, what I worry about, with all do respect, is that he believes that the USA has created the bulk of the problems that exit in the world today.

The Iraq invasion aside which I agree should have never occured, the USA has embarked for many years on this noble quest to help establish democracy and freedom to peoples across the globe. The result was seen in the Olympics in China earlier this year.

Many of those now "free" nations were helped by us.

Freedom has fostered better cooperation among various nations.

Obviousely, we can do a much better job in communicating with our world neighbors.

In my perfect dream world, I would love to see a seasoned and independent minded President McCain appoint Obama Secretary of State.

Should Obama win, he should offer the Job of Secretary of Defense to Mccain.

Bottom line, unlike some, I don't hate Obama, not in the least. I just think in these very dicy times what we need is a proven strong and patrotic Grand Father figure . Kind of like Yoda.

It may sound a little silly but that's how I see things.

Larry Disney| 11.2.08 @ 6:54PM

I see the Obama trolls have infiltrated the site again. I realize “The One” is paying you good money to squat here and defecate on Sarah Palin, but come on. Isn’t the stupid tactic getting old with you guys yet? You’ve hung it on every Republican since Eisenhower. At least try something new.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 6:56PM

Tim --

You don't sound silly at all. In fact, we're just happy to hear from someone on the right who doesn't think Obama is a communist -- or worse.

Let me say this:

If McCain's campaign motto were "When 800 years old you are, look this good you will not," I'd consider voting for him. Any Yoda reference would do, actually.

Nevertheless, I think you'll be surprised by a) the centrist spirit of Obama's administration; b) the number of Republicans in Obama's cabinet (in order to get anything done, they need Republicans on board); and c) the conservative temperament of Obama. True, Obama is an old school liberal in his politics, but he's conservative and cautious as a man.

Hope that helps.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 6:59PM

Larry Disney --

The idea that Obama is paying me to read the American Spectator or post on its site is hilarious. Hilarious.

He's got so much money now he could probably afford it. And I guarantee you I wouldn't turn it down. But sorry, Larry, that's not how it works. Actually, I was just sort of interested in what you guys thought about all this so I came on over and dropped in.

I'm sure there's some way for you to explain that by inserting me into a conspiracy of some kind or other (maybe I'm secretly with Hamas -- did you ever think of that?) if you want. More power to you if you figure it all out dude.

ruth| 11.2.08 @ 7:45PM

Nah, Tommyboy, you're probably just some smelly old hippy who won't let go of your old Weather Underground days. Say hi to Bill for us.

Tom Paine| 11.2.08 @ 8:19PM

Ruth --

What are you, in the seventh grade?

When are you going to ask yourself why you need to demonize people you disagree with?

You do understand that it is possible to disagree with you and not be a domestic terrorist, don't you Ruth?

So Ruth, here's the facts: I'm not a hippy nor a member of the Weather Underground. I don't approve of what they did. Not that any of this matters. I just think it would be interesting if something could penetrate your arrogant obtuseness.

ruth| 11.2.08 @ 10:02PM

Come on, TP, it was just a joke! You sure think sarcasm is funny when it's at our expense. Remember, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Lighten up, old boy!

marky| 11.2.08 @ 10:29PM

"Republicans would be wise to pay more attention to the people, and less to the experts."

since when does popularity equal intelligence? there are people in third world countries lining up for blocks for a bag of rice. is that what palin is -- a free handout to the disaffected masses? please!

ruth| 11.2.08 @ 10:39PM

Marky, do you mock Governor Palin's popularity before or after you've bowed down to your messiah?

Alex| 11.2.08 @ 11:45PM

Just a couple of points:

First of all, from a purely political perspective, I agree that Palin is very popular with a certain segment of the country, but that doesn't make her truly popular. If you look at the polls (and say what you want about them, but they're pretty consistent on this), her unfavorables outnumber her favorables, and more than half the country have a negative opinion of her. From a trying to win an election standpoint, that makes Gov. Palin a liability.

Second of all, while many people participating on this site are posting ... unpleasantly, I don't see why so many of you seem annoyed that there are liberals here. Do you really want to sit around and congratulate each other on all agreeing? Sounds kind of boring to me.

Third, in terms of drilling for oil, I disagree that domestic oil could solve all of our problems. First of all, most estimates put the amount of oil reserves in US territory to be about 3% of the world's, much less than our share of the world market for oil. Second, any oil drilled would be drilled by international energy companies that would put the energy on the world market. Unless you conservatives wanted the government to nationalize the oil industry, it wouldn't solve our problems.

Oh and also, I'm a registered Democrat and a self-proclaimed liberal, and I'll be damned if anyone of any political persuasion calls me unpatriotic for my political views or my support for Obama. Generalize and stereotype if you want, it's what most of us do everyday, but don't tell me I must not love my country because I'm a liberal. Don't tell me I'm not as American as you are because I plan on voting for Obama.

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 12:11AM

Okay, Alex, just know that you are turning the country you profess to love so much over to a Marxist. But I promise I won't call you a traitor, oops, unpatriotic for voting Obama.

Alex| 11.3.08 @ 12:24AM

This is a slightly modified post I left over on your blog:

I disagree with you on the Marxist thing, ruth. So convince me. Convince me that Obama's plan - raising the top tax rate from 35% to 39%, where it was 8 years ago, a rate that McCain defended at the time, is Marxism. Convince me that his healthcare plan, which doesn't even come close to resembling the socialist ones in Europe, is Marxism.

Both tickets this year are capitalists, they both favor progressive taxation. Neither side likes to point it out, but the differences, in terms of ideology, between them are small.

If you're calling Obama a Marxist for something other than his stated policies, convince me why I should expect something different from his administration than what he's talking about on the campaign trail.

Alex| 11.3.08 @ 12:24AM

P.S. "your blog" = the AmSpec blog

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 12:42AM

Alex, why do I have to try to convince you of the truth about Obama? You and I both know that he's a Marxist--he's just a slick liar who's fooled a lot of people (sheeple). Besides, you've probably already voted about 100 times for your messiah through ACORN, along with Mickey Mouse, Minnie, Donald Duck, etc. You get the picture.

marky| 11.3.08 @ 12:44AM

before i bow down to the messiah.

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 12:46AM

Thought so.

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 12:59AM

My predictions on (the unlikely) Obama Presidency:
1) The middle east will go nuclear
2) 100,000 deaths in a large American city (not such a bad thing given the blue voters
3) He will allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010 (therefore a tax increase on everyone)
4) Unemployment at 11%

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 1:02AM

When Obama raises the taxes on businesses...where do you think the costs trickle down to? The consumer! This is Econ 101. It is a tax increase on everyone.

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 1:07AM

Last one...
It is a capitalist government's job to stimulate the free market. If you tax a business that (in this or any economy) is on hard times that business has 2 options:
1) Layoffs
2) Raise costs to the consumer

If you cut their taxes, it gives businesses the ability to:
1) Hire
2) Lower prices to compete
3) Develop new products through research and development
4) Grow

All of the above, should, at the same tax rate, give the gov more money. Taxes stifle growth. Lower taxes foster growth. Econ 101

Alex| 11.3.08 @ 1:31AM

Thank you RegularGuy, for arguing with me on the issues. Only debate like this is productive.

Here's my reply, but I fully admit that you have a real point:

I would say that, in terms of the economy, taking money from the people (in terms of taxes on business and the wealthy) makes the economy worse. But, if that money is taken by the govm't and then invested in the country and economy wisely, it provides a net benefit. So if a president Obama or McCain were to tax a business that business wouldn't be able to grow as much, but the money taken would be invested in building infrastructure the business needs, creating other jobs in things like renewable energy, etc.

I think we both agree some amount of taxes are needed, to provide for the needs of the country the free market can't provide for - nat'l defense, police, roads, investment in tech., etc. The question is where the amount of taxation should be set at. Lower taxes isn't always better.

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 1:49AM

Alex I like you by default as we share the same name (Alec). Thanks for your reply. But our system is based on capitalist principles. It is key that we foster the free market to drive our economy. Out economy drives the world. The govt already takes a healthy chuck from these businesses to distribute as they see fit. Most of us work in businesses that, in these times, are at best scraping by. Higher taxes can in no way help our economy because the brunt will be borne by the employees and/or the consumers. Both are already being pressed to the max. We must do all we can to reinvigorate our economy. And higher taxes will absolutely not be the answer. In my case, my company of 1500 just laid off 100. I have to work 2 jobs to keep my home. If I get socked by any more taxes (e.g., the tax cuts getting repealed)..I will have to sell my house and me and my 3 kids will have to relocate. That doesn't seem right. What did I do wrong? I have worked for 20 years in my industry (software development) and it seems like I am being punished by my government for being successful. I am the bad guy? What should I tell my children? Should I tell them to "only be so successful? Not too much." Not to reach for the stars?
Alec

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 2:12AM

By the way Alex, just wanted to say. It is refreshing to see a level headed liberal here. You make good points, and no, you are not unpatriotic for your positions. I think of myself as a "mainstream Republican." I am a 43 year old "Navy Brat" who grew up all over the world as the son of a career Naval Officer. I have seen first hand the commradarie (sp?), honor, and integrity that flows through the service. I am an middle class "white guy" with 3 kids just, working 60+ hours/week trying to get by. I think America is the best country on the planet. Why else are immigrants dying to get here? I don't care much for McCain. I will vote for him. But Obama is scary. Not because of the color of his skin. Because of his:
1) Unkowns
2) Affiliations
3) Voting history
4) Disappointment with America
5) Recent penchant for censorship and surpression (very scary)

To expand on (1). Who is this guy and why hasn't the press dug into him? If McCain had Ayers or Rev Wright ties, ya think it wouldn't be on air 24/7?

To expand on (5)...if someone asked McCain a tough question that he slipped up on do you think the media (think KGB or Stasi) would have dug up dirt on this average citizen? Or if certain press organizations asked the wrong questions...they'd be cut off?? That scares the heck out of me. Why didn't Obama condemn that? Instead of make fun of they guy?

My take on Obama is that we are being sold an image. There is nothing there. And what we are going to get is going to push this country into a place that we may not be able to get out of. Even if we want to.

I'm not ready for that. And I hope my country isn't either.
Alec

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 2:31AM

Regular guy, did you notice Alex never responded to my assertion that she had already voted multiple times through ACORN? Obama's campaign, Axelrod, has sent many paid bloggers to infiltrate conservative blogs such as this one to challenge, demoralize and antagonize. I have read this on numerous websites, PUMA--hill buzz is an excellent source.
I have no problem debating rationally--I just don't trust some of these trolls. The Hillary Clinton supporters said Obama's campaign did the same thing to them and they are still seething. I think the PUMA voter crossover factor is a great unknown in this election. McCain/Palin 2008

Alex| 11.3.08 @ 2:33AM

Alec-

I'm not going to ask you about your personal finances, and I won't presume to guess, but, as I'm sure you've heard before, if you make under $200,000 a year, you'll get a tax cut. And if you make more than that, those tax cuts will make huge numbers of potential customers more able to afford the products your company offers. McCain isn't offering any additional tax cuts to the middle class or lower class.

And as to the media, I agree, it tends to have a liberal bias. But more important than that I think, is that the media is so scared of being called biased that it's not really willing to investigate lies that both candidates are telling. All it does is put up the stories that the campaigns are talking about. (i.e., when McCain talks about Wright, the media does. When McCain doesn't, the media doesn't.)

This means that when Obama lies or misrepresents McCain in his ads, the media's too afraid to correct those lies, when McCain does the same, the media doesn't step in. They're not helping anyone, and that means lots of people are voting for Obama for the wrong reasons, based on misrepresentations, ditto for McCain.

(Given my persuasion, I think more people have been conned into voting for McCain than Obama, but I'm guessing you all will disagree.)

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 2:36AM

Ruth I hear ya. All I can do is vote and get out the vote. We will win. 54-46% Let 'em riot. Bring it on.

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 2:42AM

Oh, 100,000 American deaths is a horrible thought regardless of their political affiliation. Right?

ruth| 11.3.08 @ 2:46AM

54-46%-- man, I'm lovin' that!

RegularGuy| 11.3.08 @ 2:56AM

Yes, Ruth I was being dramatic. But the deaths would arise from dirty bombs non-the-less. Regardless of politics.
Alex,
I kinda disagree that I will see a tax cut under Obama. According to factcheck.org (search Obama tax cuts):
#He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of “working” families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain’s plan at 66 million and finds that Obama’s plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.
# Obama noted that McCain’s health care plan would "tax people’s benefits" but didn’t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.

# He said McCain, far from being a maverick who’s "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.

Across the aisle? I don't see that with Obama kicking press that aligned against him off the plane.

Alec

Tim| 11.3.08 @ 11:41AM

RegularGuy,

It isn't just kicking reporters who's news papers had endorced McCain off the plane that concerns me but the fact that the Obama campaign launched a boycott of a Florida TV station who's anchor women asked Biden some tough but honest questions but perhaps the most disturbing and ominous sign of the "Big Brother" tactics was ordering a democratic state official in Ohio to dig up dirt on a civilian citizen, Joe the Plumber.

All this while not in power. What would it look like if they actually had unchecked power?

Here is the point. I believe in freedom and freedom of speech. If republicans were doing this I would be just as upset and concerned.

What makes these events ominous is that they have come from a campaign who has publically and charasmatically promoted change and a new politics devoid of division and love of all.

In 1917 there was a band of charasmatic people that revolted against the Russian royal family. They did so while telling the starving population that under their uthopian rule the masses would have a chance to always be heard and most importantly would be taken care of by the state.
That they would establish rights to all.

Well we know how that story played out.

The old rule still applies.

Those that don't learn from their history are doomed to repeat it regardless of how slick or pretty or innocent looking the package .

bob| 11.11.08 @ 12:07PM

"Popularity as a pathology? What Brooks and the others are saying is that these people who spend hours in the cold October wind for a chance to see Sarah Palin are too stupid to know what's good for them. "Listen to us," say the political experts. "

So if popularity is the be all and end all, democrats are best?

Tiffany Bracelet| 4.9.10 @ 4:38AM

dfsdfsdf