On Barack Obama, by Bill Brown, retired member of Billy Graham team

[John317]

Obama

> By Bill Brown

> (on Billy Graham Team)

>

> Bill Brown, is a highly respected retired member of the Billy

> Graham team.

> ________________________________

>

> The Obama Tidal Wave

>

> We are witnessing a political phenomenon with Barack Obama of rare

> magnitude.

>

> His speeches have inspired millions and yet most of his followers

> have no idea of what he stands for except platitudes of "Change" or that he

> says he will be a "Uniter."

>

> The power of speech from a charismatic person truly can be a

> powerful thing. Certainly Billy Graham had charisma and both his manner of

> speech and particularly the content changed millions.

>

> On the extreme other hand, the charisma of Adolph Hitler inspired

> millions and the results were catastrophic.

>

> Barack Obama certainly is no Hitler or Billy Graham, but for

> many Americans out there feeling just like a surfer who might be ecstatic

> and euphoric while riding a tidal wave, the

> real story is what happens when it hits shore.

>

> Just Some of What Defines Barack Obama:

>

> · He voted against banning partial birth abortion.

> · He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state

> abortions.

> · Supports affirmative action in colleges and government.

> · In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.

> · Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum

> wage affair.

> · Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in

> college.

> · His religious convictions are very murky.

> · He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung

> Il, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

> · Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would

> be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.

> · Opposed the Patriot Act.

> · First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance

> reform.

> · Voted "No" on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.

> · Supports universal health-care.

> · Voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

> · Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

> · Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.

> · Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.

> · Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social

> Security.

> · Wants to make the minimum wage a "living wage."

> · Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.

> · Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.

> · Opposed to any efforts to privatize Social Security and instead

> supports

> increasing the amount of tax paid.

> · He voted "No" on repealing the alternative minimum tax.

> · He voted No on repealing the death tax.

> · He wants to raise the capital gains tax.

> · Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded....

> · He is ranked as the most liberal senator in the Senate today

> and that takes some doing.

>

> If your political choices are consistent with Barack Obama's and

> you think that his positions will bring America together or make it a

> better place, then you will probably enjoy the ride and not forward this

> e-mail. If you are like most Americans, that are truly not in line with his

> record, it would be prudent to get off the wave or better yet, never get

> on, before it comes on shore and undermines the very foundations of this

> great country. We have limited time to save America or the Supreme Court as

> we know it.

>

> Bill Brown

[Bravus]

That's accurate.

[Jeannieb43]

I agree with everything he has planned for the future. There are solid, valid reasons for such things as decriminalizing drug abuse.

I don't condone everything he's done in the past. But he's not doing those things any more.

The way he arrived at his decisions was by thoughtful, logical, methods. The way I'd want my President to make decisions.

[carolaa]

A record he can be proud of.

[Woody]

Quote:

Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college.

This would have disqualified him a few years back. But times change. Ever since the Bill Clinton "I never inhaled" comment ... things has deteriorated.

[carolaa]

Yes, it's refreshing to have an honest candidate.

[Woody]

It wouldn't take much to have an improvement from Bill Clinton.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Ah, I see reflected in the Global Warming misericordiam - the barmy climes!

[Bravus]

> · He voted against banning partial birth abortion.

Hmm, that is worrying.

> · He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state

> abortions.

I've kicked that around with my friend Shane, and I think I see his point that in the general run of things it's good for parents to know. Except the ones who got the daughters pregnant themselves in the first place. Or those who would severely beat them if they found out.

> · Supports affirmative action in colleges and government.

Sweet - society could do with some more justice.

> · In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.

Major dealers need harsh penalties, street level dealers selling to support their own habits need rehabilitation

> · Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum

> wage affair.

Which is what it is.

> · Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in

> college.

How many people of his generation can you name who can claim never to have used either (or to have abused alcohol like the current incumbent) and be telling the truth?

> · His religious convictions are very murky.

Says who?

> · He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung

> Il, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Yep: diplomacy is how world leaders get things done and avoid pointless wars.

> · Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would

> be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.

Do you or do you not believe that the War on Terror is a clash of religions? If you believe that most Muslims are peaceful people and the terrorists are extremists (but perhaps that moderate Muslims need to speak out more), then a hugely important part of the War on Terror is engaging with Muslim nations and getting them on side.

> · Opposed the Patriot Act.

Good, the Patriot Act, despite its deceitful name, was a massive and unconstitutional erosion of the freedoms of Americans.

> · First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance

> reform.

And this is a bad thing how?

> · Voted "No" on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.

Manufacturers of all products are liable for death and injury caused by their products, why exempt gun manufacturers? That bill was special pleading.

> · Supports universal health-care.

Woohoo! It works extremely well in Australia and Canada, and would be a lot better for my friend who owes tens of thousands she will *never* be able to repay for her brain tumor surgery - and for the people who are turned away from hospitals. Only in America could 'supports universal health care' be listed as a *bad* quality...

> · Voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

Habeas corpus applies to everyone, and should: detention without charge is illegal and immoral.

> · Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Better they should drive unlicensed?

> · Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.

Better they should starve?

> · Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.

And this is precisely what is going to solve the illegal immigrant problem, including the ones above and below.

> · Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social

> Security.

Given their relative youth and work, they would be contributing to the pool that may well help support *your* retirement.

> · Wants to make the minimum wage a "living wage."

Because of course the poorest in our society should have to work for less than enough to live on...

> · Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.

Got any stats on McCain?

> · Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.

As were the Founding Fathers.

> · Opposed to any efforts to privatize Social Security and instead

> supports increasing the amount of tax paid.

Privatising Social Security would be an absolute disaster, with millions in shareholder profits being skimmed, and shareholder value becoming the prime imperative rather than... social security.

> · He voted "No" on repealing the alternative minimum tax.

> · He voted No on repealing the death tax.

> · He wants to raise the capital gains tax.

He believes in social services and in tax cuts for those who need them most, not those who need them least. Each of these taxes is progressive in that it taxes the wealthiest to serve the nation - those who can give most.

> · Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded....

Which is true.

> · He is ranked as the most liberal senator in the Senate today

> and that takes some doing.

Actually, that's not true on almost any measure, but has been repeated and repeated. Check the stats.

So it's fairly clear where I'd be voting if I lived in the US. The bit that stuns me is that a Christian pastor considers many of these things as reasons to vote *against* Obama. Just gob-smacked.

[Dr. Shane]

Obama voted against the ban on partial birth abortion because it didn't have a provision for an exception in the case of the mother's health. He does support a ban on the practice when exceptions are allowed for the mother's health. I have no problem with that exception and think it should be part of any such ban.

I think we have two great candidates. Obama will do some things I don't like and do other things I do. I can say the same about McCain. It is going to be hard to decide.

[jasd]

>>Obama voted against the ban on partial birth abortion because it didn't have a provision for an exception in the case of the mother's health.<< [ed.jasd]

Help me out. What sort of 'health problems' are generally encountered when the baby being delivered is forcibly restrained in the birthing canal - that a suctioning procedure might be performed on the baby's brain? The most obvious danger to the mother at that point would be

the invasive procedure performed by the abortionist.

Mebbe, someone is just blowin' smoke

[jasd]

I don’t know whether the following was posted to the list at large using the Quick Reply frame – or whether I am, indeed, the one addressed. Anyway,

I’m addressing some of the points following:

Quote:

>.He voted against banning partial birth abortion.

>>Hmm, that is worrying.<<

Worrying? That seems to be stated with either a large measure of unconcern or some equanimity.

Quote:

> · He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state

> abortions.

>>I've kicked that around with my friend Shane, and I think I see his point that in the general run of things it's good for parents to know. Except the ones who got the daughters pregnant themselves in the first place. Or those who would severely beat them if they found out.<<

I can appreciate the legal imperative the State takes re the issue of State-licensed marriages; that is, the child belongs to the State. Until that legal matter is pressed, the child is accepted as being the responsibility of his or her parents – who are, following, held responsible in all matters pertaining... not a teacher, a representative from Planned Parenthood, or other likely participant re the child.

Yes, there is always the exception such as the father who practices incest and the parent who would beat the child; however, to forward the anomalous as normative is insufficient to validate an obverse argumentum ad numerum.

Quote:

> · Supports affirmative action in colleges and government.

>>Sweet - society could do with some more justice.<<

Justice should, rightfully, be blindfolded. Cutting __equally__ across the board, which affirmative action does not, nor does it even bother to make a pretense of it. [/gobsmacked]

[jasd]

Quote:

> · In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.

>>Major dealers need harsh penalties, street level dealers selling to support their own habits need rehabilitation<<

Than ‘bama should specify. He seems singularly unwilling or unable to deal in specifics. That said, it is not the “major dealers” who latch on to the neighbourhood children turning them into junkies – it is the “street-level” dealer who does.

Quote:

> · Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum

> wage affair.

>>Which is what it is.<<

So, a wise guy in Cosa Nostra, Mafia, or other, claims “minimum wage” – and we should excuse them their activities?

Quote:

> · Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in

> college.

>>How many people of his generation can you name who can claim never to have used either (or to have abused alcohol like the current incumbent) and be telling the truth?<<

I’d give ‘bama a pass on that one should he have been engaged in a legal activity – which, MJ (exceptions noted) and Blow are not and were not. ‘bama, writing in his book, seemingly - proudly admits – that he was a practicing scofflaw (nice tone, eh – ‘bama/scofflaw?). That said, McCain was training to serve his country at that age – instead of playing at Animal House.

Quote:

> · His religious convictions are very murky.

>>Says who?<<

Alan Keyes, for one. And, he stands self-indicted having condoned by association the jiu-jitsu-like juxtaposition of Jesus Christ and Marxism in ol’ Jer Wright’s church.

[Bravus]

I understated the case on partial birth abortion, simply because I felt I didn't understand the context of Obama's opposition to the bill well enough. If the statement was 'Obama supports partial birth abortion', then my comment and my feelings would be much stronger. But it's not too hard to imagine a situation where there was a fatally flawed bill, for example one that included partial birth abortion along with other issues, and that Obama voted against it based on those other issues. I do not believe that Obama supports partial birth abortion as a general principle: if I did it would be much harder to support him.

On parental notification, I agree with the general principle but think that the kinds of exceptions - of which I described only two of many - are numerous enough to need serious consideration. As the father of two teenage daughters, I also believe that if I needed some third party to inform me that my daughter had gone to another state and had an abortion that would be evidence of dereliction in my parenting - I know them and their lives much better than that.

On Affirmative Action - the claim that it is fair to, for example, build the wealth of the US on the back of slavery, then emancipate the slaves with nothing and keep the former slaveholders wealthy, then say 'OK, *now* everyone must be treated exactly the same' is hardly just. It's as though I came to your house and stole all your money at gunpoint, then said 'OK, we'll each just start with the money we have and that will be fair'. There are solid reasons why there are fewer people of certain races and genders in certain roles that do not relate to their capacities or characters but do relate to historical injustices. Working to redress the balance actually gives society access to the knowledge and skills and perspectives of a wider range of people, enhancing life for everyone. Roll on the day when it is no longer needed, but it only takes looking around to see that that day is not here yet.

Want to have a bash at a few of the other issues?

[jasd]

Quote:

> · He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung

> Il, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

>>Yep: diplomacy is how world leaders get things done and avoid pointless wars.<<

I thought that was why, largely, the United Nations was established. I remember Neville Chamberlain engaging in ‘diplomacy’ with Germany just prior to WWII. Hadn’t we been engaged in a whole bunch of diplomacy via the good offices of allies and friends as well the UN – prior to entering Iraq for the overthrow of Saddam? Sometimes,

the most effective diplomacy is WAR.

Doesn’t Australia believe in diplomacy? Didn’t Australia send troops to Iraq? or don’t you consider your PM to have been a “world leader”?

Quote:

> · Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would

> be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.

>>Do you or do you not believe that the War on Terror is a clash of religions? If you believe that most Muslims are peaceful people and the terrorists are extremists (but perhaps that moderate Muslims need to speak out more), then a hugely important part of the War on Terror is engaging with Muslim nations and getting them on side.<<

To considerable degree – it is a clash of religions. That said, it is also so much about hate that the Q’uran is stood on its head to allow for the wishes of Muslim mullahs to pursue jihad.

Saudi Arabia gave us Wahhabi terrorism – still exporting it and still funding it – with us as primary target. How much more could we have bent over being friend and ally to them? What else could we do that we’ve not already done? They (Muslims, generally) are, for the most part, backward and not inclined to friendliness with us. They, extremist Muslims, have declared war on us. Where are the (supposedly there) moderating Muslim voices? (yes, I believe they exist {some of them are included in my family}; however, for the most part, they are collateral pieces)

We have a choice – to prosecute our defense against such fanaticism to win – or we will lose and be forced to pray towards Mecca five times a day – or be beheaded. I believe we will, eventually, win – but it will cost us and the entire West our civilization. (not saying this all will be at the hand of Muslims – but that they will, to some degree, serve as cat’s paw)

[jasd]

Quote:

> · Opposed the Patriot Act.

>>Good, the Patriot Act, despite its deceitful name, was a massive and unconstitutional erosion of the freedoms of Americans.<<

On some points it goes too far – and on other points – not far enough. Anyway, outstanding and extant Executive Orders far outweigh the Patriot Act for being both far-reaching and repressive – yet, there is no outcry against them.

Quote:

> · First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance

> reform.

>>And this is a bad thing how?<<

So, why does he not adhere to its restrictions re himself?

Quote:

> · Voted "No" on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.

>>Manufacturers of all products are liable for death and injury caused by their products, why exempt gun manufacturers? That bill was special pleading.<<

Specious. Opens the way for unrestrained ‘tort’ laws and action. The “Manufacturers” are held liable for their products which are shoddy, faulty, or otherwise not-as-advertised; or, for those products intrinsically dangerous or posing potential danger to its purchaser. Guns are faultless and flawless in manufacture. Any danger inherent exists only in its improper use. To suggest that improper use is cause for action against the manufacturer – is liberal-think, or the American BAR Association’s very moistest :-) dream. That is not yet addressing those

who could give a tinker’s d**n about our Constitution.

It is the ludicrous parent who would bring suit against GM because his son deliberately drove the new family Buick over the cliff or ran it into a concrete abutment. Improper use should not translate to a tort suit.

Quote:

> · Supports universal health-care.

>>Woohoo! It works extremely well in Australia and Canada, and would be a lot better for my friend who owes tens of thousands she will *never* be able to repay for her brain tumor surgery - and for the people who are turned away from hospitals. Only in America could 'supports universal health care' be listed as a *bad* quality...<<

It may be that you don’t have 20,000,000 illegals living in Australia that are included in the term “universal”. They have already burdened existing hospitals to such a degree that many hospitals and clinics have closed their doors producing a vacuum where there ought to be medical care for those legitimately deserving of such facilities.

Have you been following the recent news reports of vermin-infested hospitals, ORs, and other health facilities in England? They have universal healthcare, yes?

Additionally, I ask, “Why are our border town health-care facilities so inundated by Canadians?”

Anyone not having health insurance applies to State-sponsored Medicaid, go to subsidized clinics, or just enter the nearest Emergency Room at the local hospital (it is unlawful to turn one away from the care provided by an Emergency Room. By the way, did you know that Michelle Obama was paid more than $300,000 per annum to steer people away from her Emergency Room?).

[Bravus]

Heh, I have to go to work so I won't have time to do a lot of line-by-line until later, but very quickly:

1. Street level drug dealing is a problem, and an important one, but having 1% of the nation's entire population in prison is also a problem. You can lock up street level dealers forever, the goal needs to be to find the importers and high level dealers and lock *them* up. Cut off supply, and focus on drug education, rehabilitation and enhancing education and opportunities for poor urban males... it's more effective than sending kids to 'criminal school' in jail for decades for buying an ounce, smoking half and selling half.

2. The Mafia guys aren't working at the street/medium wage level of dealing, they're higher up, and should be pursued with vigor.

3. Guess I'm a scofflaw too, for occasionally breaking the speed limit. Guess Dubya is too, for DWI. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone on that score.

4. Australia should not have sent troops to Iraq. John Howard, our Prime Minister at the time, was not a 'world leader' but a 'world follower' in Bush's pocket. And there are dozens or hundreds of successful incidences of diplomacy, so bringing up Chamberlain every time is disingenuous. I'm not saying 'no war ever', I am saying that talking with leaders is always preferable to war and many times, but not every time, can prevent war.

5. If you are willing to burn down your society to stop terror, then you will be able to do that (burn down your society, not stop terror, that's impossible), and will deserve the consequences.

[jasd]

Quote:

> · Voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

>>Habeas corpus applies to everyone, and should: detention without charge is illegal and immoral.<<

Does it matter whether an enemy alien held in Gitmo is a detainee or a POW? what about captured partisans?

What about the DC Circuit or the Supreme Court decision re the ‘sovereign’ status of Gitmo?

Feel-goodism ought not trump law. Should one have grievance with law as it exists, he or she ought to get involved and change the law – sorta like, Palin, yes?

Quote:

> · Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

>>Better they should drive unlicensed?<<

Why not? they drive without insurance. Disregard for both law and license find illegals driving with nar' a concern upon our roadways. Besides, a driver’s license serves as a legal ID, enabling one to vote in some States, board a commercial airliner, etc.

The national Real ID being foisted on the American peoples by the Natl Govt’s active badgering of individual States – would establish an ID with a magnetic strip that effectively relegates everyone within our borders to the same status (chattel or free) which would, in much too great an extent, include the illegal immigrant.

Quote:

> · Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.

>>Better they should starve?<<

Howsabout they just go back where they came from? If I entered Mexico illegally, I’d be arrested, inquiries would be made re my family’s finances, and my family would have to divest everything it owned – to get me out of jail and out of Mexico – providing I wasn’t killed – in the meantime.

Speaking of welfare for the, ahem, immigrants – veterans returning from service in Iraq are qualified to rent subsidized housing. Unfortunately, they are put on an extensive waiting list – as two/thirds of the subsidized housing (here in Oregon) is taken by – you guessed it.

[Bravus]

Seems like many of the problems in all sorts of areas of US life, including health care and driving, are basically caused by the illegals. So surely the top priority ought to be getting that problem sorted out? But apparently the fact that Obama voted for immigration reform is a reason to vote *against* him?

Truth is, illegals are an important labor source and industry doesn't want them to go home. If it did things would happen. It's a massive problem and not a simple one, and just deporting them all is not a realistic solution. Some form of process for integrating them is much more realistic, and the various things Obama has voted for and supported are steps on that road.

But illegals are less than 10% of the total population, so they alone do not serve as enough argument against things like universal health care, and are a separate issue.

Anyway, really must head to work, but I want to say that I'm enjoying this discussion.

[jasd]

Quote:

> · Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.

>>And this is precisely what is going to solve the illegal immigrant problem, including the ones above and below.<<

Specifics are sadly lacking where ‘bama is concerned. Those voting for him, being delusional, do so on a wing and a prayer.

Quote:

> · Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social

> Security.

>>Given their relative youth and work, they would be contributing to the pool that may well help support *your* retirement.<<

Let me give you an example of “contributions”. Meat packers and butchers used to earn about $20.00 per hour; whereas, the average meat packers now earns about $9.00 per hour. Which worker contributed more to the SS system, the pre-illegal worker or the post-illegal worker? Is the illegal immigrant a plus in this instance?

This downward pressure upon the wages of Middle America goes across the board.

Upon one point I favor amnesty for the illegal. The illegal would then receive his or her ‘green card’ – thereby, becoming eligible for the draft. We’re going to need more bodies – lots more.

Quote:

> · Wants to make the minimum wage a "living wage."

>>Because of course the poorest in our society should have to work for less than enough to live on...<<

How much would that be, in America? If ‘bama couldn’t care less about a bro’ living on $1.00 a month, why all the hullubaloo about minimum wage? Mebbe, to appear pious?

Sheesh, how do so many do it? that is, get on in life...

I had a girlfriend in Los Angeles who complained that she would have to move; the reason given was that she lived in an apartment renting to a number of Asians. They worked at two-thee-four jobs, mostly janitorial, and would come and go at all hours – using and sharing bed and bath – saving monie$. After this self-imposed deprivation of 4-5 years, they manage to save enough to invest in a business. They never whizzed and moaned about being poor – rather, they clung to

a work ethic.

[jasd]

Quote:

> · Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.

>>Got any stats on McCain?<<

The reason McCain had so little support among conservative Republicans is that he crossed the aisle too many times – embracing the opposition – working with and advancing the agenda of the opposition. Definitely, a thing the opposition doesn’t reciprocate.

Quote:

> · Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.

>>As were the Founding Fathers.<<

Not true. Our Supreme Court relied heavily on the writings of our Founding Fathers to arrive at the decision that America is a Xtian nation. That’s it. It was not until much later that there was generated agitation to establish in law a demarcation re ‘separation’ of church and State.

It has arrived at the point of ridiculousness. We now see that the Bible is not allowed on school grounds, that would include the classroom and the library. Jesus Christ is not allowed mention; and those wishing to honor Him must do so before school begins – at the flagpole, in most instances, regardless the inclemency of weather. Meanwhile,

there are mandatory classes re Islam that demand ‘immersion’. The restrooms are renovated to accommodate foot-washing. The Q’uran is placed in many classrooms with the injunction that no other book may be placed above the level the Q’uran occupies.

Do you begin to see why I despise that certain form of liberalism, aka, political correctness? As well, the metro-sexual American male who gets his nails done at a lady’s salon and sports that thin elastic line on his(?) waist. All this devolution rather than attaining to the higher standards America offers – is, is, is, ... [/gobsmacking]

Quote:

> · Opposed to any efforts to privatize Social Security and instead

> supports increasing the amount of tax paid.

>>Privatising Social Security would be an absolute disaster, with millions in shareholder profits being skimmed, and shareholder value becoming the prime imperative rather than... social security.<<

If I recall, the suggestion was that 4% of one’s SS contribution could be discretionally privatized. SS contributions earn about 2.5% annually. The presently low return offered on passbook savings accounts in my area is about 3.75% per annum. That is compounded interest – yielding a substantial increase over the straight 2.5% generated in the SS trust; well, what used to be the Trust, which has been emptied – except for those IOUs. Of course, there are always CDs...

Quote:

> · He voted "No" on repealing the alternative minimum tax.

Well, kinda goes along with excessive taxing, yes?

Quote:

> · He voted No on repealing the death tax.

The “death tax” is devastating the American Small Farm, which the great Agri-conglomerates are rapidly acquiring. It is a matter of but a very short time before our food prices will be monopolistically controlled by Agri-cartels who – you guessed it – would not have been able to acquire those tens of thousands of acres of American farmland were the ‘death tax’ to have been eliminated.

Quote:

> · He wants to raise the capital gains tax.

Wow, like the housing market needs this, not to mention the stock market or our dependence upon capital investments.

[Neil D]

Bravus,

Do you and your family want to move to America? I will sponser you..... You would make a better American than many of us...

I know, I know... much of what America does influences the land of OZ as well as many other places...So, Ozzies who know what America does, understands how thier country will proceed with world affairs...

Still, it's nice to know that there are some who understand our politics as well or better than we do...

[jasd]

>>He believes in social services and in tax cuts for those who need them most, not those who need them least. Each of these taxes is progressive in that it taxes the wealthiest to serve the nation - those who can give most.<<

Most? Least? Do the poor create jobs? Rather than a handout, I’d think one would rather have a job, which the wealthy provide. Money makes the world go ‘round..., take it away and squander it on the least productive ill-serves not only those who receive the largesse but our very America - which is all of us – not just the poor or the unproductive.

Quote:

> · Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded....

>>Which is true.<<

Goes to perception.

Quote:

> · He is ranked as the most liberal senator in the Senate today

> and that takes some doing.

>>Actually, that's not true on almost any measure, but has been repeated and repeated. Check the stats.<<

Checked the “National Journal” and find that ‘bama is rated the most liberal Senator in year 2007. The Wall Street Journal concurs. Even were he only the 6th, 7th, or other – is too much of a liberal. Incidentally, Biden is rated #3. Wow, Frick and Frack – what a ticket!

>>So it's fairly clear where I'd be voting if I lived in the US. The bit that stuns me is that a Christian pastor considers many of these things as reasons to vote *against* Obama. Just gob-smacked.<<

That’s a shame.

Color jasd “gobsmacked”.

My above opinions are not to suggest that the GOP is the sine qua non, but that the Party of the nouveau gyno/proctocrats (re Palin) is frightening, as in freaky-scary.