Login | Staff | Feedback | Customer Service | RSS | Advertise | Subscriber Services
customer service

HomeElections 2008Elections

PHOTOS/POLL: McCain, Obama get tough, personal in final debate

Who do you think performed best in the third presidential debate?

See the results without voting ».

HEMPSTEAD, N.Y. (AP) -- John McCain assailed Barack Obama's character and his campaign positions on taxes, abortion and more Wednesday night, hoping to turn their final presidential debate into a launching pad for a political comeback. "You didn't tell the American people the truth," he said.

Unruffled, and ahead in the polls, Obama parried each charge, and leveled a few of his own.

"One hundred percent, John, of your ads, 100 percent of them have been negative," Obama shot back in an uncommonly personal debate less than three weeks from Election Day.

"That's not true," McCain retorted.

"It is true," said Obama, seeking the last word.

McCain is currently running all negative ads, according to a study by the University of Wisconsin-Madison. But he has run a number of positive ads during the campaign.

The 90-minute encounter, at a round table at Hofstra University, was their third debate, and marked the beginning of a 20-day sprint to Election Day. Obama leads in the national polls and in surveys in many battleground states, an advantage built in the weeks since the nation stumbled into the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.

With few exceptions, the campaign is being waged in states that voted Republican in 2004 - Virginia, Colorado, Iowa - and in many of them, Obama holds a lead in the polls.

McCain played the aggressor from the opening moments of the debate, accusing Obama of waging class warfare by seeking tax increases that would "spread the wealth around."

The Arizona senator also demanded to know the full extent of Obama's relationship with William Ayers, a 1960s-era terrorist and the Democrat's ties with ACORN, a liberal group accused of violating federal law as it seeks to register voters. And he insisted Obama disavow last week's remarks by Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat, who accused the Republican ticket of playing racial politics along the same lines as segregationists of the past.

Struggling to escape the political drag of an unpopular Republican incumbent, McCain also said, "Sen. Obama, I am not President Bush. ... You wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago."

Obama returned each volley, and brushed aside McCain's claim to full political independence.

"If I've occasionally mistaken your policies for George Bush's policies, it's because on the core economic issues that matter to the American people - on tax policy, on energy policy, on spending priorities - you have been a vigorous supporter of President Bush," he said.

McCain's allegation that Obama had not leveled with the public involved the Illinois senator's decision to forgo public financing for his campaign in favor of raising his own funds. As a result, he has far outraised McCain, although the difference has been somewhat neutralized by an advantage the Republican National Committee holds over the Democratic Party.

"He signed a piece of paper" earlier in the campaign pledging to accept federal financing, McCain said. He added that Obama's campaign has spent more money than any since Watergate, a reference to President Nixon's re-election, a campaign that later became synonymous with scandal.

Obama made no immediate response to McCain's assertion about having signed a pledge to accept federal campaign funds.

Comments

This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. Break our rules, and we will ban you. No exceptions, no second chances. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.


Obama went 3 for 3 in the debates. Is McCain dead yet? Dang that is one old geezer. God help us if Palin was President.

#1 Posted by voteforobama on October 15, 2008 at 11:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You know what is sad Ven? There are people like Ironside and Liestopper who actually believe its their RIGHT to take your money because they could not be successful as Joe the Plumber.

Liberalism is just an excuse for lazy hippies to take money away from hard working people.

I ask all liberals the same question, What gives you the right to take money that you have not earned to give it to your loser constituency?

#2 Posted by Sanity on October 15, 2008 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

voteforobama,

I wonder who you will vote for.

#3 Posted by Sanity on October 15, 2008 at 11:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

sanity.....what gives the wall street investment banks and insurance companies the right to take $700 billion of our tax money to prop them up after the mistakes they made as a result of their greed?

Socialism works both ways...and unfortunately...we taxpayers are on the hook for funding the redistribution of wealth to (formerly) rich investment bankers and brokers on wall street.

#4 Posted by antiquepaper on October 15, 2008 at 11:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the place to be on election night is grant park, chicago illinois! what a party that will be! make your reservations, call your long lost chicago relatives, or just drive up tamiami trail (us 41) straight to grant park, lake shore drive (SAME us 41), chicago and see what freedom really is! but hurry, you only have a little under 3 weeks! oh yeah, you better bring some warm clothes, sweats will be just fine!

#5 Posted by naples759 on October 16, 2008 at 12:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#3 Hi Sanity. Do you think the Obamanations can even spell entitlement? They sure do want it BAD!

#6 Posted by lamoatesre on October 16, 2008 at 12:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

sanity: regarding #3 - you are so right!

#7 Posted by smartypants on October 16, 2008 at 12:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I guess the reason why so many Republicans reside in SW Florida is that they don't have to worry about paying for heating oil when the markets tank like the poor people they left behind in the south side of Chicago.

#8 Posted by chap914 on October 16, 2008 at 1:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Screw Joe the Plumber and his cousin Joe Six-Pack. More of the same bull-crap from McSame, just a little more angry this time.

GObama '08

#9 Posted by Trojanz33 on October 16, 2008 at 1:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

the poor people on the south side of chicago make what the average sw floridian makes. but food is cheaper in chicago and so is housing. you have to heat but you don't have to air condition. plus, excellent public trans system. by the way, there are a lot of rich people (all cultures) on the south side.

#10 Posted by naples759 on October 16, 2008 at 1:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

how much of the 4.2 million obama made on books etc.. last year did he share with the less fortunate? i already know the tax return figures. less than 10% of after tax income. put your money where your mouth is. spread the wealth.

#11 Posted by islandman4now on October 16, 2008 at 6:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Woo Hoo! Obama wins 3 out of 3 debates!

Sanity, do you support McCain wanting to tax your health benefits for the first time ever? That's clearly what his plan calls for!

95% Of the American people will get a tax cut under Obama's plan!

The Tax Policy Center says the middle-class will get three times as much tax relief under Obama's tax plan than under McCain's plan!

Obama/Biden '08

#12 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 6:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

if you arent working, there is no income to tax. if you are handing out checks you are fostering a welfare society. before forcing people to redistribute their wealth, lead the way and give away your own. dont be a hypocrite.

#13 Posted by islandman4now on October 16, 2008 at 6:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It seems like the republicans are in a near panic state. Haven't they learned from the last eight years that a different approach to the economy and government is needed? Geez, they act like the sky is falling. Relax and try something new for a change y'all.

#14 Posted by ravenhawk on October 16, 2008 at 6:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

more stimulus checks to spend at wal mart. i am also successfully self employed. not a republican either. only looking out for the future responsibly i.e. the burdens we are leaving behind for our grandchildren. heres an idea, how about buying american goods and services for starters?

#15 Posted by islandman4now on October 16, 2008 at 6:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No way can John McCain ever beat Obama in a debate. The reason is.... McCain is who he is and he can't change that. He's an angry old white man that's out of touch with the average America people. He's a hot-head and erratic.

Barack Obama is the common-sense candidate. He's rational and has the temperment to be President of the United States of America.

hope women were paying very close attention to this debate!

BOTTOM LINE...

On equal pay for women doing the same work men do:

Obama: "For years, she had been getting paid less than a man had been paid for doing the exact same job. And when she brought a suit, saying equal pay for equal work, the judges said, well, you know, it's taken you too long to bring this lawsuit, even though she didn't know about it until fairly recently. We tried to overturn it in the Senate. I supported that effort to provide better guidance to the courts; John McCain opposed it."

McCain: "It was a trial lawyer's dream."

BOTTOM LINE...

On abortion:

Obama: "With respect to partial-birth abortion, I am completely supportive of a ban on late-term abortions, partial-birth or otherwise, as long as there's an exception for the mother's health and life, and this did not contain that exception."

McCain: "Just again, the example of the eloquence of Sen. Obama. He's health for the mother. You know, that's been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything.

That's the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, 'health.'"
___________________________

John McCain mocking a woman's health for policy was scary!

Also, his hatred for "trial lawyers" over a woman's right for equal pay was rather disturbing.

#16 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Excelent suggestion islandman4now! Buy American and stop outsourcing American jobs to foreign countries. We need to keep our own citizens working.

#17 Posted by ravenhawk on October 16, 2008 at 7 a.m. (Suggest removal)

islandman4now, we have to make products in America to be able to buy American made products. Manufacturing jobs are going overseas and the companies doing so are receiving tax incentives to do so. That's something John McCain supports. Obama will instead give tax credits to companies employing Americans here at home and not shipping our jobs overseas.

#18 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 7:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

His insurance plan is keeping your emploee insurance with lower premiums, if you wish to keep it. Those not wanting that insurance and those uninsured will be able to join a group that receives the same benefits the members of Congress are getting.

McCain wants to tax your insurance for the first time ever.

Meaning, under McCains paln, if you make $40,000 a year and your company insurance costs $12,000 a year, you will be paying income tax on $52,000. How's that fair?

Experts say about 22 million workers will lose their insurance under McCain's plan, McCain says if that's the case he'll give you a check for $5,000 to buy $12,000 worth of insurance with.

Obama/Biden '08

#19 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 7:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama's insurance plan is keeping your employee insurance with lower premiums, if you wish to keep it. Those not wanting that insurance and those uninsured will be able to join a group that receives the same benefits the members of Congress are getting.

McCain wants to tax your insurance for the first time ever.

Meaning, under McCains plan, if you make $40,000 a year and your company insurance costs $12,000 a year, you will be paying income tax on $52,000. How's that fair?

Experts say about 22 million workers will lose their insurance under McCain's plan, McCain says if that's the case he'll give you a check for $5,000 to buy $12,000 worth of insurance with.

McCain also wants to cut medi-care by $1.3 trillion.

McCain supports spending $10 billion a month in Iraq, though!

Obama/Biden '08

#20 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It’s clearly over people. McCain showed his true personality last night. He held it together in the beginning, but he then became the arrogant, mean, name calling, impulsive, finger pointing, desperate, sarcastic, rude, disrespectful, unlikable, and most importantly un-presidential old man that he is.

#21 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 7:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#17, Do you really believe that you'll get something "new" from either one of the chosen ones?

You want something new, for real??

Vote Ron Paul.

#22 Posted by myrealname on October 16, 2008 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

thedudesview, I agree with you. I also don't think the split-screen did McCain any favors, but I enjoyed watching McCain's angry and condescending expressions (eye rolling, frowns and sighs) as Obama spoke. That was priceless!

#23 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside #28 -- I was a very young boy, but it reminded me of the Kennedy/Nixon debate.

#24 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If McSame wants to win the presidency, he should really request no HD cameras. He looks like a corpse.

#25 Posted by Sean1215 on October 16, 2008 at 7:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hi there HarleyHog, good to see ya again. I never did get an answer on the previous article blog about how the Constitution of the United States was based on Christianty as you stated before. Care to elaborate yet?

#26 Posted by ravenhawk on October 16, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sean1215 -- yes, at first I mistook him for Keith Richards

#27 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 7:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wouldn't it be nice if all future presidential debates were "real debates", not the BS we've seen, so we can get an idea of how these guys deal with people (one on one) which is necessary and integral to the job. This last debate was closest to that, but not quite there.

#28 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

GOP (Grumpy Old People) will finally take a dirt nap on Nov 4.

Vote Change!
Vote Obama!

And the nightmare will end.
Remember how it all began:
Lose the popular vote
Win the electoral vote

. . . . The "majority rule" is often described as a characteristic feature of democracy, but without responsible government it is possible for the rights of a minority to be abused by the "tyranny of the majority".

And go see the film "W".
Laugh your butt off!
and see what happens when a complete and absolute spoiled brat D+ student loser is in charge of the corporation.

You crash!

#29 Posted by bicoastal on October 16, 2008 at 7:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: Post #34 - Because we all know how politically neutral Oliver Stone is, right?

I'm sure that his newest film is as unbiased as his other ones that have ventured into the political arena (i.e. JFK, Nixon, etc.).

He and Michael Moore are close pals, aren't they?

#30 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

ironside, both parties have sold the country out. we can go tit for tat on how each party votes til we're dead. tax breaks arent enough to compete with goods made overseas at fractions of the cost here. level the playing field on imports to deter the outsourcing of our jobs. penalize the outsourcing and cheap imports. start by buying what IS produced here. mccain also offers tax breaks to corporations that are readily slammed by obama. someone needs to stand up to make a real difference and the paltry sums offered to buy the middle class vote arent going to do it. where did the last stimulus package get us? who made nafta a legislative priority? where did it take us? by the way i dont stand for either party. i just have more issue with ones socialist views than the other. off to work i go to support the less fortunate.

#31 Posted by islandman4now on October 16, 2008 at 8 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#16, Obama never stated he wasn't going to raise you taxes and if you haven't 'given' insurance to you employees good luck handling both increases...feel sorry for your customers. I have family in the sub-contractor business with 50-60 employees barely making it by right now and with Obama, he is very likely going to go out of business with increased taxes and being 'MADE' to have health insurance for all of those employees.
Big Government making the small business man run his business the Big Government want him to.
#24 The insurance companies are going to have to make up the money somewhere so, the people like myself who pay for their own, will take up the slack for government. Since i want good insurance and don't want to be sidelined to other "more important" patients i would like to keep paying for my own because i have good coverage. I am not going to go into my cousin who lives in England and his woes from government run insurance but, i will if you want.

#32 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: Post #13 - I am a partner in a small business in addition to my regular job.

My annual gross income at my regular job is less than $250,000 per year. But, my small business typically averages between $350,000 and $500,000 gross income per year.

So, my personal income taxes wouldn't change under Obama but my small business income taxes would go up, because those are also taxed as individual income and not as business income.
Why would I vote for someone who is going to take more money out of my pocket? Especially at a time when business in general, and small business in particular, needs all the extra money it can get.

Obama cannot deliver the tax cuts he is promising and still fund all of the new programs that he is promising. He will need to increase spending to deliver those programs and that money has to come from somewhere. And, you can't cut taxes (revenues) and increase spending simultaneously without adding to the deficit.

So, is he lying to us now? Or, will he be lying to us in the future?

#33 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have to agree as well, that split screen did Sen. McCain no good at all. That half smile and those black blinking eye holes.... I actually felt bad for the man as you could tell afterward he was so relieved it was over. He probably already regrets selling out to the NeoCons.
And did anybody catch that part about penalizing large Companies (walmart) that cost shift their employees healthcare to the taxpayers? Hillary could never say that.
I just hope when Obama wins, his opponents can at least accept him as "good black folk".

#34 Posted by wes on October 16, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"good black folk"? what in the world?
liberals bringing up race again? my goodness i thought we were trying to get passed this

#35 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Pianoman, I'm not a CPA but it occurs to me that you can ease your tax liability if you become a Corporation (sub chapter S, whatever). Then pay yourself a salary from that business income and be taxed in the normal way. The corporation will have so many things it can write off, that its tax liability will be much reduced. McCain touched on this but Obama did not respond as I would. McSame-"Corporate rates are the 2nd highest in the industrial world". Obama - " rates are high but almost nobody pays them there are so many loopholes and offshore tax havens aka creative accounting".
Just read somewhere that the Corp share of our tax collection is 7% and it used to be 20 to 25% a few years back. Corporations have been allowed to shift the tax burden to you and me.

#36 Posted by progressivedem on October 16, 2008 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: Post #42 - Both the company that I work for at my regular job and the company that I am partnered in are setup as S-Corporations, and I am paid a salary by both. That's only part of the equation, because it only addresses the manner in which you are incorporated.

If you are a designated small business that is set-up as a sole-proprietorship or a partnership, your business income is taxed as personal income. Which means if your small business makes over $250,000 per year, your taxes are going to go up, regardless of how you are incorporated.

That's why I am a proponent of a flat tax with no deductions and no loopholes. It would be a very simple formula:

Line 1: Enter your gross income.

Line 2: Send the IRS a check for 15% of the value entered on Line 1.

Then everyone would pay their fair share.

#37 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Antiquepaper,
#5
So Obama is for the poor and middle class?
So McCain is only for the banks and insurance companies?
Then why does Obama not support McCain’s and originally Hilary Clinton’s proposal to bail out the people who are being foreclosed on? This is part of where McCain wants to spend the $700 billion. He says it will enrich the banks, but it is not true. Clinton and now McCain have said that they buy the mortgages at a discount and then renegotiate the mortgages with the home owners at the current market value. How does that help enrich the banks? The banks get less than they were expecting for the mortgage and the homeowner gets to keep their house at a lower payment.

#38 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 8:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The RICH hire us. They give us our jobs. Ever been employed by a poor person? Up the taxes on the rich and they'll go elsewhere or start terminating jobs. One company has told managers they estimate 12,000 jobs will be cut if Obama's tax hikes become law. Any moron should know you don't bite the hand of those that feed you.

#39 Posted by thinker on October 16, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside???????????????????????????????????

The person with enough mouth for another full row of teeth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#40 Posted by August8 on October 16, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Once again, the fact that Obama graduated Magna Cume Laude from Harvard showed.
McCain 894 out of 899....in 1954. How intelligent did you need to be to graduate from the Naval Academy in 1954?
The difference in intelligence showed in all three debates.
Joe the plumber is not happy with Obama's tax plan because he isnt educated himself. If you have any trace of intelligence and you listen to Obama's tax plan, it makes sense. McCain's plan does not.

#41 Posted by Blkndn305 on October 16, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside,
#19
Concerning your allegation that McCain was against equal pay. (the way you framed it, not even how Obama framed it) He clearly stated that he was for equal pay and that the issue was, do we change the law to allow anyone to sue at any time regardless of how long ago the infraction occurred. If we do that then he is right, it is a lawyers dream. Lets now go back to the duel between Alexander Hamilton and Arron Burr and have the descendants start suing each other. There is a specific time frame in which a law suit can be brought for a reason and it applies both in civil and criminal courts for all legal disputes except murder.

Ignorance is not a valid legal defense in any court.

#42 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside,
#21
Again, stick to the facts instead of interpreting to suit you agenda.

Exactly when did John McCain state that he was for sending jobs overseas?

#43 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)

couldnt find text of debate but as i recall obama wants to give tax breaks to companies to improve efficiency. in plain english someone is losing their job. through automation and the purchase of technology to become efficient from foreign countries.

#44 Posted by islandman4now on October 16, 2008 at 9:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Blkndn305 -- I agree with you that intelligence has played a large roll in this election. I heard from a number of my republican friends (I'm an independent) who are embarrassed by the ticket for that reason - not just McCain - and decided to vote for Obama.

#45 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#47
As a business owner i would just cut out one of the positions in my business to make up for the tax increase Obama has proposed and another job because i now 'have' to insure my employees OR i can raise prices for the American public. ooops i just increased unemployment by 2 OR caused inflation and that's just me

#46 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: Post #47 - Even in 1954, it took more brains to get accepted to a service academy than it took to get accepted to an Ivy League school. And, it still does.

Graduating Magna Cum Laude is not that impressive. It's not that hard to do. I did it. And, Ivy League schools hand out those Latin suffixes to just about everyone they hand a degree to, that's part of their "exclusive" tradition.

I am both intelligent and educated, and Obama's tax plan scares the daylights out of me. I've read it, and I'm singularly unimpressed.

#47 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

High point of the last debate: Sen McCain goes through the effusive talk about Gov Palin, ending it with something like "Oh... And her husband is some top-gun/great guy/dude."
That´s it. That was the missing piece of information. All lingering doubts have been removed.

Obama 2008

#48 Posted by dooley on October 16, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside,
#23 & 24
First, I have heard that you are self employed. Do you spend $12,000 per year for your health insurance? If so, either you are getting ripped off, or you have no deductable, or you get a free face lift every three years.

Second, Assuming you are in a 25% tax bracket, if you are middle class it isn’t actually quite that high, McCain gives you $5000 to pay your supposed $12,000 health insurance and taxes you on the full $12,000. This is your argument and more than my understanding of how much he will tax. Ok, 25% of $12,000 is $3,000, so in fact he has only given you $2,000 that you did not have before to pay your health insurance.

Obama says he just met two women who have recently been laid off and lost their health insurance. He stated they had no alternative. Well, actually there is COBRA that will cover up to 18 months of unemployment. It is difficult to do, but I was able to do it. When you are unemployed you have to make some tough choices, but you do what you have to do.

Obama also says he will lower your insurance premiums. How? He never explains that part. Without injecting the government into the private health care industry and nationalizing health care, there is no way it can be done. But he says he won’t do this. So, How?

You also say you are a veteran and support Obama’s plan to broadcast to the world our withdrawal date from Iraq. Would you really want to be in a war zone and have your Commander and Chief broadcast your intensions to your adversaries? I wouldn’t.

#49 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Pianoman8869 -- too bad for you McCain's not as smart as you. Get over it. You're why too angry at this late stage.

#50 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,
#25
Unfortunately it seems to be coming from either Obama’s camp or at least his supporters that if you don’t vote for Obama you are racist. There was a report on NPR just last week where an Obama “supporter” stated that he is from Brooklyn, New York and never see’s racism in New York, but as he now goes around the country campaigning for Obama he see’s it everywhere. He sighted an example where a man told him he did not feel he could trust Obama. He stated that that is a racist statement. First, please, he never see’s racism in New York. I lived there and saw it every day. I moved back to Florida about three and one half years ago. IT all miraculously evaporated in that time. And since when is feeling that you can not trust someone a racist statement? There are a lot of people I don’t trust, and there is not one single instance where it is based in any way on that persons race in my case.

#51 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To #45 Thinker: we're all dependent upon the rich??? I work for a big corporation and have seen benefits 'go away' for years now...no more company vehicle, it's harder and harder to be reimbursed for gas mileage, no more over-time, no more reduced cost flu-shots (this year they are $30!!!)--smaller raises, too. ENOUGH helping the rich individuals and big corporations! They have CEO's who've obliterated workers 401K's and pension plans and get off scott-free! The rich don't need any help.

#52 Posted by valnaples on October 16, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought there are more than two people running for president. Why weren't they in the debates?

Mr. Obama, I would vote for you if I really knew who you are and what your agenda is. Why don't you release your college transcripts and thesis? Why don't you provide us your true vaulted birth certificate? etc. etc. etc.

Stop the speculation. It is yours to do. What are you hiding? If nothing, you got my vote. Time is running out. It is the old saying "known evil versus unknown evil".

And to all you prejudice people, quit insulting old people!!! LOL

#53 Posted by skyhook1fl on October 16, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ravenhawk,
#31

Regarding how the Constitution of the United States was based on Christianity. This would be based on statement of the framers of the Constitution as well as the continental Congress at that time. There are quite a few quotes from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, etc. who basically stated that they drew up the Constitution based on the tenants put forth in the bible. That would of course infer that both Christianity and Judaism are incorporated. They did, however, go one step further and state that as long as the constitution was followed then any religion was accepted in our country.

#54 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My golly gee gosh let's hope that McGrump took Joe & Caribou Barbie with him when he left the building...

The fat lady continues to warm up....

#55 Posted by herrick9 on October 16, 2008 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

dont worry #59 expect increase job cuts when the Obama tax plan goes into affect

#56 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 9:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Prgressivedem
#42
The problem with subchapter S corporations is first you get taxed on your revenue as a corporation, and yes there are deductions, but not nearly as many as you may think, then you draw a salary and get taxed again. So no matter how you cut it, your taxes will be going up under the Obama plan, and not by just a little bit. This is the sector of our economy that is struggling the hardest right now and Obama’s plan is going to put a knife in their heart.

#57 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

McCain bounced around his talking points like a pogo stick last night. And he NEVER tells you how he's gonna do something. All he ever says is "I know how to do it".. "I can fix it".. "I know what to do". How about sharing with us what and how he's going to do it? Obama is direct.. he's raising taxes on those making over $250K, he will end the war, he will pursue healthcare for all, he may not be able to balance the budget until 10 yrs out.. substance. Things you may not like but you know. McCain babbles and wastes time and energy on things that happened 40 yrs ago. The real reason he doesn't talk about th Who cares about this when the economy is bad. In the words of a wise man.. "It's the economy stupid!"

#58 Posted by Lemme on October 16, 2008 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey,

I want to recognize, that for the most part, people are having a debate here instead of name calling!

Wow!!! Isn’t it great! Rodney King would be proud! We can all get along!

#59 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Are you people watching the same debates. You want to make Obama, who has only 4 years experience in the Senate, who couldn't even vote, marked himself as "present" the leader of the most powerful country in the world??? ABC news after the debate said Obama "lied" 4 times in the debate, which means people, he's lying to you about what he's going to do. He lied about not funding Acorn, lied about the negative campaigning, lied about having relations with Ayres. What about the last question on education. Obama said "every kid will be able to go to college" but, there's that word "but" you will have to payback the money by serving in the military. Parents out there ask your kids if they will want to get funding from the government to go to school but have to serve in the miliary to back it back?? What about single parents who want to get a college degree? what will they do when they have to go serve in the military or reserve, who's going to take care of their child or children. No way!! Obama wants to mandate education. People wake up. He's a liar and he's making promises he will not be able to keep.

#60 Posted by tastelikechicken on October 16, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I just received this and it needs to be watched. Eerie simularities.....

A little long but worth it.

http://wwwdailymotion.com/video/x32cx...

#61 Posted by skyhook1fl on October 16, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

sorry skyhook but the link didnt work

#62 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

A little observation about politics...

Media and polls can heavily influence election outcomes with misinformation. To those who did not watch the debates, the Obama supporters on this blog and others do a disservice. They would like to make up your mind for you in one of two ways...

If you are undecided, they want to appeal to the basic desire to be on the "winning team". That is, if you don't give a darn about who wins, you are more likely to vote for who you think is going to.

If you are a McCain supporter, they want you to feel so overwhelmed that you stay home on election day in a sense of futility.

This is a common tactic in military psychological operations and can be very effective.

It does not make it true.

McCain was trying to win an election. Obama was trying to look presidential. Looking cool and not answering questions should not be the way to win an election. We expect that in congressional hearings.

Whomever wins, let it be because the electoral votes and the process make it so. If the country wants Obama, so be it. But let it not be because Obama's campaign forecast a victory and convinced you McCain had already lost.

Vote.

#63 Posted by TruthHurtz on October 16, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#53 Pianoman, you are sorely misinformed. Please do your homework on mccain. #1 He flunked out of one high school before he got in to episcopal in alexandria, va. #2 It is chronicled that the only reason he got into the naval academy was becasue his grandfather and father were in the navy. His father acutally got him in. #3 I doubt that you have any education at all. Graduating Magna Cum Laude from a beer school is not impressive! Harvard is one of the most prestigious american institutions of higher learning. It is also ranked #2 in the WORLD. I'm sorry you are worshipping a false hero but those are the FACTS. Get over yourself. By the way, what institution of higher learning did you attend????????

#64 Posted by Blkndn305 on October 16, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

All these so-called movie stars like Barbra Streisand, Matt Damon, Oprah and others that support Obama....are they ok with paying more taxes? They make millions and own several mansions (and I hear that Ms. Streisand is extremely tight with her money)...are they ok with paying all these taxes?....or are they exempt because of their contributions? Hmmmm.........

#65 Posted by ryersongirl on October 16, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

#66 Posted by tastelikechicken on October 16, 2008 at 10:12 a.m.

#71 Blkndn305, since you have emphasized that McCain's father & grandfather got him into the naval academy, can I ask you WHO got Obama into Harvard?

#67 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Two issues on taxes and the wealthy:
By closing loopholes which allow for the wealthy to dodge full income tax on 100% of income it will help generate more revenue fo either parties plans. Be it off-shore banks or stock based pay it is not fair that the lower echelon who lives paycheck to paycheck pay taxes on 100% of their check when the rich can afford to dodge taxes.
Not all rich people are greedy. Some understand that they would rather have a healthy educated lower class than a desperate angry one. I've been to many third world countries where the upperclass lives in fear for their lives because the have-nots are angry, starving and desperate. Infrastructure also takes money. I keep hearing this ear-mark garbage over and over again, what do you think it is? It is federal dollars going directly to improving your life. From assisting with pass dredging to road programs. I would be scared to think of a state/county bound to only the resources it has. Crist can't even keep Alligator Alley public! What makes any of you think the state can run w/o federal funds? The argument is ridiculous, selfish and short-sighted.

#68 Posted by Caliban on October 16, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Caliban,

I agree with you on the closing loopholes. At least for the most part. There are a few loopholes that I think should remain. For instance, being able to deduct a portion of your mortgage or rent based on a home based office that is used for business purposes. I used to use this one when I had a sales position for a large corporation and worked out of an office in my home. Without it my job would have been a lot more difficult.

I agree with you on education and your recommendation to go visit a foreign country to see how the poor live there. I suggest Venezuela. Caracas will be a real eye opener.

Concerning ear marks. Ear marks are addendums to other bills that usually have nothing to do with the earmark. They are placed there to slip something through the process that otherwise might not get passed. The solution is through legislative reform. That reform being that no part of a bill passed by the legislature will have addendums that do not pertain to the purpose of that bill. Then you cease earmarks for a projector for a planetarium being slid into an energy bill and things of this sort. You also prevent important legislation from being defeated because there are too many unrelated addendums (ear marks) stuffed into the bill. This is a big part of the problem. A lot of bills are past, not based on the central issue of that bill, but because of everything else that is hidden within the bill.

#69 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

GatorBite,
#74
Here its is:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE....

#70 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Caliban - I hear you on that 'earmark' garbage. Has anybody seen Connie Mack's campaign commercial? It's a 30-second promo for earmarks. He proudly displays each earmark project as a GOOD thing for the people who live here, and brags about how many he's fought for / received. Without earmarks, Connie Mack's campaign would consist of what exactly? His hair?

#71 Posted by fearisfailure on October 16, 2008 at 10:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Fromhere, I can handle the concept of legislative reform. What I feel needs to be understood is, federal funds are important to everybody. If you want to refigure how they are meeted out, fine. Prioritize them based on need, bridges which are about to collapse, etc. But to think that the states will be fine without them is ridiculous. Where would states be without federal assistance on any number of things from security issues to post disaster recovery? It is sad how the conservatives want their taxes cut but expect federal assistance when a hurricane comes through. They want to reap the benifits but not pay into the kitty.

#72 Posted by Caliban on October 16, 2008 at 10:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry I cut and pasted this, but it is very interesting.

According To Senate Records, Women Working In Obama's Senate Office Paid An Average Of $9,000 Less Than Men, As "Obama Pays Women Just 83 Cents For Every Dollar His Men Make." "Obama's commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make." (Deroy Murdock, Op-Ed, "Obama Only Talks Good Game On Gender Pay Equity," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/11/08)

Columnist Deroy Murdock: "In short, these statistics suggest that John McCain is more than fair with his female employees, while Barack Obama -- at the expense of the women who work for him -- quietly perpetuates the very same pay-equity divide that he loudly denounces. Of all people, the Democratic standard bearer should understand that equal pay begins at home." (Deroy Murdock, Op-Ed, "Obama Only Talks Good Game On Gender Pay Equity," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/11/08)

#73 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 10:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#67
tastelikechicken, I have to wonder if you were watching the same debate. When Obama talked about college funding, he did mention the military as one option but he also mentioned the Peace Corps and community service - that's a far cry from forcing a child to serve in the military.

So, that's one 'lie' for your scorecard...and unfortunately it sounds like something that Palin and McCain will probably be mentioning in more of their negative ads!

#74 Posted by audree_k on October 16, 2008 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

fromhere, thanks for the link. I knew that Obama had "help" from radicals to get into Harvard.

I wondered if Blkndn305 was aware of that since he had to throw it out that McCain got into the Naval Academy because of his father and grandfather.

I'd rather get into school because of my family than some radical with an agenda!

#75 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#44 fromhere

I've not heard the word discounted when they spoke of purchasing the mortgages. It sounded to me that the banks would be paid in full, then the new mortgage amount determined. I've not read the actual wording, just listened to the candidate.

Have you seen the specifics of that plan anywhere?

#76 Posted by memphismedic on October 16, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Caliban,

I agree that the way the system is set up, the sates can not do it without federal assistance. Funds needed to build bridges should be in either a highway transportation bill or a budget bill. Unfortunately they often show up with snail darters and polar bear counting some how involved. This is what has to be reformed.

I actually know a good number of conservatives and I have not heard them asking for a tax cut. I have heard them question how much more does Obama going to make them pay, what are the costs of the programs that he is proposing and how are they going to keep their small business afloat when their taxes go up. I also did not see a lot of conservatives demanding money when the hurricane came through. Yes they were upset with the government because Promised services were not delivered in a timely fashion. Everyone complained about that, but the conservatives I knew who were affected by the hurricanes usually had private insurance which covered a substantial portion of their losses. The conservatives believe that the government should not be involved in our every day lives and should only help during extraordinary circumstance, like a hurricane, and then only to the level that is needed to preserve life and help those with no other means get back on track.

#77 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

THE LILLY LEDBETTER FOR PAY ACT

Last April Republicans in the senate killed a bill that seeked equal pay for women with a 56-42 vote that denied the measure the 60 votes needed to advance it to full debate (FILIBUSTER) and a vote.

Senate majority leader Harry Reid delayed the vote to give Clinton and Obama, time to return to Washington to support the measure, which would make it easier for women to sue their employers for pay discrimination.

McCain skipped the vote to campaign in New Orleans. John McCain did say, "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."

The bill was named for Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'s plant in Gadsden, Alabama. Ledbetter sued for pay discrimination after being employed for almost 20 years there. When Ledbetter retired she was earning $6,500 a year less than the lowest-paid male supervisor.

The Supreme Court voted 5-4 last year against her complaint, saying she had waited too long to sue.

McCain for opposed the bill.

In last night's debate John McCain said her case "was a trial lawyer's dream."

"Compassionate" consevative? I'd say NOT!

#78 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OBAMAS main goal is to destroy the middle class.

Get more people on the government doll.

How did Obama even get government clearance on a background check?. If I associated with the people he associated with....there would be no way the government would allow me to have top secret clearance.

Everyone must watch this new documentary on The Third Jihad

The Third Jihad focuses on radical Islam's campaign to dominate America and the West, and the ramifications of such a reality on our day to day lives. It underscores the importance of the American people joining together against radical Islam that if not defeated, will continue to threaten our lives and values until they are destroyed completely

The Third Jihad should be considered a clarion call for Western Civilization. We either heed the warning or go silently into the night of another dark age.”
- Congressman Tom Tancredo

#79 Posted by celtic99 on October 16, 2008 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Audree_k

Actually, I am surprised that McCain did not point out the fact that these programs presently exist. Although right now you need to do your service BEFORE you get the benefits. I have several friends who served in the Peace Corp.s as well as some who have serviced in the military who have had a substantial portion of their education paid for by the government.

#80 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Memphismedic,

McCain stated that this was originally Hilary Clinton’s proposal. It was reported yesterday that it was exactly the same proposal that she made. I have not seen the actual text of McCain’s, but that is what Hilary had proposed.

#81 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside,

I am all for equal pay. Go look at post # 80. Obama pays the women on his staff $0.83 for every dollar he pays men. So is it that he does not believe in equal pay or that he thinks women are less qualified?

Again, the bill was whether to drop the statute of limitations on law suits. It was not on equal pay.

Also, last April the majority in the senate was the Democratic Party, so how, if all the democratic senators supported it, were the republicans able to defeat it? There is a problem with you logic there Ironside.

#82 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: Post #71 - So now the Dems are so desperate to discredit McCain that they are going all the way back to his high school education? Please, you're reaching.

I am aware that McCain was a "legacy" admission to Annapolis, but that just gets you in the door. Once you're there, you have to stay there on your own merit. Everyone who graduates from Annapolis gets called "ensign", not just the people who finish at the top of the class. Your argument on McCain's class placement is meaningless.

Not that it's any of your business, but I graduated Magna from the Taubman College of Architecture & Urban Planning at the University of Michigan. That's hardly a "beer school", sorry to disappoint you. (I know that probably doesn't compare to the pretigious typewriter repair vocational program that you completed while you were in prison, but I'll take my chances.)

Calling McCain a "false hero" is laughable coming from anyone who believes anything that comes from the man the Democrats are calling "the saviour".

Thank you for playing. Please try again.

#83 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 11:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

#24 Ironside - With McCain's health care plan the lower income working class families with health insurance through their employers will actually come out on top, which benefits them more than the current tax exemption on health care benefits.

CNN Money magazine stated that McCain's plan has the best chance of getting medical costs under control in this country and that's exactly what we need. It's deemed more economic.

#84 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ironside, also your medical benefits are already taxed. The portion of benefits that your employer pays for you to have insurance is taxed and he pays for them.

So your statement in #24 "McCain wants to tax your insurance for the first time ever" is moot.

Scare tactics by the lefties.

#85 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper # 93 -- great comment. Why are we wasting our time? This is over.

#86 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I can't believe the amount of angry sore losers posting comments this morning. Do they really think their anger is accomplishing anything. Take a walk -- it's a beautiful day.

#87 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,
Obama was referred to as the Messiah by Louis Farrakhan when he backed him for president in a recent sermon. I hope he gets added to the law suit that the Christian ministers who stated that they support McCain in their sermons. Think it will happen? Doubt it.

#88 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 11:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dude,

I actually see lively debate going on here. The amount of name calling from a few weeks ago is down about 80 to 90%. I don’t see a lot of anger here. What are you reading that makes you think that? Debate and disagreement do not mean anger. They merely point out a difference of opinion.

#89 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Audree K, why should a college student have to serve in the military or do community service to pay back a loan under Obama's plan when there are other student loan options available right now, without having to worry about serving time in the military or putting in community service time. Obama wants to mandate. "I'll do this for you, but you have to do this for me".

#90 Posted by tastelikechicken on October 16, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper, I do see the light, but it isn't pointing in Obama's direction.

Obama had dealings with Ayers, he helped launch his political career, yet he denies it as he did during the debate last night. He flat out lied to the American public, to you.

Obama may actually pull this off and take over the White House, however the real Obama will reveal himself eventually, showing us his real agenda and then I can sit back and celebrate with a glass of champagne and say "I told you so".

#91 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

#100 tastelikechicken "I'll do this for you, but you have to do this for me".

Good statement, makes you wonder what Obama had to do for Saul Alinsky to repay him for getting him into Harvard? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

#92 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 12:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,

Your statement was, “Piano, you have never heard the "Messiah or Savior" garbage from us Dems.”
I merely related where the tribulation came from. And Farrakhan is considered part of the left. Whether he is a democrat I can not say, I have never heard or seen him state a political affiliation.

It was just a fact. The interpretation was yours.

#93 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,
Are you actually saying that you do not know who Louis Farrakhan is?

Where have you been?

#94 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Saul Alinsky died in 1972. He was a Marxist grassroots organizer who spent much of his life organizing rent strikes and protesting conditions of the poor in Chicago in the 1930s. However, unlike Christian socialist and activist for the poor Dorothy Day, Alinsky's real claim to fame was as strategist for anti-establishment '60s radicals and revolutionaries He is also remembered for his books, "Reveille for Radicals" (1946) and "Rules for Radicals" (1971).,

"Rules for Radicals" begins with an unusual tribute: "From all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer."

“He is credited for coining the phrase "Think globally, act locally." I never have heard that being attributed to him.

#95 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,

No, Farrakhan is probably not a democrat, he is a socialist and a black supremacist who happens to be the head of a major religious institution here in the US.

Sorry Liestopper, I would love to debate some more, but I have to go make some money for Obama to redistribute.

#96 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Last note LieStopper,

Again, I am an independant who has done his homework.

#97 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 12:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Question for you people. If Obama's ties to radicals is so dominant to his success, why hasn't this been put out in the open by some major news organizations and not just the scandal sheets? Why can't someone trustworthy (by that, I DON'T mean Jerome Corsi, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity)come out and lay it down for all to see. According to you Obama bashers, he has been successful only due to the assistance of some very radical, ultra-left atheist pinkos. (Oh, wait. He might be Muslim, and that wouldn't jive now would it?) So, which is it guys? It amazes me that he could have even gotten as far as he has without our own federal intelligence agencies going after him as an insurrectionist, or something. I mean, really!! You just want to believe all this b.s. to make you feel better. Sorry, it ain't working. Get used to it. Barack Hussein Obama - the next President of the United States of America. Yes!!!

#98 Posted by geecee827 on October 16, 2008 at 12:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper, I have never once in my life listened to Rush, if he were standing next to me in line at the grocery store, I wouldn't know him.

I read articles, mostly from non-partisan sites, doing my own research.

LieStopper, don't point the finger of blame at my party alone for the mess that we are in. It is well documented that Democrats, Republicans, Wall Street, Mortgage Brokers, Realtors, average Joe's & Janes are to blame for for the current situation.

That's one of the biggest problems with Democrats and their campaign, they would rather point fingers than admit any wrong doing. You can't begin to fix your problem until you admit your mistakes.

#99 Posted by GatorBite on October 16, 2008 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The latest polls show that more that 40% of Collier Republicans are voting for Obama! I'm one of them.

#100 Posted by voteforobama on October 16, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Joe Biden said on a stump speech

There are three letters that Obama will bring to the American people and that is J-O-B-S (he said all 4 letters)

Three letters J-O-B-S and this guy has a 146 I.Q.

Funny.

#101 Posted by celtic99 on October 16, 2008 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

fromhere #99 -- maybe it's just my interpretation. I think I was influenced from an earlier back and forth in was sucked into on a different article.

#102 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 1:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

117 voteforobama "The latest polls show that more that 40% of Collier Republicans are voting for Obama! I'm one of them.'….Good for you Jack Antaramian

#103 Posted by celtic99 on October 16, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

celtic are you sure you want go petty?

Sarah Palin thinks New Hampshire is in the "great Northwest." SEE THE VIDEO...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10...

I can play tit for tat with you all day long. LOL

On a more serious note:
Sarah Palin abused her power as governor of Akaska, imagine the rightwing outrage had she been a Democrat.

#104 Posted by Ironside on October 16, 2008 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: post #123 - At least Palin has held an executive government office in which she allegedly had an opporunity to abuse her power. That's more than can be said for your guy.

His only experience with abuse of power is as a "community organizer" and a state senator. (I would include U.S. Senator, too, but he's spent more time campaigning than he actually has doing the job he was elected to do, so that wouldn't count.)

#105 Posted by Pianoman8869 on October 16, 2008 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

#114 because when it is brought up "Racist" is thrown around

#106 Posted by NeezDutz on October 16, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Re: #125 - Evidently, McCain thinks Obama has been around for quite a while considering last night he blamed Obama for voting "no" on the appointment of Justice Breyer. Ahem? Huh? Breyer was appointed in 1994...a decade before Obama even sniffed the Senate. McCain must be channeling Uncle Leo (Seinfeld reference): "I'm an old man, I'm confused, can you help me? What's my name?"

#107 Posted by starttheinsanity on October 16, 2008 at 3:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

neezdutz are you for real? What are you doing just now? Go back and read your post #41. Which by the way was actually quite disenginuous as your comment against post #40 disregards comment #20 prior that refences those words.
Who cares. You win. That's wierd.
Yeah good post Celtic- Sen. Joe Biden, gosh I'm shocked! He can't even do simple arithmetic? He's really just a dum-dum. The October surprise.
And it's even on tape. Do you think he'll have to resign now or will the liberal media just cover it all up?

#108 Posted by wes on October 16, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

PS- Palin supporters- that last part was sarcasm.

#109 Posted by wes on October 16, 2008 at 4:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is over. Lets talk about pit bulls.

#110 Posted by thedudesview on October 16, 2008 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Geecee827
#114
“It amazes me that he could have even gotten as far as he has without our own federal intelligence agencies going after him as an insurrectionist, or something.”

The truth is that elected officials are not given background checks.

Main stream media has been on Obama’s side since the primaries. I can site you several instances where major members of the Democratic Party contradicted Obama in live interviews since the primaries on major networks and there is no follow-up. Obama blames Bush entirely for the present economic situation, Both Bill Clinton and Chris Dodd have said that is incorrect. Have you seen the media give that any legs?

On another note, Obama chastises McCain that no one says anything when someone at a Republican rally shout “kill him” in reference to the mention of Obama’s name. Well the secret service has investigated and listened to the tapes of the rallies in question and has stated that they can not hear anywhere in the tapes where anyone supposedly did this. They report that there was one reporter who reported this in both instances. Now I am not saying that it did not happen, maybe it did, maybe the reporter heard wrong, in any event, if you have ever done any public speaking you know that it is very difficult to make out what people are saying from the podium. Palin most likely never heard the statements even if they were said, which is now questionable.

#111 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 4:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LieStopper,
#116
The original question was who wrote the letter of recommendation for Obama to get into Harvard.

I answered the question, you made him out to be some great patriot. I gave more background on the guy.

I was around in the 1960’s and 1970’s. I also demonstrated during that period. The joke in the community was that my brother and I were John and John. He was John Wayne and I was John Lennon. Throughout my life I have always been actively involved in a wide variety of community charitable activities from Nursing homes and homeless shelters to ecology and drug rehabilitation. I have spent my life Thinking Globally and Acting Locally.

All I am doing is filling in the blanks where people tell lies half truths and spins. I do it to both sides.

Sorry if the truth hurts.

#112 Posted by fromhere on October 16, 2008 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Still, it's difficult to believe that someone running for the Presidency of the United States cannot be "vetted" enough to find something that may be nefarious in his past. But now that you mention it, I believe you about elected officials not being given background checks. I can think of two guys (Bush/Cheney) currently in office who wouldn't have passed. In any event. Palin does incite her supporters to hate Obama. She likes to work them up into a frenzy cause that's all she's got is innuendo. Obama has always attempted to quiet his supporters when they booed McCain. He said from the beginning, "Sen. McCain is a genuine American Hero and deserves our respect and I will not stand for any disrespect being shown t