Archive for the ‘John McCain’ Category
McCain Concedes, Obama Elected 44th President In Our 233rd Year Of Independence
.
Senator John McCain’s Concession Speech:
.
We have come to the end of a long journey. The American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly.
A little while ago, I had the honor of calling senator Barack Obama to congratulate him on being elected the next president of the country that we both love. In a contest as long and difficult as this campaign has been, his success alone commands my respect for his ability and perseverance. But that he managed to do so by inspiring the hopes of so many millions of Americans who had once wrongly believed that they had little at stake or little influence in the election of an American president is something I deeply admire and commend him for achieving.
This is an historic election, and I recognize the special significance it has for African-Americans and for the special pride that must be theirs tonight.
I’ve always believed that America offers opportunities to all who have the industry and will to seize it. Senator Obama believes that, too.
But we both recognize that, though we have come a long way from the old injustices that once stained our nation’s reputation and denied some Americans the full blessings of American citizenship, the memory of them still had the power to wound.
A century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt’s invitation of Booker T. Washington to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage in many quarters.
America today is a world away from the cruel and frightful bigotry of that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African-American to the presidency of the United States.
Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth.Senator Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country. I applaud him for it, and offer him my sincere sympathy that his beloved grandmother did not live to see this day. Though our faith assures us she is at rest in the presence of her creator and so very proud of the good man she helped raise.
Senator Obama and I have had and argued our differences, and he has prevailed. No doubt many of those differences remain.
These are difficult times for our country. And I pledge to him tonight to do all in my power to help him lead us through the many challenges we face.
I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.
Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans. And please believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.
It is natural. It’s natural, tonight, to feel some disappointment. But tomorrow, we must move beyond it and work together to get our country moving again.
We fought — we fought as hard as we could. And though we fell short, the failure is mine, not yours.
I am so deeply grateful to all of you for the great honor of your support and for all you have done for me. I wish the outcome had been different, my friends.
The road was a difficult one from the outset, but your support and friendship never wavered. I cannot adequately express how deeply indebted I am to you.
I’m especially grateful to my wife, Cindy, my children, my dear mother and all my family, and to the many old and dear friends who have stood by my side through the many ups and downs of this long campaign.
I have always been a fortunate man, and never more so for the love and encouragement you have given me.
You know, campaigns are often harder on a candidate’s family than on the candidate, and that’s been true in this campaign.
All I can offer in compensation is my love and gratitude and the promise of more peaceful years ahead.
for their tireless dedication to our cause, and the courage and grace they showed in the rough and tumble of a presidential campaign.
I am also — I am also, of course, very thankful to Governor Sarah Palin, one of the best campaigners I have ever seen, and an impressive new voice in our party for reform and the principles that have always been our greatest strength, her husband Todd and their five beautiful children. We can all look forward with great interest to her future service to Alaska, the Republican Party and our country.
To all my campaign comrades, from Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter, to every last volunteer who fought so hard and valiantly, month after month, in what at times seemed to be the most challenged campaign in modern times, thank you so much. A lost election will never mean more to me than the privilege of your faith and friendship.
I don’t know — I don’t know what more we could have done to try to win this election. I’ll leave that to others to determine. Every candidate makes mistakes, and I’m sure I made my share of them. But I won’t spend a moment of the future regretting what might have been.
This campaign was and will remain the great honor of my life, and my heart is filled with nothing but gratitude for the experience and to the American people for giving me a fair hearing before deciding that Senator Obama and my old friend Senator Joe Biden should have the honor of leading us for the next four years.
I would not — I would not be an American worthy of the name should I regret a fate that has allowed me the extraordinary privilege of serving this country for a half a century.
Today, I was a candidate for the highest office in the country I love so much. And tonight, I remain her servant. That is blessing enough for anyone, and I thank the people of Arizona for it.
Tonight — tonight, more than any night, I hold in my heart nothing but love for this country and for all its citizens, whether they supported me or Senator Obama.
I wish Godspeed to the man who was my former opponent and will be my president. And I call on all Americans, as I have often in this campaign, to not despair of our present difficulties, but to believe, always, in the promise and greatness of America, because nothing is inevitable here.
Americans never quit! We never surrender! We never hide from history! We make history! Thank you, and God bless you, and God bless America.
YouTube’s Top Election Video Is Iraq War Vet’s McCain Endorsement
The video, titled ‘Dear Mr. Obama,’ has been viewed more than 11 million times!
If the election came down to YouTube viewers, a pro-John McCain video would be the winner.
A video of an Iraq veteran giving his endorsement to McCain is the site’s most watched election video, with 11 million views, according to the BBC, which calls it “short, simple and powerful.”
The video opens with a young man with close-cropped hair standing outside in casual clothes next to an American flag.
“Dear Mr. Obama,” he says, and describes himself as an Iraq war veteran, whose yearlong tour convinced him that Iraqis are “just like us” in seeking freedom.
“Are they better off today than they were in 2002? You bet,” he says.
.
John McCain – Hero, Maverick & Friend of Israel
John McCain – Hero, Maverick, Friend of the Jewish 
people.
His 22 year Senate record of unwavering support for Israel is unmatched. He believes that Jerusalem was, is and must always be the capitol of Israel.
Barack Obama is a untested, wavering and dangerous gamble for all who understand Israel is a needed and trusted friend of America. Obama’s flirtation with radical Muslims and Leftists makes him an unthinkable choice, an abomination to anyone who supports Israel and understands the complex nature of the Middle East.
.
2 Dumb Slate Staffers Split With Wiser Colleagues On Obama Vote!!
Andrew Malcom of the L.A. Times, (You know the newspaper so in the tank for Obama it is hiding a video of Obama at a Jew-bashing dinner attended by those people he hardly knows, Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers and his fellow terrorist wife, Bernadette Dohrn) reports, perhaps mocks Slate:
One writer has broken ranks with Slate’s slate of writers and intends to vote for John McCain! The Republican senator from Arizona!
No, really. We’re serious here.
And one other Slate writer intends to vote for Bob Barr! The Libertarian former Republican representative from Georgia!
Not just because Bob has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. But because the editor-at-large, Jack Shafer, explains he has chosen the Libertarian candidate ever since he started voting in 1972.
Jack admits there have been “a long line of chowderheads” atop the Libertarian ticket. But he feels that party comes closest to his ideal of limited government, free markets and noninterventionist foreign policy.
The rebel Republican over at Slate is Rachael Larimore, the deputy managing editor and copy chief, who’s a lifelong moderate GOP voter who admires McCain, is incapable of generating a ton of hate for that known Satan George W. Bush and hopes that a Democratic victory will help recharge the GOP in the long run for the benefit of our two-party system.
That leaves only 55 other Slate staffers who chose to ann
ounce their fealty to the Illinois fellow for a variety of reasons you can read for yourself here.
Editor David Plotz describes the political announcements as a sign of openness and because he, like his predecessors, says he does not believe that how writers write politically is affected by how writers think politically.
So rest assured the online vote at Slate has absolutely nothing to do with all this late-race trumped up empty chatter over media bias in favor of the handsome, eloquent Democrat with the darling family running against the grumpy old pilot who can’t use a BlackBerry or play tennis because his arms were allegedly broken so often and then shocked the media by picking as his running mate a Washington outsider, a non-Democrat female no less, who’s so opposed to abortion she didn’t get one herself.
That’s just widespread biased hooey. Forget about it because we say to.
–Andrew Malcolm
McCain Fact Versus Obama Fiction
Barack Obama and Joe Biden have consistently lied to Americans about John McCain’s plan. Their claims have failed every fact check from CBS to the Washington Post. John McCain is not going to raise taxes on middle class families.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the only ones in this race that plan to raise taxes. Their recent attacks have become increasingly misleading. Read the facts below to learn the truth about the McCain-Palin Health Care Plan.
The Truth about the McCain-Palin Health Care Plan
Barack Obama And Joe Biden Have Consistently Lied To Americans About John McCain’s Plan. Their claims have failed every fact-check – from CBS to the Washington Post. John McCain is not going to raise taxes on middle class families. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the only ones in this race that plan to raise taxes.
OBAMA FICTION
John McCain Will Tax Health Care Benefits For The First Time And Will Be the Largest Middle Class Tax Increase In History.
THE FACTS
This Obama charge is a blatant mischaracterization of the McCain Health Plan. It only focuses on the fact that the value of the employer provided insurance will now show up as additional income for the employees – what he fails to mention – is that John McCain’s generous refundable tax credit ($5,000 for families and $2,500 for individuals) will not only shield millions of families from a tax increase but will actually give them MORE dollars to invest in their health care needs.
The McCain Plan DOES NOT tax:
- Premiums paid by families and individuals
- Employers for providing health care coverage
- Medical expenses like the cost of a procedure or medication
- Insurance claims
Approach Supported By Obama’s Own Advisor: This is an approach supported by Barack Obama’s own Senior Economic Advisor Jason Furman who wrote that “we could scrap the current deduction altogether and replace it with progressive tax credits that, together with other changes, would ensure that every American has affordable health insurance.”
Better Than “Members of Congress”: Under the McCain Plan, your employer can provide you with health insurance as good as a “Member of Congress” (approximately $12,000), and you would pay no more in taxes – regardless of your tax bracket. In fact, you would have additional money left over from the McCain tax credit to put in a health savings account.
Where Is The Middle-Class “Tax Increase”? If you or your family is in the 28% bracket, with an income of $180,000, you could receive employer provided health insurance even better than a Member of Congress, with a cost of almost $18,000, with no increase in taxes. Even the liberal leaning Tax Policy Center, agrees that the McCain proposals will result in a “net tax benefit” of more than $1,200 for an average tax payer. A recent Lewin Group study estimated savings of more than $1,400 per American family – almost three times the savings as under the Obama plan.
OBAMA FICTION
The McCain Plan Will Reduce Medicare Spending By Billions By “Cutting Benefits, Eligibility or Both.”
THE FACTS
John McCain believes that we can achieve savings in Medicare without reducing benefits or eligibility. He has proposed common-sense reforms that will not only put Medicare on a path of financial stability but ensure access to quality care for millions of Americans. Some of the policies proposed by the McCain plan include:
- Promote payment reform that allows us to move away from the current fragmented and volume-based service to a system which rewards coordinated and quality focused care.
- Eliminate Medicare fraud and abuse to ensure that nearly $60 billion a year, almost 10 percent of total Medicare spending, that goes to line the pocket of criminals instead of providing quality care for seniors.
- Ensure that drug premiums for the wealthiest Americans are not being subsidized by the middle class.
- Promote a new generation of treatment models that better manage chronic care conditions while rewarding prevention and wellness.
- Greater use of Health IT and medical homes to promote greater co-ordination of care.
- Reduce drug costs by allowing greater use of generics (including bio-generics).
The Obama Spin: If some of the proposals above sound familiar to Senator Obama’s proposals including – better managing chronic care diseases, greater use of health IT, promoting prevention and greater use of generic drugs – because they are. Only the liberal media and the Obama campaign would characterize similar proposals as “savings” in the their plan and “cutting benefits, eligibility or both” in the McCain plan.
OBAMA FICTION
John McCain Will Tax Health Care Benefits For The First Time And Send The Money Straight To The Insurance Companies.
THE FACTS
Another desperate attack by the Obama campaign. Here is what they purposefully fail to mention – the credit goes to the insurance company that the American family chooses to get coverage from, anywhere in the nation. The power of choice lies with the family – not government bureaucrats or insurance companies.
- Putting Families In Charge: Under the McCain Plan American families will not only decide where the tax credit should be directed for their coverage needs but any additional money left over after purchasing coverage will be controlled by the family in a portable health savings account. Ridiculing this line of strange attack, The Associated Press stated, “Of course it would, because it’s meant to pay for insurance. That’s like saying money for a car loan will go straight to the car dealer.”
- Obama Criticizing His Own Approach: Most importantly, Senator Obama is criticizing an approach that is used by his own HOPE credits – where tax payer money simply goes from the federal government to colleges.
OBAMA FICTION
Americans With Pre-Existing Condition Under The McCain Plan Will Not Find Coverage.
THE FACTS
John McCain believes that no American should be denied access to quality and affordable coverage simply because of a pre-existing condition. As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow – a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP – that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.
OBAMA FICTION
The McCain Health Plan Will Damage Employer Provided Insurance For Millions of Americans.
THE FACTS
The McCain health plan builds on the employer-based system. Employers will have the same incentive to provide health insurance as they do today since they will continue to deduct the cost of health insurance they provide to employees.
- Millions With Employer Coverage Will Do Better Under The McCain Plan: Millions of American families with employer sponsored coverage in all tax brackets with the same coverage as a “Members of Congress” will now come out ahead with additional funds going into a portable health savings account. Importantly, younger and healthier employees with the McCain health care tax credit will have a bigger incentive to stay with the employers. For example, a 25-year-old employee in the 25 percent tax bracket with a $2,500 tax credit could either purchase a policy in the individual market for the same amount or stay with his employer plan and receive a $5,000 policy with an additional $1,250 to invest in a portable health savings account. Why would people choose fewer benefits for more money?
So Why Is Barack Obama Hiding Details About His Plan?
The Obama plan includes a $179 billion a year employer mandate. The mandate requires employers to either provide “meaningful” coverage or pay a tax towards the government plan. Faced with tough economic conditions and rising health costs this creates a clear incentive for employers to drop coverage and move families into the new government plan. A Lewin Group study which examined a similar employer mandate combined with a national plan, like the Obama plan, concluded that almost 52 million individuals would lose their private employer coverage. To maintain their competitive edge, others employers will follow – spelling the demise of the employer coverage system.
The Obama plan will create a brand new government-run health plan at the cost of $243 billion a year – a financial burden of more than $3,000 a year on American families.
The government-run plan will have a clear advantage over private insurance since it will be subsidized by American taxpayers. A recent analysis of both plans by the nonpartisan CATO Institute concluded that the Obama government-run plan will be able to “keep its premiums artificially low…since it can turn to the U.S. Treasury to cover any shortfalls” resulting in “undercutting the private market.” According to Wall Street Journal, the goal of the Obama plan “…like HillaryCare in the 1990s, is to displace current private coverage and switch people to the default government option.”
“Conned by Obama Mania” – How McCain Can Win
Despite polls that show Barack Obama ahead, one McCain stratagist sees a scenerio that will give victory to John McCain. Lewis Oliver is the Chairman of McCain’s campaign in Central Florida. He says little things such as Palin on Saturday Night Live and gaffs by Joe Biden have given McCain momentum and undecideds will break towards the candidate who looks like he is going to win.
McCain Criticism of Obama & Administration Stepped Up
Sen. John McCain meets with local business leaders at Buckingham Smokehouse Bar-B-Q in Columbia, Mo.
John McCain told those gathered for a town hall meeting in Lima, in northwest Ohio, that Obama is a talented orator with an agenda that could be boiled down to simple policies the Arizona Republican opposes.
After the two waged a fierce campaign for the Republican nomination in 2000, McCain has remained a persistent burr in Bush’s side, White House insiders have recounted. Some recent quotes from McCain seem to indicate he has finally figured out what really concerns Americans:
.
Government is too big, Obama wants to grow it. Taxes are to high, he wants to raise them, Congress spends too much and he proposes more. We need more energy and he’s against producing it. We’re finally winning in Iraq, and he wants to forfeit.”
I am so disturbed that this administration has not done what we have to do, and that is to go out and buy up these bad mortgages,”
Pew Research: Most Voters Say Media Wants Obama to Win
Voters overwhelmingly believe that the media wants Barack Obama to win the presidential election. By a margin of 70%-9%, Americans say most journalists want to see Obama, not John McCain, win on Nov. 4. Another 8% say journalists don’t favor either candidate, and 13% say they don’t know which candidate most reporters support.
In recent presidential campaigns, voters repeatedly have said they thought journalists favored the Democratic candidate over the Republican. But this year’s margin is particularly wide.
At this stage of the 2004 campaign, 50% of voters said most journalists wanted to see John Kerry win the election, while 22% said most journalists favored George Bush. In October 2000, 47% of voters said journalists wanted to see Al Gore win and 23% said most journalists wanted Bush to win. In 1996, 59% said journalists were pulling for Bill Clinton.
In the current campaign, Republicans, Democrats and independents all feel that the media wants to see Obama win the election. Republicans are almost unanimous in their opinion: 90% of GOP voters say most journalists are pulling for Obama. More than six-in-ten Democratic and independent voters (62% each) say the same.
The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.
Coverage of McCain has been heavily unfavorable — and has become more so over time. In the six weeks following the conventions through the final debate, unfavorable stories about McCain outweighed favorable ones by a factor of more than three-to-one — the most unfavorable of all four candidates — according to the study by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.
For Obama during this period, just over a third of the stories were clearly positive in tone (36%), while a similar number (35%) were neutral or mixed. A smaller number (29%) were negative.
For McCain, by comparison, nearly six-in-ten stories studied were decidedly negative in nature (57%), while fewer than two-in-ten (14%) were positive.
Study Shows McCain Media Coverage Mostly Negative
The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s report shows John McCain’s media coverage has been 57 percent negative, while Barack Obama’s has been 29% negative.
John McCain may long for the days when Barack Obama got the lion’s share of the media attention: Coverage of the Republican candidate has been overwhelmingly negative since the conventions ended, a study released Wednesday found.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s report illustrates how the media echo chamber can send things spiraling out of control for a candidate. It’s likely to give ammunition to people who say the press has been biased against McCain, but the organization said its findings on this were inconclusive.
“It’s quite possible for there to be elements of enthusiasm for one candidate or another,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Washington-based think tank. “That’s a failure of professionalism if it’s there. But this report can’t suss it out.”
McCain and Obama have received an equal amount of media attention since the conventions.
The project judged 57 percent of the stories about McCain as negative, with 14 percent positive. The rest were neutral.
Obama’s coverage was mixed: 36 percent positive, 29 percent negative, 35 percent neutral, the study found.
Sarah Palin
Sarah Palin has received three times the press attention as the Democratic vice presidential candidate, Joe Biden, the study found. Her stories were judged 39 percent negative, 33 percent mixed and 28 percent positive.
Palin’s coverage started out positive but turned when reporters went to Alaska to check on her record as governor. The study found only 5 percent of the stories were about Palin’s family, most of them in the days after it was revealed her daughter was pregnant.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism studied some 2,412 stories from 48 news outlets for its study, including newspapers, Web sites and broadcast and cable news. A smaller sample, 857 stories, was used to judge the tone of the coverage.
Military Times: Troops Support McCain 3-to-1 Over Obama!
Well known leftist-leaning Gannett News Service, which owns a multitude of newspapers, radio stations, and magazines in the U.S. and the UK, also has a long history of supporting the Democrat Party.
Gannett also owns the Military Times.
A military-wide presidential poll of active-duty soldiers from all branches, conducted by the Military Times, shows McCain hugely favored over Obama.
If Soldiers Could Choose Their Own Commander-in-Chief
(Source: Military Times Poll for 2008 Presidential Election)
.
| All Branches | McCain | Obama | Uncommitted |
| ALL BRANCHES | 68% | 23% | 9% |
| White non-Hispanic | 76% | 17% | 7% |
| African-American | 12% | 79% | 9% |
| Hispanic-Latino | 63% | 27% | 10% |
| “Other” Race Specified | 58% | 30% | 12% |
| By Rank | McCain | Obama | Uncommitted |
| Enlisted Military | 67% | 24% | 9% |
| Military Officers | 70% | 22% | 8% |
| By Branch | McCain | Obama | Uncommitted |
| Army | 68% | 23% | 9% |
| Navy | 69% | 24% | 7% |
| Air Force | 67% | 24% | 9% |
| Marines | 75% | 18% | 7% |
| By Gender | McCain | Obama | Uncommitted |
| Men | 70% | 22% | 8% |
| Women | 53% | 36% | 11% |
| By Age | McCain | Obama | Uncommitted |
| 18-34 | 65% | 27% | 8% |
| 35 and older | 70% | 21% | 9% |
With the obvious exception of the racial slant in the black vote, which like the civilian black voting bloc mostly trends heavily towards the candidate running as an African-American, no other sector of the military comes even close to supporting Barack Obama for Commander-in-Chief.
Now, Obama supporters point to Powell. But Powell is a known political opportunist who has clearly taken a side against active duty military members before, and again in this election.
They will attempt to discredit the published results by claiming some right-wing slant. But the Military Times is owned and edited by left-leaning Gannett News Service.
They will call all non-black members of the military “racists” for opposing Obama, just like they label other Americans opposing Obama as “racists.” Never mind the overt racism in the black vote.
They might even try to label these men and women in uniform “fascists” – since they don’t know what a “fascist” really is and have misused the name to describe Bush and Cheney for years now.
But they can’t hurt our soldier’s feelings anymore than they already have by calling them “terrorists” running “Gulags” and “torture chambers.”
Yet the facts remain…
Active troops support John McCain 3-to-1 over Barack Obama.
Colin Powell stands to personally gain power and money by supporting Obama. What do the troops stand to gain by supporting John McCain for Commander-in-Chief?
As the men and women actually in Iraq and Afghanistan, who know best what is happening on the ground there and in many other dangerous places around the globe, does their opinion matter to average Americans back home? Do they matter to you?
What do we mean when we say “we support the troops?”
There is no ambiguity in the results of the military poll that shows all branches combined still support McCain by 68% over only 23% for Obama.
What does this mean about Americans back home who do not have their lives on the line, when they vote against the troops?
Who is better qualified to choose the next Commander-in-Chief? The troops “we support,” or the millions back home who have never put on a uniform or taken up a weapon in defense of this nation?
Who has more at stake than our troops in harm’s way, when deciding who the next Commander-in-Chief will be?
What does it say about you if their opinion doesn’t matter to you?
John McCain is “one of them!”
Barack Obama is so far from being “one of them,” that he can’t even begin to imagine what it is to be “one of them.”
The troops will serve under anyone we elect. Some of them will die under whomever we elect.
Do you have what it really takes to “support our troops?” Colin Powell doesn’t… Colin Powell has once again chosen to serve himself.
Read those numbers above. Think about the men and women who answered those surveys. Try to imagine what this election means to them. Then ask yourself why they won’t support Barack Hussein Obama for their next Commander-in-Chief…
Then ask yourself, how can you?
You can stand with leftists attempting to serve themselves if you like…
I, on the other hand, will SUPPORT THE TROOPS who support McCain!
.
More Endorsements Roll McCain’s Way
The Dallas Morning News endorsed McCain on Oct. 18:
In better times, America could afford to consider entrusting the White House to an appealing newcomer like Mr. Obama and giving control of the presidency and Congress to the same party.
But in this time of great anxiety, the American people need a leader of experience guiding the ship of state. Mr. McCain offers the continuity, stability and sense of authority people want, as well as a decisive break from the Bush years.
The Democrat talks about change, but only the Republican has made change happen. Only one candidate has a solid record of standing up to his own party on principle and working hand in hand with legislators from the opposing party to get things done.
That candidate is John McCain, a progressive conservative we recommend.”
The Tampa (Fla.) Tribune endorsed McCain on Oct. 17:
Hard economic times, a disappointing Republican administration and the seductive promises of a master orator are pushing America toward a European-style social democracy. If you don’t want that to happen, vote for Republican Sen. John McCain. …
McCain brings a lifetime of useful experience, including his grueling captivity in Vietnam and long Senate service. He believes in federalism, a strong defense and disciplined self-interest.
McCain has been willing to cross party lines to work on tough problems. He co-authored a campaign finance law that failed to fulfill its objective, but he did muster the bipartisan support needed to try to control the buying and selling of public office. …
(Barack) Obama’s vision of hope shines like a rainbow, appealing but just out of reach. McCain’s call to freedom and responsibility is less exciting, but you know it works. The Tribune encourages voters to vote what they believe, not what they wish were true. The nation needs a stable leader in these unpredictable times.”
Annual Alfred Smith Dinner: McCain, Obama Roasted
.
Edward Cardinal Egan is flanked by presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama at Thursday nights annual Al Smith dinner
Appropriately, Republican John McCain was seated to Edward Cardinal Egan’s right at Thursday night’s annual Al Smith Dinner – Democrat Barack Obama to his left. Donning white tie and tails, they put aside political rancor to roast and toast each other with equal relish.
.
.
McCain got the ball rolling with a mock announcement that he had fired his entire team of high-priced advisers, as he once did last summer. “All of their positions will now be held by a man named Joe the Plumber,” deadpanned McCain, referring to real-life plumber Joe Wurzelbacher of Ohio, who became a minor star of the candidates’ final debate Wednesday.
As for those who question whether Joe would have enough money to pay his taxes under an Obama administration, McCain whispered that Joe “recently signed a very lucrative contract with a wealthy couple to handle all the work on all seven of their houses” – a reference to McCain’s many homes.
Obama got off his own zingers, beginning by telling the tuxedoed crowd that there is no other group in America that he would rather be “palling around” with, a dig at McCain ads asserting that Obama consorted with one-time radical William Ayers.
“It’s often been said that I share the politics of Alfred E. Smith,” said Obama, “and the ears of Alfred E. Neuman.” The Illinois senator also paid homage to the dinner’s location at the Waldorf-Astoria. “I hear from the doorstep, you can see all the way to the Russian Tea Room,” he cracked in a shot at GOP veep nominee Sarah Palin’s boast that she can see Russia from Alaska.
In another riff, Obama said “contrary to the rumors you have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father, Jor-el, to save the planet Earth,” a shoutout to Superman.
With Mayor Bloomberg sitting just a few feet away, Obama also got in a dig at the mayor’s bid to seek a third term. “The mayor recently announced some news … by announcing he is going to be rewriting the rules and running for a third term, which caused Bill Clinton to say, ‘You can do that?’” joked Obama, causing the nearby Hillary Clinton to throw back her head in laughter.
But both men’s jokes ended with poignant salutes to each other for a battle well-fought, offering what amounted to a goodbye. The two men are not expected to share the same stage again this election.
“There was a time when a mere invitation of an African-American citizen to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage and an insult,” said McCain, adding, “I can’t wish my opponent luck, but I do wish him well.”
Said Obama, “There are very few of us that have served this country with the same dedication and honor and distinction as Senator McCain.”
The 63rd annual dinner, named in honor of the four-term governor of New York in the 1920s, raised $4 million for the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation. Smith’s great-grandson, Alfred Smith 4th, began the evening by joking that he hoped both vice presidential nominees, Palin and Democrat Joe Biden, would also attend. “But Sarah Palin is at the state troopers’ ball,” quipped Smith, “and Joe Biden couldn’t find a white tie and tails at Home Depot.”
Fight!
Didn’t Obama say, at last night’s debate, that 100% of all McCain ads were negative smears?
Just another example of how Obama constantly lies and distorts…all with that snide grin on his face.
Final Debate: Complete Breakdown Of Obama’s Lies & Distortions
OBAMA DISTORTION #1: Barack Obama Will Cut Taxes For 95% Of American Taxpayers
Barack Obama once-again repeat the line that his tax plan means a tax cut for 95% of American taxpayers. This is NOT TRUE. Forty percent of Americans don’t pay income taxes but Barack Obama is proposing a refundable tax credit which “in the real world is known as ‘welfare.’”
The Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberly Strassel: Barack Obama Says He Will Cut Taxes For 95% Of Americans Even Though 40% Don’t Pay Taxes. “To kick off our show tonight, Mr. Obama will give 95% of American working families a tax cut, even though 40% of Americans today don’t pay income taxes! How can our star enact such mathemagic? How can he ‘cut’ zero? Abracadabra! It’s called a ‘refundable tax credit.’ It involves the federal government taking money from those who do pay taxes, and writing checks to those who don’t. Yes, yes, in the real world this is known as ‘welfare,’ but please try not to ruin the show.” (Kimberly Strassel, Op-Ed, “Obama’s Magic,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/10/08)
OBAMA DISTORTION #2: John McCains $5,000 Health Care Tax Credit Goes Directly To Insurance Companies, Leaving Families On Their Own To Pay McCains Tax On Health Insurance Benefits
Barack Obama once-again claimed that John McCain’s $5,000 health care tax credit goes directly to the insurance companies leaving families to pay a tax on health insurance benefits. This is NOT TRUE. If Barack Obama was honest about the health care system, he would conclude like PolitiFact that there is “excellent reason that the credit goes to the insurance companies.”
PolitiFact: “Excellent Reason That The Credit Goes To The Insurance Companies.” “But then the ad says, ‘McCains own Web site said it goes straight to the insurance companies, not to you, leaving you on your own to pay McCains health insurance tax.’ McCain’s Web site does say that, but there’s an excellent reason that the credit goes to the insurance companies. It’s so people don’t blow the tax credit on cigarettes and beer (or whatever else they’d like) instead of health insurance. Under McCain’s plan, workers would pay taxes on the health exemption, but they would get $2,500 knocked off their health insurance bill. If workers come out ahead and there’s money left over, that would go into a health spending account for them to spend on health-related incidentals.” (“McCain’s Plan Includes Tax Switch,” PolitiFact, 10/3/08)
OBAMA DISTORTION #3: John McCain’s Health Care Plan Will Hurt Middle-Income Families
Tonight, Barack Obama will once-again claim that John McCain’s health care plan will hurt middle-class families. This is NOT TRUE. According to independent third party sources, middle-class families would see a rise in after-tax income.
A Middle Class Family Under John McCain’s Plan Would See Their After-Tax Income Rise. “To take Biden’s comparison one step further, consider his $40,000 family whose insurance cost $12,000. That family is in the 15 percent tax bracket. So, multiplying that additional $12,000 in income by 15 percent means that the family in Biden’s example currently gets an $1,800 federal income-tax break. McCain’s tax break for that family would be $5,000.” (Kevin Freking, “Biden Misleads With Accusation Of Tax Increase,” The Associated Press, 9/26/08)
Tax Policy Center: “But Low- And Middle-Income Workers Would Still See A Rise In After-Tax Income.” “By 2018, high-income households would be worse off under McCain’s plan than they would have been under current law because the credit would be worth less than the current tax exclusion. But low- and middle-income workers would still see a rise in after-tax income, the center projected.” (Kevin Freking, “Biden Misleads With Accusation Of Tax Increase,” The Associated Press, 9/26/08)
OBAMA DISTORTION #4: John McCains Tax Plan Favors Oil Companies.
Tonight, Barack Obama will once-again claim that John McCain’s tax plan favors oil companies. This is NOT TRUE. John McCain’s tax plan favors all companies in the United States, will create jobs here, and is even being considered by Barack Obama.
FactCheck.org: Barack Obama Claim Is “Misleading” Because “McCain Is Not Proposing Any Special Tax Breaks For The Oil Industry.” “The ad’s claim that ‘McCain wants to give [oil companies] another $4 billion in tax breaks’ is also somewhat misleading. McCain is not proposing any special tax breaks for the oil industry. What he’s proposing is a reduction in the corporate income tax rate for all companies.” (Brooks Jackson And Emi Kolawole, “Obama’s Overstatement,” FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_overstatement.html, 8/4/08)
Obama Economic Policy Director Jason Furman: “[Barack Obama] Would Like To Cut The Corporate Tax Rate, And It’s A Question That We’re Studying.” “Here are two things you don’t often hear mentioned in the same sentence: Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and a lower corporate tax rate. But it appears the Illinois senator is at least considering such a measure. ‘He would like to cut the corporate tax rate, and it’s a question that we’re studying,’ Jason Furman, Obama’s director of economic policy, told Forbes.com in an interview this week. Obama’s Republican rival, Arizona Sen. John McCain, proposes to lower the maximum corporate tax rate from 35% to 25% (see: ‘McCain And The Economy’). Obama hasn’t made such a pledge, and Furman won’t say by how much or when Obama might slash corporate tax rates. But if it does happen, Furman says, ‘It’ll be much better for the economy and much better for businesses than what John McCain has proposed.’” (Brian Wingfield, “Obama’s Taxing Policies,” Forbes.com, 7/31/08)
OBAMA DISTORTION #5: John McCain Will Cut Social Security Benefits In Half
Tonight, Barack Obama may claim that John McCain will cut Social Security benefits in half. This is NOT TRUE. Numerous independent fact check organizations have said that Barack Obama is using this “false” charge “to frighten seniors.”
On September 19, 2008, FactCheck.org Criticized Obama-Biden For Launching A “False” Social Security Ad. “In a Sept. 19 article we criticized an Obama-Biden ad for its false insinuation that Sen. John McCain favored massive cuts in current Social Security benefits.” (Brooks Jackson, “More Social Security Spin,” FactCheck.org, 10/2/08)
On September 20, 2008, FactCheck.org Criticized Barack Obama For Making “False” Social Security Attacks On The Campaign Trail. “And in a Sept. 20 article we criticized Obama for claiming in a stump speech that Social Security recipients would have had their money tied up in the stock market if the plan McCain once endorsed had been enacted. That was also false.” (Brooks Jackson, “More Social Security Spin,” FactCheck.org, 10/2/08)
FactCheck.org: Obama Ad That Says The “Bush-McCain Privatization Plan” Will Cut Social Security Benefits In Half Is A “Falsehood Sure To Frighten Seniors.” “A new Obama ad characterizes the ‘Bush-McCain privatization plan’ as ‘cutting Social Security Benefits in half.’ This is a falsehood sure to frighten seniors who rely on their Social Security checks. In truth, McCain does not propose to cut those checks at all.” (Lori Robertson and Brooks Jackson, “Scaring Seniors,” FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/scaring_seniors.html, 9/19/08)
PolitiFact: Obama-Biden “Using Some Scare Tactics” On Social Security. “We also think Obama may have been guilty of using some scare tactics here.” (“Obama Overstates McCain’s Plan, Whatever That Is,” PolitiFact.com, 9/20/08)
DEBATE FACT #1: BARACK OBAMA HAS MUCH TALK BUT NO LEADERSHIP
Summary:.
Barack Obama talks about his economic leadership but he was “mum” on the crisis for weeks.
The Facts About Barack Obama:
Barack Obama Did Not Make Calls To Round Up Votes For The Economic Recovery Package
Obama Aides Concede Obama Did Not Make Calls To Round Up Votes. ABC’s JOHN BERMAN: “The McCain campaign has been hammering Obama suggesting he did not take a leading role in the financial negotiations.” SEN. MCCAIN: “At first, he didn’t want to get involved. Then, he was monitoring the situation.” BERMAN: “Indeed, Obama aides say he did not make any calls to help round up votes.” (ABC’s “Good Morning America,” 9/30/08)
Barack Obama “Hinted That Had He Known Earlier The Deal Was Going Down To Defeat He Would Have Worked The Phones Even Harder.” “Obama also hinted that had he known earlier the deal was going down to defeat he would have worked the phones even harder, especially given that some of those who voted no, were some of his early supporters.” (Lee Cowan, “Obama Places No Blame, But…” MSNBC’s “First Read” Blog, http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/30/1471678.aspx, Posted 9/30/08)
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) Said He Did Not Feel Pressure To Vote For The Bailout Bill. “Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., told me yesterday that he felt no pressure at all to vote for the bill. ‘For me it was an easy decision,’ Johnson said. ‘The bill has nothing in there that mandates workouts of these foreclosures that are pending. We have up to 5 million that are meant to occur over the next year.’” (Jake Tapper, “And What About Those 95 Democrats?” ABC News’ “Political Punch” Blog, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/and-what-about.html, Posted 9/30/08)
Barack Obama Was “Mum” On The Financial Crisis
The Washington Times: “Obama Mum On Market Crisis.” “Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama opted Friday not to divulge details of his recovery plan for the financial crisis after a morning meeting with his top economic advisers – fearing it would stir Wall Street jitters.” (S.A. Miller, “Obama Mum On Market Crisis,” The Washington Times, 9/20/08)
Barack Obama “Opted Friday Not To Divulge Details Of His Recovery Plan For The Financial Crisis.” “Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama opted Friday not to divulge details of his recovery plan for the financial crisis after a morning meeting with his top economic advisers — fearing it would stir Wall Street jitters.” (S.A. Miller, “Obama Mum On Market Crisis,” The Washington Times, 9/20/08)
Fox News’ Major Garrett Reported That Barack Obama Would Not Take A Position On Whether Or Not He Supported Or Opposed The Government Rescue Of AIG. GARRETT: “On the biggest financial issue of the day, Barack Obama would not say if he supported or opposed the government-backed rescue of insurance giant AIG.” BARACK OBAMA: “We don’t know all the details of the arrangement with AIG and the Federal Reserve must ensure that plans protect the families that count on insurance.” GARRETT: “Obama also wants taxpayers protected but executives and shareholders exposed but on the central question to intervene or not, Obama sidestepped. Advisers said lack of details forced caution. The larger political truth: advisors believe anxiety alone is enough to lift Obama in the polls. That is why on the trail, Obama doesn’t talk about specifics of the moment but the nation’s overall direction.” (Fox News’ “The Special Report,” 9/17/08)
Joe Biden On The AIG Bailout: “It’s Hard To Judge That Right Now.” JOE BIDEN: “Its hard to second guess. I havent spoken with the Secretary. I mean theres no good answer because it was the spot the policies of the last eight years that put us in. So its hard to judge that right now, in my spot right here.” (ABC’s “Good Morning America,” 9/18/08)
3) DEBATE FACT #2: BARACK OBAMA HAS A STRONG TAX INCREASE AGENDA
Summary:.
Barack Obama has a strong tax increase agenda that will impact small businesses.
The Facts About The Obama-Biden Agenda And Barack Obama’s Record
Obama-Biden Has Called For Higher Income Taxes, Social Security Taxes, Capital Gains And Dividend Taxes, And Corporate Taxes, As Well As “Massive New Domestic Spending.” “Obama’s transformation, if you go by his campaign so far, would mean higher income taxes, higher Social Security taxes, higher investment taxes, higher corporate taxes, massive new domestic spending, and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system. Is that what most Americans want, someone who will fulfill a Democratic policy wish list?” (James Pethokoukis, “Barack Hussein Reagan? Ronald Wilson Obama?” U.S. News & World Report‘s “Capital Commerce” Blog, 2/12/08)
Obama-Biden Will Increase Capital Gains And Dividend Taxes. Obama Economic Advisors Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee: The top capital-gains rate for families making more than $250,000 would return to 20% The tax rate on dividends would also be 20% for families making more than $250,000, rather than returning to the ordinary income rate. (Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee, Op-Ed, The Obama Tax Plan, The Wall Street Journal, 8/14/08)
Tax Policy Center: Obama-Biden Would Raise Taxes On One Out Of Every Three Senior Households. “Even though Senator Obama’s plan eliminates individual income taxes for seniors with incomes less than $50,000, his plan would raise taxes for almost 10 million senior households, over a third of the total (not shown in table). On average, seniors would face a tax increase of about 2 percent of income.” (Burman et al., “A Preliminary Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans,” The Tax Policy Center, 6/11/08)
Obama-Biden Would Raise Income Taxes. Obama: “[I] would roll back the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000.” (Sen. Barack Obama, CNN Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 6/3/07)
U.S. Department Of Treasury: Small Business Owners “Are Frequently Subject To The Highest Individual Income Tax Rates.” (“Topics Related To The President’s Tax Relief,” U.S. Department Of Treasury, http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/reports/president_taxrelief_topics_0508.pdf, May 2008)
Obama-Biden Would Raise Social Security Taxes. “Obama’s proposal would impose social security taxes on income above $250,000 per year. He would continue to exempt income between $102,000 and $250,000 from social security taxes.” (Teddy Davis, Sunlen Miller, and Gregory Wallace, “Obama Kisses Billions Goodbye,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, blogs.abcnews.com http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-kisses-bi.html, 6/18/08)
Obama-Biden Called For A Tax On Coal And Natural Gas. Obama: “What we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (“Q&A With Sen. Barack Obama,” San Antonio Express-News, 2/19/08)
Obama-Biden Called For A Tax On Oil. Obama: “I think it is appropriate for us to impose a windfall profits tax on our oil companies.”(Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Charlotte, NC, 5/2/08)
The Washington Post: Barack Obama’s Tax On Oil Companies Will Only Lead To “Higher Prices At The Pump.” (Editorial, “Tapping Tired Wells,” The Washington Post, 8/6/08)
FactCheck.org: “Obama’s Votes Indicate A Willingness To Raise Taxes.” “Certainly Obama’s votes indicate a willingness to raise taxes, and Obama has not been shy about saying explicitly that he will raise some taxes.” (“The $32,000 Question,” FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_32000_question.html, 7/8/08)
4) DEBATE FACT #3: BARACK OBAMA IS “MISLEADING” ON TAX CUTS FOR OIL COMPANIES
Summary:.
Barack Obama is wrong when he says John McCain supports tax cuts for oil companies.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
Barack Obama’s Claim Is “Misleading” According To Non-Partisan Fact-Check Organizations
FactCheck.org: Barack Obama Claim Is “Misleading” Because “McCain Is Not Proposing Any Special Tax Breaks For The Oil Industry.” “The ad’s claim that ‘McCain wants to give [oil companies] another $4 billion in tax breaks’ is also somewhat misleading. McCain is not proposing any special tax breaks for the oil industry. What he’s proposing is a reduction in the corporate income tax rate for all companies.” (Brooks Jackson And Emi Kolawole, “Obama’s Overstatement,” FactCheck.org, http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_overstatement.html, 8/4/08)
PolitiFact: Obama’s Statement “Barely True,” As Obama Is “Cherry-Picking” On Tax Cut, As “The Corporate Tax Rate Reduction Would Apply To ALL Corporations.” “Obama is cherry-picking here. The corporate tax rate reduction would apply to ALL corporations. Yes, Exxon Mobil, but also to Wal-Mart, General Motors and Home Depot, to name a few of the other Fortune 50 biggies. Even everybody’s favorite, Starbucks, would get the same tax break. Obama’s statement is technically true, but singling out oil companies suggests McCain has targeted oil companies for tax breaks. He hasn’t. We rate Obama’s statement, and the claim in the ad, Barely True.” (“Big Oil, Like All Companies, Would Get Tax Break,” PolitiFact.com http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/563/, Accessed 8/4/08)
Barack Obama Said That He Too Supports Cutting Taxes For Corporations
In A Wall Street Journal Interview, Barack Obama Said That He Was Considering Lowering Corporate Taxes. “Sen. Obama’s nod to lowering corporate taxes comes as Republicans have been attacking him for proposals that would raise the cost of doing business, such as his pledge to raise the tax rate on capital gains, and his vow to increase the top income-tax rates, which are often used by small, unincorporated enterprises. He didn’t say how deeply he would cut the rate, but said it could be trimmed in return for reducing corporate tax breaks, simplifying the tax system.” (Bob Davis and Amy Chozick, “Obama Plans Spending Boost, Possible Cut In Business Tax,” The Wall Street Journal, 6/17/08)
Obama Economic Policy Director Jason Furman: “[Barack Obama] Would Like To Cut The Corporate Tax Rate, And It’s A Question That We’re Studying.” (Brian Wingfield, “Obama’s Taxing Policies,” Forbes.com, 7/31/08)
Barack Obama Voted For The 2005 Energy Bill Containing Billions In Tax Breaks For Big Oil
Barack Obama Voted For The 2005 Energy Bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #152: Motion Agreed To 92-4: R 53-1; D 38-3; I 1-0, 6/23/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #158: Passed 85-12: R 49-5; D 35-7; I 1-0, 6/28/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 74-26: R 49-6; D 25-19; I 0-1, 7/29/05, Obama Voted Yea)
The 2005 Energy Bill Included $2.8 Billion In Subsidies For Oil And Natural Gas Production. “The conference agreement provides for $14.6 billion in tax breaks and credits between 2005 and 2015, including: — $2.8 billion for fossil fuel production…” (Toni Johnson, “CQ Bill Analysis: HR 6,” Congressional Quarterly‘s “CQ Bill Analysis,” http://www.cq.com: http://www.cq.com/, Accessed 7/14/08)
Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY): “When It Came Time To Stand Up Against The Oil Companies, To Stand Against Dick Cheney’s Energy Bill, My Opponent Voted For It And I Voted Against It.” (Aaron Burns, “Clinton Questions Obama’s Oil Company Claims,” Fox News’ “Embeds” Blog, 4/25/08)
5) DEBATE FACT #4: WHAT IS 95%?
Summary:.
Barack Obama is talking about 95% but it is misleading.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
The Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberly Strassel:Barack Obama Says He Will Cut Taxes For 95% Of Americans Even Though 40% Don’t Pay Taxes. “To kick off our show tonight, Mr. Obama will give 95% of American working families a tax cut, even though 40% of Americans today don’t pay income taxes! How can our star enact such mathemagic? How can he ‘cut’ zero? Abracadabra! It’s called a ‘refundable tax credit.’ It involves the federal government taking money from those who do pay taxes, and writing checks to those who don’t. Yes, yes, in the real world this is known as ‘welfare,’ but please try not to ruin the show.” (Kimberly Strassel, Op-Ed, “Obama’s Magic,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/10/08)
Tax Policy Center: Over 10 Years, Barack Obama Will Devote $1.05 Trillion To Households Paying No Income Tax – An Additional $647.51 Than Under Current Law. (Table T08-0191, “Senator Barack Obama’s Non-Health Tax Proposals As Described By His Economic Advisors: Impact On Outlays And Tax Units With No Individual Income Tax Liability, 2009-18,” Tax Policy Center, 7/25/08)
Tax Policy Center: Under Obama’s Plan, He Would Direct $100.6 Billion In 2009 To Households Who Pay No Income Tax. (Table T08-0191, “Senator Barack Obama’s Non-Health Tax Proposals As Described By His Economic Advisors: Impact On Outlays And Tax Units With No Individual Income Tax Liability, 2009-18,” Tax Policy Center, 7/25/08)
According To The Tax Foundation, Under The Obama Tax Plan 63 Million Americans “Would Have No Income Tax Liability And Most Of Those Would Get A Check From The IRS Each Year.” “The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year.” (Editorial, “Obama’s 95% Illusion,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/13/08)
The Wall Street Journal: Barack Obama’s Tax Plan Has “Several Sleights Of Hand.” “It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of ‘tax cut.’” (Editorial, “Obama’s 95% Illusion,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/13/08)
New York Post: “[O]bama’s ‘Tax Cuts’ Really Amount To A Sizable Expansion Of Welfare.” “In other words, Obama’s ‘tax cuts’ really amount to a sizable expansion of welfare. That leaves American taxpayers to foot the bill – both directly, and through the lost economic opportunity that’s sure to follow Obama’s promised tax hikes on income, dividends and capital gains.” (Editorial, “Ready, Set Spend!” New York Post, 10/14/08)
The Washington Times’ Donald Lambro: Some Say Barack Obama’s Tax Plan Looks “Suspiciously Like Welfare.” “Barack Obama says he will give 95 percent of all American workers a tax cut but does not mention that his plan would send checks to tens of millions of tax filers who pay no personal income taxes – payments that critics say look ‘suspiciously like welfare.’” (Donald Lambro, “Obama Tax Cut ‘Refunds’ Those Who Don’t Pay,” The Washington Times, 10/13/08)
Americans For Tax Reform: “‘Refundable Tax Credits’ Means That If You Zero Out Your Income Tax Liability, The Government Gives You A Welfare Check. This Isn’t An Income Tax Cut-It’s Spending.” “Most of the ‘tax cuts’ Obama claims credit for is in fact spending. ‘Refundable tax credits’ means that if you zero out your income tax liability, the government gives you a welfare check. This isn’t an income tax cut-it’s spending. According to the Tax Foundation, one-third of households don’t have an income tax liability.” (Americans For Tax Reform, “Americans For Tax Reform Calls Obama ‘Tax Calculator’ Inaccurate And Misleading,” Press Release, 10/14/08)
6) DEBATE FACT #5: WHO IS JOE THE PLUMBER?
“That’s the American Dream to me. You work hard. Youre going to get what you want eventually. It’s not going to happen overnight by no means, but if you work hard enough you will get it. I resent the government or Obama’s plan to take more away from me.” - Joe Wurzelbacher, AKA Joe The Plumber
Watch Joe here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpZLMPoQ8VI
FOX News’ “Your World”
October 14, 2008
Neil Cavuto: “Well, you know, you’re the type of guy who these tax increases of his could affect, or with a cutoff that his could affect, and you don’t fit this gazillionaire model. In other words, you’re not the Henry Kravis types, but you’re in that group that would see your taxes hiked. What do you think of that?”
Joe Wurzelbacher: “Well, it’s, you know – I don’t know how much of the video is shown, but I’m living in a simple middle-class home. Most of the homes go from anywhere from $90,000 at the lowest to maybe $140,000 at the highest. You know, just working, and when I do purchase the rest of this company and move forward, I will be living there still, because, one, I don’t want to keep up with the Joneses, and two, I just couldn’t really afford a bigger house. Im going to have to work harder to make that company go. I want to put more trucks on the road and his tax increases kind of hurts that aspect.”
Cavuto: “Some people interpreted his remark as sort of like Robin Hood-ish, Joe, that it was a redistribution of wealth. Taking from guys like you to help people who are not as well off as you. What do you think of that?”
Wurzelbacher: “Robin Hood stole from greedy rich people and redistributed it to the peasants, so to speak, so if hes calling us peasants, I kind of resent that. I’m the same class of people that went from paycheck to paycheck living to finally being able to save some money, and its just – you work and hard work. That’s the American Dream to me. You work hard. Youre going to get what you want eventually. It’s not going to happen overnight by no means, but if you work hard enough you will get it. I resent the government or Obama’s plan to take more away from me.”
Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpZLMPoQ8VI The FOX News Report
DEBATE FACT #6: BARACK OBAMA HAS NO INTEREST IN REDUCING THE DEFICIT
Summary:.
Barack Obama talks about priorities but he has proposed billions in new spending with no way to pay for it.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
If Barack Obama Could Enact All Of His Campaign Proposals, Taxpayers Would Be Faced With Financing Over $1 Trillion In New Spending Over One White House Term. (Barack Obama’s Spending Proposals: http://www.barackobama.com/index.php, Accessed 8/19/08)
PolitiFact Discredits Obama’s Claim That His Proposals Are Paid For; Says His Rhetoric Is “Disingenuous.” “Until he fleshes out his economic plan considerably more, it’s disingenuous to go around claiming his proposals are ‘paid for.’ And that claim is even more suspect considering that his proposals would leave a larger deficit than would the tax laws currently on the books. We find his claim to be Barely True.” (“‘Paid For’ Without Real Money,” St. Petersburg Times’ “PolitiFact.com,” http://www.politifact.com http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/533/, 6/16/08)
The New York Times’ David Brooks Said For Barack Obama To Fund His Domestic Programs, He Will Have To Break His Pledge Not To Tax The Middle Class. “Both [Obama and Clinton] promised to not raise taxes on those making less than $200,000 or $250,000 a year. They both just emasculated their domestic programs. Returning the rich to their Clinton-era tax rates will yield, at best, $40 billion a year in revenue. It’s impossible to fund a health care plan, let alone anything else, with that kind of money. The consequences are clear: if elected they will have to break their pledge, and thus destroy their credibility, or run a minimalist administration.” (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “No Whining About The Media,” The New York Times, 4/16/08)
Chicago Tribune: Barack Obama Hasn’t Been Talking About Balancing The Budget And “Has A Full Plate Of Spending Initiatives.” “Obama’s campaign on Monday scoffed at the McCain proposals. But Obama hasn’t been talking boldly about the certain path to a balanced budget. He promises to cut taxes for most Americans . . . and he has a full plate of spending initiatives.” (Editorial, “Failure Of Nerve,” Chicago Tribune, 7/8/08)
Los Angeles Times: Barack Obama “Has Not Identified New Revenue Sources Or Spending Cuts To Pay For Some Of” His Proposals. “The Obama campaign responds that tax cuts, once enacted, are usually renewed and do not expire. Therefore, they say, Obama can legitimately claim to be recouping money for other purposes by scaling back the tax cuts. Obama has not identified new revenue sources or spending cuts to pay for some of what he wants to do.” (Peter Nicholas, “Adding Up The Cost Of Obama’s Agenda,” Los Angeles Times, 7/8/08)
ABC News: Barack Obama Can Not “Pay For Every Dime” Of New Spending He Has Proposed. “Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said during Friday’s presidential debate that he would ‘pay for every dime’ of his spending. But according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, ‘without substantial cuts in government spending’ Obama’s plan – and McCain’s, too -’would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years.’ The Tax Policy Center has estimated that Obama’s proposed tax policies would increase the debt by $3.5 trillion over ten years.” (“Fact Check: ‘Pay for Every Dime’? Not Quite,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/fact-check-pay.html, Posted 9/26/08)
Barack Obama Has No Interest In Eliminating Deficit Spending
Barack Obama: “I Do Not Make A Promise That We Can Reduce [The Budget Deficit] By 2013.” “‘I do not make a promise that we can reduce it by 2013 because I think it is important for us to make some critical investments right now in America’s families,’ Obama told reporters this week when asked if he’d match McCain’s pledge.” (Nedra Pickler, “Analysis: Obama Won’t Try For McCain’s Budget Goal,” The Associated Press, 7/8/08)
Chicago Tribune: Barack Obama Has “No Interest In Eliminating Deficit Spending.” “Since winning the nomination, Obama reportedly has been moving toward the middle of the political spectrum. But on the budget, he still sounds left of center, with no interest in eliminating deficit spending.” (Editorial, “Failure Of Nerve,” Chicago Tribune, 7/8/08)
8) DEBATE FACT #7: BARACK OBAMA VOTED WITH BUSH “FOR THE MOST PART”
DEBATE FACT #7: BARACK OBAMA VOTED WITH BUSH “FOR THE MOST PART”
Summary:.
Why is it that Barack Obama says he voted with President Bush “for the most part”?
The Facts:
“Factually Inaccurate” To Say McCain Is Like President Bush
The New York Times‘ David Brooks: Democrats Saying McCain Represents The Third Bush Term Are “Just Factually Inaccurate.” “Finally, the Obama people are too convinced that they can define McCain as Bush III. The case is just factually inaccurate. McCain will be able to pull out dozens of instances, from torture to global warming to spending, in which he broke with his party, as Rush Limbaugh will tell you.” (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “Calling Dr. Doom,” The New York Times, 6/3/08)
Seattle Times‘ Danny Westneat: “This Guy Ain’t Bush, Folks.” “I have been feeling out of step lately with my fellow Seattle liberals. The reason is that when politics comes up, the knee-jerk gist of the conversation is that John McCain equals George W. Bush. This guy ain’t Bush, folks. No matter how many times you say it. (And it is said incessantly by Democratic groups.)” (Danny Westneat, Op-Ed, “Beyond The Bush Formula,” The Seattle Times, 5/14/08)
Barack Obama Says He Voted With President Bush “For The Most Part”
Barack Obama Says He Voted With President Bush “For The Most Part.” REPORTER: “For a couple of days, they’ve been saying you voted to raise taxes something like 94 times. That seems to be the drumbeat that’s going to happen during this campaign. Are you going to raise taxes in a big way for average Americans?” OBAMA: “I mean this is the standard fare of politics. And the truth of the matter is that the only bills that I voted for, for the most part, since I’ve been in the Senate were introduced by Republicans with George Bush. You know, they were the majority for a big chunk of the time I was there.” (KMOV [St. Louis, MO], 6/10/08)
Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhST5Nuw6bc Barack Obama’s KMOV Interview
In 2004, Barack Obama Said There Wasn’t Much Difference Between His Iraq Position And President Bush’s
In 2004, Barack Obama Said There Was Not Much Of A Difference Between His Position And The President’s Position On Iraq. “‘On Iraq, on paper, there’s not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago,’ Obama said. ‘There’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage.’” (John Kass, “Obama’s A Star Who Doesn’t Stick To The Script,” Chicago Tribune, 7/27/04)
In 2005, Barack Obama Joined With President Bush To Pass The Bush-Cheney Energy Bill Giving The Oil Companies $2.8 Billion In Taxpayer Money:
Barack Obama Voted For The 2005 Bush-Cheney Energy Bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #152: Motion Agreed To 92-4: R 53-1; D 38-3; I 1-0, 6/23/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #158: Passed 85-12: R 49-5; D 35-7; I 1-0, 6/28/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 74-26: R 49-6; D 25-19; I 0-1, 7/29/05, Obama Voted Yea)
The 2005 Energy Bill Included $2.8 Billion In Subsidies For Oil And Natural Gas Production. “The conference agreement provides for $14.6 billion in tax breaks and credits between 2005 and 2015, including: — $2.8 billion for fossil fuel production…” (Toni Johnson, “CQ Bill Analysis: HR 6,” Congressional Quarterly‘s “CQ Bill Analysis,” http://www.cq.com: http://www.cq.com/, Accessed 7/14/08)
9) DEBATE FACT #8: A FALSE CLAIM OF BIPARTISANSHIP FROM OBAMA
Summary:.
Barack Obama talks about reaching across the aisle but he hasn’t done so in the Senate.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
The Associated Press: “None” Of Barack Obama’s Touted Bipartisan Efforts Paced Him “At Odds With The Leaders Of His Own Party Or Gave Significant Offense To Outside Interest Groups With Democrats.” (David Espo, “Bipartisanship Marks McCain’s Senate Tenure,” Associated Press, 7/2/08)
NPR’s Juan Williams: Barack Obama “Doesn’t Have The Record” Of Bipartisanship That John McCain Has. NPR’S JUAN WILLIAMS: “You think about everything from campaign finance to immigration and on, and there’s John McCain working across party lines. Senator Obama doesn’t have a record. Now, he can make the claim and he can hold himself up as pure and trying to reach to a new generation of post partisan politics, but he has to do so largely based on rhetoric and wishful thinking because he doesn’t have the record.” (Fox News’ “Special Report With Brit Hume,” 5/7/08)
The Washington Post‘s Richard Cohen: “There Is Scant Evidence The Illinois Senator Takes Positions That Challenge His Base Or Otherwise Threaten Him Politically.” (Richard Cohen, Op-Ed, “McCain’s Core Advantage,” The Washington Post, 6/24/08)
Politico‘s Jonathan Martin: “He’s Pretty Much A Conventional Liberal On The Issues And Has Few Examples Of Breaking With His Own Party, So How Does Obama Try To Pull Off Being ‘Post-Partisan?’” (Jonathan Martin, “Obama’s Third Way: It’s All In The Tone,” Politico, 6/30/08)
Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK): “His Record Does Not Reflect Working In A Bipartisan Fashion.” “Boren, the lone Democrat in Oklahoma’s congressional delegate, said that while Obama has talked about working with Republicans, ‘unfortunately, his record does not reflect working in a bipartisan fashion.’” (Tim Talley, “Okla. Dem Calls Obama Liberal, Declines To Endorse,” The Associated Press, 6/10/08)
The Weekly Standard‘s Fred Barnes: “Despite Polarization, The Senate Is An Opportunity-Rich Environment For Bipartisan Compromise. But Obama Has Never Been A Leader In Crossing The Aisle.” (Fred Barnes, “To Tell The Truth,” The Weekly Standard, 4/26/08)
“The Record Shows Obama To Be A Fairly Doctrinaire Liberal Democrat” (Editorial, “Obama’s Rhetoric Soars, But What Does His Record Suggest?” USA Today, 1/28/08)
In 2007, Obama Voted With The Democrat Party 97 Percent Of The Time. (Congressional Quarterly Website, http://www.cq.com http://www.cq.com/, Accessed 3/3/08)
10) DEBATE FACT #9: THE OBAMA-AYERS RELATIONSHIP
Summary:
Bill Ayers is much more than a someone Barack Obama knows from a board.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Relationship:
First, Barack Obama Only Said “This Is A Guy Who Lives In My Neighborhood.” “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” (Sen. Barack Obama, ABC Democratic Presidential Debate, Philadelphia, PA, 4/16/08)
Barack Obama’s Relationship With Ayers “Went Much Deeper, Ran Much Longer And Was Much More Political Than Obama Said.” CNN’S DREW GRIFFIN: “Barack Obama confirmed during a primary debate that he knew Ayers and when pressed, said they served on a charitable foundation board together. And Obama condemned Ayers support of violence. But the relationship between Obama and Ayers went much deeper, ran much longer, and was much more political than Obama said.” (CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360,” 10/6/08)
Mayor Richard Daley On Ayers And Obama’s Relationship: “They’re Friends. So What?” “Obama says he was 8 years old when the bombs went off. But he was a grown man when he sought Ayers’ political blessing, and when they worked on the same education projects. ‘They’re friends. So what?’ Mayor Daley said in August.” (John Kass, “Daley Reins In Radicals – The Chicago Way,” Chicago Tribune, 10/12/08)
Axelrod Has Previously Said Obama And Ayers Are “Certainly Friendly.” AXELROD: “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.” (Ben Smith, “Ax On Ayers,” http://www.politico.com: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Ax_on_Ayers.html, 2/26/08)
In 1995, When Barack Obama Was 34, During Barack Obama’s First State Senate Campaign, William Ayers And Wife Bernadine Dohrn Hosted A Meeting Of Chicago Liberals At Their Home For Obama, Which One Attendee Said Was Aimed At “Launching Him.” “In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.” (Ben Smith, “Obama Once Visited ’60s Radicals,” The Politico, 1/22/08)
From March Of 1995 Until September Of 1997, Barack Obama And Ayers Attended At Least Seven Meetings Together Relating To The Chicago Annenberg Challenge. (Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Board Of Directors Meeting, Minutes Of The Board, 3/15/95, 3/31/95, 4/13/95, 6/5/95, 9/30/97; National Annenberg Challenge Evaluation Meeting, List Of Participants, 5/24/95; Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Chicago School Reform Collaborative Meeting, Minutes, 10/23/96)
In 1997, Barack Obama Praised Ayers’ Book On The Juvenile Justice: “A searing and timely account of the juvenile court system, and the courageous individuals who rescue hope from despair.” (Chicago Tribune, 12/21/97)
“[Obama And Ayers] Have Also Appeared Jointly On Two Academic Panels, One In 1997 And Another In 2001.” (Russell Berman, “Obama’s Ties To Left Come Under Scrutiny,” The New York Sun, 2/19/08)
From 1999 To 2002, Barack Obama Served With Ayers On The Board Of Directors For Woods Fund Of Chicago. “[Ayers] served with [Obama] from 1999 to 2002 on the board of the Woods Fund, an anti-poverty group.”(Timothy J. Burger, “Obama’s Chicago Ties Might Fuel ‘Republican Attack Machine’,” Bloomberg, 2/15/08)
During The Time Obama And Ayers Served Together On The Woods Fund, Ayers Was Quoted Saying “I Don’t Regret Setting Bombs … I Feel We Didn’t Do Enough.” (Dinitia Smith, “No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives,” The New York Times, 9/11/01)
While Obama And Ayers Were Serving On The Woods Fund Together, Ayers Posed Standing On An American Flag For An Article In Chicago Magazine Entitled “No Regrets.” (Marcia Froelke Coburn, “No Regrets,” Chicago Magazine, 8/01)
“William Ayers … [Was] A Founding Member Of The Group That Bombed The U.S. Capitol And The Pentagon During The 1970s.” (Russell Berman, “Obama’s Ties To Left Come Under Scrutiny,” The New York Sun, 2/19/08)
11) DEBATE FACT #10: THE OBAMA-ACORN RELATIONSHIP
Summary:.
Despite what he said tonight, Barack Obama has a long relationship with ACORN that extends back to the early 1990s.
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
ACORN’s Political Action Committee Endorsed Barack Obama For President. “[A]CORN’s political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama – who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago – understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.” (Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Op-Ed, “ACORN: Obama Gets It,” The Nation, 2/23/08)
Barack Obama’s Campaign “Paid More Than $800,000″ To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally “Misrepresented” The Group’s Work To The FEC. “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in ‘get-out-the-vote’ projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.” (David M. Brown, “Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending,” Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)
Barack Obama Directed Project Vote And Later Taught Classes For “Future Leaders Identified By ACORN And The Centers For New Horizons.” “In 1992 Obama took time off to direct Project Vote, the most successful grass-roots voter-registration campaign in recent city history. Credited with helping elect Carol Moseley-Braun to the U.S. Senate, the registration drive, aimed primarily at African-Americans, added an estimated 125,000 voters to the voter rolls–even more than were registered during Harold Washington’s mayoral campaigns. ‘It’s a power thing,’ said the brochures and radio commercials. Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.” (Hank De Zutter, Op-Ed, “What Makes Obama Run?” Chicago Reader, 12/8/95)
In 1992, Barack Obama Was Hired By ACORN To Run A Voter Registration Effort. “Indeed, Mr. Obama has extensive connections with the granddaddy of activist groups, Acorn (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which has gotten millions in government grants for its low-income housing programs. In 1992, Acorn hired Mr. Obama to run a voter registration effort. He later became a trainer for the group, as well as its lawyer in election law cases. Acorn’s political arm has endorsed Mr. Obama while its ‘voter education’ arm has pledged to spend $35 million to register people this fall — despite a history of vote fraud scandals that have led to guilty pleas by many Acorn employees.” (John Fund, “Obama’s Liberal Shock Troops,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/12/08)
Barack Obama Was Part Of Team Of Lawyers Who Represented ACORN In A Suit Against The State Of Illinois. Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters. (Mike Robinson, Obama Got Start In Civil Rights Practice, The Associated Press, 2/20/07)
ACORN Received Grants From The Woods Fund When Barack Obama Served on The Board Of Directors
The Chicago ACORN Received Grants Of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), And $40,000 (2002) From The Woods Fund. (Donors Forum Website, ifs.donorsforum.org: http://ifs.donorsforum.org/ , Accessed 6/10/08)
NOTE: From 1993 To 2002, Barack Obama Served On The Board Of Directors For The Woods Fund. (Tim Novak and Fran Spielman, Obama Helped Ex-Boss Get $1 Mil. From Charity, Chicago Sun-Times, 11/29/07)
12) McCain Tonight: “I am not President Bush“
John McCain: Sen. Obama, I am not President Bush, if you wanted to run against President Bush you should have run four years ago. I will take this country in a new direction.”
Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLAK2RXuoj0
And longer version here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R1OHKSPWRI
13) Obama Misleads on ACORN Tonight
This from Obama on ACORN is obviously false:
OBAMA: The only involvement I’ve had with ACORN is, I represented them alongside the US justice department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs.
See full extent of relationship here:
ACORN’s Political Action Committee Endorsed Barack Obama For President. “[A]CORN’s political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama – who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago – understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.” (Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Op-Ed, “ACORN: Obama Gets It,” The Nation, 2/23/08)
Barack Obama’s Campaign “Paid More Than $800,000″ To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally “Misrepresented” The Group’s Work To The FEC. “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in ‘get-out-the-vote’ projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.” (David M. Brown, “Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending,” Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)
Barack Obama Directed Project Vote And Later Taught Classes For “Future Leaders Identified By ACORN And The Centers For New Horizons.” “In 1992 Obama took time off to direct Project Vote, the most successful grass-roots voter-registration campaign in recent city history. Credited with helping elect Carol Moseley-Braun to the U.S. Senate, the registration drive, aimed primarily at African-Americans, added an estimated 125,000 voters to the voter rolls–even more than were registered during Harold Washington’s mayoral campaigns. ‘It’s a power thing,’ said the brochures and radio commercials. Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.” (Hank De Zutter, Op-Ed, “What Makes Obama Run?” Chicago Reader, 12/8/95)
In 1992, Barack Obama Was Hired By ACORN To Run A Voter Registration Effort. “Indeed, Mr. Obama has extensive connections with the granddaddy of activist groups, Acorn (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which has gotten millions in government grants for its low-income housing programs. In 1992, Acorn hired Mr. Obama to run a voter registration effort. He later became a trainer for the group, as well as its lawyer in election law cases. Acorn’s political arm has endorsed Mr. Obama while its ‘voter education’ arm has pledged to spend $35 million to register people this fall — despite a history of vote fraud scandals that have led to guilty pleas by many Acorn employees.” (John Fund, “Obama’s Liberal Shock Troops,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/12/08)
Barack Obama Was Part Of Team Of Lawyers Who Represented ACORN In A Suit Against The State Of Illinois. Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters. (Mike Robinson, Obama Got Start In Civil Rights Practice, The Associated Press, 2/20/07)
ACORN Received Grants From The Woods Fund When Barack Obama Served on The Board Of Directors
The Chicago ACORN Received Grants Of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), And $40,000 (2002) From The Woods Fund. (Donors Forum Website, ifs.donorsforum.org http://ifs.donorsforum.org/, Accessed 6/10/08)
NOTE: From 1993 To 2002, Barack Obama Served On The Board Of Directors For The Woods Fund. (Tim Novak and Fran Spielman, Obama Helped Ex-Boss Get $1 Mil. From Charity, Chicago Sun-Times, 11/29/07)
14) DEBATE FACT #11: ACHIEVING ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
Summary:.
Barack Obama’s energy plan will “do nothing to answer the nation’s long-term needs.”
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record
The Detroit News: Barack Obama’s Energy Plan Will “Do Nothing To Answer The Nation’s Long-Term Needs.”“The latest additions to Sen. Barack Obama’s energy plan, outlined during an appearance in Lansing Monday, may win the Democratic presidential candidate some votes from disgruntled consumers in November, but they’ll do nothing to answer the nation’s long-term needs.” (Editorial, “Obama’s Energy Plan Is Fueled By Populism,” The Detroit News, 8/5/08)
Barack Obama Opposes Offshore Drilling. Obama: “Now the latest scheme is well, we’re going to drill offshore. Now, I want to be absolutely clear to everybody about this. If I thought that I could provide you some immediate relief on gas prices by drilling off the shores of California and New Jersey, I understand how desperate folks are. I met a guy who couldn’t go on a job search that lost his job, couldn’t go on a job search because of the high price of gas. Just couldn’t fill up his tank. I met a teacher in South Dakota who loved her job as a teacher on an Indian reservation, she had to quit because the drive was too far, it was taking up too much of her paycheck. I know how bad people are hurting. So If I thought that by drilling offshore, we could solve our problem, I’d do it.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Campaign Event, Springfield, MO, 7/30/08)
Barack Obama Opposes Immediate Gas Tax Relief For American Families. Obama: “I think John McCain’s proposal for a three month tax holiday is a bad idea.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Campaign Event, Blue Bell, PA, 4/21/08)
Barack Obama Opposes Encouraging Battery Innovation. Obama: “In this campaign, John McCain is offering the same old gimmicks that will provide almost no short-term relief to folks who are struggling with high gas prices. Gimmicks that will only increase our addiction for another four years.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Campaign Event, Las Vegas, NV, 6/24/08)
Barack Obama Does Not Support Nuclear Power. Obama: “I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal. I am not a nuclear energy proponent.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Town Hall Event, Newton, IA, 12/30/07)
15) DEBATE FACT #12: THE “MOST PRECTIONIST U.S. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN DECADES”
Summary:.
Despite his claims, Barack Obama is the “most protectionist U.S. presidential candidate in decades.”
The Facts About Barack Obama’s Record:
The Wall Street Journal:”On The Record So Far, Mr. Obama Is The Most Protectionist U.S. Presidential Candidate In Decades.” (Editorial, “Change You’ll Have To Pay For,” Wall Street Journal Asia, 5/28/08)
The Wall Street Journal: “Mr. Obama Is Promising Change You Can Believe In. But On Trade, It Is Closer To The Status Quo Americans Will Be Paying For.” (Editorial, “Change You’ll Have To Pay For,” The Wall Street Journal, 5/28/08)
Barack Obama Pledges To Renegotiate NAFTA With The Threat Of A “Potential Opt-Out.” NBC’s Tim Russert: “A simple question. Will you as president say to Canada and Mexico, this [NAFTA] has not worked for us, we are out?” Obama: “I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about, and I think actually Senator Clinton’s answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.” (Sen. Barack Obama, MSNBC Democrat Presidential Debate, Cleveland, OH, 2/26/08)
Barack Obama Opposes The Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Obama: “The violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor protections that we’ve insisted be included in these types of agreements.” (WHTM-TV Harrisburg’s “News,” 4/7/08)
Barack Obama Opposes The South Korea Free Trade Agreement. “‘Senator Obama does not support the South Korea free trade agreement in its current form,’ Obama spokesperson Jen Psaki tells ABC News.” (Teddy Davis, “Clinton And Obama Follow Edwards On Trade,” ABC News, abcnews.go.com http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3070540&page=1, 4/23/07)
Barack Obama Voted Against CAFTA Twice. (S. 1307, CQ Vote #170: Adopted 54-45: R 43-12; D 10-33; I 1-0, 6/30/05, Obama Voted Nay; H.R. 3045, CQ Vote #209: Adopted 55-45: R 43-12; D 11-33; I 1-0, 7/28/05, Obama Voted Nay)
“[M]r. Obama Would Have Voted Against Giving The President ‘Fast Track’ Authority To Negotiate More Trade Deals.” (Greg Hinz, “Keyes Guarantees Rocky Ride For GOP,” Crain’s Chicago Business, 8/16/04)
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown Criticized Obama’s Economic Isolationism, Saying It Will “Affect Every Industry” And “Hold Back The Development Of The World.” Prime Minister Brown:”We cannot allow protectionism to become the dominant mood because that will affect every industry and it will hold back the development of the world. If you go to America, the debate is about how they can restrict imports from China and other countries; if you go to parts of Europe, the debate is about heavy-handed regulation of hedge funds, sovereign wealth funds, or other instruments of finance; … there is absolutely no doubt that protectionist sentiment is growing, particularly in America and Europe.” (Sarah Arnott, “Protectionist Mood In US Threatens Progress, Says Brown,” The [London] Financial Times, 5/20/08)
Foreign Minister David Milibrand Urged Barack Obama To Commit To Free Trade After He Opposed Other Free Trade Agreements. “Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Miliband is to urge the United States to remain committed to free trade, he said in comments published on Monday as he begins a five-day visit there. The Financial Times quoted Miliband as saying that Washington must remain committed to global trade ‘in a very fundamental way’ after Democratic Party hopefuls for the US presidency both spoke against free trade pacts.” (“British FM To Push US To Remain Committed To Free Trade: Report,” Agence France Presse, 5/19/08)
“Peter Mandelson, European Trade Commissioner, Has Said The Protectionist Stances Taken By The US Presidential Candidates Risk Taking The World Trading System Back By Decades.” (Alan Beattie, “EU Trade Chief Hits At Democrat Hopefuls,” Financial Times, 5/7/08)
“Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper Says The United States Should Not Reopen Talks On The North American Free Trade Agreement As The Two U.S. Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Have Proposed.” (“Canada’s Prime Minister Warns US It Would Be Making A Mistake To Reopen NAFTA,” The Associated Press, 2/28/08)
“Colombia’s President Sharply Criticized U.S. Presidential Contender Barack Obama On Wednesday For Opposing A Trade Deal With His Country, Calling The Democrat Out Of Touch With The Realities Of The South American Nation.” (“Colombia’s President Criticizes Obama,” The Associated Press, 4/3/08)
16) DEBATE FACT #13: BARACK OBAMA’S COSTLY HEALTH CARE PLAN
Summary:
Barack Obama has proposed a costly health care plan with “zero credible evidence” it will help anyone.
The Facts:
Despite Earlier Claims That It Would Cost Less, Barack Obama Recently Said His Plan Will Cost $150 Billion
Barack Obama Said On “60 Minutes” That His Plan Would Cost $150 Billion. CBS’ Steve Kroft: “How much is it going to cost? Obama: “$150 billion it’s going to cost, right from the start.”
Biden Seriously Misinformed, Likely Due To Alcohol Problem
When you interview for a job, here is a hint: make sure you know what the job is. Joe Biden failed that test last Thursday. He couldn’t even get right what a vice president does, but the media didn’t notice.
.
The media is all over itself about how smart and experienced Biden is. Political analyst Charlie Cook is quoted in the Washington Post on Saturday as saying “Biden is clearly so much more knowledgeable, by a factor of about a million.” Saturday Night Live does a skit about Biden being smart, if slimy. Meanwhile, Governor Sarah Palin is treated as being nothing more than a simpleton.
Yet, take Biden’s statement from the debate on the role of the vice president:
Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.
And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there’s a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.
The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he’s part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive, and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous.”
One should be careful when throwing around terms such as “most dangerous” and “bizarre.” But Biden is confusing which part of the Constitution covers the Executive Branch (it is Article II, not Article I). More importantly, the notion that the vice president can preside over the Senate only when there is a tie vote is simply wrong. Nor is it true that the only legislative involvement the vice president has is to break tie votes. The vice president is the president of the Senate, where he interprets the rules and can only be overridden by a vote of 60 senators.
Early vice presidents spent a lot of time in the Senate. Thomas Jefferson even spent his time writing “A Manual of Parliamentary Practice: for the Use of the Senate of the United States.” Modern vice presidents may show up only when they think tie votes will occur, but that is their choice.
This isn’t rocket science. The Constitution on this point is very straightforward: “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”
Instead, it was Palin who got it right. Besides correctly stating that the vice president holds positions in both the executive and legislative branches, she also noted that:
Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that’s not only to preside over the Senate and [I] will take that position very seriously also. I’m thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chooses to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president’s policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are.
But just as the vice president’s job includes more than simply being ready to assume the presidency if the president dies, the Constitution merely states what the vice president’s minimum responsibilities are.
Compare the uproar over Palin’s answer to Charlie Gibson about the “Bush Doctrine,” a doctrine that Gibson clearly didn’t understand and for which there apparently exist at least four different versions. Where is the outrage over Biden not understanding what vice presidents do? For Biden, his inability to correctly say what vice presidents do was surely his “gotcha” moment.
Yet, this mistake during the debate was hardly unique. Biden got a lot of things wrong in the debate that are going unnoticed by the fact-check media. Take just a few:
– Will McCain’s health care proposals raise taxes? Biden says that McCain’s proposal will cost people money. The Tax Foundation finds that could easily be “roughly deficit-neutral over ten years.”
– Under an Obama Administration the middle class will “pay no more than they did under Ronald Reagan”? No, the tax rates will be similar to the higher rates under Clinton.
– Did “we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country”? No, one year’s worth of spending in Iraq equaled five in Afghanistan.
– France and the U.S. “kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon”? No, and it wouldn’t have made much more sense if he had said “Syria” instead.
– Is it really “simply not true” that Obama said that he would meet with the leader of countries such as Iran without preconditions? No, Obama said “I would.”
– Did Obama warn against letting Hamas participate in Palestinian legislative elections in 2005? No.
– Do “Iraqis have an $80 billion surplus”? No. If oil prices had remained high, it might have reached $50 billion by the end of this year.
– Finally, an amusing point as evidence that Biden is just one of the people he pointed to, inviting anyone to have a beer with him at “Katie’s Restaurant” in Wilmington, Del. Unfortunately, people will have a hard time taking him up on his offer, since the restaurant hasn’t had that name for probably 15 years.
Unfortunately, voters who are trying to get an accurate count on whether the candidates are telling the truth can’t rely on the media. FactCheck.org mentions only one of these points, the size of the Iraqi surplus. The Washington Post mentioned Biden’s misstatement on Hamas and Katie’s restaurant. AOL’s coverage of the errors in the vice presidential debate was by far the worst, though that might not be too surprising given that Tommy Christopher, who wrote their news analysis, also blogs on the Obama Web site. None of these checkers mentioned Biden’s statements about the role of the vice president.
Compare this to the attacks on Sarah Palin:
– FactCheck.org criticizes Palin for claiming that McCain’s health care tax credits will be “budget neutral” – they argue that the tax credit will be larger than the new taxes that the program will impose. Fine, but if the people at FactCheck.org believe that is true and that the Tax Foundation is wrong, Biden’s claim about increased taxes is even more inaccurate. But FactCheck.org doesn’t even mention Biden’s statement from the debate.
– From AOL’s news analysis piece. “Palin: Said that it is untrue that the U.S. is killing civilians in Afghanistan. According to an analysis by the AP, however, the U.S. is killing more civilians than insurgents are.”
What Palin actually said was: “Now, Barack Obama had said that all we’re doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians.” Whether one believes the AP estimate or not, the question is whether she was accurately characterizing Obama’s statement of the job that our forces were doing. And Obama said, “We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians” (emphasis added).
– FactCheck.org’s first critique claims that Palin was wrong to claim that troop levels in Iraq are down to their pre-surge levels. They are correct that after the recently announced drawdown, 6,000 more troops will be in Iraq than immediately before the surge. But why not mention that 84 percent of the 38,000 troops in the surge are home or are in the process of coming home?
The media seems to have been covering for Biden for some time. While news stories still talk about Dan Quayle’s spelling mistake 18 years later, there has been almost no news coverage of Biden’s numerous wacky statements. What if Quayle had said something similar to Biden’s recent statement that, “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’” A neat trick given that Herbert Hoover was president in 1929 and no one was watching television.
It might not fit the simple template for a 36-year veteran of the Senate to not understand what vice presidents do (after all, eight vice presidents have served with him), but Biden knew less about this than the political outsider, Sarah Palin. Given that they are running to be vice president, why didn’t that story dominate the news coverage after the debate?
McCain’s Brother, Joe – Blasts Campaign! See Video Below
Joe McCain
Frustrations inside John McCain’s camp boiled over on the eve of tonight’s presidential debate as the candidate’s brother unleashed an e-mail blasting the campaign’s “counter-productive” strategy.” Let John McCain be John McCain,” wrote Joe McCain in a missive sent out shortly before midnight Monday.
“Make ads that show John not as crank and curmudgeon but as a great leader for his time.”McCain’s younger brother was sharply critical of unnamed top campaign officials who “so tightly ‘control the message’” that they are preventing reporters from speaking with those, like himself, who know the candidate best.
His complaint echoed those of other McCain intimates who have chafed for months at orders not to speak with the news media without advance permission from the campaign. The younger McCain called this news management strategy “counter-intuitive, counter-experiential, and counter-productive” because it conflicts with his brother’s reputation for openness.
The clampdown “has gradually bled away all the good will that this great man had from the press,” he wrote. He described himself as a sailor warning that the campaign is sailing into shoals “while the rest of the officers and warrants are poring over plans and maps and high-minded thoughts.”
The McCain campaign declined to comment. His angry dispatch to McCain campaign and Republican Party officials appears to reflect growing restiveness among supporters over the direction of the presidential contest.
Nets Condemn McCain Calling Obama ‘That One’; CNN: Palin Racist | NewsBusters.org
Matching the Obama campaign spin, the network reporters and analysts were upset by John McCain, at one moment in the second presidential debate on Tuesday night, referring to Barack Obama as “that one.” CBS’s Jeff Greenfield asserted “there is going to be clearly a major headline soundbite” and insisted “those two words are going to be what the water cooler conversation is tomorrow. Was it demeaning? Was it an insult? Hell no!
Katie Couric turned to a group of “undecided voters” for their reaction to the phrase. One man “thought it was a little bit childish” and another “undecided” man declared: “I’m really tired of the last eight years of for us or against us and to me that showed that side of McCain coming out and the picky and childish and we’ve had eight years of that.”
On CNN a little past 11 PM EDT, reporter Suzanne Malveaux compared it to Bill Clinton’s characterization of Monica Lewinsky: “It’s like ‘that woman,’ you know, that we’ve heard ‘that woman,’ I mean a lot of people are saying that was the kind of language that was very condescending.” A few minutes later, Democratic hack Paul Begala slimed Sarah Palin as a racist, citing the Associated Press and how “they said her attack on this whole Bill Ayers thing was ‘racially-tinged.’ That’s not what a Democrat said, that’s what the Associated Press said.” There’s a difference? MSNBC viewers heard Chris Matthews pleased by Obama’s “wonderful smile” before he charged McCain’s smile “has a somewhat menacing quality.”
In the post-debate 25 minutes on NBC, Brian Williams relied on Internet chatter as he contended “John McCain took some heat from a lot of people” for ” when he referred to his Senate colleague, an opponent in this race, Senator Obama, as, quote, ‘that one.’ That line got a lot of response on the Internet.”
“I thank you my friend, thanks for serving.”
John McCain had one of the best moments of Tuesday’s debate in connecting with a Navy veteran, saying “Everything I ever learned about leadership I learned from a chief petty officer, and I thank you. And I thank you my friend, thanks for serving.”
.
.
.
.
The ‘Pre-Determined Order Of Things’ Was Upset By Palin
Watching the “opinion elite” quietly, calmly go about their “business” after the debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin is, unfortunately, just more of the same we have all come to expect of the impostor journalists that pass for what once was a noble profession, once upon a time.
Look at the carefully crafted headlines, served up for the morning spin:
- The VP Debate: Sarah the Speedy
- The VP Debate: Palin Good, Biden Better
- The VP Debate: Palin’s Big Mistake
- The VP Debate: She Won Fersure, Also
- The VP Debate: A Victory — of Sorts
- Palin Takes On A New Foe: Her Image
It is quite apparent from those, and any other headlines you might search for on the Net, in relation to the just-concluded Biden/Palin debate, that the Pundit’s CW (Conventional Wisdom) sensibilities were mightily offended at Palin’s temerity at coming off as credible, and not as some (their words) “trailer trash” red-neck. The MSM / Bloggers simply cannot abide their pre-determined judgments being upset by anyone. Especially a conservative someone.
One might feel terribly out of place to point out to the media mavens what the Founding Fathers envisioned was not a ruling political class, but citizen politicians almost exactly like Sarah Palin, and not anything like Barack Obama, Joe Biden or even John McCain. What matters most in our politicians is outlook and common sense, not an encyclopedic knowledge of who is President of every country on the planet, or even a working knowledge of the Monroe Doctrine. After all, Monroe has been dead over one hundred years, hasn’t he? It is highly doubtful any future President will invoke it as his justification for some unforeseen action.
Make no mistake about it, The Press is very much of and from our modern day ruling class. They are no longer the watchers, but an integral part of “protecting” citizens from their own ignorance, by constantly preaching to us just what is needed in a plausible leader. This is only due to their unabashed, and undeniable liberalism, which they no longer bother to hide or apologize for.
I listened to the debate on the radio before watching the TiVo of it later. I thought Palin did a great job of softening up Biden, even using Obama as a club to beat the head of his running mate. Whenever she pointed out some instance where Biden and Obama disagreed, where she thought Biden was right and Obama was wrong, she sincerely congratulated his good judgment. There was no knockout. But Palin has a good, steady (and deadly) jab.
Later, when I saw the debate on television, I was even more impressed. Palin loves the camera, and it loves her back. This is her medium, and debates are her forum. She’s a natural communicator, cut of the same cloth as Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton.
So, who won? Palin, of course, you dolts! She won the moment she decided to ignore Gwen Ifill and Joe Biden and do what Ronald Reagan was so hated by The Press and The Pundits, and beloved by the voters for so doing: Talking directly to “the folks”. She reaffirmed their worst fear of fears, that of being superfluous, supercilious and completely unneeded, and I predict a new round of frenzied PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) in the final weeks of this campaign.
Bob Beckel huffed about how lacking in “stature” Palin was. Excuse me? Vice Presidents, historically, have been completely lacking in it! Gravitas? No Presidential candidate has ever been accused of seeking it in naming their running mates, that’s for damn sure. His talking points, furnished by the Obama campaign as their surrogate, are once again making the same old (and by now completely tired and pedantic) liberal mistake of being dismissive of anyone not sharing their left-wing POV. Somehow, after being bludgeoned with Ronald Reagan for eight years in California as Governor, and again for an equally long period of time with President Reagan, one almost expects the liberals to have learned their lesson. It really does seem improbable they can be this obtuse, and actually keep repeating their mistakes, decade after decade.
The important thing is, “the folks” understood. They know she is one of them, perhaps more so than any politician they can remember, since Ronald Reagan. That is why Governor Palin is still the game-changer she first appeared to be. The more she is denigrated, marginalized, degraded and smeared, the more the people hate her attackers and are drawn to her, and by extension, John McCain.
Famously, years ago, in discussing the Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers partnership, someone said she gave him sex and he gave her class. McCain and Palin have such a symbiosis. McCain gives Palin his gravitas, and Palin gives McCain her unique connectivity to “the folks”.
Other posts of interest:
- Pundita Op-Ed: Sarah Palin takes command
- Personalilty Cult, Personality Cult, Personality Cult
- 15′ tall Obama mural in Houston, Texas
Enough Is Enough – Obama Took Money From Fanny Mae & Freddie Mac!
“We’ve seen a telling moment in this campaign today. Senator Obama saw an economic crisis, and he’s found a political opportunity. My friends, this is not a time for political opportunism; this is a time for leadership.
Too often, we hear people say America’s in decline. I reject that. I believe America’s best days are ahead of us. Governor Palin and I are going to reform Wall Street. We’re going to reform Washington. I’m going to fight for you, and I’m going to lead our nation forward in the greatest periods of prosperity in its history.
And let’s have some straight talk. Senator Obama is not interested in the politics of hope, he’s interested in his political future and that’s why he is hurling in insults and making up facts about his record.
Today, he claimed that the Congressional stimulus package was his idea. That’s news to those of us in Congress who supported it. Senator Obama didn’t even show up to vote on it.
He talks a tough game on the financial crisis, but the facts tell a different story. Senator Obama took more money from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac than anyone but the chairman of the committee they answer to, and he put Fannie Mae’s CEO, who helped create this problem in charge of finding his Vice President. That’s not change, that’s what’s broken in Washington.
He talked about siding with the people, siding with the people, just before he flew off to Hollywood for a fundraiser with Barbara Streisand and his celebrity friends. Let me tell you, my friends, there’s no place I’d rather be than here, with the working men and women of Ohio. I’m going to fight for you and together we’re going to win in November.”
Watch John McCain’s speech here:
.
.
Newest McCain video ad, running immediately in selected markets, about the financial problems……
Governor Palin Hits Wall Street Crisis Hard
Sarah Palin opened up her remarks here focusing on the current Wall Street financial crisis and how a McCain-Palin administration will put an end to the “mismanagement and abuses” on Wall Street.
In her usual folksy language calling the crowd “guys and gals”, she addressed the excited throng of a few thousand saying that the country’s economic problems need some “shaking up and some fixin’.” She added that she was pleased to see taxpayer money wasn’t being used to bail out Lehman Brothers unlike the Bear Stearns bail out:
“It’s taking a toll on our economy and that means people’s life savings and I’m glad to see in this case the Federal Reserve and the Treasury have said no to using taxpayer money to bail out another one–this time Lehman Brothers. Every effort has to be made.’’
She blamed the government and Wall Street for today’s financial turmoil, “Guys and gals, our regulatory system is outdated and needs a complete overhaul. Washington has ignored this. Washington has been asleep at the switch and ineffective and management on Wall Street has not run these institutions responsibly and has put companies and markets at risk,” Palin told the cheering crowd, “They place their own interests first instead of their employees and the shareholders who actually own these companies.”
She pressed how important it was for America to“remain the strongest” financial market in the world and pledged that a McCain-Palin administration will restore the “integrity” and “confidence” in our markets, “We are going to reform the way Wall Street does business and stop multi-million dollar payouts and golden parachutes to CEOs who break the public trust.”
Her economic remarks come on the same day the McCain campaign released a new ad touting the duo’s ability to fix the ailing economy. The ad explains how they will do it, “Tougher rules on Wall Street to protect your life savings. No special interest giveaways. Lower taxes to create new jobs. Offshore drilling to reduce gas prices.”
Palin hit Barack Obama during her speech saying he will raise taxes, “Our opponent wants to raise income taxes and raise payroll tax and raise investment income taxes and raise business taxes and raise the death tax.”
“I knew that as I lowered taxes and got rid of business inventory taxes and then on a state level, suspended our fuel tax, those things do add to a vibrant economy, and we do have some wonderful economic indicators of success in my hometown,” Palin said. “We became part of the fastest growing area of the state because businesses wanted to be there. They knew that government would be on their side.”
Palin’s remarks were in front of an enthusiastic crowd at the Jefferson County fairgrounds. The crowd screamed her name and held signs that read, “Read my Lipstick, “Taxpayers for McCain-Palin,” and “Working Moms for Palin.” There were protestors outside of the event, one with a sign that read “The Antichrist Wears Lipstick.” But, it seemed as though only one lone protestor came inside the event–she screamed “Liar!” and “You don’t have the experience!” throughout the speech.
More Government, Socialism & No Drilling Or The Change We Need?
Today, U.S. Senator John McCain issued the following statement on the situation in the financial markets:
“The crisis in our financial markets has taken an enormous toll on our economy and the American people – first the decline of our housing markets followed by the collapse of Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and now Lehman Brothers. I am glad to see that the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department have said no to using taxpayer money to bailout Lehman Brothers, a position I have spoken about throughout this campaign. We are carefully monitoring the financial markets, including the duress at Lehman Brothers that is the latest reminder of ineffective regulation and management. Efforts must also be focused on ensuring that the deposits of hardworking Americans are protected.
“It is essential for us to make sure that the U.S. remains the pre-eminent financial market of the world. This will be a highest priority of my Administration. In order to do this, major reform must be made in Washington and on Wall Street. We cannot tolerate a system that handicaps our markets and our banks and places at risk the savings of hard-working Americans and investors. The McCain-Palin Administration will replace the outdated and ineffective patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight in Washington and bring transparency and accountability to Wall Street. We will rebuild confidence in our markets and restore our leadership in the financial world.”
Do a Google search. John McCain has been speaking out about the recession, the U.S. Economic situation since 2006 and 2007! He was telling us we were in a recession before any other Republican, and most Democrats. He was warning about the government bailing out poorly run investment companies years ago! We need to elect a President who tells us what we need to hear, not someone like Obama who tells us what his polls say we want to hear.
Sen. Mike Gravel Praises Sarah Palin, Pacifica Hosts Shocked!
Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel appeared in an interview with the staunchly pro-Obama Pacifica radio. They expected Gravel to bash Sarah Palin, and tell them what the Republicans “haven’t told us about Sarah Palin.” Sounds pretty ominous….
Instead of obliging, Gravel says nice things about Palin.! And then takes a few shots at today’s Democrats for being “imperialists.”
Watch the video:
.
.
Gravel is a former Democratic United States Senator from Alaska, who served two terms from 1969 to 1981, and a former candidate in the 2008 presidential election.
He served in the Alaska House of Representatives from 1963 to 1966 and became its Speaker of the House. Gravel was elected to the United States Senate in 1968.
As Senator, Gravel became nationally known for his forceful but unsuccessful attempts to end the draft during the Vietnam War and for having put the Pentagon Papers into the public record in 1971 despite risk to himself. He conducted an unusual campaign for the Democratic nomination for Vice President of the United States in 1972, and then played a crucial role in getting Congressional approval for the Trans-Alaska pipeline in 1973. He was re-elected to the Senate in 1974, but gradually alienated most of his Alaskan constituencies and his bid for a third term was defeated in a Democratic primary election in 1980.
Gravel followed up the interview on Pacifica Radio with an article in CounterPunch explaining what he finds so appealing about his fellow Alaskan–it comes down to her integrity, staunch independence, and not having the taint of years in Washington:
“Sarah Palin has a sense of personal outrage over political corruption that plays extremely well with the public, something the others have lost long ago. She has demonstrated the personal courage to publicly confront and overcome Republican Party corruption and has successfully taken on the oil industry over taxation and oil leasing issues. She has publicly stood up to Senator Ted Stevens and Representative Don Young on the “Bridge to Nowhere” and the policy of federal earmarks arguing for a public transparency process.
Sarah has literally come to the national scene without owing anything to any party or corporate interest––not even McCain––he needs her more than she needs him. Imagine a person a heart beat away not owned by the military-industrial complex, Wall Street, corporate America or AIPAC. WOW! Can this last? Probably not. But she does have an uncanny sense of political direction and the ability to capitalize on change like putting the public interest above Republican Party interests.”
Don’t look for this interview to mentioned on any of the radical leftist blogs at The Atlantic, and its soul mate, Daily Kos, as Gravel has been something of a hero there, and this will shock those poor boys Goldberg, Sullivan and Ambinder. They have little real tolerance for liberal icons straying off the reservation, and they certainly won’t like hearing Gravel confirm Palin stopped that damned “Bridge to nowhere”, or that the so-called “Troopergate” will be resolved in Palin’s favor, and that the Trooper in question should have been fired.
.
This item is based on an item that appeared in: The Western Standard. I highly recommend you add them to your Blog Roll, and subscribe to their updates! Based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, the Western Standard is a fortnightly news and views magazine. It’s your online source for news and views from a Western Canadian perspective.
Palin & What The Left Now Doesn’t Want You To See
Alaska Governor Sarah H. Palin
NOW on PBS interviewed Alaska Governor Sarah Palin — John McCain’s running mate — about her efforts to clean up corruption in her home state in a story that aired earlier in July of 2008. Typical of the left, now they don’t advertise and use as citations anymore, now that Palin is running with McCain. What they formerly used to praise her, they now ignore, because it makes a lie of the slander they now spread about her.
.
.
.
Here is an article from the New York Times, published last July, before Sarah Palin was selected as John McCain’s running mate, and the Times started to smear her.
.
Those wondering just who are the people crawling out of the woodwork going after Governor Palin, might do well to check this page at the Anchorage Daily News. It gives a pretty complete rundown on just who is who in the several corruption investigations that resulted from Sarah Palin’s whistle-blowing. If one does the legwork, you will find the connections to those corrupt politicians that most of those talking smack about Palin have.
Desperate Disrespect From The Nattering Nabobs Of Negativism
Today, the McCain-Palin campaign released its latest television ad, entitled “Disrespectful.” The ad highlights the Obama campaign’s desperate efforts to attack and smear Governor Sarah Palin. Yet, despite all their tactics, Governor Palin is demonstrating time and again that she will be the strong vice president our country needs. Obama is a sexist, a man who thinks a woman (think Hillary Clinton) isn’t good enough to stand at his side. An insecure narcissist who needs flunkies and yes men around him, who cannot accept or tolerate opinions that differ from his own, or those who upstage him. This has become more and more apparent.
.
ABC: Palin Interview Structured For Minipulation On-The-Fly
While much is being made of the way in which ABC will play anchorman Charles Gibson’s interview with Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in pieces beginning tonight as a way to maximize ratings, there is another clever aspect to it that I have not found mentioned much elsewhere.
By airing the interview in chunks across a 28 and 1/2 hour news cycle starting tonight at 6:30, ABC News will also be able to fine tune the editorial content to the reaction of the press and public if executives feel the need.
Wednesday, former Nightline anchor Ted Koppel was on NPR talking about what a hard place Gibson finds himself in, likely to be criticized by his colleagues in the press if he seems too deferential to Palin, or attacked by the political right if he seems to harsh.
I think the situation could have been even tougher than that for Gibson. The exclusive nature of the interview makes him representative of The American Press, as well as a repository for all the intense and volatile feelings the public holds toward that embattled and somewhat dazed institution these days.
But by breaking the interview up the way it is, ABC executives can alter and balance the ratio of what it airs as they go along. If blog reviews tonight say Gibson was too harsh, ABC execs can feature some of the less contentious moments starting on Good Morning America tomorrow. Ditto for World News Friday. And then, they get the final edit for 20/20 tonight at 10 — after a full day in which to gauge the reaction to Gibson’s performance. Not to mention all the different demographics they will be reaching throughout the day and night.
Plus, since the interview itself will take place in three parts during that time period, Gibson can adjust his style to the reaction.
The New York Post Endorses John McCain!
.
.POST ENDORSES JOHN MCCAIN
September 8, 2008
THE Post today enthusiastically urges the election of Sen. John S. McCain as the 44th president of the United States.
McCain’s lifelong record of service to America, his battle-tested courage, unshakeable devotion to principle and clear grasp of the dangers and opportunities now facing the nation stand in dramatic contrast to the tissue-paper-thin résumé of his Democratic opponent, freshman Sen. Barack Obama.
McCain has been in Washington for many years now, but he is not of Washington. He knows where the levers of power are located – and how to manipulate them – but he is not controlled by them.
McCain’s selection of the charming, but rock-solid, outsider Sarah Palin as his running mate underscores the point.
Neither plays well with others.
And this is an unalloyed asset at a time when special interests – lobbyists, lawyers and organized labor chief among them – wield enormous influence in the nation’s capital.
McCain’s Democratic opponents, Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden, lead a party constructed of special interests – public-employee unionists in particular.
There are many reasons to support the McCain-Palin ticket. Here are but a few:
.
- National security: The differences between McCain and Obama are especially stark.
McCain says 9/11 represented a two-decade “failure . . . to respond to . . . a [growing] global terror network.” He understood that Iraq is a critical front in the war on terror – and he urged perseverance even in the dark days that preceded the success of “the surge.”
Obama backed policies that would have abandoned Iraq to its fate, he bitterly opposed the surge, and once insisted that US forces invade Pakistan in search of Osama bin Laden – seemingly without regard for the potential consequences of attacking a nuclear-armed nation, ally or not.
Regarding a nuclear Iran, McCain has pushed for the strongest possible international sanctions and diplomatic pressure. Obama opposes sanctions.
And, when Russia invaded the former Soviet republic of Georgia, threatening a return to the Cold War, McCain reacted with stern disapprobation: “We must remind Russia’s leaders that the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world require their respect for the values, stability and peace of that world.”
Obama called for UN action – unaware, apparently, that Russia’s Security Council veto would have prevented any.
- Taxes: McCain knows that when government absorbs ever-larger shares of national income, the economy suffers.
High tax rates diminish investment, killing jobs and stunting growth.
And while Obama promises tax cuts for “95 percent” of Americans, what he actually is proposing is some $650 billion in tax-credit-driven hikes in entitlement and other spending, to be paid for with heavier imposts across the board, but especially on investment – like a sharply higher capital-gains tax.
This is bad news for the millions of ordinary Americans who own stocks, either personally or through pension funds or who plan someday to sell their homes or other real property.
McCain, wisely, vows to keep capital-gains taxes at 15 percent and to keep the Bush-era tax cuts in place – understanding that new growth will boost revenue, and promising to make up the rest with spending restraint.
And he’s called for a one-year freeze on most discretionary spending and an end to pork-barrel giveaways.
- Trade:
“I object when Senator Obama and others preach the false virtues of economic isolationism,” says McCain – noting that “globalization is an opportunity” for US workers. He adds that while emerging economies like those of China and India are worrisome, the answer is competition informed by education and innovation – not protectionism.
- Energy: On the economic issue most vexing Americans today – energy prices – McCain is aggressive
He is a strong convert to offshore drilling: “We have trillions of dollars’ worth of oil and gas reserves in the US at a time we are exporting hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas to buy energy.”
He also strongly backs nuclear power – a carbon-free form of energy that America can produce relatively cheaply.
Obama, meanwhile, hews to the Democratic Party line on energy: no nukes, no drilling and no comprehension of the consequences of such policies.
None of this implies an iota of disrespect toward Obama. It took a formidable candidacy to defeat Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton – a candidacy, by the way, which we strongly supported earlier this year.
And the intelligence, the organizational skills and the ability to communicate that Obama demonstrated from the beginning dramatically underscore the history that is being made by the first African-American to head a major-party presidential ticket.
He should be around for a long time, and we hope that he is.
In the end, though, sound security, economic and energy policies – plus allegiance to principle – are critical to keeping America safe and strong.
On all counts, John McCain and Sarah Palin understand this – and that’s why we’re in their corner to the finish.
Tammy Bruce Makes A Feminist’s Argument For Sarah Palin
Tammy Bruce is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women, and is the author of “The New American Revolution” . She has a daily talk radio show. A registered Democrat her entire adult life until February, she now is registered as a decline-to-state voter. So, feminist credentials established, I was happy to see her offer some clarity about Sarah Palin.
.
.
In the shadow of the blatant and truly stunning sexism launched against the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, and as a pro-choice feminist, I wasn’t the only one thrilled to hear Republican John McCain announce Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. For the GOP, she bridges for conservatives and independents what I term “the enthusiasm gap” for the ticket. For Democrats, she offers something even more compelling – a chance to vote for a someone who is her own woman, and who represents a party that, while we don’t agree on all the issues, at least respects women enough to take them seriously.
Whether we have a D, R or an “i for independent” after our names, women share a different life experience from men, and we bring that difference to the choices we make and the decisions we come to. Having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise. But with the Palin nomination, maybe they’ll realize it’s not up to them any longer.
Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it’s about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It’s that simple.
The rank bullying of the Clinton candidacy during the primary season has the distinction of simply being the first revelation of how misogynistic the party has become. The media led the assault, then the Obama campaign continued it. Trailblazer Geraldine Ferraro, who was the first Democratic vice presidential candidate, was so taken aback by the attacks that she publicly decried nominee Barack Obama as “terribly sexist” and openly criticized party chairman Howard Dean for his remarkable silence on the obvious sexism.
Concerned feminists noted, among other thinly veiled sexist remarks during the campaign, Obama quipping, “I understand that Sen. Clinton, periodically when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal,” and Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen in a television interview comparing Clinton to a spurned lover-turned-stalker in the film, “Fatal Attraction,” noting, “Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub, and Sen. Clinton has had a remarkable career…”. These attitudes, and more, define the tenor of the party leadership, and sent a message to the grassroots and media that it was “Bros Before Hoes,” to quote a popular Obama-supporter T-shirt.
The campaign’s chauvinistic attitude was reflected in the even more condescending Democratic National Convention. There, the Obama camp made it clear it thought a Super Special Women’s Night would be enough to quell the fervent support of the woman who had virtually tied him with votes and was on his heels with pledged delegates.
There was a lot of pandering and lip service to women’s rights, and evenings filled with anecdotes of how so many have been kept from achieving their dreams, or failed to be promoted, simply because they were women. Clinton’s “18 million cracks in the glass ceiling” were mentioned a heck of a lot. More people began to wonder, though, how many cracks does it take to break the thing?
Ironically, all this at an event that was negotiated and twisted at every turn in an astounding effort not to promote a woman.
Virtually moments after the GOP announcement of Palin for vice president, pundits on both sides of the aisle began to wonder if Clinton supporters – pro-choice women and gays to be specific – would be attracted to the McCain-Palin ticket. The answer is, of course. There is a point where all of our issues, including abortion rights, are made safer not only if the people we vote for agree with us – but when those people and our society embrace a respect for women and promote policies that increase our personal wealth, power and political influence.
Make no mistake – the Democratic Party and its nominee have created the powerhouse that is Sarah Palin, and the party’s increased attacks on her (and even on her daughter) reflect that panic.
The party has moved from taking the female vote for granted to outright contempt for women. That’s why Palin represents the most serious conservative threat ever to the modern liberal claim on issues of cultural and social superiority. Why? Because men and women who never before would have considered voting for a Republican have either decided, or are seriously considering, doing so.
They are deciding women’s rights must be more than a slogan and actually belong to every woman, not just the sort approved of by left-wing special interest groups.
Palin’s candidacy brings both figurative and literal feminist change. The simple act of thinking outside the liberal box, which has insisted for generations that only liberals and Democrats can be trusted on issues of import to women, is the political equivalent of a nuclear explosion.
The idea of feminists willing to look to the right changes not only electoral politics, but will put more women in power at lightning speed as we move from being taken for granted to being pursued, nominated and appointed and ultimately, sworn in.
It should be no surprise that the Democratic response to the McCain-Palin ticket was to immediately attack by playing the liberal trump card that keeps Democrats in line – the abortion card – where the party daily tells restless feminists the other side is going to police their wombs.
The power of that accusation is interesting, coming from the Democrats – a group that just told the world that if you have ovaries, then you don’t count.
Yes, both McCain and Palin identify as anti-abortion, but neither has led a political life with that belief, or their other religious principles, as their signature issue. Politicians act on their passions – the passion of McCain and Palin is reform. In her time in office, Palin’s focus has not been to kick the gays and make abortion illegal; it has been to kick the corrupt and make wasteful spending illegal. The Republicans are now making direct appeals to Clinton supporters, knowingly crafting a political base that would include pro-choice voters.
On the day McCain announced her selection as his running mate, Palin thanked Clinton and Ferraro for blazing her trail. A day later, Ferraro noted her shock at Palin’s comment. You see, none of her peers, not one of them, had ever publicly thanked her in the 24 years since her historic run for the White House. Ferraro has since refused to divulge for whom she’s voting. Many more now are realizing that it does indeed take a woman – who happens to be a Republican named Sarah Palin.
.
.
Tammy Bruce is an openly gay, pro-choice, gun owning, pro-death penalty, voted-for-President Bush authentic feminist. A lifelong Democrat, in the 1990s she worked to help elect Senators Feinstein and Boxer, and aided the Clinton for President campaign. Before we knew he was a sexual compulsive and “did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
She was drawn into feminist activism in the late 1980′s to contribute to the ongoing effort to ensure safe and legal abortion for all women, and with a special focus on violence against women and ending international subjugation of women. Just two years after joining the National Organization for Women, with a brand of feminism that places her somewhere between Donna Reed and Thelma and Louise, Ms. Bruce was elected president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW at the age of 27. The youngest ever to achieve that position, she doubled the chapter’s membership from 2,000 to 4,000 within a year with issue campaigns that introduced a fresh view of feminist activism. In her seven years as president (1990-1996, the longest continuous tenure in the chapter’s 30 year history) she mobilized activists locally and nationally on a whole range of issues, including women’s image in media, child care, health care, violence against women, economics, and domestic violence. Ms. Bruce also served two years as a member of the National NOW Board of Directors.
An important contributor to the author’s position on the relevance of free speech comes from her experience as a radio talk show host. Flagshipped at KABC Radio and nationally syndicated with 153 affiliates, The “Tammy Bruce Show” premiered in 1993 in Los Angeles. Additionally, her editorials and commentaries on significant social issues have been published nationally and internationally in a wide variety of magazines, newspapers, and on television and radio programming. Ms. Bruce is also a Fox News Channel Political Analyst, and served on California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Transition Team.
Ms. Bruce’s first book, “The New Thought Police,” was published by Forum, an imprint of Crown/Random House, in October 2001. An analysis of freedom of expression and the culture wars, it explores the importance of freedom of expression and personal liberty and how that liberty is under attack by the dangerous rise of Left-wing McCarthyism. Her second book, “The Death of Right and Wrong,”also for Random House (April 2003), addresses the rise of moral relativism in society and quickly became a New York Times best seller. Ms. Bruce’s latest work,“The New American Revolution,” was published by Harper Collins/Morrow in November 2005. The paperback edition was released November 2006. She is currently working on her fourth book, with a subject matter yet to be revealed.
A native of Los Angeles, Ms. Bruce holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science from the University of Southern California. She also notes her interest in politics and individual liberty was sparked during her childhood in part because of the work of authors Ray Bradbury and George Orwell, both of whom remain her favorite writers. Ms. Bruce lives in Los Angeles with Snoopy the Cat, Snoopy’s best friend Sydney the Dog, and puts up with a raccoon she has named Rocky, who refuses to leave her outside patio.
Free Tammy Radio Stream
M-F 9am-12pm PT
Talk Stream Live also carries a replay from 12pm-3pm PT
Saturday 4pm-7pm PT
KABC Radio, Los Angeles, Saturday’s, 7-10 PM Pacific Time
Top 8 Myths, Lies and Untruths About Sarah Palin (Updated)
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has been subjected to an intense amount of media and public scrutiny since she was named as John McCain’s vice presidential pick one week ago. Many of the attacks have come in the form of unconfirmed reports on the Internet. Among them:
.
1) Palin “Joined a Secessionist Political Party”
The Charge: Unsubstantiated Internet reports insisted Palin was once a member of the Alaska Independence Party, which critics call a secessionist political movement and supporters say is dedicated to seeking greater state control over federal lands across Alaska.
The Facts: Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982. There is no record of her ever being a member of the AIP, or any party but the GOP. Palin’s husband has been a member of the AIP in the past, but since 2002 has been a registered independent.
(See: Party Official Says Palin Was Not a Member)
2) Palin Supported a “Nazi Sympathizer”
The Charge: “Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan, a right-winger or, as many Jews call him: a Nazi sympathizer,” Obama Florida spokesman Mark Bubriski was quoted as saying in a Miami Herald article.
The Facts: While mayor of Wasilla, Palin wore a Buchanan button during the sometimes presidential candidate’s 1999 visit. But Palin actually supported Steve Forbes in 2000, and served as a co-chair on his Alaska campaign.
In the weeks after the 1999 report of her wearing the Buchanan button, Palin said: “When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I’ll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect. … The article may have left your readers with the perception that I am endorsing this candidate, as opposed to welcoming his visit to Wasilla.”
(See: Obama campaign advisor quote is from an e-mail sent to the Miami Herald )
3) Palin “Wants Creationism Taught in School”
The Charge: Palin opposes the teaching of evolution, and would mandate the teaching of creationism in the state’s public schools.
The Facts: Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members. She has kept this pledge, according to the Associated Press.
Palin has spoken in favor of classroom discussions of creationism, in some cases. “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum,” Palin told the Anchorage Daily News in a 2006 interview.
(See: ‘Creation science’ enters the race; Palin is only candidate to suggest it should be discussed in schools. By Tom Kizzia, Anchorage Daily News, 27 October 2006)
4) Palin “Was Nearly Recalled” While Mayor
The Charge: Palin was so controversial as mayor of Wasilla that she was almost recalled by a popular voter movement.
The Facts: The Wasilla City Council considered but never took up a recall motion after she fired a longtime police chief, who subsequently brought a lawsuit. A citizen’s group dropped their recall bid, and a judge ruled Palin had the authority to fire the chief.
(See: Foes Back Off Push to Recall Mayor)
5) Palin “Opposes Sex Education”
The Charge: Palin opponents say she supported the end of all sex education in public schools. In light of her daughter’s presumably unplanned teen pregnancy, this has been a particularly well discussed Internet topic.
The Facts: “The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support,” Palin wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates. Palin favors abstinence-based sex education programs.
(See: McCain fought money on teen pregnancy programs, By Sharon Theimer, Associated Press, Sept. 2, 2008)
6) “This Picture Proves Palin is …”
This doctored photo of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is one of a number of falsifications and rumors to emerge since she became Sen. John McCain
The Charge: A slew of fake, Photoshopped or misdated photographs on the Internet purport to show Palin in any number of embarrassing or compromising poses. One photo claimed to show Palin standing poolside, wearing an American flag-themed bikini, toting a rifle with telescopic sight.
The Facts: The various photos are being discredited and shown to be fake on a number of Web sites. The original of the so-called bikini shot, probably the best-known of the pictures, was shown to have been taken of another woman, with Palin’s head Photoshopped above the body.
(See: Call to Arms)
.
..
..
..
.7) Palin is the grandmother, and not the mother, of Trig Palin
The Charge: The most salacious rumor of all, this theory holds that Palin did not give birth to her son Trig in April, and was actually covering up for her daughter, Bristol.
The Facts: There are a number of photographs showing an apparently pregnant Sarah Palin, as well as a number of published eyewitness accounts of her pregnancy. These include First Lady Laura Bush, who says she spoke with a pregnant Palin at a governor’s conference in February. An assignment manager for KTVA news in Anchorage, Cherie Shirey, has also been quoted saying: “We worked with Governor Palin many times in 2008. Our reporters worked her on location and in the studio and I worked with her myself. She was definitely pregnant. You could see it in her belly and her face. The whole idea that Sarah Palin wasn’t pregnant with Trig is completely, absolutely absurd.”
The McCain campaign, in an apparent effort to counteract the rumors, announced last weekend that Bristol Palin is five months pregnant, which indicated she would have become pregnant before Trig was born.
(See: Palin Rebuts Rumors, Says Daughter Pregnant,
Anchorage TV Station: Palin Was ‘Definitely Pregnant’ With Trig’ )
8 ) Governor Palin slashed funding for a program supporting teen mothers
The Charge: he Washington Post’s Paul Kane reported that “Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms.” The far-left Huffington Post repeated the story the next day, and it was off and running. To support this contention, Kane produced the 2008 Alaska budget, along with Governor Palin’s line-item reductions. Kane said, “Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million.”
The Facts: Covenant House Alaska is a faith-based, not-for-profit agency which provides a variety of services to troubled teens, including a home for teen moms. Although the work with adolescent mothers is only one component of Covenant’s services, Kane focused on this particular aspect of its work. His focus was not a surprise, given the revelation that Governor Palin’s teen daughter is five months pregnant. Covenant House requested additional state funding to help expand housing capacity. The legislature agreed that expansion was a worthy objective and allocated the substantial sum of $5 million in the proposed budget.
In Alaska, the governor is allowed to reduce budget allocations in the service of sound management and fiscal accountability. It is true that Mrs. Palin trimmed the proposed $5 million allocation to $3.9 million. However, the Washington Post did not tell readers that the state of Alaska’s 2008 allocation was three times more than Covenant House Alaska received from all government grants in 2007. According to records posted on the Covenant House Alaska website, the organization received just over $1.3 million dollars from grants in 2007 and nearly $1.2 million in 2006. Even with the reductions, Governor Palin signed a budget which provided a massive influx of support for troubled teens.
Thus, the Post report is misleading on three counts. One, the funding in question went to an organization which provides many different services, including work with teen mothers. There was no funding at issue exclusively earmarked for pregnant teens. No funds directly allocated to teen moms were slashed.
Two, the report gives the impression that the Governor reduced prior state funding levels, when, in fact, the Palin-approved budget allowed a massive expansion of funding for this faith-based organization. The organization’s total revenue for 2007, from all sources, was just over $3 million. Thus, the amount approved by Palin and the Alaska legislature was a huge increase. The money given to Covenant House cannot be considered a cut in funding; it was a raise, even if the raise was not as great as originally contemplated by the legislature.
Three, Covenant House Alaska experienced no cut in operating expenses as the result of the Palin budget. The center’s executive director, Deirdre Cronin, explained it this way in a September 4 statement:
“Despite some press reports to the contrary, our operating budget was not reduced. Our $3.9 million appropriation is directed toward a multi-year capital project and it is our understanding that the state simply opted to phase in its support for this project over several years, rather than all at once in the current budget year.”
Viewed within the context of prior expenditures, it becomes clear that Governor Palin increased funding for social services which benefit kids, not “slashed” them as the Post reported. The increase is the beginning of a multi-year investment in help for vulnerable teens. A prudent course, the state will monitor the progress of Covenant House and allocate funds over time. In this way, Palin demonstrated she is not afraid to exercise fiscal caution, even when that decision involves those of similar ideology.
Taking everything into account, a dramatically different picture of Governor Palin’s actions comes into focus. Executive Director Cronin sees it differently than Mr. Kane, saying, “We are grateful for the support we have received from Governor Sarah Palin, the Alaska legislature and our Congressional delegation over the years.”
In Washington, D.C., sometimes more is less. In Alaska, more is still more.
Your submissions and additions are welcome!
‘Stand up and fight! We’re Americans, and we never give up…
COUNTRY FIRST!
.
-
“I’m very proud to have introduced our next Vice President to the country. But I can’t wait until I introduce her to Washington. And let me offer an advance warning to the old, big spending, do nothing, me first, country second Washington crowd: change is coming.”
-
“The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn’t a cause, it’s a symptom. It’s what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you. Again and again, I’ve worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That’s how I will govern as President. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. I have that record and the scars to prove it. Senator Obama does not.”
-
“I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s.”
-
I’m going to fight for my cause every day as your President. I’m going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank Him: that I’m an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me!
Fight for what’s right for our country!
Fight for the ideals and character of a free people!
Fight for our children’s future!
Fight for justice and opportunity for all!
Stand up to defend our country from its enemies!
Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America!
Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight! Nothing is inevitable here. We’re Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.
.
This Faux Palin Business: Nothing But Deflection
The whole “Palin Controversy” isn’t. It is a concoction whipped up that is lighter than Meringue, by David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager, to deflect attention away from the real subject of this election: Barack Obama.
The media and Obama’s campaign couldn’t wait to tell the public about Palin’s husband getting a driving under the influence arrest 25 years ago, something they breathlessly announced as “proof” Palin wasn’t vetted properly.
What about the vetting of Barack H. Obama? You know, the PRESIDENTIAL candidate who himself used cocaine and other drugs about 20-30 years ago?? Are the media aware of what crimes Obama committed back then? Nope, didn’t think so… Why not? Because they did not VET him! Why isn’t anyone screaming about the lack of proper vetting of Barack Obama?
Who did Obama live with, room with in college? Where are they now? Where are the legislative records, transcripts from all his massive amount of work in the Illinois Senate? Surely a man so accomplished as Obama would have left a gigantic amount of statements in support or opposition to the thousands of proposals and bills submitted to such a large body. Who in the media poured over them? No one did.
Thomas Sowell, writing at Townhall. com raised some good points:
Now that the Democrats have recovered from the shock of Governor Sarah Palin’s nomination as the Republican’s candidate for vice president, they have suddenly discovered that her lack of experience in general– and foreign policy experience in particular– is a terrible danger in someone just a heartbeat away from being President of the United States.
For those who are satisfied with talking points, there is no need to go any further. But, for those who still consider substance relevant, this is an incredible argument coming from those whose presidential candidate has even less experience in public office than Sarah Palin, and none in foreign policy.
Moreover, if Senator Barack Obama is elected, he will not be a heartbeat away from the presidency, his would be the heartbeat of the president– and he would be the one making foreign policy.
But the big talking point is that the Democrats’ vice-presidential nominee, Senator Joe Biden, has years of foreign policy experience as a member, and now chairman, of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
That all depends on what the definition of “experience” is.
Before getting into that, however, a plain fact should be noted: No governor ever had foreign policy experience before becoming president– not Ronald Reagan, not Franklin D. Roosevelt, nor any other governor.
It is hard to know how many people could possibly have had foreign policy experience before reaching the White House besides a Secretary of State or a Secretary of Defense.
The last Secretary of War (the old title of Secretaries of Defense) to later become President of the United States was William Howard Taft, a hundred years ago. The last Secretary of State to become President of the United States was James Buchanan, a century and a half ago.
The first President Bush had been head of the C.I.A., which certainly gave him a lot of knowledge of what was happening around the world, though still not experience in making the country’s foreign policy.
Senator Joe Biden’s years of service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is even further removed from foreign policy experience. He has had a front-row seat as an observer of foreign policy. But Senator Biden has never had any real experience of making foreign policy and taking the consequences of the results.
The difference between being a spectator and being a participant, with responsibility for the consequences of what you say and do, is fundamental.
You can read books about crime or attend lectures by criminologists, but you have no real experience or expertise about crime unless you have been a criminal or a policeman.
Although I served in the Marine Corps, I have no military experience in any meaningful sense. The closest I ever came to combat was being assigned to photograph the maneuvers of the Second Marine Division at Camp Lejeune, N.C.
That was photographic experience, not military experience. If someone gave me a policy-making job in the Pentagon, I wouldn’t have a clue.
The fact that Senator Joe Biden has for years listened to all sorts of people testify on all sorts of foreign policy issues tells us nothing about how well he understood the issues.
Out of the four presidential and vice-presidential candidates this year, only Governor Palin has had to make executive decisions and live with the consequences.
As for Senator Obama, his various pronouncements on foreign policy have been as immature as they have been presumptuous.
He talked publicly about taking military action against Pakistan, one of our few Islamic allies and a nation with nuclear weapons.
Barack Obama’s first response to the Russian invasion of Georgia was to urge “all sides” to negotiate a cease-fire and take their issues to the United Nations. That is standard liberal talk, which even Obama had second thoughts about, after Senator John McCain gave a more grown-up response.
We should all have second thoughts about what is, and is not, foreign policy “experience.”
Palin Delivers A ‘News Flash’ To Media Pundits
Palin Takes On Obama in Convention Speech
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican Party’s vice presidential nominee, went on the offense during her address to the 2008 Republican National Convention, drawing sharp distinctions between the Republican ticket and Obama-Biden and taking on the media for its coverage of her in recent days. Excerpts from her speech are below:
.
“I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids’ public education better. When I ran for city council, I didn’t need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too. Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.”
***
“I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment. And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion – I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country.”
***
“Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems — as if we all didn’t know that already,” she said. “But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.”
***
“Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.”
More on Sarah Palin’s speech later, when I have had a chance to sleep on it, sort out my feelings, which are basically positive.
____________________
Alaska Maverick
Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign today released its latest television ad, entitled “Alaska Maverick.” The ad highlights Governor Sarah Palin’s record of taking on the special interests in Alaska and bringing reform and change. While Barack Obama talks about change, Governor Sarah Palin has actually done it.
.
AD FACTS: Script For “Alaska Maverick” (TV :30)
ANNCR: The Journal says: “Governor Palin’s credentials as an agent of reform exceed Barack Obama’s.” They’re right.
· The Wall Street Journal‘s Editorial: “We’d Say Governor Palin’s Credentials As An Agent Of Reform Exceed Barack Obama’s.” “For starters, we’d say Governor Palin’s credentials as an agent of reform exceed Barack Obama’s. Mr. Obama rose through the Chicago Democratic machine without a peep of push-back. Alaska’s politics are deeply inbred and backed by energy-industry money. Mr. Obama slid past the kind of forces that Mrs. Palin took head on.” (Editorial, “A Reform Ticket,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/30/08)
ANNCR: She “has a record of bi-partisan reform.”
· The Associated Press: Governor Palin “Has A Record Of Bipartisan Reform.” “It is true, as the statement said, that Palin has a record of bipartisan reform. She has a growing reputation as a maverick for bucking her party’s establishment and Alaska’s powerful oil industry.” (Ron Fournier, “Analysis: Palin’s Age, Inexperience Rival Obama’s,” The Associated Press, 8/29/08)
ANNCR: He’s the Senate’s “most liberal.”
· “Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., Was The Most Liberal Senator In 2007, According To National Journal’s 27th Annual Vote Ratings.” (Brian Friel, Richard E. Cohen and Kirk Victor, “Obama: Most Liberal Senator In 2007,” National Journal, 1/31/07)
ANNCR: She “took on the oil producers.”
· Anchorage Daily News: Governor Palin “Took On The Oil Producers.” “Palin took on the oil producers, especially Exxon Mobil, saying they had been dragging their feet on a gasline. She persuaded the Legislature to pass a bill authorizing an independent company to build the line with state subsidy.” (Tom Kizzia, “The Joan Of Arc Of Alaska Politics,” Anchorage Daily News, 8/29/08)
ANNCR: He gave big oil billions in subsidies and giveaways.
· Barack Obama Voted For The 2005 Energy Bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #152: Motion Agreed To 92-4: R 53-1; D 38-3; I 1-0, 6/23/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #158: Passed 85-12: R 49-5; D 35-7; I 1-0, 6/28/05, Obama Voted Yea; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 74-26: R 49-6; D 25-19; I 0-1, 7/29/05, Obama Voted Yea)
· The 2005 Energy Bill Included $2.8 Billion In Subsidies For Oil And Natural Gas Production. “The conference agreement provides for $14.6 billion in tax breaks and credits between 2005 and 2015, including: –$2.8 billion for fossil fuel production …” (Toni Johnson, “CQ Bill Analysis: HR 6,” Congressional Quarterly‘s “CQ Bill Analysis,” www.cq.com, Accessed 7/14/08)
ANNCR: She’s “earned a reputation as a reformer.” His reputation? Empty words.
· Seattle Times: Governor Palin “Has Earned A Reputation As A Reformer.” “Since moving into the governor’s mansion in Juneau in December of 2006, Palin has earned a reputation as a reformer who worked with both Democrats and Republicans to overhaul the state oil-tax system and to restore confidence in state government shaken by political-corruption scandals.” (Hal Bernton, “Alaska Governor Palin Comes From Small Town To National Stage,” Seattle Times, 8/29/08)
An American Patriot
Joseph Isadore “Joe” Lieberman
Senator Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut
.
In these prepared remarks, speaking before the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Senator Joseph Lieberman says he supports John McCain because “country matters more than party” and McCain is the person to break through the partisan divide.
.
Thank you for that warm welcome. I am honored to be here.
We meet tonight in the wake of a terrible storm that has hit the Gulf Coast but that hurts all of us, because we are all members of our larger American family.
At times like this, we set aside all that divides us, and we come together to help our fellow citizens in need. What matters is certainly not whether we are Democrats or Republicans, but that we are all Americans. The truth is, it shouldn’t take a hurricane to bring us together like this.
Every day, across our country, millions of our fellow citizens are facing huge problems.
They are worried about their homes, their jobs, and their businesses; they are worried about the outrageous cost of gas and of health insurance; and they are worried about the threats from our enemies abroad.
But when they look to Washington, all too often they do not see their leaders coming together to tackle these problems.
Instead they see Democrats and Republicans fighting each other, rather than fighting for the American people.
Our Founding Fathers foresaw the danger of this kind of senseless partisanship. George Washington himself — in his farewell address to our country — warned that the “spirit of party” is “the worst enemy” of our democracy and “enfeebles” our government’s ability to do its job.
George Washington was absolutely right. The sad truth is — today we are living through his worst nightmare, in the capital city that bears his name.
And that brings me directly to why I am here tonight. What, after all, is a Democrat like me doing at a Republican convention like this?
The answer is simple.
I’m here to support John McCain because country matters more than party.
I’m here tonight because John McCain is the best choice to bring our country together and lead our country forward.
I’m here because John McCain’s whole life testifies to a great truth: being a Democrat or a Republican is important.
But it is not more important than being an American.
Both presidential candidates this year talk about changing the culture of Washington, about breaking through the partisan gridlock and special interests that are poisoning our politics. But only one of them has actually done it. Only one leader has shown the courage and the capability to rise above the smallness of our politics to get big things done for our country and our people. And that leader is John McCain.
John understands that it shouldn’t take a natural disaster like Hurricane Gustav to get us to take off our partisan blinders and work together to get things done.
It shouldn’t take a natural disaster to teach us that the American people don’t care much if you have an “R” or a “D” after your name.
What they care about is, are we solving the problems they are up against every day?
What you can expect from John McCain as president is precisely what he has done this week: which is to put country first. That is the code by which he has lived his entire life, and that is the code he will carry with him into the White House.
I have personally seen John, over and over again, bring people together from both parties to tackle our toughest problems we face —to reform our campaign finance, lobbying and ethics laws, to create the 9/11 Commission and pass its critical national security reforms, and to end the partisan paralysis over judicial confirmations.
My Democratic friends know all about John’s record of independence and accomplishment. Maybe that’s why some of them are spending so much time and so much money trying to convince voters that John McCain is someone else. I’m here, as a Democrat myself, to tell you: Don’t be fooled. God only made one John McCain, and he is his own man.
If John McCain was just another go-along partisan politician, he never would have taken on corrupt Republican lobbyists, or big corporations that were cheating the American people, or powerful colleagues in Congress who were wasting taxpayer money.
But he did.
If John McCain was just another go-along partisan politician, he never would have led the fight to fix our broken immigration system or to do something about global warming.
But he did.
As a matter of fact, if John McCain is just another partisan Republican, then I’m Michael Moore’s favorite Democrat.
And I’m not.
Senator Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man who can do great things for our country in the years ahead. But eloquence is no substitute for a record — not in these tough times. In the Senate he has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done, nor has he been willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party.
Contrast that to John McCain’s record, or the record of the last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who stood up to some of those same Democratic interest groups and worked with Republicans to get important things done like welfare reform, free-trade agreements, and a balanced budget.
Governor Sarah Palin, like John McCain, is a reformer who has taken on the special interests and reached across party lines. She is a leader we can count on to help John shake up Washington.
That’s why the McCain-Palin ticket is the real ticket for change this year.
The Washington bureaucrats and power brokers can’t build a pen strong enough to hold these two mavericks.
And together, you can count on John McCain and Sarah Palin to fight for America and to fight for you! And that’s what our country needs most right now.
What we need most is not more party unity in America but more national unity.
Especially at a time of war, we need a president we can count on to fight for what’s right for our country — not only when it is easy, but when it is hard.
When others were silent, John McCain had the judgment to sound the alarm about the mistakes we were making in Iraq. When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, when Barack Obama was voting to cut off funding for our troops on the ground, John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion and support the surge, and because of that, today, our troops are at last beginning to come home, not in failure, but in honor.
Before I conclude, I ask the indulgence of those in this hall tonight, as I want to speak directly to my fellow Democrats and independents who are watching.
I know many of you are angry and frustrated by our government and our politics and for good reason. You may be thinking of voting for John McCain, but you’re not sure. Some of you have never voted for a Republican before and in an ordinary election, you probably wouldn’t. But this is no ordinary election, because these are not ordinary times, and John McCain is no ordinary candidate. You may not agree with John McCain on every issue. But you can always count on him to be straight with you about where he stands, and to stand for what he thinks is right regardless of politics.
As president, you can count on John McCain to be a restless reformer, who will clean up Washington and get our government working again for you.
So tonight, I ask you whether you are an independent, a Reagan Democrat or a Clinton Democrat, or just a Democrat: This year, when you vote for president, vote for the person you believe is best for the country, not for the party you happen to belong to.
Vote for the leader who, since the age of 17, when he raised his hand and took an oath to defend and protect our Constitution, has always put our country first.
So, let’s come together to make a great American patriot our next great president.
You can view the entire speech via C-Span by clicking here.
The Most Experienced Executive In History
According to a news item this morning, George Romney, Mitt’s dad, was the worlds most experienced executive! George Romney? Yes, I kid you not. His Chairmanship of American Motors, Governor of Michigan and several campaigns for the Presidency make it so. He is followed closely by those well-known titans of industry, Richard Nixon and Hubert Humphrey. You didn’t know Nixon and Humphrey were executives? You thought they were well-known politicians/office holders? Well that’s because you don’t believe in change! You’re an antiquated relic from the past, perhaps…even…..perhaps even a distraction….
.
.
.
The news item I spoke of above was an interview with Barack Obama. The Chosen One. On Anderson Cooper’s show @ CNN Mr. Obama made some pretty amazing assertions, after the obligatory Hurricane Gustav concerns:
Now the video, aside from proving the man cannot speak easily without a teleprompter, is to me, absolutely stunning.
Obama: Well, you know, my understanding is that Governor Palin’s town, has I think 50 employees. We’ve got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about 3 times that just for the month. So I think our ability to manage large systems and to execute I think has been made clear…
Obama compares the size of his campaign to the small Alaskan town Governor Palin was mayor of and suggests that since his campaign has more employees and will spend more money, that he is then the more experienced and more qualified executive! Stop and think about those exact words.
Obama apparently forgot that Governor Palin is also a governor. And perhaps he didn’t know (but of course he does), but the number of state employees in Alaska dwarfs anything his campaign could ever hope to hire. And the Alaska state budget is some 22 times higher than the budget of the Obama campaign. And the investment boards and total revenue invested for the Alaska Trust (these are the mandadated investment of all mineral revenues) is in the tens of billions of dollars!
Oddly enough, Obama doesn’t site his days as a “community organizer” or his service in the Illinois State Senate, where presumably he did have a staff, as part of his executive experience.
In his very own words, Senator Obama concedes that the only executive experience he has had is that of running his campaign for President, these scant past two years. He is actually suggesting that the experience he has gotten from running his campaign is a major part of what qualifies him to be president!
John McCain’s spokesman called the suggestion “laughable.”
“For Barack Obama to argue that he’s experienced enough to be president because he’s running for president is desperate circular logic and its laughable. It is a testament to Barack Obama’s inexperience and failing qualifications that he would stoop to passing off his candidacy as comparable to Governor Sarah Palin’s executive experience managing a budget of over $10 billion and more than 24,000 employees,” said spokesman Tucker Bounds.
This is the first that I could find, in hours of searching, of Barack Obama claiming to take a personal role in running his campaign, being in effect the CEO of it. All previous mentions by Obama reference his campaign manager, media people, and all that. I did find a video of him in his Chicago HQ remarking how he barely recognized the faces, the place had grown so. I have run some pretty large campaigns, and have yet to run across a candidate one could compare to a CEO/COO/Chairman.
Using only Obama’s standard, it is crystal clear Governor Palin has the far greater executive experience. She controls a budget of almost $10 billion and a state work force of some 20,000+ employees – ten times the number Obama employs in his campaign. And a budget some 20 times higher than anything Obama will manage in this year’s campaign.
Here are just a few of the duties a sitting governor deals with daily:
* Government administration
* Commerce, Community & Economic Development
* Corrections/Prisons/Criminal Justice
* Education
* Environmental policies
* Fish & Game
* Health and Social Services
* Labor
* Law
* Military and Veterans’ Affairs
* Natural Resources
* Public Safety
* Revenue
* Transportation and Public Facilities
* State College and Universities
* State Legislature/Approving or Vetoing Bills
* Court System Administration
* Fund Capitalization
* Public Education Fund
* Special Appropriations
* Retirement policies
While many on the left are busy denouncing Palin for not having enough executive experience, while noting Obama’s vast experience as a community organizer and a state senator, they overlook the following: that as the governor of a state, even a small population state like Alaska, you confront issues and have responsibilities that are very much like those you will come into contact with in the White House.
I think it only logical to conclude that experience is even more relevant in Governor Palin’s case, as she is a politician used to being far closer, having more direct contact and feedback with her Constituents than Obama, who as a United States Senator and Illinois State Senator comes from a state with a compariatively huge population base that makes direct contact problematic.
What say you?
Gov. Palin And ‘That Trooper Investigation’: A Full Disclosure
.
.
In the wake of John McCain’s decision to select Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, some in the press and bloggers are reporting on an inquiry involving the Department of Public Safety commissioner and Governor Palins former brother-in-law, a state trooper. The following are the facts of the matter, with full citations. Please feel free to comment or ask questions!
.
- Governor Palin is an open book on this — she did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide. As a reformer and a leader on ethics reform, she has been happy to cooperate fully in the inquiry of this matter.
- Governor Palin dismissed Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan because of an honest disagreement over budget priorities — thats it. Though Governor Palin had differences of opinion over department policy, she valued Monegans talents and offered him another position in the administration that was consistent with Monegans skill set and that was in an area where the two shared the same policy goals.
- The allegation that Governor Palin retaliated against Commissioner Monegan for not firing Trooper Wooten is cut from whole cloth. In fact, it was first made, without any evidence, by a blogger who, as Governor Palins opponent in her 2006 gubernatorial race (receiving nine percent of the vote), has blasted the Governor ever since she turned down his request for a government job.
-
Former Public Safety Commissioner Monegan stated that at no time did Governor Palin, her husband, or anyone on her staff tell him to fire trooper Mike Wooten. Monegan told the Anchorage Daily News, for the record, no one ever said fire Wooten. Not the governor. Not Todd. Not any of the other staff.
After initially saying he was not certain why he was dismissed, Monegan later said he felt pressured to do something about Wooten, but had no knowledge that pressure was connected with his later dismissal. Gov. Palin stated that she had not pressured Monegan or his Department to fire Wooten, and that she had asked Monegan to take a different position in her administration because she wanted a new direction in the Department.
- The questions related to threats made by Governor Palins ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten, arise from a particularly contentious divorce between Wooten and the Governors sister, Molly McCann, a dispute that began in 2005 (prior to her becoming Governor).
- Mike Wooten, the former husband of Governor Palins sister, was a state trooper who made threats against his wife and father-in-law and used a taser against his 10-year old step son.
These threats, which resulted in a court-imposed Domestic Violence Protective Order, included telling others that his wifes father would eat a f***ing lead bullet if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce. As a result of these actions, Wooten was suspended from duty with the State Police. In suspending the state trooper, the State Police cited the state troopers serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity, and threatened to fire him if his behavior continued. Following this, he issued continuing threats against the Governor and her family. Since his January 2006 divorce from Molly McCann, Wooten (age 35) has married and divorced again — his fourth divorce.
- When Sarah Palin was elected Governor in 2006, the Governors security detail routinely asked if she was aware of any threats against her or her family, and learned of Wootens actions and threats.
Special Agent Bob Cockrell, of the governors security detail, instructed that Public Safety Commissioner Monegan be notified about Wootens threats on the governors fathers life and against the governor because Wooten constituted a security threat. Governor Palin raised the subject with Monegan, and he suggested that it would be better for them not to talk about it, but that her husband, Todd Palin, could contact him about Wooten if necessary. Todd Palin did so, and made follow-up inquiries, as did other members of the Governors staff, inquiring about the appropriate Department of Public Safety procedures for dealing with someone they considered a dangerous person and rogue trooper. Monegan never informed Todd Palin of the disciplinary action against Wooten at the time, and the Governor did not learn of Wootens suspension until after Monegan had left the Department of Public Safety. The governor did not learn of these contacts by Todd Palin until August of this year.
- Thereafter, Governor Palin discovered that others in her administration had spoken to Monegan about Wooten, and that there was a recording of one, Frank Bailey, doing so.
Governor Palin was the first to disclose the discovery, publicly releasing a tape of the conversation. She stated that she was unaware of Baileys actions, that they were unauthorized and wrong and she suspended him from his duties. Bailey has testified under oath that no one on the governors staff authorized his inquiry about Wooten, and that he acted on his own initiative because he thought Wooten was a dangerous threat to the security of the governor and her father.
- The legislature and Attorney General are both currently reviewing the circumstances of Walt Monegans departure from the Department of Public Safety, and the Governor is fully cooperating with those inquiries.
As an appointee of the Governor, Monegan could legally be removed from office for any reason whatsoever, however, the governor removed Monegan from office for reasons related to their differences over budget policy, not for anything connected to her family.
Background Information On Trooper Inquiry:
- In 2005, Sarah Palin Alleged That Her Brother-In-Law, State Trooper Mike Wooten, Threatened Her Family And Had Used A Stun Gun On His 10-Year Old Stepson. In 2005, Governor Palin alleged that her brother in-law, Mike Wooten, had threatened to harm her sister and father and had engaged in numerous instances of misconduct, including using a stun gun on his 10-year-old stepson, according to state documents. (Jim Carlton, Alaskas Palin Faces Probe, The Wall Street Journal, 7/31/08)
- An Internal State Police Investigation Confirmed That Wooten Used A Taser On His Stepson, Threatened His Father-In-Law With Violence And Drank Beer In His Patrol Car. As the investigation got under way in 2005, Wooten was in the midst of a bitter divorce from Palins sister, Molly McCann. The couple was fighting over custody of their two young children. Accusations flew from both sides. Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both: –Wooten used a Taser on his stepson. –He illegally shot a moose. –He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion. –He told others his father-in-law would eat a fing lead bullet if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce. Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force, according to Grimes letter to Wooten. Those incidents included: a reprimand in January 2004 for negligent damage to a state vehicle; a January 2005 instruction after being accused of speeding, unsafe lane changes, following too closely and not using turn signals in his state vehicle; a June 2005 instruction regarding personal cell phone calls; an October 2005 suspension from work after getting a speeding ticket; and a November 2005 memo to clarify duty hours, tardiness and personal business during duty time. (Lisa Demer, Is Wooten A Good Trooper? Anchorage Daily News, 7/27/08)
- Wooten Was Suspended By State Police, Who Cited His Record Of A Serious And Concentrated Pattern Of Unacceptable And At Times, Illegal Activity Occurring Over A Lengthy Period, Which Establishes A Course Of Conduct Totally At Odds With The Ethics Of Our Profession. The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession, Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days. She warned that if he messed up again, hed be fired. (Lisa Demer, Is Wooten A Good Trooper? Anchorage Daily News, 7/27/08)
- A State Police Investigation Revealed That After Palins Sister Filed Protective Order Against Wooten, He Was Ordered To Surrender His Department-Issued Guns, Badge, Credentials And Vehicle During His Off-Duty Time, While The Order Was In Effect. The troopers investigation into Wooten began after Chuck Heath — Wootens father-in-law and Palin and McCanns dad — alerted troopers about a domestic violence protective order McCann had obtained against Wooten on April 11, 2005. McCann filed for divorce the same day, according to the court docket. The trooper had not physically assaulted his wife but intimidated her and threatened to shoot him, Heath told troopers, according to a memo about the complaint. The same day, a concerned neighbor of the couple called troopers with more accusations, including alcohol abuse, based on what Heath and McCann had relayed to him. Wooten seemed disconnected lately, the neighbor said. He told troopers that Heath and McCann were afraid to call troopers themselves. Extreme verbal abuse and violent threats and physical intimidation, McCann wrote in her April 11, 2005, petition to the court. He had driven drunk multiple times, threatened her father, told her to put a leash on your sister and family or Im going to bring them down, her petition says. A judge issued a 20-day protective order to keep Wooten away. In written orders to Wooten sent the next day, trooper Capt. Matt Leveque echoed the courts directive. Leveque, now a major, also told Wooten to give up his department-issued guns, badge, credentials and vehicle during his off-duty time, while the order was in effect. (Lisa Demer, Is Wooten A Good Trooper? Anchorage Daily News, 7/27/08)
- In July 2007, Palin Dismissed The Department Of Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan, Who Then Complained That Palin Had Pressured Him To Fire Wooten. On July 11 of this year, Ms. Palin fired Department of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Mr. Monegan then complained that she and her husband had pressured him to fire Mr. Wooten. (Jim Carlton, Alaskas Palin Faces Probe, The Wall Street Journal, 7/31/08)
- Palin Agreed To Cooperate With A Legislative Inquiry Of Monegans Departure. Ms. Palin, in a statement, denied that, saying she had removed the commissioner she had appointed 18 months earlier because she wanted a new direction. She said she will cooperate with the legislative probe, which is expected to be completed by November. (Jim Carlton, Alaskas Palin Faces Probe, The Wall Street Journal, 7/31/08)
- Palin Disclosed That She Had Discovered That Administration Staff Discussed Wooten With The Department Of Public Safety. Palin, who has previously said her administration didnt exert pressure to get rid of trooper Mike Wooten, also disclosed that members of her staff had made about two dozen contacts with public safety officials about the trooper. I do now have to tell Alaskans that such pressure could have been perceived to exist although I have only now become aware of it, Palin said. (Sean Cockerham, Palin Staff Pushed To Have Trooper Fired, Anchorage Daily News, 8/14/08)
- Palin Suspended Administration Staffer Frank Bailey, Who Said He Made Phone Call On Wooten Without Governor Palins Knowledge. Gov. Sarah Palin placed the states director of boards and commissions on paid administrative leave Tuesday while an investigation continues into whether she abused her power when firing former public safety commissioner Walt Monegan. Frank Bailey was one of several officials who placed a call to the Alaska State Troopers questioning the employment of an officer who went through a messy divorce with Palins sister. Monegan has said he felt pressure to fire the trooper, Mike Wooten. Palin denies firing Monegan because he refused to dismiss the trooper. But last week, she acknowledged that at least two dozen calls were made by staff members to Public Safety Department officials questioning Wootens employment, including one by Bailey that was retained on tape. Bailey has said he made the phone call on his own without knowledge of Palin or her husband, Todd. Nearly a week later after the call was made public, Palin announced her decision to place Bailey on leave. (Steve Quinn, Palin Places Bailey On Administrative Leave, The Associated Press, 8/20/08)
- Palin Said Administration Staffer Frank Baileys Actions Were Unauthorized And Wrong: His Comments Were Unauthorized As Well As Just Wrong. But it was Baileys conversation with a trooper, Ketchikan-based Lt. Rodney Dial, that Palin said last week was most disturbing and problematic. Mr. Bailey seemed to be speaking on my behalf, but Mr. Bailey was not speaking for me, Palin said last week. His comments were unauthorized as well as just wrong. (Steve Quinn, Palin Places Bailey On Administrative Leave, The Associated Press, 8/20/08)
- Note: The Head Of Governor Palins Security, Special Agent Bob Cockrell, Instructed Todd Palin To Contact Monegan Directly About Any Security Concerns: When Made Aware Of The Security Concerns Regarding A State Trooper, I Instructed The First Gentleman To Contact The Commissioner Of Public Safety. Monegan has also raised questions about the propriety of the First Gentleman, Todd Palin, meeting with Monegan right after the Governor was elected to discuss security concerns surrounding a state trooper. That meeting occurred following standard questioning of any newly-elected Governor and First Family members regarding security detail concerns. The First Gentleman was specifically told to meet with Monegan by the Governors top security detail, Special Agent Bob Cockrell, to forward serious concerns that were substantiated in an internal trooper investigation. The concerns regarding the trooper included: using a Taser stun gun on his stepson, illegally killing a moose and driving with an open container in his patrol car. The First Gentleman also expressed concern over death threats made against a family member by the trooper. When made aware of the security concerns regarding a state trooper, I instructed the First Gentleman to contact the commissioner of Public Safety, Cockrell said. It is standard protocol to ask every governor about any threats they perceive or have realized. I will not hesitate to set the record straight in answering these false allegations by former Commissioner Monegan. (Governor Sarah Palin, Palin Responds To Latest Falsehoods Accusations By Former Commissioner, Press Release, 7/22/08)
- Note: Monegan Said It Was Appropriate For Todd Palin To Contact Him About Any Security Threats. The governor raised the issue again in February 2007 during the legislative session in Juneau. As we were walking down the stairs in the capitol building, Monegan said, she wanted to talk to me about her former brother-in-law. I said, Ma’am, I need to keep you at arms length with this. I cant deal about him with you. If need be, I can talk to Todd. (James V. Grimaldi and Kimberly Kindy, Palin Focus Of Probe In Police Chiefs Firing, The Washington Post, 8/30/08)
Governor Palin Has Dedicated Her Career To Reform, Taking On Corruption And Passing Ethics Reform. If you still have doubts about Sarah Palin, look into the following. It will be illuminating….
Palin Flies High As Reformer –Anchorage Daily News, 12/27/07
Palin Signs Ethics Reforms Into Law –The Associated Press, 7/10/07
Rebel Status Has Fueled Front-Runners Success: Palin: Her Reputation As A Crusader Has Had Perfect Timing –Anchorage Daily News, 10/24/06
Palin, Croft Call For Expanded Ethics Investigation –The Associated Press, 12/11/04
Palins Simply Doing The Right Thing –Anchorage Daily News, 6/24/07
Oil Industry Clout Pushed Back By Palin, Legislators –Anchorage Daily News, 11/19/07
The Joan Of Arc Of Alaska Politics –Anchorage Daily News, 8/29/08
Palin Sends Ethics Bill To House –Anchorage Daily News, 1/26/07
Shes No Good Ol Boy –Los Angeles Times, 8/30/08
Bipartisan Duo Seeks Formal Ethics Probe Of Governor, Renkes –Anchorage Daily News, 12/11/04
Palin Recounts Investigation Of Alaska GOP Chairman –The Associated Press, 9/22/04
Andrea Mitchell: Only Hillary’s Uneducated Voters will Vote For Sarah Palin
Interesting report I have seen from from many sources, this one from NewsBusters:
.
“Meet the Press this week was as prosaic as ever, but for one little line uttered by the increasingly partisan Andrea Mitchell. In a discussion about the McCain VP pick of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, guest Doris Kerns Goodwin, plagiarist/historian, said that the choice of Palin is a “very strange choice,” showing how little she bothered to even think about the facts.
But the most outrageous analysis came from Mitchell who said that only uneducated, female voters will be drawn to Sarah Palin, not those smart, college educated ones. After Brokaw asked Mitchell what this Palin pick means for Hillary voters, we find that Andrea Mitchell took the occasion to attack instead of answer the question with serious analysis….
So, only the stupid, uneducated, working class ninnies will be somehow fooled into voting for the McCain/Palin ticket, Andrea? Them thar smart, educated, upper class women are too smart for that? Is that what we are saying here, Andrea?
But, notice how Mitchell didn’t just answer Brokaw’s question but did her best to gig at the GOP for their “booing” of Hillary Clinton? Brokaw asked about Clinton voters crossing the aisle to vote McCain because of his VP pick, he did NOT ask anything about how traditional conservative voters react to mention of Hillary Clinton’s name at rallies. Further, no one should expect conservatives to have any different reaction to Clinton now that she is a loser than they’ve ever had. So, Mitchell’s attempt to make Republicans look mean because they booed Clinton’s name was gratuitous needling on her part. Of course conservatives are going to boo Hillary, but, Andrea, THAT wasn’t the subject under discussion!
So, on top of calling any women who might vote for McCain because of the addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket uneducated, Mitchell needlessly strayed off topic to search for some way to make Republicans look mean.
Yep, that’s the partisan hack Mitchell we have become so used to!”
KUDOS TO MCCAIN FOR CHOOSING SARAH PALIN FOR HIS VP!
“McCain has reached for the stars and grabbed one. On a recent cruise to Alaska, I had the pleasure of spending an afternoon with Sarah Palin. She is brilliant and articulate and, in Alaska politics, is a breath of fresh air as an alternative to their corruption epitomized by Alaska Republican Senator Ted Stevens. Now Obama, who has spent two years preventing a woman from being president, will spend two months preventing one from becoming vice president – and hopes to do so with women votes. The entire premise of the Democratic convention was the fungibility of Bush and McCain. Now McCain has vividly demonstrated the difference. Sarah Palin is no Dick Cheney!”
Newsmax Interview With Sarah Palin
Alaska Governor Sarah H. Palin
Sarah Palin has emerged as John McCain’s vice-presidential running mate. Palin talked to Newsmax magazine for its upcoming September 2008 issue about Alaskan oil, global warming, and John McCain.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is a God-fearing, gun-toting former beauty queen who could just become America’s next vice president.
In Alaska, the right to bear arms means staying on top of the food chain. Palin, a lifelong member of the National Rifle Association, hunts, shoots, and fishes.
Husband Todd holds a commercial fishing license for salmon. In the mid-1990s, when Todd got a job working on Alaska’s North Slope, Palin decided to occupy herself by becoming mayor of Wasilla, the state’s fastest-growing community.
As mayor, she gradually grew frustrated with Alaska’s “good ol’ boy” style of governance — so she decided to do something about it. She ran for governor in 2006 and won, defeating popular former Democratic Gov. Tony Knowles.
Palin’s victory made her Alaska’s first female chief executive, and its youngest.
Now, many insiders believe this 44-year-old mother of five would add a strong conservative presence to the GOP ticket.
Palin tells Newsmax that it’s high time Congress allows the development of Alaska’s wealth of oil and gas. She doubts global warming stems from human activity, and she considers herself both a fiscal and social conservative.
Are you open to running as McCain’s vice president?
Palin: I have so much on my plate as governor, it’s hard to even imagine such an offer. I would just have to cross that bridge when it comes.
What do you think of McCain’s chances, and what should he and the GOP do to win in November?
I believe John McCain will be our next president. To win, he needs to continue his message that America needs leadership devoted to the public interest — not the special interest. The GOP needs to live the planks of its platform, not just offer lip service.
How did you pull off your election victory as governor?
Alaska was ready for a positive change and tired of the good ol’ boy network. It caused many Alaskans to lose faith in their government. People want faith in their government. I have been able to pass a comprehensive reform law and place the state’s checkbook online. You can be a reformer and also be a conservative.
And your stand on abortion?
I’m pro-life. I’ll do all I can to see every baby is created with a future and potential. The legislature should do all it can to protect human life.
Politically, how would you describe yourself?
Fiscally and socially, I am a conservative. My respect for the three different branches of government and the balance between them has been my guide.
If you were running for president, what causes would you champion?
I would push for a strong military and a sound energy policy. I believe that Alaska can help set an example on energy policy.
Speaking of energy, how much oil and gas does America really have?
We have billions and billions of barrels of oil and trillions of feet of natural gas. We have so much potential from tapping our resources here in Alaska. And we can do this with minimum environmental impact. We have a very pro-development president in President Bush, and yet he failed to push for opening up parts of Alaska to drilling through Congress — and a Republican-controlled Congress, I might add.
I thought when we hit $100 a barrel for oil it would have been a psychological barrier that would have caused Congress to reconsider, but they didn’t. Now we are approaching $200 a barrel. It’s nonsense not to tap a safe domestic source of oil. I think Americans need to hold Congress accountable on this one.
What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?
A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being 100% man-made.
.
.
.
SUBSCRIBE TO NEWSMAX!
7/16 Article: The Most Popular Governor In America
Alaska’s Sarah Palin is the GOP’s newest star
by Fred Barnes 07/16/2007
The wipeout in the 2006 election left Republicans in such a state of dejection that they’ve overlooked the one shining victory in which a Republican star was born. The triumph came in Alaska where Sarah Palin, a politician of eye-popping integrity, was elected governor. She is now the most popular governor in America, with an approval rating of 90%.
Her rise is a great (and rare) story of how adherence to principle–especially to transparency and accountability in government–can produce political success. And by the way, Palin is a conservative who only last month vetoed 13 percent of the state’s proposed budget for capital projects. The cuts, the Anchorage Daily News said, “may be the biggest single-year line-item veto total in state history.”
As recently as last year, Palin (pronounced pale-in) was a political outcast. She resigned in January 2004 as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after complaining to the office of Governor Frank Murkowski and to state Attorney General Gregg Renkes about ethical violations by another commissioner, Randy Ruedrich, who was also Republican state chairman.
State law barred Palin from speaking out publicly about ethical violations and corruption. But she was vindicated later in 2004 when Ruedrich, who’d been reconfirmed as state chairman, agreed to pay a $12,000 fine for breaking state ethics laws. She became a hero in the eyes of the public and the press, and the bane of Republican leaders.
Stumble It!
