McCain's trend

[Oracle of Delphi]

If I were Obama, when I became president, I would recall all our troops that we have stationed in other countries that have shown they are no friend to the USA. I would recall all US troops from Europe as I don't see a need for them there any longer. It's time for the EU to take control of their own fate. In fact, I think it would bind the member nations into a new supernation, a lot faster than it is happening now, when we force them to work for their own common good and their own mutual protection.

Think of the tax savings we could have, when we are no longer the policeman of the world, and what we could do with that tax money here at home.

[loki]

How are tax cuts for the middle class and taxes increases for the rich (who have been enjoying tax breaks for 8 years) socialism?

any and all $$ redistribution that is not voluntary is socialism...other wise it'd be charity.

[Intrepidation]

any and all $$ redistribution that is not voluntary is socialism...other wise it'd be charity.

So wait, then wouldn't McCain's cuts for the rich be socialism too? Or is that another double standard?

[loki]

If I were Obama, when I became president, I would recall all our troops that we have stationed in other countries that have shown they are no friend to the USA. I would recall all US troops from Europe as I don't see a need for them there any longer. It's time for the EU to take control of their own fate. In fact, I think it would bind the member nations into a new supernation, a lot faster than it is happening now, when we force them to work for their own common good and their own mutual protection.

Think of the tax savings we could have, when we are no longer the policeman of the world, and what we could do with that tax money here at home.

if you were Obama, i don't think things would be as civil around here. among other things. but you being you, keeps here a little uncivil anyway

I would agree with that, But i don't think he wants to do that because of Pakistan/Afghanistan.

[Satty]

U.S. troops dont need to be stationed in Germany. Or in Japan. Or in Cuba. I see the need for troops in South Korea, and obviously in Afghanistan, but otherwise we need to pull those troops back, they're a drain on the taxpayer.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

How are tax cuts for the middle class and taxes increases for the rich (who have been enjoying tax breaks for 8 years) socialism?

Because offering refundable tax credits to the lowest 33% of the nation who doesn't pay federal taxes anyways is income redistribution which is a key tenant of socialism.

Essentially Obama's tax plan is just a new welfare plan, although for some reason McCain was hesitant to label it as such (which i think would have perhaps would have given him a stronger base in the debate).

And satty, our entire military strength comes from having bases all over the world. if we close down our bases we will no longer be a military superpower, we won't have the ability to rapidly deploy anywhere in the world. And aside from military problems, this will stifle our aid efforts to nations when they are struck with a natural disaster.

Edited September 28, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[SoCalCTS]

you mean subsidizing all the countries in the world with our bases on their soil?

or the spending of SS money in our regular budget and therefor need ..what is it, several trillion in the future, for SS payments?

Nope. We don't need many of the foreign bases or many of the ones in the USA. Merging the V.A. with Social Security would make it harder for the Republicans to siphon all the money away like they always do. Why don't they sipon the VA money because the veterans wouldnt stand for it. So I say dissolve the VA, merge it with Social Security call it the Homeland Security fund and maybe these dips%$t veterans will give a damn about someone other than themselves.

[Satty]

We aren't the world's babysitter. Thats way too much pressure for a country that cant keep its domestic problems in check. Bring 'em home.

[Intrepidation]

We aren't the world's babysitter. Thats way too much pressure for a country that cant keep its domestic problems in check. Bring 'em home.

+1

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

+1

Unfortunately, without the USSR and NATO keeping everyone in check, we essentially need to be the worlds babysitter.

[Enzora]

So McCain wins over radio and Obama over TV or is it the other way around?

Funny you mention that. I talked to my girlfriend afterwards, and she actually did listen to it over the radio, because her family had to drive to Kentucky for a funeral, and she said she thought McCain performed better in the debate, so I think that may have been the case. Unfortunately for him, the percentage of people using radio to hear the speech vs TV is nowhere near what it was in 1960.

Obama's always going to have the edge in presentation just because he's so much younger and better looking, but McCain's body language was flat-out awful. It looked like he had actually been coached in Bushian debating style, only to have it backfire horribly. I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a new approach in the next two debates.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Funny you mention that. I talked to my girlfriend afterwards, and she actually did listen to it over the radio, because her family had to drive to Kentucky for a funeral, and she said she thought McCain performed better in the debate, so I think that may have been the case. Unfortunately for him, the percentage of people using radio to hear the speech vs TV is nowhere near what it was in 1960.

Obama's always going to have the edge in presentation just because he's so much younger and better looking, but McCain's body language was flat-out awful. It looked like he had actually been coached in Bushian debating style, only to have it backfire horribly. I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a new approach in the next two debates.

It's funny, when I watched the debate here and saw McCain, all I could think of was the movie "Grumpy Old Men"!

[gm4life]

I don't believe in socialism and therefore can't support a canidate whom does. McCain will give everyone tax cuts even to the rich whom pay a larger portion than anyone else is that fair? Or is it fair to tax the rich more and give more back to the middle a larger percentage of voters to win votes? I am not rich our household income is around 80K by the time we pay for insurance (which isn't the goverments problem) and taxes we have enough to be comfortable and hence the reason I have a purple base Torrent and not a GXP, that is why my Bonneville is an SLE not a GXP. We all do the best we can and if even if I have more money with Obama it isn't right. An ethical person would realize that as well. Tax cuts for everyone is the only fair way to do it. That is why our house has no HD tv's or digital cable and I don't have a great Mac Pro with all the fix'ens and I shoot Pentax instead of Nikon.

[Satty]

If I had to, I'd give up eating to keep digital cable, its just that awesome.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco

By Jeff Jacoby

Globe Columnist / September 28, 2008

'THE PRIVATE SECTOR got us into this mess. The government has to get us out of it."

That's Barney Frank's story, and he's sticking to it. As the Massachusetts Democrat has explained it in recent days, the current financial crisis is the spawn of the free market run amok, with the political class guilty only of failing to rein the capitalists in. The Wall Street meltdown was caused by "bad decisions that were made by people in the private sector," Frank said; the country is in dire straits today "thanks to a conservative philosophy that says the market knows best." And that philosophy goes "back to Ronald Reagan, when at his inauguration he said, 'Government is not the answer to our problems; government is the problem.' "

In fact, that isn't what Reagan said. His actual words were: "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Were he president today, he would be saying much the same thing.

Because while the mortgage crisis convulsing Wall Street has its share of private-sector culprits they weren't the ones who "got us into this mess." Barney Frank's talking points notwithstanding,mortgage lenders didn't wake up one fine day deciding to junk long-held standards of creditworthiness in order to make ill-advised loans to unqualified borrowers. It would be closer to the truth to say they woke up to find the government twisting their arms and demanding that they do so - or else.

The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.

The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.

All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.

As long as housing prices kept rising, the illusion that all this was good public policy could be sustained. But it didn't take a financial whiz to recognize that a day of reckoning would come. "What does it mean when Boston banks start making many more loans to minorities?" I asked in this space in 1995. "Most likely, that they are knowingly approving risky loans in order to get the feds and the activists off their backs . . . When the coming wave of foreclosures rolls through the inner city, which of today's self-congratulating bankers, politicians, and regulators plans to take the credit?"

Frank doesn't. But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.

Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train. If Frank is looking for a culprit to blame, he'll find one suspect in the nearest mirror.

It's a shame that through the "me me me" mentality, logic and common sense cannot prevail. Of course, socialism always looks good on paper.

Edited September 28, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[loki]

Unfortunately, without the USSR and NATO keeping everyone in check, we essentially need to be the worlds babysitter.

i can almost agree....

it's like saying without the british empire (way back when) we could not have prospered. yes, the world will always try to have a "empire" to lead... but those empires have always fallen.

is it good to impoverish oneself to help another? I could never say yes when it comes to more than 1 person making his mind up for himself.

cause everyone knows that's what we are doing, nationally and internationally, we just can't agree how to stop it, or how far it should go.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

i can almost agree....

it's like saying without the british empire (way back when) we could not have prospered. yes, the world will always try to have a "empire" to lead... but those empires have always fallen.

is it good to impoverish oneself to help another? I could never say yes when it comes to more than 1 person making his mind up for himself.

cause everyone knows that's what we are doing, nationally and internationally, we just can't agree how to stop it, or how far it should go.

The one and only way i can see us not being the worlds babysitter is to give some teeth to the UN resolutions. The UN has no real military power (aside from what countries will provide it) as such there isnt much in the way of "do this or else" statements. And as a side effect, when the UN makes a poor decision, the blame lies on everyone instead of just US

And the EU have the 2nd largest military expenditure in the world behind the US.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

So wait, then wouldn't McCain's cuts for the rich be socialism too? Or is that another double standard?

No, because the idea is that those people got rich by going through legitimate channels of the market. You invent something people like (like say a television) and you build and sell them for a profit. People see these TVs and feel it is worth their whatever $$$s and will voluntarily exchange their money for said television.

Since these are all voluntary transactions this is capitalist policies. The poor are not being taxed and having their money go straight to the rich, the rich have to "earn" their money (of course varying levels of corruption, unfair practices etc etc can compound this).

Socialism, Obama's policies, tax the rich, who got rich (generally) by earning their wealth and giving that money to the poor who did nothing other than being poor to earn that money.

That is income redistribution. There is no double standard here. The government have some policies in place that actually encourage this through "regulation" (why do you think some businesses actually ENCOURAGE government regulations in some cases?). Of course the government also has policies that discourage this as well.

One could argue that our current financial crisis has its roots in socialist policies (and a myriad of other causes).

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Drew Dowdell]

No, because the idea is that those people got rich by going through legitimate channels of the market. You invent something people like (like say a television) and you build and sell them for a profit. People see these TVs and feel it is worth their whatever $$$s and will voluntarily exchange their money for said television.

Since these are all voluntary transactions this is capitalist policies. The poor are not being taxed and having their money go straight to the rich, the rich have to "earn" their money (of course varying levels of corruption, unfair practices etc etc can compound this).

Socialism, Obama's policies, tax the rich, who got rich (generally) by earning their wealth and giving that money to the poor who did nothing other than being poor to earn that money.

That is income redistribution. There is no double standard here. The government have some policies in place that actually encourage this through "regulation" (why do you think some businesses actually ENCOURAGE government regulations in some cases?). Of course the government also has policies that discourage this as well.

One could argue that our current financial crisis has its roots in socialist policies (and a myriad of other causes).

What if I'm the CEO of a large company... say.. an insurance company. I place a lot of REALLY risky stock market bets using other people's money. I pay myself a record setting salary and get the board of directors <CEOs at other ginormus companies> to approve it. I feel really good because 1. I made a bet using other people's money that could potentially pay off big, 2. I paid myself for the wisdom of making that bet, 3. If the bet was wrong, my company is so large that the government can't let it go bankrupt, 4. If it does go bankrupt, I've already negotiated a $41 million dollar golden parachute that I get before anyone else gets any money........

The incentive to f@#k it up so badly that you require a government bail out is HUGE. The Republicans are opposed to any salary cap for companies receiving bailout money. I find this astonishing.

You keep throwing around Socialism as a bad word...... I say that in this case Socialism is not only required but justified.

I'd have no problem adding a line to the tax code that says "You're on the executive team of a financial serviced company that failed in the past 8 years, your tax is 90% and retroactive"

[Drew Dowdell]

Socialism, Obama's policies, tax the rich, who got rich (generally) by earning their wealth and giving that money to the poor who did nothing other than being poor to earn that money.

What about taxing the rich and giving that money to infrastructure, education, and healthcare?

A strong, healthy, intelligent, mobile workforce is the BEST gift you can give to the capitalists.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

What if I'm the CEO of a large company... say.. an insurance company. I place a lot of REALLY risky stock market bets using other people's money. I pay myself a record setting salary and get the board of directors <CEOs at other ginormus companies> to approve it. I feel really good because 1. I made a bet using other people's money that could potentially pay off big, 2. I paid myself for the wisdom of making that bet, 3. If the bet was wrong, my company is so large that the government can't let it go bankrupt, 4. If it does go bankrupt, I've already negotiated a $41 million dollar golden parachute that I get before anyone else gets any money........

The incentive to f@#k it up so badly that you require a government bail out is HUGE. The Republicans are opposed to any salary cap for companies receiving bailout money. I find this astonishing.

You keep throwing around Socialism as a bad word...... I say that in this case Socialism is not only required but justified.

I'd have no problem adding a line to the tax code that says "You're on the executive team of a financial serviced company that failed in the past 8 years, your tax is 90% and retroactive"

Unfortunately your argument falls apart when it is the government who forces them to make these risky decisions... All in the name of promoting overall societal health, regardless of the [current] consequences of it.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

What about taxing the rich and giving that money to infrastructure, education, and healthcare?

A strong, healthy, intelligent, mobile workforce is the BEST gift you can give to the capitalists.

This is true, however from a cost benefit point of view, it may not be after all the taxes are said and done.

But i agree that CEO compensation is rather crazy.

[Drew Dowdell]

Unfortunately your argument falls apart when it is the government who forces them to make these risky decisions.

:spit: I'm sorry, could you hand me a towel? I need to clean the hot chocolate off my keyboard.

ok...

try that one again? It might be vaguely true if every bank was failing.... but it's only a handful that actually are.

The risky decisions weren't forced on anyone..... they were the result of bridled, unabashed, unashamed greed.

[Drew Dowdell]

This is true, however from a cost benefit point of view, it may not be after all the taxes are said and done.

But i agree that CEO compensation is rather crazy.

Are you trying to tell me that infrastructure and education should be privatized?

A strong, healthy, educated, and mobile workforce has MANY other benefits. Lower crime, higher standard of living for everyone, better growth....

[loki]

So wait, then wouldn't McCain's cuts for the rich be socialism too? Or is that another double standard?

i'm saying income taxes are socialistic.

The one and only way i can see us not being the worlds babysitter is to give some teeth to the UN resolutions. The UN has no real military power (aside from what countries will provide it) as such there isnt much in the way of "do this or else" statements. And as a side effect, when the UN makes a poor decision, the blame lies on everyone instead of just US

And the EU have the 2nd largest military expenditure in the world behind the US.

and giving the UN teeth is very dangerous... and another step to world government, and if it's the U.N. way, us little people will have no voice in it.

What if I'm the CEO of a large company... say.. an insurance company. I place a lot of REALLY risky stock market bets using other people's money. I pay myself a record setting salary and get the board of directors <CEOs at other ginormus companies> to approve it. I feel really good because 1. I made a bet using other people's money that could potentially pay off big, 2. I paid myself for the wisdom of making that bet, 3. If the bet was wrong, my company is so large that the government can't let it go bankrupt, 4. If it does go bankrupt, I've already negotiated a $41 million dollar golden parachute that I get before anyone else gets any money........

The incentive to f@#k it up so badly that you require a government bail out is HUGE. The Republicans are opposed to any salary cap for companies receiving bailout money. I find this astonishing.

You keep throwing around Socialism as a bad word...... I say that in this case Socialism is not only required but justified.

I'd have no problem adding a line to the tax code that says "You're on the executive team of a financial serviced company that failed in the past 8 years, your tax is 90% and retroactive"

in your example, yes, regulations will be the result of the social hurt 1 person caused, but hopefully that scam would follow that person anywhere they went and would not find work anywhere after that happened.

Are you trying to tell me that infrastructure and education should be privatized?

A strong, healthy, educated, and mobile workforce has MANY other benefits. Lower crime, higher standard of living for everyone, better growth....

doesn't it show that for education at least?...and therefore the DOE has doubled in size since the clinton years...and a teacher i know has said the new regulations have been very backwards...but she was "teaching" "special" children.

infrastructure (roads) i can't say should be privatized, unless it had lots of regulations and oversight...which would still add costs.

your second comment could be describing nazi germany.... just as counterpoint.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Well if gas prices continue to stay high, you will probably see growth in the middle class as manufacturing starts to trickle back into the States... high transportation costs kinda negates savings from using 3rd world labor.

One of America's great strengths is our productivity. Socialism tends to have negative effects on productivity.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Satty]

How can productivity be a strength when all of our jobs producing things are in China?

[Drew Dowdell]

doesn't it show that for education at least?...and therefore the DOE has doubled in size since the clinton years...and a teacher i know has said the new regulations have been very backwards...but she was "teaching" "special" children.

infrastructure (roads) i can't say should be privatized, unless it had lots of regulations and oversight...which would still add costs.

your second comment could be describing nazi germany.... just as counterpoint.

Ah yes... the Department of Education as run under the Bush administration. Certainly no amount of incompetence there.

[mustang84]

doesn't it show that for education at least?...and therefore the DOE has doubled in size since the clinton years...and a teacher i know has said the new regulations have been very backwards...but she was "teaching" "special" children.

infrastructure (roads) i can't say should be privatized, unless it had lots of regulations and oversight...which would still add costs.

your second comment could be describing nazi germany.... just as counterpoint.

My mom is a second grade teacher at a small school district and she says Bush's No Child Left Behind is a joke. They have these "productivity" days every two Fridays where the kids get the day off from school and they spend all day in meetings. All the bureaucracy they have to go through under NCLB has not improved anything. And, kids with special needs that should be in a special ed class are forced under NCLB to be in the classroom with regular children; for example, she has a kid that likes to poop in his pants and then take it out and show it to the other kids. They spend more time catering to the kids with special needs than they do teaching the rest of the class.

[Drew Dowdell]

a friend of mine had an 8 year old girl who would openly masturbate in class.... during lessons and everything.

[loki]

a friend of mine had an 8 year old girl who would openly masturbate in class.... during lessons and everything.

had? edit: oh, she was the teacher ok, /edit.

it's sad that the law requires children to go to school, even these that obviously shouldn't be in the classroom. some children are not fit to be in a school, like your example...

yes public education helps many people and maybe society at large, but again, when you can't push ahead in the curriculum because of the "lowest denominator" it hurts everyone that can't be put into "faster learning programs"....and more bureaucracy above the local level can only hurt education at large.

Edited September 29, 2008 by loki

[Drew Dowdell]

It's a new school year.

[siegen]

she has a kid that likes to poop in his pants and then take it out and show it to the other kids.

Well, it could be much worse.

[Croc]

My mom is a second grade teacher at a small school district and she says Bush's No Child Left Behind is a joke. They have these "productivity" days every two Fridays where the kids get the day off from school and they spend all day in meetings. All the bureaucracy they have to go through under NCLB has not improved anything. And, kids with special needs that should be in a special ed class are forced under NCLB to be in the classroom with regular children; for example, she has a kid that likes to poop in his pants and then take it out and show it to the other kids. They spend more time catering to the kids with special needs than they do teaching the rest of the class.

Now how's that? I know both Indiana and California have dedicated special-needs programs so things like that don't happen. Sounds like a budget issue on the part of the district...

[A Horse With No Name]

:spit: I'm sorry, could you hand me a towel? I need to clean the hot chocolate off my keyboard.

ok...

try that one again? It might be vaguely true if every bank was failing.... but it's only a handful that actually are.

The risky decisions weren't forced on anyone..... they were the result of bridled, unabashed, unashamed greed.

Few people will ever believe that, although it is true.

I got into a debate with a parent at my suns Cub Scout pack campout Saturday about these bail outs.

Other parent basically tried to assert that Clinton mandated subprime lending while he was in office and that it was ultimately Clinton's fault that the banking system was a mess.

What an idiot!

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

a friend of mine had an 8 year old girl who would openly masturbate in class.... during lessons and everything.

That child is disturbed.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Well if gas prices continue to stay high, you will probably see growth in the middle class as manufacturing starts to trickle back into the States... high transportation costs kinda negates savings from using 3rd world labor.

One of America's great strengths is our productivity. Socialism tends to have negative effects on productivity.

Other than the fact that say Germany or switzerland or sweeden have much higher productivity than we do and also much higher taxes.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Using your father's influence to get you into flight school, then crashing 6 navy jets and being held prisoner for years doesn't make you a war hero no matter how hard the Republican's try to spin it. Obama far exceeds McCain in qualifications. McCain is one of those guys that thinks "just showing up" is the same as doing something. He "showed up in Vietnam", had a phot-op in the middle east... oh... how experienced!!!

+1

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Consider that our relations with our allies in Europe and around the world will likely improve the moment we elect Obama, and we may have an easier time negotiating trade deals and requesting their help in foreign matters because of it. I have a feeling electing McCain will be sort of equivalent to not only giving the rest of the world the finger, but making them all think we're a bunch of dummies that don't learn from the past and are willing to continue on our current path.

That being said, I am really excited for tonight, and am very glad McCain chose to go through with the debate. I really didn't want to sit there and watch Obama answer questions, we've already seen plenty of that.

Obama is just loved in most of the rest of the world, while W is hated. I have had several friends travel overseas, and they get very regular questions about how the hell we elected such an idiot.

I think they will be asking the same question if we elect McCain.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

Other than the fact that say Germany or switzerland or sweeden have much higher productivity than we do and also much higher taxes.

Chris

and MUCH better work/life balance

[Enzora]

That child is disturbed.

Chris

It's actually pretty natural for little children to masturbate unless someone teaches them not to.

[Satty]

John McCain isn't going to win this election, but there are still 35 days for Barack Obama to lose the election.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Other than the fact that say Germany or switzerland or sweeden have much higher productivity than we do and also much higher taxes.

Chris

Lies! Luxembourg is #1, but they are so small its not really a comparison. We are #2 followed closely by Ireland. Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden are significantly less productive than us Americans.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_ove_...roductivity-ppp

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/vie...p;tmpl=newsitem

Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement

JEFFERSON CITY - Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics.

“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.

“Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.”

a video composing a lot of news stations http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ2DXN3aOSo

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Satty]

Blunt, the guy who wasn't going to run again because nobody likes him?

[Drew Dowdell]

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/vie...p;tmpl=newsitem

a video composing a lot of news stations http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ2DXN3aOSo

You are quick to forget that the Republican took out police brutality insurance and then went around zip tying any protesters.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

You are quick to forget that the Republican took out police brutality insurance and then went around zip tying any protesters.

Eh the point is not to spare the Republicans from blame, but to show that the Democrats and Obama are no better.

On a positive note, with the Bailout bill defeated, we may actually get a decent bill through.

[loki]

ron paul after the voting down of the economic resolution.

[balthazar]

Other parent basically tried to assert that Clinton mandated subprime lending while he was in office and that it was ultimately Clinton's fault that the banking system was a mess. What an idiot!

Did he mention Glass-Steagall, which Clinton signed the repeal of in '99? Sub-prime lending skyrocketed afterward compared to being flatlined prior to.

>>>"Since repeal of Glass Steagall in 1999, after more than a decade of de facto inroads, super-banks have been able to re-enact the same kinds of structural conflicts of interest that were endemic in the 1920s – lending to speculators, packaging and securitizing credits and then selling them off, wholesale or retail, and extracting fees at every step along the way. And, much of this paper is even more opaque to bank examiners than its counterparts were in the 1920s. Much of it isn’t paper at all, and the whole process is supercharged by computers and automated formulas."<<< -- Robert Kuttner

This was stated before Barney Frank’s Committee on Banking and Financial Services. Frank, a MA Dem, has repeatedly denied there was an impending crisis in the banking industry, and loudly rebuked proposed regulation numerous times in the last 10 or so years. In the last few days, however, in typical hypocritical Democratic fashion, Frank has done numerous interviews attempting to pin blame on Bush & McCain for blocking financial reforms.

McCain, 05-25-06 : >>"I join as a co-sponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."

[siegen]

a video composing a lot of news stations http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ2DXN3aOSo

Wow, if that wasn't the definition of FUD then I don't know what is, right down to the cheesy music in the background. What WILL we do if Obama is our president? Omg what will we do!? Have mercy!

"Obama can't cut taxes for people that aren't paying income tax already." Do the poor pay no federal income tax even if they are working at a normal hourly/salary job? Do they get full tax credits or something? If what Obama says isn't true why doesn't McCain call him on it during the debate? What percentage of working American's don't pay federal income tax?

As far as Obama putting together "truth squads", it has the potential to get out of hand, but we won't know until it does. It seems to me like the McCain campaign is spouting a lot of lies, this seems like a typical proactive political solution. It won't be any more annoying than the cold-calls you get asking you if you are supporting so-and-so, or when the zealots come knocking door-to-door.

I don't think police are going to come and break down your door because you said something negative about Obama on a blog.

Watch this.....

.....

Obama sucks!! He's going to raise taxes and invade Spain!

......

.... ah crap, a knock at the door already. damn I'm not even in missouri. I hope I can vote for McCain from jail. :-[