Obama Bets on Bigot Biden:

In speaking about Obama, Biden proclaims that he is "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2838420&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0...

He also makes disparaging remarks about the Indian-Americans who reside in his home state of Delaware: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13757367/

It appears that Biden the Plagiarist is also Biden the Bigot. The local blogger Vamma recently made an offensive remark regarding someones heritage. Vamma justifies this by claiming the victim of the attack is a Republican.

Vamma (VPP? ... Vicious Pablum Puker?) has really crossed the line with the ethnic slur and owes the victim an apology.

AIDS Test For Biden and Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulJXJUjAKLk

Check out the look on Al Sharpton's face.

Just caught Palin on the Clinton News Network (CNN). She was quite eloquent, speaks well, and without a teleprompter I noticed.
Judging by the squawking on the left, this move does not bode well for them. Many comments on how Obama bin Biden should have picked Clinton.

Despite what Madam Fact-Checker/Ponytail may have inferred in her recent post ( a typical regurgitation of what someone else wrote long ago). General George Washington did have military experience when he was elected president. Barry Obama and Joey Biden do not.

John McCain's experience can't be questioned. Sarah Palin has been the Commander-In-Chief of the Alaskan National Guard. That is more than Barry and Joey can say.

LEER JET LIBERAL SPEAKS

During last weeks DNC, the most forgettable moment - next to watching the Obamas and Bidens swap wet kisses - was the prime time speech By Angry Al Gore.

Gore is still stuck back in the year 2000, when he lost the presidential election. In typical Gore-speak, he talks himself up with a lot of "if I were president" nonsense. Among Gore's claims, "we would not be denying the climate crisis; we'd be solving it."

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_10328950?source=rss

As it turns out, despite his public statements, Gore's personal habits suggest that he too is in denial of the "climate crisis." If Gore believed in one percent of the global warming demagoguery he profits from, then the following video would not exist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VV309lbB8c&NR=1

Gore stole the show by being even more obnoxious that Bigmouth Biden.

Republicans Have Class.

Over the weekend, Republican leaders announced plans to curtail most of Monday's Republican Convention schedule as Hurricane Gustav was zeroing in on New Orleans.

Meanwhile back in Minnesota, Democratic anarchists kept true to their plans to conduct criminal acts and on Monday they became violent. Almost three hundred of these thugs were arrested. This illustrates that liberals in general are a classless breed of political activists with little or no respect for the law. They lack common decency.

Meanwhile in a southwestern suburb of the Twin Cities, the edenprairiefictionwriter was a busy beaver blogging away. As violence was occurring in St Paul, the fictionwriter was safely behind a keyboard cutting-and-pasting stories for her blog, and spreading the news that some "right-wingers" might be in town. Not ordinary "right-wingers" mind you; according to the fictionwriter, these are "ultra-secret right-wingers" who are "clothed in secrecy."

If any more violence breaks out during the rest of the convention, we'll know who it is that inciting the rioters: It is the classless edenprairiefictionwriter and other Democratic hacks who find pleasure in encouraging violent outbursts from their left-wing comrades.

WAS PLAGIARIST JOE BIDEN FULLY VETTED?

I believe he was.

A Google search reveals that Biden cheated his way through law school. It also acknowledges he dropped out of a previous bid for the White house because he got busted plagiarizing someone else's speech. And the fact that he's a racist is all there too.

We all know he has a big mouth, no need to google that.

Was Sarah Palin fully vetted?

I believe she was.

Sarah was well known for her stance against the "bridge to nowhere." It was well known that Palin supported the bridge before the funding plan changed. The bottom line was that Palin was not going to subject her constituents to a last minute tax-burden. She put her foot in the sand once federal funding was attached to strings.

What most of us have learned in recent days is something referred to as Trooper-gate. This is something that was a dead issue before Palin was chosen as a V.P. candidate. Within 48 hours of her selection, mainstream media, i.e the liberal Barack Hussein Obama-lovin media, decided to dig up a dead horse to beat it some more.

Pregnant daughter: Once the left-wing smear tactics started rolling, Palin was forced to publilcy acknowledge the her 17 year-old daughter was pregnant. I can't imagine that this a situation that any parent would want to face, but Palin did.

Lay off the kid will ya? Imagine the pressure on the family before this became a campaign issue. Have some respect. Have a sense of decency.

Was Palin vetted about her daughter's maternal status? No. What were they going to do ask for medical records or make her take a pee test?

When Angry Al Franken was the head writer at Saturday Night Live (back when it really-really wasn't funny) there were a few skits about how ugly Chelsea Clinton was. Even though the Clinton's were a sitting "two for the price of one" presidency", mainstream media pounced on the idea that SNL was poking fun and embarrassing a kid.

Mainstream media had it right, lay off the kids.

Joe Biden has an adult son that was a lobbyist. Both Joe Biden' son and brother have ties to a fundraiser who is a bribery suspect. Stay tuned.

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE

Great name for a band, wouldn't you agree? They must be really progessive and promoting positive change. I can't imagine that these guys would ever refuse the option of taking public transportation.

It was very considerate of them to make a stop in Minneapolis to entertain the hardworking Democratic anarchists who were in town. Many of these anarchists had to travel long distances to Minnesota (some of them without pay) and have been housed by local Democratic activists who've given them a couch or floor to crash on.

Too bad more than one hundred of them were arrested after the concert.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/09/04/rage_arrests/

Good point Bigfoot, I thought Palin's speech last night was electrifying to say the least. Many liberal jaws were dropping last night and sure enough, MSNBC, the antithesis of real journalism was aghast that she did so well. They nearly fell over each other trying to dish dirt on one of the great convention speeches of our era.

Feminists Label Palin as an Uncle Tom.

Among the first to attack Sarah Palin was the National Organization of Women.

N.O.W. states: "Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women's rights, just like John McCain."

Abortion aside, what right or rights does Palin oppose for women? Having Palin as V.P. would provide for the greater good of women in this country?

If John McCain had picked a pro-choice lesbian N.O.W would still be harping. Is there a Republican candidate in the world that N.O.W. would approve of to serve as either President or Vice President? If Hillary Clinton ran as a Republican they'd attack her too.

Palin is a pro-life Republican and therefore has been granted Uncle Tom status by the card carrying members of N.O.W. Abortion is a single issue. The right to abort an unborn child is a single right. The N.O.W suggestion that Palin opposes women's rights may be a clever talking-point (and certainly one Joe Biden could plagiarize) but it doesn't reflect reality.

With their attack on Palin, N.O.W is now anti-women and pro-democrat.

RNC A SUCCESS ... Anarchist RNC-Welcoming-Committee a Failure.

The Republicans successfully held their convention and in the process even impressed most liberal pundits. As for the Welcoming Committee, many of these terrorists will be going to jail.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view/2008_09_03...

While the Welcoming Committee failed in their attempt to disrupt the policital process, the real victims were the local businesses that lost out because would-be patrons spent money at more secure locations. Also victimized were those who suffered property damage from rock throwing terrorists.

This biggest loser of all is the taxpayer. Cops get paid, and when we have to pay more of them to maintain civil order it is the taxpayer who suffers. Those arrested do need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. That costs money too.

Could this have been prevented? Law enforcement was both proactive and prepared. Despite what the ACLU would have you think, the police were hoping things would remain peaceful and that they wouldn't be forced to put themselves in harm's way.

There should have been a voice of reason, from the left, calling for those involved in these so-called protests to remain lawful. Many of the anarchists are Democratic supporters and will vote for Democrats.

Did Barack or Biden ask for calm? Angry Al Franken was at the State Fair last week after getting snubbed from prime-time at the Democratic Convention. What did Franken do to discourage unlawful protest? A message of peace from DFL leaders may have prevented their supporters from creating the anarchy that occurred.

And where was the DFL new kid on the block, Ashwin Madia? Out going for a run in front of the cameras again, I'll bet. (What is Madia running from? The truth?)

Truly, those at fault are the terrorists and anarchists who conspired to commit criminal acts. We can't blame Obama, Biden, Franken, Madia or others, but where is the leadership? It has long been the strategy of the Democratic Party to cater to the least common denominator and by remaining silent that's what they did.

They all missed a great opportunity to prove themselves worthy of the offices they are seeking.

Who cares if Barack Obama can bowl or not. Bowling is a luxury for people that are not living paycheck to paycheck. I'm sick of these Republican blogs touting capitalism. We live in a country where people are denied basic needs. Education, health care, housing and food are essentials. It is the duty of government to provide this, as all Americans are guaranteed basic human rights. Capitolism has failed in this country. Barack Obama and Joe Biden see this, it is a central part of their message of change. It is well known that the people in socialized countries are much happier than we are, there is comfort in knowing that we and our fellow humans have basic needs guaranteed to them. Before you label me as a socialist, let me say that I am not! I do believe that our country is behind the curve in social progams and I would be proud to pay more in taxes to ensure as all of us are entitled to basic human needs. For those who think tax cuts for the rich help creates jobs, they don't. An increase in government programs such as universal health care and public housing will create jobs while providing for the basis needs of all Americans.

Uh-bama on video!

It's been OK to make fun of the GWB's ability to get tongue tied the past 8 years. Let's take a look at a guy who wants to be president.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEAO0lt4Dw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4qGKdl37iY&feature=related

http://obamauh.com/

If you know of any good Uh-bama videos please post.

Apples to Oranges:

Who is the least qualified for the respective position they are seeking, Barack Obama or young Ashwin Madia.

Barack Obama has eight years of elected office in the Illinois State Senate, and barely one-half term as a junior United State Senator. He has no foreign policy or military experience.

He wants to be President so he can raise your taxes.

Jigar Ashwin Madia has never held public office, other than student body president at the University of Minnesota. Madia finished his one year term with an abysmal record.

He wants to be a United States Congressman so he can raise your taxes.

So who is more out of their respective league, Ashwin or Barack? Which one wants to raise your taxes more?

Obama Camp Plays Race Card.

The term "Community Organizer" may soon be listed as disparaging in Webster's dictionary. When Sarah Palin used this term in a recent speech, some folks didn't take kindly to a white woman using it to describe a black man's back work experience.

http://wcbstv.com/politics/paterson.mccain.palin.2.813646.html

"Community Organizer" is now considered racial code for black. Is there a double standard in play here" Obama has it right there on his resume, and U.S. News did a write up on on his background as a "Community Organizer" about a year ago.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070826/3obama.htm

This is one more thing we no longer can say without offending someone. I will never use "C-O" term again.

Remembering 9/11

http://www.september11news.com/USANewspapers.htm

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/

http://www.fdnylodd.com/

Campaigns give it a rest to remember 9/11.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C09%5C12%5Cstory_12-...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C09%5C12%5Cstory_12-...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-memorial11-20...

Do you remember where you were when you first heard the news, seven years ago today?

Sen. John McCain supported Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld in 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQMDmvdqA0

I know Sen. McCain was merely there to promote Republicans and to help President Bush’s image.

After the Abu Gharib scandal, Sen. McCain’s support for Rumsfeld decreased. Now, with hindsight, Sen. McCain has changed his view:
http://wcco.com/politics/Sen.John.McCain.2.282166.html

So which view by Sen. McCain is correct?

Which Obama is correct?

January 30, 2008 1:57 PM

It was January 17, 2001, and Illinois state senator Barack Obama was on WTTW11’s “Chicago Tonight."

Discussing his opposition to Attorney General nominee John Ashcroft, Obama praised newly-elected President Bush's new nominee for Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.

“The proof in the pudding is looking at the treatment of the other Bush nominees," Obama said. "I mean for the most part, I for example do not agree with a missile defense system, but I dont think that soon-to-be-Secretary Rumsfeld is in any way out of the mainstream of American political life. And I would argue that the same would be true for the vast majority of the Bush nominees, and I give him credit for that.

"So I don’t want to be pegged as being far left simply because I find certain aspects in John Ashcroft’s record to be divisive or offensive," Obama continued. "I think it’s legitimate for me to raise that. As I said before, if he brought before us a nominee who didn’t agree with me on affirmative action and yet said that, you know, I do think that and showed a history for showing regard and concern for racial justice, if he came before us and said I oppose a woman’s right to choose, or I oppose abortion, I find it religiously offensive, and yet I do respect, for example, the notion that we shouldn’t be solving these things with violence, historically, if that had been what was said, then I don’t think I would object. And I think that’s a fair position to take.”

You can watch the specific part about Rumsfeld HERE ….which some Democrats may not particularly care for….

Rumsfeld danced through his confirmation hearings and was confirmed by the Senate in a voice vote, meaning no one -- including then-newly elected Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY -- objected.

A Day To Pay Respect:

Weeks ago, the McCain and Obama campaigns announced they would do no negative campaigning on September 11, in honor of Patriot Day.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5614751

Meanwhile, a little closer to home, common decency would be short-lived on Septemeber 11, 2008. Who was the first to post a negative political rant on the Eden Prairie News Website? It was Dan Brome, an Ashwin Madia supporter.

A few hours later, edenprairiefictionwriter chimed in with not one, but four negative posts: all cut, pasted, and posted within a 24 minute time period. It was just another day for the blog-hog edenpraiirefictionwriter. Two of the posts were negative towards McCain, one negative towards Palin, and one negative about war efforts in Iraq.

Most would agree that this was a day to remember victims, although with the Madia supporter, the message may have been sent to his parents house and was "overlooked."

Who was responsible you ask?

First let me say that you do have the right to post your negative views on any day of the year. That right is the same one which allows Pastor Fred Phelps to protest at military funerals (from a reasonable distance). You also have the right to burn the American Flag.

Those directly responsible were the 20 high-jackers (the 19 who died and the one in prison) and those who trained and funded them.

If you want to blame the U.S. Government, as liberals love to do, think about what led up to 9/11. George W. Bush became president less than 8 months before the 2001 September attacks. William Jefferson Clinton had been president for 8 full years prior to that.

During the Clinton years, there were six major terrorist attacks, within the United States or against Americans abroad, committed by Islamic radicals. Among these, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole.

The most Clinton did was to occasionally launch a few cruise missiles against the countries harboring terrorists. Clinton was weak on addressing terror. In 1999 he pardoned sixteen FALN terrorists. http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120277819085260827.html

If you insist on blaming America first, blame Clinton.

You ask why aren't those responsible dead or on trial. Many are dead, and many others in prison. Even though Osama bin Laden may be dead, the hunt goes on. Not a day goes by where our military and intelligence agencies aren't actively looking for him or his body. The FBI has a $5 million bounty on his head. If he's already dead and buried, they may never find him.

If Bin Laden is alive, you can bet he and other terrorists will be rooting for Obama in November. For terrorists, Obama/Biden is the dream ticket.

Minnesota Poll: Obama, McCain are dead even in state

Who would have believed this a few months ago when Obama had a 13 point lead?
With 51 days before Election Day, Barack Obama and John McCain are tied with 45 percent support, raising the stakes in the campaign.

By BOB VON STERNBERG, Star Tribune

Last update: September 14, 2008 - 8:37 AM
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/28353589.html?elr...

Quote from the Red Star:
Let's look at the Obama main strategy: A guy running for president with 143 days in the Senate and no governing experience, questioning the … read more experience of the vice presidential candidate - who is more experienced than he is. Ya think people might be noticing that and it's coming back to bite him? This is the last issue he should be talking about and this is all he and his followers obsess on. Speaking objectively, his campaign manager should be fired yesterday. It's looking more and more like a Reagan/Carter election and Obama's going to bring down a whole lot of Democrats if he doesn't change direction. But as a conservative, I say, keep attacking Palin!

It's Guns and Butter.

( Click here for: Definition )

More accurately, it's fewer guns and no more butter.

CentralLion (was that the name you posted under?), I will try to break it down for you.

Senator McCain is confident that the troop surge in Iraq, which had bi-partisan support, is working. When is the last time that John Freakin Kerry uttered the word "quagmire", when he wasn't referring to his wife Maria Teresa Thierstein Simões-Ferreira Heinz, aka Teresa Heinz Kerry.

The troop surge has pushed Coalition Forces in Iraq ever closer to proclaiming total victory. Once victory is achieved, the U.S. can begin reducing its presence. That will save money. The money saved will be used to offset deficit spending. It will not be spent on needless social programs or other pork projects.

John McCain has faith in our armed forces and allies. Barack Obama does not.

Alrightie then?

You'll vote for Barack regardless of the the war in Iraq.

Obama is weak on defense and weak on terror. That's why terrorists and the French support him.

Obama will take the "savings" from his surrender plan and spend, spend, spend. And that won't be enough for him, so he'll raise your taxes too!

Is that the best you can do?

Sen. McCain is known to have a temper. With his aggressive nature, I'd say it would be impossible for him to negotiate a treaty with Syria or Iran. How well would Gov. Palin do in negotiations with the President of Iran?

Also, how would a McCain administration correct the Bush administration's blunders in infrastructure in Iraq? That takes more than talk of "victory" and reforming corrupt Republicans.

Great post Double G. I first heard of the prediction by Farmer's Almanac discussed on conservative talk radio last week. I was expecting that the epfudgefactor would have spewed a challenge to this by now.

Fudgefactor is not yet aware of this, or perhaps was too busy posting under multiple names over the weekend to respond. At last check, Wikipedia had not yet revised it's Farmer's Almanac to refute their latest findings. Fudgefactor could be working to arrange for that.

"Weather(sic) you're talking about global warming or global cooling - it's solar activity, stupid." - bigfoot, 2008.

Obama delays troops withdrawal?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Barack Obama’s campaign denied a New York Post report Monday that said the Democratic presidential candidate privately tried to persuade Iraqi political leaders to stall an agreement on scaling back American troops in Iraq while publicly campaigning for a speedy withdrawal.

Obama’s request for a delay was a major theme of his talks with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said in an interview with the Post.

Obama also tried to persuade the U.S. commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to offer a “realistic withdrawal date,” the Post reported. The commanders declined, the newspaper said.

A top foreign policy adviser to Obama sat in on the meetings between the candidate and Iraqi officials this summer and said no such conversations occurred, the campaign said Monday.

Obama has said he wants U.S. troops out of Iraq as rapidly as possible, and while the U.S. negotiates a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, Obama wants that brought to Congress.

According to the report in the Post, Obama said he wants the Bush administration excluded from the negotiations, given its “state of weakness and political confusion.”

The New York Post article raises doubts about Obama’s call to withdraw combat troops by 2010, especially if his request for a delayed agreement had been accepted. By the time a new Iraqi government is elected, fully operational, can form a new coalition government and comes up with a draft accord, it will already by May 2010, the Post noted. It could take another six months for the draft to be passed into law.

Click here to read the article in The New York Post.

Biden Drunk! Again!

Joe Biden gives a drunken speech - I don't think he plagiarized this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TBNeNHHXEY

He's drunker than a shopping mall Santa. No wonder he takes the train to work.

Quint was the best character in a great movie. Perhaps Robert Shaw's finest role. I think of Quint as more of a fisherman, than a sailor, although his character was a former navy seaman. Quint never used the f-word like Franken does, that I can remember.

Quint didn't feel catching a great white was above his pay-grade. (Obama)

Quint was a drunk, but he wasn't a bigot or a plagiarist. (Biden)

Quint wouldn't lie about who he voted for in a presidential election. (Madia)

Quint never got busted cheating on his taxes. (Franken)

Quint wouldn't surrender in Iraq. (Obama, Biden, Madia, Franken)

Quint wasn't a carpetbagger. (Madia, Franken)

Quint wouldn't raises your taxes. (Obama, Biden. Madia, Franken)

"Here's to swimmin' with bow-legged women"

EDEN PRAIRIE PLAGIARIST

Kelobo, your post in which you argue that John McCain is a "coward" is verbatim to an Op/Ed piece that was published on-line last night.

Unless you are the same shameful "former Co-Founder and National Co-Chair of the Democratic National Committee's Saxophone Club," then you are a PLAGIARIST - "Plagiarist on the Prairie"

You should start a group called Plagiarists Rising Up - PRUP

P.S. Rumor has it that you're one of many imaginary friends the edenprairiefictionwriter has.

Polls: McCain, Obama tied in 5 battleground states

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/17/battleground.poll/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- New polls in five battleground states that could decide the presidency suggest the fight for the White House between Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama remains a dead heat.
A new poll out Wednesday shows a virtually tied race between John McCain and Barack Obama in key states.

A new poll out Wednesday shows a virtually tied race between John McCain and Barack Obama in key states.

The CNN/Time Magazine/Opinion Research Corp. polls out Wednesday indicate the race for Florida and its 27 electoral votes is tied.

Florida decided the 2000 election between then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and then-Vice President Al Gore. Four years ago, President Bush won Florida by 5 points over Sen. John Kerry.

The new survey, conducted Sunday through Tuesday, indicates 48 percent of registered voters in Florida back Republican presidential candidate McCain for president and an equal amount support Obama, the Democratic candidate.

"Florida is a state that would be directly affected by offshore drilling, but voters in that state may be more affected by high gas prices," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Two-thirds of all Floridians favor increased offshore drilling for oil and gas." Video Watch how the candidates are doing in key states »

The poll shows a tight race for Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. The new survey suggests that 49 percent of registered voters in Ohio back Obama and 47 percent support McCain. Interactive: CNN's Electoral Map
Don't Miss

* Election Center 2008

The small Obama advantage is well within the poll's sampling error, making the race a tie. President Bush's narrow victory in Ohio four years ago clinched his re-election.

A CNN poll of polls in Ohio, also out Wednesday, gives McCain a 3-point lead, 48-45 percent. The poll of polls is an average of the latest public opinion surveys in the state.

"In Ohio, higher-income voters have moved more toward McCain in the last few weeks, while lower-income voters have trended toward Obama," Holland said. "It looks like economic issues are increasingly dividing voters along income lines -- at least in Ohio -- in the classic pattern that we have seen in previous elections."

Paranoia?

You have only humiliated yourselves. But, you've also just proven to everyone that your intent is to humiliate me.

How not clever of you.

Do try to contain yourselves by sticking to the CON script and try hard to lay off personal attacks. (the two seem inseparable)

Patriotism: Biden's Definition

Joe Biden defended the Obama plan to increase taxes by throwing patriotism into the mix. It is important for Joe to make sure that all Americans have toasters.

If by Biden's measure, ones patriotism is based upon the the amount of income tax paid, then the wealthy in this country are far and away our most patriotic citizens, and the poor should move to Canada.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/joe-biden-calls.html

BIDEN: You got it," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America" when his interviewer noted that Obama was targeting the affluent. "It's time (for the well-off) to be patriotic."

JOHN MCCAIN'S RESPONSE: "It's not a badge of honor. It's just plain dumb."

Liberal teachers soiling our children's minds:
Palin essay question draws GOP fire
By Joey Bunch
The Denver Post

A part-time English teacher at Metropolitan State College is under fire from conservatives after he allegedly told students to write essays critiquing Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

The adjunct instructor, Andrew Hallam, has not been available for comment since one of his students went to a Denver TV station with an allegation that he bullied and harrassed conservative students.

Hallam is teaching two classes this semester, his first at Metro State, according to the school.

Today, Republican legislators in Colorado called for "immediate corrective action" against Hallam.

"Good grief, this is supposed to be an English class," Republican state Sen. Mike Kopp of Littleton stated on the GOP legislative website Coloradosenate.com.

"Once again, it looks like an academic at a publicly supported college in our state is using his classroom as a soapbox for his personal politics. And he is trampling on students' free speech in the process -- actually telling them what opinions they are allowed to express."

According to the conservative news website WorldNetDaily.com., Hallam assigned students to write about Palin, noting "her body language, facial expressions, the way she dressed, what she said and who she pointed out or talked about in her speech. How do these elements form a 'fairy tale' image about Sarah Palin as a person and as a politician that the Republican Party may wish its members and the American public to believe?"

The fairy tale "Sleeping Beauty" is included in the class syllabus.

One of Hallam's students, Jana Barber, took her concerns about the assignment to KCNC4, which broadcast a story Wednesday night.

Barber spoke with the TV station and on the Mike Rosen radio show this morning, before filing a complaint against Hallam with the school later in the day, said Cathy Lucas, a spokeswoman for Metro State.

Lucas said Hallam made the assignment last Thursday. After consideration, he broadened it at the next class on Tuesday to allow students to write about Barack Obama, Joe Biden and John McCain, she said.

Barber has said other students had felt as she did, but so far none of those students have come forward, Lucas said. The university plans to interview students in the class before making a determination about the accusations.

Jana Barber is the sister of Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs for the conservative Liberty Counsel legal organization. Until June, Matt Barber held a similar title with Concerned Women for America, another conservative Christian organization.

Matt Barber told the WorldNetDaily.com. that Hallam was representative of "left-wing elitists throughout the media, academia and the larger Democratic Party."

"What's happening in that classroom represents a microcosm for what's happening with the angry left around the country," he said.
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10502315
Joey Bunch: 303-954-1174 or jbunch@denverpost.com

Print Email Font ResizeReturn to Top Share » Get Home Delivery

Yahoo! Buzz Like this story? Buzz it up on
Problems commenting? Our article comments were down this until 10:00 a.m. this morning. They're working now. Get more information about this here.
Login | Sign Up | Email Support
Article Comments (3)

You must be registered to comment (your comment will be saved for you while you register). It's quick (it takes about 30 seconds) and we only require your email and name. Comments that include any offensive material are prohibited. By using our site you agree to our terms of use.

» View all this article's 3 comments

Comment:

» Switch comment order to newest-to-oldest

* Hi, I'm Andrew Hallam, I lack the common sense to consider that my actions might not be seen as harmless or proper......but hey, I'm still allowed to teach your kids.

Note-the above is satirical in nature and is not meant to be taken seriously.
Cpack L
Joined: Mar 1
Points: 4866 Permanent link to this commentCpack L (aka RockPack) | 7:36 PM on Thursday Sep 18 Vote up Vote down (must be logged in to vote) Report Abuse
* Yet another liberal idiot teaching our children. Where do all these hacks come from and why are they hired?
One-Eyed Jack
Joined: Dec 12
Points: 10190 Permanent link to this commentOne-Eyed Jack (aka Funny) | 8:05 PM on Thursday Sep 18 Vote up Vote down (must be logged in to vote) Report Abuse

McCain trashes Obama-Fannie connection
by Mosheh Oinounou

The messiah has no clothes.

GREEN BAY, WI — Two can play at the guilt-by-association game.

With Democrats continuing to hammer McCain for campaign connections to former lobbyists as well as receiving economic advice from Phil Gramm, the McCain campaign is going after Obama Thursday for relying on the counsel of former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines.

In his new TV spot, “Advice,” McCain accuses Obama of having “no background in economics” and relying on Raines for advice. (above)

“Under Raines, Fannie Mae committed ‘extensive financial fraud.’ Raines made millions. Fannie Mae collapsed. Taxpayers? Stuck with the bill. Barack Obama. Bad advice. Bad instincts. Not ready to lead,” a narrator concludes.

McCain echoed that note during a rally this afternoon in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

“When I pushed legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Senator Obama was silent. He didn’t lift a finger to avert this crisis,” McCain said. “While the leaders of Fannie and Freddie were lining the pockets of his campaign, and they were sowing the seeds of the financial crisis we see today and they also enriched themselves with millions of dollars in payments.”

The Obama camp shot back with a twofer. First Raines responded to the ad by denying any advisory role.

“I am not an adviser to Barack Obama, nor have I provided his campaign with advice on housing or economic matters,” Raines said.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton also chimed in: “This is another flat-out lie from a dishonorable campaign that is increasingly incapable of telling the truth. Frank Raines has never advised Senator Obama about anything — ever. And by the way, someone whose campaign manager and top advisor worked and lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shouldn’t be throwing stones from his seven glass houses.”

Share Leave a Comment

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 18th, 2008 at 7:34 pm and is filed under Blogroll, Candidates, John McCain. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
« Obama Says McCain Has Economic Identity Crisis
Mayorfight! Youngstown’s Boss Disses Palin’s Wasilla »
3 Responses to “McCain trashes Obama-Fannie connection”
Comment by Patricia
September 18th, 2008 at 8:01 pm

comon Mr Oboma, your involved and you know it fes up. There you go again pulling the wool of the eyes of the American people just to get elected. It will all come out soon.

no more democrates

Comment by TM
September 18th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Is there an English translation available?

Comment by Vote Mcain-Palin
September 18th, 2008 at 8:19 pm

Best ad so far,tell it like it is Mcain! Macain 08,Country FIRST!!

http://www.IamGino.com

Was that rap tune east coast or west coast? I always confuse the two. I know that P. Diddy is supporting Obama and he's from New York, so I'll guess these guys are west coast rappers.

I heard Joe Biden is going to do his own rap song. He's going to plagiarize as many of the lyrics as he can, get really drunk, and sing it himself. The chorus will go something like, "I'm Joseph Biden, Joseph Biden ... raise your tax up!, raise your tax up! ..."

"What is rap, other than talk?" Ray Charles - The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, 1990.

Obama's Social Security Whopper
September 20, 2008

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_social_security_whopper.h...

He tells Social Security recipients their money would now be in the stock market under McCain's plan. False.
Summary
In Daytona Beach, Obama said that "if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would've had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week." He referred to "elderly women" at risk of poverty, and said families would be scrambling to support "grandmothers and grandfathers."

That's not true. The plan proposed by President Bush and supported by McCain in 2005 would not have allowed anyone born before 1950 to invest any part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts. All current retirees would be covered by the same benefits they are now.

Obama would have been correct to say that many workers under age 58 would have had some portion of their Social Security benefits affected by the current market turmoil – if they had chosen to participate. And market drops would be a worry for those who retire in future decades. But current retirees would not have been affected.
Analysis
In our "Scaring Seniors" article posted Sept. 19 we took apart a claim in an Obama-Biden ad that McCain somehow supported a 50 percent cut in Social Security benefits, which is simply false. Then, on Saturday Sept. 20, Sen. Barack Obama personally fed senior citizens another whopper, this one a highly distorted claim about the private Social Security accounts that McCain supports.

What Obama Said

In Daytona Beach, Florida, Obama said in prepared remarks released by the campaign:

Obama, Sept. 20: And I'll protect Social Security, while John McCain wants to privatize it. Without Social Security half of elderly women would be living in poverty - half. But if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would've had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week. Millions would've watched as the market tumbled and their nest egg disappeared before their eyes. Millions of families would've been scrambling to figure out how to give their mothers and fathers, their grandmothers and grandfathers, the secure retirement that every American deserves. So I know Senator McCain is talking about a "casino culture" on Wall Street - but the fact is, he's the one who wants to gamble with your life savings.

That's untrue. All current retirees would be covered by exactly the same Social Security benefits they are now under what the Obama campaign likes to call the "Bush-McCain privatization plan," which Bush pushed for unsuccessfully in 2005.

Who Would Have Been Affected

As the White House spelled out at the time, on page 5 of the document titled "Strengthening Social Security for the 21st Century," released in February 2005:

Bush Plan: Personal retirement accounts would be phased in. To ease the transition to a personal retirement account system, participation would be phased in according to the age of the worker. In the first year of implementation, workers currently between age 40 and 54 (born 1950 through 1965 inclusive) would have the option of establishing personal retirement accounts. In the second year, workers currently between age 26 and 54 (born 1950 through 1978 inclusive) would be given the option and by the end of the third year, all workers born in 1950 or later who want to participate in personal retirement accounts would be able to do so.

Nobody born before Jan. 1, 1950 could have participated, and anyone born on that date would be 58 years old now. The earliest possible age for receiving Social Security retirement benefits is 62, for early retirement at reduced benefits. Full retirement age is currently 66, and scheduled to go up to age 67 in coming years.

It is certainly true that the stock market carries risks, as recent events remind us. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is down nearly 17 percent for this year, for example, and despite gains in other years it is still barely above where it was at the start of 2000. But historically there have also been rewards for those who make diversified investments and hold for long periods. When Obama spoke, the Dow Jones average still stood 305 percent higher than it had at the start of the 1990's.

Disappearing nest eggs?

Barack has a 3-way conference call with his pastor and grandma. Too funny! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFcRfy3zcA0

That's a great video about the Obama smear campaign on Palin. The Obama camp has been kicking themselves for snubbing Hillary since the day McCain picked Palin. Biden must feel like a redheaded stepchild.

The best part was when the Fox News guy threatened to shut off the microphone of the Obama girl if she kept rambling on with her (CNN) talking points.

Hard-Hitting McCain Ad Links Obama to Chicago Political ‘Machine’

John McCain’s campaign released one of its hardest hitting ads in this election on Monday, aiming to ratchet up the guilt-by-association game by linking Barack Obama to convicted felon Tony Rezko.

The new spot, “Chicago Machine” also connects the Democratic presidential nominee to three prominent Illinois politicians– former U.S. Commerce Secretary Bill Daley, Illinois state Senate President Emil Jones and Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich — all of whom have faced criticism for questionable ties to businessmen and political power brokers.

The ad claims Obama is “born of the corrupt Chicago political machine,” before calling Jones his “political godfather” and Rezko his “money man.”

Jones and Blagojevich are under an “ethics cloud,” says the McCain camp, relating to investigations into nepotism and favors to political donors by the two pols. As for Daley, the ad suggests cronysim is at play for the former Fannie Mae “lobbyist” and brother of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley.

The ad is to be released nationally. The Obama campaign responded by saying the Democrat is the true maverick when it comes to ethics reform.

“It’s no coincidence that on the very day newspapers reported that John McCain’s campaign manager was paid $2 million to lobby against tighter regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the McCain campaign would launch this false, gratuitous attack,” said spokesman Bill Burton.

“Barack Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate as an independent Democrat. He took on the Chicago Democratic organization in a primary to win a seat in the U.S. Senate. And in both Illinois and Washington, he has challenged the Old Guard for landmark ethics reforms,” Burton said.

McCain campaign advisers say that they decided to make the ad in response to the association game played by Obama’s campaign, which most recently issued a Spanish language ad linking McCain to Rush Limbaugh on the topic of immigration.

The first ad to hit Obama for would-be shady associations came out last week. It tied the Illinois senator to former Fannie Mae executives Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson.

Still untouched by the McCain camp are Obama’s connections to Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers and Obama’s controversial former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Obama called Wright a “legitimate political issue” back in the spring. McCain advisers say those names and associations will not be off-limits and could come up in the last 43 days before the Nov. 4 election.

Click here to view the ad “Chicago Machine”
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/22/hard-hitting-mccain-ad-links-oba...

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0
Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The financial crisis of the past year has provided a number of surprising twists and turns, and from Bear Stearns Cos. to American International Group Inc., ambiguity has been a big part of the story.

Why did Bear Stearns fail, and how does that relate to AIG? It all seems so complex.

But really, it isn't. Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.

Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.

In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn't make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.

The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.

Turning Point

Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.

It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.

Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.

Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.

Greenspan's Warning

The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''

What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.

There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

FactChecking Obama

He stuck to the facts, except when he stretched them.

Summary
We checked the accuracy of Obama's speech accepting the Democratic nomination, and noted the following:

* Obama said he could "pay for every dime" of his spending and tax cut proposals "by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens." That's wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain's, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts.
* He twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, saying, "When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources." Actually, McCain said in 2003 we "may" muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.
* He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of "working" families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain's plan at 66 million and finds that Obama's plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.
* Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..."
* Obama noted that McCain's health care plan would "tax people's benefits" but didn't say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.
* He said McCain, far from being a maverick who's "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.
* Obama said "average family income" went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn't correct. An aide said he was really talking only about "working" families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.

Analysis
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accepted his party's nomination Aug. 28, speaking before more than 84,000 people in Denver's Mile High football stadium. Some of his comments were worthy of a ref's yellow flag.

Not Quite Every Dime
Obama reassured voters that he can pay for all his spending proposals:

Obama: Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime – by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow.

This is misleading. Even by his own campaign's estimates, closing corporate loopholes and tax havens won't pay for all of Obama's new plans. In July, the campaign told the Los Angeles Times that they estimate the yearly cost of their proposed tax cuts at $130 billion. They put revenue from closing tax loopholes at just $80 billion. Obama also proposes to raise taxes to pre-Bush levels for families earning more than $250,000 a year and singles making more than $200,000, yielding additional revenue. But he didn't mention that in his speech.

But Obama's claim is misleading on another level. 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." Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor told FactCheck.org that the Tax Policy Center's analysis "fails to take in account Senator Obama's spending cuts, including ending the Iraq war." That's true, but Obama's proposed cuts are dwarfed by the Tax Policy Center's projected deficits. Obama's new spending programs might be completely offset by new revenue and spending cuts. But overall spending will still exceed overall revenue, and the nation would face at least 10 more years of annual deficits.

Afghan Muddle
Obama twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, incorrectly implying that McCain saw no need for more troops there.

Obama: When John McCain said we could just "muddle through" in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11.

Actually, McCain said in 2003 that the U.S. "may" muddle through, not that we could or would. He also said he was very concerned about a rise in al Qaeda activity there. He said then that he was "guardedly optimistic" that the government could handle it.

McCain, 2003: I think Afghanistan is dicey. I think that there are certain areas of the country, particularly along the Pakistani border, that are clearly not under the control of either Pakistan or the Afghan government. ... There has been a rise in al Qaeda activity along the border. There has been some increase in U.S. casualties. I am concerned about it, but I'm not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I'd be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that – in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan.

So I'm guardedly optimistic, but I am also realistic that the central government in Kabul has very little effect on the policies and practices of the warlords who control the surrounding areas.

read all here:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/156246

FACTCHECK.ORG
School Funding Misleads

http://www.newsweek.com/id/158409

Summary
A new Obama-Biden ad includes misleading claims about McCain and education spending:

It says McCain "voted to cut education funding" and lists five votes. But one was a vote for increased education funding, although for fewer dollars than what Democrats may have wanted. And three others were votes against additional funding, not votes for funding cuts.

The ad says that "McCain's economic plan gives $200 billion more to special interests while taking money away from public schools." Not exactly. McCain has proposed a one-year freeze on discretionary spending in general. A freeze would mean that funds would not keep pace with inflation and population growth, but no dollars would be "taken away." The $200 billion for "special interests" refers to the cost of McCain's proposal to reduce the tax rate for all business corporations, not just a few "special" ones.

The ad says McCain proposed abolishing the Department of Education. He did once say in an interview that he "would certainly favor" abolishing both the departments of Education and Energy, but he hasn't pushed for either.

Analysis
On Sept. 9, Obama gave a speech on education in Ohio, and his campaign released a new attack ad.

Distorting the Vote Record
The Obama ad says that McCain "voted to cut education funding" and lists five Senate votes. But only one of the five meets that description, and even then, the vote requires further explanation.

In 1995, McCain voted for a Republican budget resolution for fiscal year 1996 that would have reduced education spending from the previous year. But education was not the only budget item targeted. The resolution was actually one in a series of appropriations bills for departments ranging from Health and Human Services to the Department of Energy, and in each measure, the Newt Gingrich-led Republicans tried to reduce funding from the previous year's level. President Bill Clinton refused to sign any of the measures, and the government was shutdown for a time.

Besides that vote to actually cut funding, the ad lists three votes against increased funding for the Department of Education. In the past, we've criticized Republicans for falsely attacking Obama on voting for tax increases when he actually voted against tax cuts. Obama's ad applies the same faulty logic. Voting against an increase is notably different from voting for a funding cut.

Those three votes were:
A vote McCain cast against an amendment to the 2006 budget resolution to increase discretionary education funding by $500 million. It passed anyway, and McCain voted for the final bill.

A vote against an amendment to the 2001 budget resolution that would have repealed tax cuts worth $250 billion in order to increase education funding. It passed anyway, and, again McCain voted for the final bill.

A vote against an amendment in 2001 to add $250 million to Title I funding for struggling schools. The measure failed.

Finally, the Obama campaign points to McCain's vote in 2000 for the next year's education appropriations bill, saying in their ad backup that it "underfunded" the department. But that legislation, which was signed into law by President Clinton, was a spending increase from the previous year.

Obama-Biden Ad: "New Kind"
Narrator: When they grow up, will the economy be strong enough? Barack Obama understands what it takes: make America number one in education again. John McCain doesn't understand. John McCain voted to cut education funding. Against accountability standards. He even proposed abolishing the Department of Education. And John McCain's economic plan gives $200 billion more to special interests while taking money away from public schools. We can't afford more of the same.

Obama: I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message.

Like Candy from a Baby?
The ad also says, "John McCain's economic plan gives $200 billion more to special interests while taking money away from public schools." But that's misleading.

To start, McCain's plan doesn't include any specific cuts to education programs and funding. Rather, he has proposed an across-the-board "freeze [of] non-defense, non-veterans discretionary spending for a year." So education grants, as well as all sorts of other government programs like farm subsidies and NASA projects, would not receive their annual funding increase for one year. Some would argue that a freeze is actually a cut when you factor in the effect of inflation. And others would go further and say it's a cut if the money had been projected by an earlier budget.

Indeed, the Obama campaign provided us with an analysis done by the Tennessee affiliate of the National Education Association that demonstrated the difference in funding between a freeze and the anticipated increase from the previous year's budget. To the NEA Tennessee branch, a freeze is a cut. But even if one agrees with that, McCain's proposal to freeze the entire discretionary budget is different from a proposal to specifically "take money away from public schools," as the ad says. No dollars are being "taken away."

The "$200 billion to special interests" line is actually a new version of an old attack. It refers to the total cost, over five years, of McCain's proposal to lower the corporate tax rate. The Tax Policy Center's analysis of McCain's plan estimates a $200 billion loss of revenue over the next five years. We've criticized the Obama campaign previously for unfairly implying that McCain's plan would give tax breaks targeted to "oil companies." In this case, the campaign calls a change in taxes on all businesses a giveaway to "special interests." But the corporate tax rate is paid by any incorporated entity, a group that includes restaurant owners, garage mechanics and other small businesses that we suspect few would call a "special interest."
« Prev Page

* 1
* 2
* 3
* Next Page »

continued.

Madia and taxes.
I have heard the rumor that Madia will not file a tax return or pay any property taxes for 2008. Can anyone confirm this?
If this is true, how can one vote for an individual that has nothing in common with his fellow taxpayers?

MUST SEE TV: FOX 9 STORY ON HILLARY SUPPORTERS FOR MCCAIN

Read'em and weep!

This is a must watch story from FOX 9 about Senator Hillary Clinton supporters campaiging and voting for Senator John McCain instead of Senator Obama. This is a Minnesota based story, so I tip my hat to McCain’s Minnesota press-shop for a job well done.

http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/08/27/must-see-tv-fox-9-st...

PAULSEN REMINDS ATTENDEES AT JCRC DEBATE THAT MADIA THINKS “IRAN IS NOT A THREAT”
Another reason not to vote for Ashwin Madia
“The first question at the Jewish Community Relations Council debate was about Iran. Republican Erik Paulsen wasted no time in reminding the audience at Minnetonka’s Bet Shalom synagogue what his Democratic opponent Ashwin Madia has said about that country.

‘Mr. Madia at one time said Iran is not a threat. I’ll say it again. At one time, Ashwin Madia said Iran is not a threat,’ Paulsen said.

And Paulsen disagrees.

‘It’s a threat not only to Israel. It’s a threat to the United States, and it’s probably the most important threat that faces the entire globe as we look at the possibility of them getting nuclear weapons in the near future.’

But Madia, a military veteran who served in Iraq, stands by his statement.” Source: MPR, September 23, 2008

Click here for the complete story.

###

“Iran and issues related to the Middle East were the first topics of discussion. Paulsen characterized Iran as ‘a serious threat’ and, as he has in the past, criticized Madia for statements the DFLer has made that Paulsen said did not sufficiently recognize the threat. Paulsen said that no strategy should be taken off the table but that economic sanctions should be explored first.

‘Iran is a threat, not only to Israel, it’s a threat to the United States and it’s the most important threat globally,’ Paulsen said.” Source: Star Tribune, September 22, 2008

Click here for the complete story.
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/09/23/paulsen-reminds-atte...

Liberals finally see the light:
What took you so long? What will you tell the bleeding hearts?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/23/national/main4472940.shtml

Dems To Relent On Offshore Drilling
Democrats Will Allow 25-Year Ban On Drilling Off Coast To Expire

Comments Comments19

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23, 2008
AP) Democrats have decided to allow a quarter-century ban on drilling for oil off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to expire next week, conceding defeat in a months-long battle with the White House and Republicans set off by $4 a gallon gasoline prices this summer.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., told reporters Tuesday that a provision continuing the moratorium will be dropped this year from a stopgap spending bill to keep the government running after Congress recesses for the election.

Republicans have made lifting the ban a key campaign issue after gasoline prices spiked this summer and public opinion turned in favor of more drilling. President Bush lifted an executive ban on offshore drilling in July.

"If true, this capitulation by Democrats following months of Republican pressure is a big victory for Americans struggling with record gasoline prices," said House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio.

Democrats had clung to the hope of only a partial repeal of the drilling moratorium, but the White House had promised a veto, Obey said.

The House is expected to act on the spending bill Wednesday. The Senate is likely to go along with the House.

"The White House has made it clear they will not accept anything with a drilling moratorium, and Democrats know we cannot afford to shut down the government over this," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "We look forward to working with the next president to hammer out a final resolution of this issue."

While the House would lift the long-standing drilling moratoriums for both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, a drilling ban in waters within 125 miles of Florida's western coast would remain in force under a law passed by Congress in 2006 that opened some new areas of the east-central Gulf to drilling.

Just last week, the House passed legislation to open waters off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to oil and gas drilling but only 50 or more miles out to sea and only if a state agrees to energy development off its shore. It quickly became clear that measure would not get the 60 votes needed in the Senate.

Republicans called that effort a sham that would have left almost 90 percent of offshore reserves effectively off-limits.

The Interior Department estimates there are 18 billion barrels of recoverable oil beneath the Outer Continental Shelf, about half of it off California.

While the ban on energy development will be lifted if the Senate goes along with the House action, it doesn't mean any federal sale of oil and gas leases in the offshore waters - much less actual drilling - would be imminent.

The Interior Department's current five-year leasing plan includes potential leases off the Virginia coast but probably would not be pursued unless the state agrees to energy development. And the state is unlikely to do so without Congress agreeing to share federal royalties with the state.

The congressional battle over offshore drilling is far from over. Democrats are expected to press for broader energy legislation, probably next year, that would put limits on any drilling off most of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Republicans, meanwhile, are likely to fight any resumption of the drilling bans that have been in place since 1981.

John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, has promised to make offshore oil drilling a priority if elected president. He has called for developing the oil and gas resources along all of Outer Continental Shelf and for the federal government to share royalties with states who go along with drilling.

Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama has said he would support limited drilling in certain areas - possibly the South Atlantic region - if it is part of a broader energy plan to shift the U.S. away from oil to alternative fuels and more energy efficiency.

The debate over offshore drilling is not expected to subside in the first months of the next presidency - no matter who sits in the White House.

Lifting the drilling ban gives considerable momentum to the underlying bill, which includes the Pentagon budget, $24 billion in aid for flood and hurricane victims and $25 billion in loans for Detroit automakers in addition to keeping the government open past the Oct. 1 start of the 2009 budget year.

But Democrats decided not to use the must-pass measure as a battering ram to carry an extension of unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless past White House veto promises, prompting grumbling among some lawmakers. Efforts to boost food stamps and give states billions of dollars to help with Medicaid bills also fell through.

But the measure would double, to $5.2 billion, funding for heating subsidies for the poor, Obey said.

The measure also would provide more than $600 billion to fund the 2009 budgets for the Pentagon, Homeland Security Department and the Veterans Affairs Department. Nine other spending bills for the 2009 budget year starting Oct. 1 remain unfinished.

Bush had threatened to veto bills that don't cut the number and cost of pet projects known as "earmarks" sought by lawmakers in half from current levels or cause agency operating budgets, taken together, to exceed his request. Obey said, however, the White House would reluctantly sign the measure.

Baroccoli - What Is Love?

Barry can't bowl, but he sure can sing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j9F1vz_y50

Biden Dropping Out? Rumor Thrives on Internet

Would the dems stoop to this level just to win an election? You bet your bottom dollar.

It’s almost certainly just a case of the telephone game gone high-tech, but there’s an Internet rumor surging through inboxes and discussion boards that Joe Biden will drop out as Barack Obama’s running mate after his Oct. 2 debate with Sarah Palin — and that he’ll be replaced by Hillary Clinton on the Democratic presidential ticket.

The story line goes as follows: John McCain’s selection of Palin has generated so much interest in the Republican ticket that Obama needs to make a radical move to regain momentum. So in the days after the vice presidential candidates debate in Missouri, Biden will bow out, citing “health problems” (Biden underwent surgery in 1988 to repair two brain aneurysms). Enter Clinton.

Furthermore, the story goes, any damage the gaffe-prone Biden does during the debate will be erased by his abrupt exit.

It sounds like a job for Fight the Smears, the Web site the Obama campaign set up to quash damaging Internet rumors. But Fight the Smears hasn’t touched this one, perhaps out of fear that it would only further a wild rumor. The Obama campaign has not commented on it, other than to say that Biden’s medical records will be released soon.

Snopes.com, a site devoted to picking apart online rumors and urban legends, has labeled the status of the claim “undetermined.” Several online discussion boards have been loaded up with denials.

Biden has caused a few hiccups for the Obama campaign. On Monday, he had to issue a clarification after he called one of his own campaign ads “terrible” in an interview with CBS News. He also faced a rebuke from Obama after he spoke out against the government bailout of American International Group last week before Obama was ready to take a position.

On Tuesday, he said that President Franklin Roosevelt had gone on television in 1929 to discuss the Wall Street crash (Herbert Hoover was president in 1929 and the TV hadn’t been invented yet).

At one point, he even said Hillary Clinton might have been a better pick for Obama’s No. 2.

The Republican National Committee has gleefully set up a Biden “gaffe clock” to monitor his rhetorical flubs on the campaign trail.

Nonetheless, Democratic supporters dismiss outright any speculation that he might be dropped from the ticket.

“It’s crazy. … It’s just not gonna happen,” Democratic strategist Bob Beckel said.

Dropping Biden from the ticket would be a throwback to George McGovern’s shocker in 1972, when he replaced running mate Thomas Eagleton after it was learned that Eagleton had undergone electro-shock therapy for depression.

McGovern lost to President Nixon in a landslide, suggesting that seventh-inning lineup changes are not the best strategy for presidential candidates who want to shake things up.

Speaking hypothetically, Beckel said that, if it were to happen, the Democratic National Committee could feasibly call a mini-convention of sorts to confirm a new running mate. He also said “it would be so disruptive” that it would make no sense for Obama to pursue such a change.

Deadlines have passed in some states to send absentee ballots to military personnel and civilian voters overseas — meaning they would have received a ballot already with Biden (and Palin) on their parties’ tickets.

“I doubt it,” said Christopher Hull, presidential scholar and adjunct government professor at Georgetown University, when told of the Biden rumor. “Joe Biden is not that big a liability. Joe Biden was arguably the most experienced candidate in the [Democratic primary] race.”

“Joe Biden, of course, has shot off his mouth and gotten himself in trouble,” he added. “It’s Joe Biden we’re talking about.”

Though Obama lost ground in the polls after McCain tapped Palin to be his running mate, he has recently regained some of that footing. The FOX News Opinion Dynamics Poll on Wednesday gave Obama a 6-point lead, and a Washington Post-ABC News poll put his lead at 9 points. The Gallup daily tracking poll gave the Democrat a 3-point lead.

Hull said he would understand the desire to put Clinton on the ticket if Obama were persistently trailing in the polls.

A recent Associated Press-Yahoo News poll showed former Clinton backers are still reluctant to support Obama. The survey showed just 58 percent of them back him - unchanged since a similar poll in June.

But Hull said he doesn’t sense panic in the Obama ranks.

“I don’t think the Obama campaign was panicking even when the rest of the Democrats were panicking,” he said.

Obama, meanwhile, is standing by his man.

“Joe Biden is also an outstanding public servant and I am very proud of the choice that I made,” he told NBC’s “Today Show” in an interview that aired Tuesday. He said he’s a “great admirer of Senator Clinton’s” and he hopes she remains a “close adviser.”

And Biden is dutifully living up to his role as attack dog.

“Time and again, on the most critical national security issues of our time, John McCain’s judgment has simply been wrong,” the Delaware senator said Wednesday in Cincinnati.

BIden has campaigned all over the country for Obama, hitting long-shot states like Montana as well as key battlegrounds like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida and Michigan. He’s largely hitting working-class towns, especially in the Midwest.

Though Snopes.com ruled the validity of the dropout rumor was “undetermined,” the write-up did cast serious doubt on the idea that Obama would dump the Senate veteran who seemed to fill in Obama’s perceived foreign policy gap.

“It’s difficult to definitely prove a negative, but rumors of Biden’s replacement as a VP candidate seem to be nothing more than e-mail chatter at this point,” the site said. “Whatever boost Barack Obama’s campaign might conceivably gain by swapping Joe Biden for Hillary Clinton just a month before the general election might also be more than offset by criticism that such a last-minute switch demonstrated poor decision-making ability and was indicative of a weak and vacillating presidential candidate.”
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/24/biden-dropping-out-rumor-thrives...

Putt Putt

Please calm down. In your haste, you proved the point that you were spreading ugly rumors about the Coleman family.

Your smear attempt is a complete rip off of what Garrison Keillor tried six years ago. Come up with some original material. I do admit that I laugh at some of your witty propaganda ... I couldn't say that about Keillor.

Jedi Mind Tricks? Followers learn Barry's meaning of hope, change, and Oprah!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3_jh2dO78U

Putt-Putt, do try to keep up.

I wasn't referring the the hair dryer accessory, I was speaking of the nasty things Garrison Keillor has said about the Coleman family, such as "St. Paul is a small town and anybody who hangs around the St. Paul Grill knows about Norm's habits. Everyone knows that his family situation is, shall we say, very interesting, but nobody bothered to ask about it." http://www.usatoday.com/community/tags/topic.aspx?req=tag&tag=A+Prairie+...

Keillor has also thrown around innuendos that Norm Coleman had something to do with the death of Paul Wellstone. Have you thought about doing that too, as you try to emulate Keillor?

As far as the Blo & Go, "The Blo & Go will revolutionize the way you style your hair! Not everyone can afford the time and money of a professional salon blowout but with Blo & Go- it is like getting the next closest thing to a salon experience at home!"

Buy 1 BLO & GO Get 1 Half-Price! That's 2 BLO & GO's for only $44.98, plus $15.90 S&H.