LadyJane wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 7:13pm:


You want to see Obama's birth certificate? and a record of his baptism? Why?

It's simple, she is a conservative deep down.

LJ of course

How nice to wake up and find I've been discussed.

I find as I get older that I do tend to be more fiscally Conservative and certainly lean to the Right where National Security is concerned. Still pretty much socially liberal.

How many times do I have to say it? I don't see WHY Obama gets a FREE PASS??? Why are all other candidates put under the UBER microscope but this guy won't release his BIRTH CERTIFICATE???? I don't like the guy. I don't trust him. I find him smug and elitist. He is not experienced enough FOR ME. Of course the issues are important but when a Senator votes Present a majority of the time, how the hell am I supposed to know where he stands? There is a double standard here regarding the media and I detest DOUBLE STANDARDS!!!!!

If it makes ya'll feel better, call me a racist. Or call me a sore loser over Hillary or just call me Lady
Lynn Forester de Rothschild!!!

Oh and while I'm at it, I happen to like Senator McCain. IN fact I recall stating that months ago only to be shot DOWN by some of my die hard right wing friends who proclaimed "LJ, he might as well be a Democrat he is so liberal"

That's it. Mind made up. Go McCain!!!

LJ.

Pdog wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 8:17pm:


Only one explanation.  The fear that Obama is Rosemary's Baby.  All grown up and running for Prez.

LadyJane wrote on Oct 20^th, 2008 at 6:03am:


I can't argue with you on that one! 

I see that early voters in W VA are experiencing problems already.  They vote for Obama but a check mark appears beside McCain's name.  The officials are blaming it on "voter error" and finicky screens.  Sound familiar?

As far records not being released, I find this far more troubling. . .

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2008/10/03/...

IF ONE of our older physician colleagues began having significant memory problems or unusual moments of confusion, we would be concerned that these might be early signs of dementia, and would want to make sure that our colleague received a complete medical evaluation so that his or her patients were not in danger.

Over the past year, Senator John McCain has made several mistakes while speaking publicly - for example, forgetting that Czechoslovakia no longer exists, and stating that Pakistan shares a border with Iraq. These may be just normal, momentary lapses. But the fact that they were about subjects McCain knows a great deal about raises the possibility of something more serious.

At 72, McCain would be the oldest first-term US president. While many people in their 70s show no evidence of cognitive decline and are serving with distinction in leadership positions of all kinds, cognitive impairment nevertheless is common in this age group. Given McCain's recent repeated misstatements, and his history of high blood pressure and high cholesterol, which place him at increased risk for developing dementia, his unwillingness to make all of his medical records freely available is worrisome.

At any time, but especially now, when our country faces unparalleled economic, military, and environmental crises, the American people have every right to know whether their next president will be compromised. We expect to know this about physicians, airline pilots, and all military personnel who have access to nuclear weapons. We should expect no less from someone who aspires to be our next commander in chief.

Dr. ERIC CHIVIAN
Assistant clinical professor of psychiatry
Harvard Medical School

Dr. ROGER L. ALBIN
Professor of neurology
University of Michigan

I don't know how much more I can say, mm.
I don't like the guy, OKAY????

And at this point if Hillary Clinton WERE his VEEP, (NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED) I still wouldn't vote for the guy. My gut tells me this is NOT the man I want representing me.

Why weren't the media trucks that flocked to Alaska to get the dirt on Sarah Palin doing the same to Senator Obama?
Same question for "Joe the Plumber"?
The press is in love with this man. Sorry that you can't see it.

Everyone seems so caught up with this myth of a new Camelot!

The Country has collectively lost its mind. We are so desperate for a Savior that MANY (not all) just blindly throw their complete and utter support without FACTS/EXPERIENCE!!!!!!!!!!! All they hear is "Change".

And as far as fiscal responsibility, where is all of this money coming from that Sen Obama has promised?? I believe I read today that he and Pelosi do not care if the deficiit doubles!!!!

Look. If he wins, I wish him well. I have stated that.

I don't envy either one of these men.
What a fucking mess they are walking into.

LJ.


PS. I really am done. Two weeks cannot come fast enough for me. I'm sitting here trying to get my work done and I'm shaking with anger. Not worth it. Fight it out....I've said all I care to say.

Riffhard wrote on Oct 20^th, 2008 at 12:32pm:


dude!

it was your uberhero, george w bush, that just enacted the greatest socialist bailout of the banking industry in the history of the planet!

riffy....does 2 + 2 = 4 in your world?? just curious!

i'll hang up and take my anser off the air...

Starbuck wrote on Oct 20^th, 2008 at 1:05pm:


Bucky you and certain others seem to think that Bush is my hero. You could not be more wrong. I'd expect nothing less, and certainly nothing more, from an Obama supporter. I have defended Bush when he was right, and I have been vocal in my denunciations when he has been wrong. The difference is that I am not ready to throw away the capitalist system that this nation was founded on just because I have disagreed with Bush's ridiculous spending habits. The bailout is a prime example of that. While I don't like it at all, I am not so blind to the fact that most of those in the know felt that it had to be done. I wish it didn't happen, but the reason that it happened had nothing to do with the cost of the war. It was sparked because of bad loans to people that never would have been eligible for a home loan, and to real estate investors that overextended themselves when the housing bubble burst. They got these loans because of groups like ACCORN insisting on that these people get these very risky loans.


It's a little funny that you would slam Bush for the bailout when you are so ready to hand the government over to a Democrat congress with an approval rating even lower that Bush's and a nominee that has promised even more spending! You think Bush acted like a socialist, and I agree. I have said as much several times now. So what's the best answer to Bush's brand of socialism? Elect a man that is an avowed socialist with very strong leanings towards flat out Marxism.

Please give me a short definition for, "spread the wealth around."

It's an absolute fact that Barry will tax anyone that makes $42,000.00 a year in order to help give the "have nots" more of the "haves" money. Whether they are the one's earning it or not never seems to matter to a socialist.


Let's not forget his tax plans for big business. He has managed to play class warfare against the job creators in this country, and some people are stupid enough to believe that that is going to help the economy. It will kill it! Guaranteed.


Capitol gains tax, windfall profit tax, and the massive tax that he will impose on most small businesses is going to destroy jobs. Those that can't see that know next to nothing about the way that a free market economy works. In other words, they have blindly embraced socialism and they have no idea about what that will do to our economy. The idiotic belief in an unqualified candidate based on nothing more than the mantra "hope and change." Read Saul Alinsky's book Rules For Radicals. He makes the case very clear. Paraphrasing here,-"In order to effect change we must pit the haves against the havenots. That is not enough though. First we must agitate the masses against the capitalist pigs. Then we must offer them "hope and a change" that they will embrace without asking too many questions." That quote, though paraphrased, is exactly what Alinsky preached for decades. Guess who was steeped in this belief system?


You can continue to slam Bush. I won't waste my time defending a man who is not in the running. I will do everything I can to steer people to the sources of material that exposes Obama for the socialist/Marxist that he most certainly is.


Riffy

Riffhard wrote on Oct 20^th, 2008 at 11:58am:


It also says that it would apply to TV as well. Won't that balance out the bias you see in TV news coverage? 

monkey_man wrote on Oct 20^th, 2008 at 1:42pm:



Perhaps I should have been more clear on this issue. I am specifically referring to Obama's plan to "spread the wealth around." When I hear Barry tell ACORN that they will be invited to the Oval Office to help "set the agenda", I have no doubt what that means. It means socialism.

When Obama states that carbon dioxide is going to be considered a greenhouse tax I am smart enough to read between the lines. That is a future indicator that a new "breathing tax" is in the offing! Oh, he won't be so brazen as to call it a breathing tax. No he will call it something like a "carbon dioxide emissions tax", or some other more palatable name, but make no mistake, he is going to use it raise taxes. Scientific facts be damned! He will do whatever it takes in order to "spread the wealth around."

That my friend is the very definition of socialism. The Democrat plan to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine is the very definition of Marxism. If you can't compete in the free market (hello Air America) then use the courts to impose the political will of the majority. That should scare the hell out of everyone. Not that it will of course. Hope and change seem to trump common sense these days.


Riffy


PS-King Paulson is a Democrat.