Posts tagged ‘2008 Election’

September 11, 2009

Republicans: Why Should we vote for you? (Reprise)

9/11 Tribute

9/11 Tribute

Before I start this entry, I would like to take a moment to remember the 9/11 tragedy and its victims during, and after the event.

9/11 had to be one of the most surreal experiences of my life, topped only by the deaths of my parents the 1+ year prior to the event. In fact, 9/11 came exactly 1 year and 10 days after my fathers death in 2000. I remember being in a deep depressive fog that I just could not shake. Due to that depression, I did not awake that day until after the 2nd plane had hit.

When I turned on my television set (it was already on CNN) I just recall being confused and dumbfounded, but I must admit that much of that day is still a blur to me. I can’t sit here and recount the exact second I heard about it, nor my visceral reaction; other than it was the ultimate What The F–k moment. While immensely shocked, I was strangely void of emotion. It was when I witnessed a female reporter struggling to contain her emotions that it all began to sink it.

What can I say? I am good for having delayed reactions. After the levees broke in New Orleans, it wasn’t until the telethon (where Kanye West made Mike Myers squirm, and Chris Tucker eyes pop out of its sockets) that I broke down. Of course, with Katrina, I had my own personal reasons for why it was even more heart wrenching than it would have been normally. I’m sure I will share that at some point.

Meanwhile, I still have my main entry to get to where I ask the question: Republicans, why do you deserve our vote?

I wonder if the republican party realizes that, just because the democrats got voted into office, it doesn’t mean that everyone who voted for them think that they are perfect? It’s not like we are all happy with everything that they have done, (or have not done for that matter…) But, here’s my ultimate inquiry: When your only other real option is the Republican Party… why in the world would any sane, rational, informed individual vote for them?

I hear people talking about voting the democrats out of office in 2010 because they didn’t “do what they promised” and it’s clear that they aren’t really thinking things through. That they are just in the heat of the moment… (I mean, talk about the desire for instant gratification.) But, when it comes down to actually voting, why would the public, as a whole, trust the party that was at the helm when our economy tanked? When 9/11 hit? (“We kept you safe for 8 years,” my eye.) A party who, for the 8 years, did nothing to even attempt reform healthcare?

Why should we trust a party that has fallen back on their previous tactics of scaring people into voting for them? Why should we trust a party that doesn’t actually put forth any solutions, but simultaneously say NO to anything that is proposed by the opposing party? Particularly when it helps we, the little people?

These are questions that the republicans should be asking themselves, and what we the American people should demand them to answer. Why should people who are truly open to voting for either party WANT to vote republican? Do they realize that they aren’t gaining new supporters with their fear mongering? That they are just pandering to a very loud, yet very minority base? Sarah Palin referred to them as the “real America” during the campaign. Yes Sarah, they are real Americans. The real small group of Americans who will swallow anything that she and the rest of her colleagues tell them. I have a newsflash for these “real” people:  Just because more people may be unhappy with the president than before, it doesn’t mean that those  same unhappy people are daft enough to support the republican party come election time.

Best case scenario, for the republicans, is that they simply don’t vote at all. Worst case scenario, is they scare even more people into going out to vote AGAINST them. Like me! I stood in line four hours to vote the democrats into power last election, and I’ll do it again!

What people have to realize is that it’s early, not even a full year into Obama’s first term. While the republicans may feel that they are winning a couple of tiny battles here and there,  I predict that these underhanded tactics are going to come back to haunt their party. Americans are fickle and irrational at times, but once time passes and things DO improve, we will have forgotten about the fright-wing and their desperate antics. And… in the end, they will be even worse off than they are now. Much to my glee.

As of now, I know that there is no way under the sun I could ever consider voting even one republican into office. So, Republicans, how do go about changing my mind?  What are YOU going to do to better the country I live in? When will the “little people” that you step on to serve your masters begin to matter?

Why do you deserve my vote?

Advertisements
September 8, 2009

Why should we vote for republicans?

I wonder if the republican party realizes that, just because the democrats got voted into office, it doesn’t mean that everyone who voted for them think that they are perfect. It’s not like we are all happy with everything they have done, or have not done… But, when your only other real option are the republicans… why in the world would any sane, rational individual vote for them?

I hear people talking about voting the democrats out of office in 2010 because they didn’t “do what they promised” and it’s clear that they aren’t really thinking things through. That they are just in the heat of the moment… But, when it comes down to actually voting…  Why would the public, as a whole, trust the party that was at the helm when our economy tanked? Why would we trust a party that has fallen back on their previous tactics of scaring people into voting for them? Why would we trust a party that doesn’t actually put forth any solutions, but simultaneously say NO to anything that is proposed by the opposing party?

These are questions that the republicans should be asking themselves. Why should people who are truly open to voting for either party WANT to vote republican? They aren’t gaining NEW supporters with their fear mongering. They are just pandering to a very loud, minority base. Just because more people may be unhappy with the president than before, it doesn’t mean that those unhappy people are daft enough to support the republican party come election time. Best case scenario, for the republicans, is that they simply don’t vote at all. Worst case scenario, they scare even more people into going out to vote AGAINST them.

It’s early, yet. Not even a full year into Obama’s first term. While the republicans may feel like they are winning a couple of tiny battles here and there,  I predict that these underhanded tactics are going to come back to haunt their party. Americans are fickle and irrational at times, but once time passes and things DO improve, we will have forgotten about the fright-wing and their desperate tactics. And… in the end, they will be even worse off than they are now.

While I’m not a democrat, and more libertarian than anything, at this point in time I could never support the republicans. So, republicans… Please tell me, why do you deserve my vote? What are YOU going to do to better our country?

October 23, 2008

I Just Voted for Barack H. Obama!

I just stood in line for nearly FOUR hours, here in Dekalb County, GA to vote for Barack Hussein Obama and Joe Biden.

I feel good.

October 9, 2008

Palin Says Obama Would Diminish “The Prestige Of The United States Presidency”

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin attacked Barack Obama Thursday for not being honest about his association with 1960’s radical William Ayers.

“Barack Obama hasn’t told the American people the total truth about that, about his association with Ayers,” Palin said on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show. “Doggonit he fails to tell the American people with candor and with truthfulness what his associations are and we have to know.”

Palin blamed the media for not providing what she characterized as the same level of scrutiny to Obama that it has applied to her and running mate John McCain.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

This is simply outrageous. They count on the fact that their supporters rely heavily on two sources for their information, them and Fox News. They know that they won’t fact check. Their supporters just take them at their word. In their world, everything they are told by McCain and Palin is the GOSPEL TRUTH.

I am part of a community on line that has been brought together by an unpolitical commonality. We do discuss politics, however, and not one republican will touch on two key hypocritical points of the McCain/Palin ticket; no matter how eloquently the facts are laid out before them. One, is the “unpatriotic” nature of the Palin’s for being associated with a party that wants to secede from the rest of the US. The second is the fact that McCain has his own shady past, full of characters that he has had MUCH stronger ties to.

Of late, the fact that a McCain supporter, and republican, is the one who put Obama and Ayers on that board together has also been ignored. Especially when I ask how they aren’t outraged that McCain would accept support from a woman who has “palled” around with a terrorist.

In short, the republican party do not care one iota about facts and are full of hypocrites who want to distort the truth for their own political gain. They have frightened their constituents to death at the thought of Obama becoming president; an irrational fear that has been created by lies and slander promoted by both the McCain/Palin party and Fox News. NONE of their fear is even remotely rational. What they should be scared of is living out of a cardboard box when they turn 60 and their retirement fund isn’t there. McCain is CLUELESS about the economy and has admitted as much. His answer for everything is a commission.

Lord help us.

I never thought I would see McCain stoop to Karl Rove style politics, but he has. I feel that his character is so far in the toilet that, upon his death, this is one of the things he will be most remembered for.

I guess he’s no real hero after all.

October 9, 2008

Hannity, your desperation is showing.

Sunday night, the brilliant mind of Sean Hannity embarked on a mission to destroy the name and character of Barack Obama by presenting to the American public an array of misinformation, half-truths and out and out lies. While there is nothing new about Hannity’s disdain for Obama, this special took on an even more serious tone, complete with an ominous and fear inspiring soundtrack usually reserved for suspense and horror movies.

A large source of the information that Hannity shoved down the throats of the American people originates with a man by the name of Andy Martin. This is a man that has been described as “mentally unstable” by the U.S. Selective Service, and claims to have found Saddam Hussein two full months before the US Military, by way of scouring holes in Iraq with two dogs. Files from the U.S. Selective Service also noted that Martin has a “moderately-severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character.” In short? He’s wacko.

But wait, it gets better.

Andy Martin is also on record as an anti-Semite. How can one describe themselves as “no greater friend to Israel,” as Hannity did last night when he was called out by an Obama spokesman, even begin to entertain a man who has said, and I quote, “I am able to understand how the Holocaust took place, and with every passing day feel less and less sorry that it did, when Jew survivors are operating as a wolf pack to steal my property.”

In addition, back in 1983, Martin referred to a federal judge as, “a crooked slimy Jew, who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race.”

Nice.

And we are questioning Obama’s character, Mr. Hannity? It that right? Last night you said that you thought that the things that Martin said were reprehensible. Well Obama has also denounced the actions of William Ayers. The heart of your entire case against Obama is who he is, or once was, associated with in the past. And all you can do is turn to a snake like Andy Martin to support this claim?

Mmm…. Don’t look now, but I think your desperation is showing.

October 4, 2008

Fact-Checking the VP Debate

Joe Biden and Sarah Palin Vice Presidential Debate

As with any presidential campaign, lies and half-truths flow freely. The following is from wire.factcheck.org. The guys over there have done a real job of “Keeping them Honest,” throughout the entire Election.

Some highlights:

Killing Afghan Civilians?


Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called “reckless” and “untrue.”

Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here’s the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:

The Associated Press fact-checked this one, and found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: “As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party.” Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

Whether Obama said that this was “all we’re doing” is debatable. He said that we need to have enough troops so that we’re “not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians,” but did not say that troops are doing nothing else.

McCain in the Vanguard of Mortgage Reform?

Palin said that McCain had sounded the alarm on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago.

Palin is referring to a bill that would have increased oversight on Fannie and Freddie. In our recent article about assigning blame for the crisis, we found that by the time McCain added his name to the bill as a cosponsor, the collapse was well underway. Home prices began falling only two months later. Our colleagues at PolitiFact also questioned this claim.

Palin’s Health Care Hooey

Palin claimed that McCain’s health care plan would be “budget-neutral,” costing the government nothing.

The McCain campaign hasn’t released an estimate of how much the plan would cost, but independent experts contradict Palin’s claim of a cost-free program.

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain’s plan, which at its peak would cover 5 million of the uninsured, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Obama’s plan, which would cover 34 million of the uninsured, would cost $1.6 trillion over that time period.

The nonpartisan U.S. Budget Watch’s fiscal voter guide estimates that McCain’s tax credit would increase the deficit by somewhere between $288 billion to $364 billion by the year 2013, and that making employer health benefits taxable would bring in between $201 billion to $274 billion in revenue. That nets out to a shortfall of somewhere between $14 billion to $163 billion – for that year alone.

Palin also said that Obama’s plan would be “universal government run” health care and that health care would be “taken over by the feds.” That’s not the case at all. As we’ve said before, Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. It would increase the offerings of publicly funded health care.

Did McCain “vote the same way” as Obama on funding troops? This correction by Factcheck.org answers that question.

Correction Oct 3: This article originally faulted Biden for saying that McCain had voted “the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. We said that McCain was absent for the vote and so didn’t vote at all. Biden was, however, correct.

McCain did vote against the troop-funding bill in question, H.R. 1591, on March 29, 2007, when it originally cleared the Senate. The vote to which we referred, and which McCain missed, was a later vote on the House-Senate compromise version of the same bill, on April 26, 2007. McCain opposed the bill, which Obama supported, because it contained language calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Biden was responding to Palin’s accusation that “Obama voted against funding troops.” Obama voted for the bill March 29 and April 26, and then on May 24, 2007, following a veto by President Bush, Obama voted against a similar troop-funding bill, H.R. 2206, that lacked any withdrawal language.


To read more facts on the topics that the Vice Presidential candidates discussed Thursday night, check out wire.factcheck.org and PolitiFact.org.

A few other misleads of note:

  • Palin said, “We’re circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries” for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.
  • Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.
  • Palin repeated a falsehood that the McCain campaign has peddled, off and on, for some time; that under Obama “millions of small businesses” will pay high taxes. As we reported June 23, it’s simply untrue that “millions” of small business owners will pay higher federal income taxes under Obama’s proposal.
  • Palin: We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain’s call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.

    October 1, 2008

    Palin’s Credentials Reads Like a Padded Resume

    Elisabeth Hasselbeck

    Today on The View republican apologist, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, was given the opportunity to tell the world why she feels that Sarah Palin is qualified to be Vice President, or God forbid, President of the United States. After trying to redirect the question to Obama’s qualifications, Elisabeth parroted what only can be described as a short laundry list of qualifications that have been floated around since Palin blasted onto the scene just before the Republican National Convention.

    She has executive experience, she’s commanded the Alaskan National Guard, and she is an “expert” on oil.

    Palin’s National Guard Experience:

    Delving deeper into what supporters are calling one of Palin’s strongest attributes, provides little detail on what Palin has actually done as the “commander” of the Alaskan National Guard. Hasselbeck exclaimed that Palin has commanded the National Guard “in times of war,” yet in an interview with the Associated Press, Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell said that he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations. Of course, days later, Campbell appeared on FoxNews to soften the blow of what he said. (Which he was rewarded for in terms of a promotion.)

    And who can forget Tucker Bounds inability to cite one instance where Palin actually had to command the National Guard in terms of National Security?

    Palin’s Expertise on Oil:

    In my opinion, this is Palin’s strongest qualification; however, it isn’t helped by the McCain/Palin campaigns gross overstatement of the things that Palin has achieved in terms of oil. The McCain/Palin camp have boasted that Palin is responsible for negotiating a $40-billion pipeline project for Alaska. They have also stated that the state of Alaska is responsible for 20% of our nations oil production.

    The facts? Well, recently, the Resource Development Council for Alaska updated their website to say that Alaska accounts for 20% of domestic oil production between the period 1980-2000; which helps to put the McCain/Palin camp comments into context. The update notes that Alaska currently accounts for 15% of the nations oil production. In this case, the deception lies in what is not stated. While Alaska accounts for 14.3% of oil produced in the US, it only accounts 4.8% of the oil that is actually supplied to the United States.

    As far as that pipeline? Well, the folks over at Politifact.org have ranked that as “barely true.”

    Executive Experience:

    Now we arrive at what I deem to be the weakest argument. One must only look as far as Dubya himself to note that Executive Experience isn’t all what it’s cracked up to be. Enough said.

    Being able to successfully pad a resume is a tangible skill in and of itself. Whether it is stretching the truth on her states contribution to oil, or insisting that a refueling stop in Ireland, and being able to see Iraq from the Kuwait/Iraqi border truly counts as “foreign travel,” this resume has enough padding to stuff a whole gaggle of prom-goers brassieres.

    September 30, 2008

    Palin makes it easy.

    I’m sure that, by now, everyone has seen Tina Fey’s masterful “reenactment” of the Palin/Couric interview from Saturday nights SNL. I simply MUST call it a reenactment due to the fact that much of it didn’t even have to be written. Most of the “verbage” (as Palin would call it) was lifted straight from Palin’s lips and delivered straight to Tina’s.

    Here is a side by side comparison:

    Ouch.

    Meanwhile, the McCain camp is continuing their line of attack on the “biased liberal media” for daring to hold them accountable for anything that comes out of their mouths. They’ve now added the phrase “gotcha journalism” to their repertoire of campaign vocabulary; which seems to include any question that Palin does not know how to properly answer. How convenient.

    So, let’s see if we have this straight… A young man asked her a question she didn’t fully understand because she was in a pizza place at the time? Let’s examine what she actually said, shall we?

    “How about the Pakistan situation?,” asked Rovito, who said he was not a Palin supporter. “What’s your thoughts about that?”

    “In Pakistan?,” she asked, looking surprised.

    “What’s going on over there, like Waziristan?”

    “It’s working with [Pakistani president] Zardari to make sure that we’re all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border,” she told him. “And we’ll go from there.”

    Rovito wasn’t finished. “Waziristan is blowing up!,” he said.

    “Yeah it is,” Palin said, “and the economy there is blowing up too.”

    “So we do cross border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan you think?,” Rovito asked.

    “If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should, Palin responded, before moving on to greet other voters.

    Where exactly does the breakdown in communication occur?? Is it that she hears words differently if she is otherwise engaged in… ya know, buying food? Is it even safe to say that, at the VERY least, she knew that they were talking about Afghanistan and Pakistan? Maybe it’s that she thought perhaps he meant in some fictional world where there is a place called Afghanistan and Pakistan and that he clearly didn’t mean THE Afghanistan and Pakistan?

    Straight talk express, my eye.

    September 25, 2008

    McCain Gambles In Effort To Regain The Offensive

    Isn’t that what we ALL do when life gets a little hard…. Take a time out!!

    – – –

    John McCain, losing ground as the economic crisis deepens, sought today to beat Barack Obama to the punch by suspending his campaign, postponing Friday’s presidential debate, and calling for an emergency meeting between the President, congressional leaders and both nominees to produce legislation addressing the threat of a Wall Street collapse and a dangerous recession.
    Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

    September 18, 2008

    Obama and the FM’s: Corrections

    Relevant corrections appear at the end of the original entry.

    This entry has been inspired by a comment that I received from a McCain supporter. I like to try to deal in fact as much as possible. Supporters on both sides are subject to being deceived by campaigns stretching the truth, cherry picking information and at times, even out right lying.

    Jen C left an “impassioned” response to my blog regarding Republicans Turning on McCain. It wasn’t MY blog, but a blog supplied by The Huffington Post (yes yes, that horrible Liberal Rag!) I somehow doubt that she actually READ the article, but c’est la vie!

    The icing on the cake from Jen’s response was a link to YouTube that she left of Obama “confessing” to being Muslim. ::rolls eyes:: Now, one would think that I wouldn’t waste time with such drivel, but it does give me the opportunity to highlight more lies from the McCain Camp.

    As such I am led to the following…

    As supplied by FactCheck:

    McCain’s allegation about Obama’s contributions from the FMs is not true. As we’ve said many times, it’s illegal for candidates to accept contributions directly from corporations. But the FEC does keep track of the employers of individuals who give at least $200 to candidates. And according to the respected nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, in the 2008 election cycle Barack Obama has received $18,150 from employees of Freddie Mac. CRP does not list any Obama contributions from Fannie Mae.

    Let’s not stop there:

    But Obama is not No. 2 on the list of those getting contributions from the two companies, as McCain said. In fact, he ranks fourth in combined contributions, trailing Sen. Christopher Dodd, Rep. Melissa Bean and Sen. Lamar Alexander. McCain also neglects to mention his own $9,500 from Freddie Mac.

    Somehow, I doubt that the John McCain supporters have a problem with McCain also receiving money from employees of Freddie Mac. Let’s call this one of those “educated guesses.”

    Furthermore:

    Obama is second on the list of those getting contributions from employees of only Freddie Mac. But, seriously, neither candidate’s number really makes much difference. Obama has raised more than $389.4 million in the 2008 election cycle. That makes his combined contributions from the FMs work out to roughly 0.005 percent of his total contributions.

    Know what is even more of a hoot??

    And McCain has raised about $174.2 million, making his combined FM contributions work out to … 0.005 percent.

    Oh and as far as his other ties to the FM’s?

    On June 4, Obama announced that Caroline Kennedy, Eric Holder and Jim Johnson would head his VP search committee. Kennedy, of course, is the daughter of JFK. Holder was Bill Clinton’s deputy attorney general. Johnson remained on Obama’s committee for just a week. He resigned on June 11, amid allegations that Johnson received preferential treatment from Countrywide Financial Corp.

    But Johnson wasn’t the current CEO of Fannie Mae, as you might think from listening to McCain. He left nine years ago, in 1999.

    Source: http://wire.factcheck.org/2008/09/18/freddie-fannie-and-barack/

    I, of course, respect voters decision to support John McCain, but before running with every little thing he says, they may want to verify it first. He’s been known to lie.

    In the interest of fairness and keeping voters informed: Obama’s Lies.

    ________________________________________________________________

    Source: http://wire.factcheck.org/2008/09/19/freddie-fannie-and-barack-%e2%80%94-corrected/

    Turns out, our initial post “Freddie, Fannie and Barack” was erroneous. We’ve struck out the incorrect sections from our earlier post.

    We said originally that Obama was the fourth largest recipient of donations from troubled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That’s wrong. Our post was drawn from data from the Center for Responsive Politics’ Web site, OpenSecrets.org. But the data we used were incomplete.

    We talked to a spokesperson from the Center for Responsive Politics who told us that looking at all election cycles since 1989 (the first year for which CRP has data), Barack Obama is in fact the second-largest recipient of contributions from employees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their unemployed spouses and dependent children and both of the FMs’ political action committees.

    According to CRP, Obama’s total contributions from the FMs work out to $126,349. Of that sum, $6,000 comes from the FMs’ political action committees, and the rest from individuals who work for one of the two companies. Obama’s FM contributions account for about 0.03 percent of his total contributions to date. McCain’s FM haul is a smaller $21,550, all from individuals. That’s about 0.01 percent of his total contributions. We stand by our doubts that either candidate will be much swayed by numbers of this size.