1

test

Observer I think you are doing just fine at providing for your family, I know how hard it can be, don’t listen to criticism, it is not worth your time.

Half the people that would tell you to do something different don’t even have families.
and the other half already have insurance with their employer like me.

Don’t give up like so many men do.

It’s fascinating how many people expect a handout while refusing to take responsibility for their own situation. Me, if my employer didn’t offer healthcare, I’d man up, provide for my own family and look elsewhere.

Obsever all good reason to vote for him, personally I am against National health care at the present simply because I have health care with my company but if I did not have health care with my company I would be for it like you, I am also against gun control because I am somewhat of a gun nut, I am against the war like yourself which is why I think I might vote for him, because McCain is against guns just like Obama.

I see that Adam has posted a tax topic, I have not been there yet but I think I will go over there and check it out, you should come too.

Obama is for national health care, I have a family of 5 and my employer does not offer health care nor can I afford $800.00 a month for it, so I really need national health care, he is against the war, and he is for taking more guns off the streets, those are just a few reasons I like him.
I generally vote Democrat but I lean towards the middle.

To both Observers, I will chat with you about politics if you want, I promise I won’t jump on you, generally I am pretty mild mannered about politics except the war gets my blood pressure up sometimes but that is about it.

Observer, I am thinking about voting for Obama myself, he pretty much only has one issue of mine but McCain does not have any issues of mine at the present, as a registered Republican if I do vote for him it will be the first Democratic President I have ever voted for, I have voted for a Democrat before in the congress but never the white house, what do you like about Obama ?

Susan, all we have to do is vote them out when we don’t agree with what they are voting on. I think it’s American voters responsibility to track what their Congressional members are voting on and the voters should accept partial blame. We can’t give these people a free pass to destroy our economy.

VHI–

I thought this article sent to me was perfect- as a reminder-

I can’t believe how much power the Speaker of the House has- how goes the pecking order? If the President goes down, the Vice-President takes over, and if the VP goes down, the Speaker of the House takes over?

As for the President’s duties, the best way to find these without searching is just to look at the Constitution- The Executive Branch- Article II, Section 2-

I wondered where the political debate had moved to.
It looks like some have hammered on a couple of new comers again for having an opinion, surprise surprise.
I don’t see where either one of those guys said they came to debate or be educated or to educate, maybe they just came to give their opinions and nothing more.

Susan your statement hit the nail right on the head, both parties are corrupt and not as different as some would like to think.

KT,

If they are not one and the same then they are certainly working together. Frick and frack fancy themselves as political operatives, when they really are just tiny cogs in a very large machine. Where they fancy themselves as master manipulators, I see them only as master baiters. Intellectually dishonest cretins that have never had an original thought in their lives…true believers, so long as someone tells them what to believe.

I’ve dealt with their type before, the last time was with some Soros’ operatives before the last election. They were similarly stupid and also refused to share their ‘wisdom’. I seem to recall accusing them of engaging in an intellectual circle jerk with each other. Ah well.

Have a good evening! -Rod-

A truism that I’ve been aware of for quite some time, Susan, is that the political parties are simply different sides of the same tarnished coin. You sometimes see the evil when committee members come out of a hearing blasting away at the President over some issue…usually the war or a specific aspect of it when it comes into the light of the public eye…and you know darn good and well that the committee members have known about it for quite some time. Rockefeller is good at letting things slip out in such a fashion. These people are holding secrets…they know the dirt…and are perfectly content to hold it until they have a suitable target to dish it out on. When I listen to politicians pontificate about the ‘wrongness’ of the war only to find out later about their own complicities, it makes me want to put them all on the first plane to France. All of them. -Rod-

Someone just sent this to me– enjoy

THE 545 PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR AMERICA’S WOES

BY CHARLEY REESE

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 300 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton- picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a SPEAKER, who stood up and criticized G.W. BUSH for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto.

REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts – of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can’t think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in IRAQ, it’s because they want them in IRAQ.

There are no insoluble goverment problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses – provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.

A Spry Farrakhan Sings Obama’s Praises

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb24/0,4670,FarrakhanSavioursaposDay,00.html

With any luck, this endorsement will doom Obama. Farrakhan, and his anal ulcers, have been a diseased team for far too long. -Rod-

Don’t any of the bad guys ever die in Cuba?

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

The WHO, “Won’t get fooled Again”

KT-

Don’t any of the bad guys ever die in Cuba?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23321699

We had a big thing about the cheese heroin here on the news too a few weeks ago- some kid died- and then it went quiet– good for Hannity for bringing this issue back up-

KT,

I first heard about that cheese heroin maybe a month ago. I was shocked at first then remembered that Tylenol is used in drugs like Vicodin to boost it’s effectiveness. Since they are both opiates, it makes sense that some jerk would add it to heroin. I’d guess that it’s going to kill a lot of kids. -Rod-

enjoy your dinner- LOL

I was just reading your stuff– pretty good info you have going on your site- thanks for doing this.

yeah I heard about that also about the homes being auctioned, when I was researching for that article

Thanks for reading the article… I don’t know how long ago you read that article, but I posted a bill on the home page that is in relation to that artilce Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007. It’s an excellent bill but it’s stalled in Congress right now.

Anyway, I appreciate your help. Have to go make dinner now… I’ll look for you later

I also saw there are 300 homes in this area going up to be auctioned- foreclosures- and now we have to sweat out the squatters-

so much for the wall- why even bother-

I also read yours on your blue-the anchor babies- hence my article to you-

Be my guest- it pissed me off- I saw it at the store and came home and looked it up= please feel free to use it and spread the word!

Gee Susan, they keep their mouths shut and walk away with a ticket. That burns me up. I’d like to use that article you posted if you don’t mind.

ok looking now.

Here KT- Check this one out

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0224avoid0224.html

Texas… 16,000 anchor babies born per year which averages to 42 per day.

San diego just release a report that it costs them $250 million a year…that’s what the taxpayers are forking out.

Sean reported that in sountern Cali 16 clinics and 17 trauma centers closed because the illegal aliens drained their money.

Sean is reporting that a DEA investigation showed that the mexican drug dealers crossed the border and rented a bunch of apartments to set up their operation. On my site I wrote about what Oklahoma did to stop the illegal aliens fron getting apartments. This is absurd stuff. A lucrative market aimed at our kids. The border is still porous.

The children are being told it’s tylenol, but it’s mixed with 5% heroine. It immediately becomes addictive, so market value increases because the child has to buy more because of the addiction. It’s cheap to make because of the small percentage in the dosage, will cost them their lunch money no big deal.

It’s being traced back to Mexico. Mostly happening in Texas right now. Those borders and tunnels need to be closed.

Rod, Hannity’a America is reporting on something called cheese heroine. Absoilutely frightening stuff.

Rod, he did the same thing with me. I’ve wasted my time challenging him on the issues, responded to his comments and he came back with nothing… everttime I came back with a challenge, except for oBersevrer2 responding to the Thomas Jefferson quote, the challenge went ignored.

How sad are you to not be able to debate issues. You came here looking for a debate, at least that’s what you said, but you haven’t debated any issues. You just can’t handle that I came back and challenged your unsupported view points. I’ve seen you both on other blogs. You do this elsewhere too, stir up the bloggers then you leave. It’s pathetic actually.

I’m willing to debate you, both. But please give me some issues that you can back up. Otherwise it turns into political education on our part while you sit back, take notes, then go to other blogs with ammunition.

And thank you for clearing up your interpretation on Thomas Jefferson’s quote.

observer,

he is pathetic, and if you choose to like obama and vote for him, this person does not have the right to verbally insult you as he has for the last few days. does he run this blog and does he the right to tell you who to like and vote for? i bet he sits on his arse and does nothing for a living .

the thomas jefferson quote was meant to say one is always having to be on the look out which is the at the cost of freedom.

i think you people are pretty nasty. if someone wants to vote for obama or likes obama, you think you can just gun them down with your nasty comments, by verbal abuse. how sad are you?

You’re wasting your breath KT. He’s a professional victim. I gave him 3 chances to answer the question and he demurred…just like his messiah-candidate. When I gave up in disgust, well…his reaction is what any shrink would call passive-aggressive. He’s a troll, nothing less. He and Obama deserve each other. -Rod-

No it’s not a Republican characteristic. But, we’re also not here to educate you and that’s we’ve been doing. We can lead you to the water but we can’t force you to drink it, so you will go on thirsty for the knowledge (sounds like BS that a liberal will through into an argument).

You just don’t get it. On your #5 you’re indicating that we can eavesdrop on the terrorists if they’re overseas, but we can’t eavesdrop on them if they’re chattering in the homeland. We share the same wires, citizens and terrorists and drug dealers and child molesters, all on the same line. You’re more concerned over protecting the rights of a child molester who chatters on a phone line or goes on the internet and IM’s his fellow child molesting buddies than you are of American’s national security or the protection of the child. This is the same type of thinking of people who will argue that we can’t use spy satellite images to look inside a house with an active meth lab unless we have a search warrant. Even if little children are running around breathing in the toxic fumes. You would rather we spent costly time tracking down a judge, completing tons of time consuming paperwork and then hope that you don’t get a liberal minded judge who would block the request. Meanwhile lives would be at risk, innocent children. Who are you protecting, the criminals, the terrorist or the everyday person who wouldn’t be affected by the language written within the FISA law?

You’re politically uneducated. You haven’t given me anything on the iussues, same concept that Obama holds to. Now I underdstand why you’re advocating for him. Just a bunch of hollow propaganda.

This guy is down right hostile to people with a different opinion, is that a Republican characteristic ?

Coward. I’m done with you.

I think both sides should answer questions on their positions but both sides dodge questions at different times.
I have heard Obama answer many questions on his positions, as I said he is not perfect but he is currently the best candidate running.
KT most Americans are politically uneducated both Republicans and Democrats, they are to busy living their lives to study politics, but I think they know enough to know who is the right candidate for them.

SO YOU ARE OKAY WITH OBAMA NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS POSITION? YES OR NO.

Looks like several questions in there to me.
1. I am fine with finger pointing at republicans
2. I don’t care if he wears a flag lapel pin or not most Americans I see do not wear lapel pins.
3. Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for body armor not just Democrats.
4. Veterans do need to get their benefits but to suggest that Democrats do not want Veterans to get their benefits and Republicans do is rediculous.
5. personally I am against domestic wire taps but not over seas wire taps.

Hope that answers your questions.

Democrats are not evil or wrong, Republicans are not evil or wrong they are just different, as time goes by they are becoming less differant, America is moving towards the center, the far right and left are a dieing breed.

Obama is using these unsuspecting voters as a tool. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker.

No Observer, Obama had to make that statement because responsible voters are pointing out that the Obama crazed voters don’t understand politics and they’re just voting because of the craze. If Obama gets elected, obviously because the majority of voters voted for him, it won’t be because he’s the better candidate, it will be because the voters don’t understand why they are personally in financial distress and because of that they blame the war instead of accepting responsibility for their actions. Obama keeps using buzz words like hope and change and that resinates with politically uneducated voters.

So you’re okay with a guy, when asked a question about HIS position, instead points fingers at Republicans?

About not wearing an American flag lapel pin, Obama said Republicans have no lock on patriotism.

“A party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor they needed, or were sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans’ benefits that these troops need when they come home, or are undermining our Constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary?

It’s a simple yes or no question directed to you.

Like Obama said in the last debate the millions of people that vote for him are not delusional, they just do not see the world the same way that you do.

Don’t worry be happy, we will be fine with Obama as our President.

For those who are extremely worried about terrorist’s you might be interested in this link.

http://www.google.com/search?q=nuclear+bomb+shelter&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7DKUS

they are not cheap but how much is YOUR safety worth to you.
You better hurry before they are all gone.

IF Obama gets elected then I think that alone will make a statement as to how the Majority of Americans feel.
Americans who vote for Obama do not feel unsafe, nor do they think that fighting wars in other countries make us safer,
If McCain gets elected then it would appear that the Majority do fear terrorists and do think that wars on foreign soil make us safer.
there will no doubt be other attacks against the U.S. regardless of war, that is just part of life.
I guess we will find out very soon how the Majority of Americans feel, personally I think Obama will win, McCain is a good guy but I do not think he has the views of the Majority of Americans.

I’ll be back later as well. Need to shower, eat…

I’ll check back later.

It will be too late, maximum damage will already be inflicted on us. Obama seems to think it’s ok to go back to the cumbersome way of obtaining information through wiretaps. The purpose of the FISA law was to lift the restraints so we could quickly get the information needed. You only get one shot at it. There’s no rewind button on the terrorists conversations allowing you time to get a search warrant.

KT,

Really. Who’s Obama to deem warrantless wiretaps to be unneccesary? We’re not talking about the legality of them but the necessity! I think that’s a blunder he’s going to find hard to overcome. Listening in to Islamists, those that sympathize or fund them…that’s always a necessity.

At some point in the future, if/when they get lucky and hit us again, people are going to be asking how we missed it. How will Obama feel if it comes down to the fact that we weren’t listening when we should have been? Will he accept responsibility? Or will he, like he’s done in the rest of the article, simply point fingers at someone else? -Rod-

Rod, I heard Obama say that during the debate. That’s what they do, it’s propaganda. They took that one incident, made it a major statement and insinuated that it is the staus-quo for what has been happening to all troops. People hear this and they fall for it. It’s sad that people can’t think for themselves and read between the lines. People allow him to put these messages into their brains.

Indeed he did, KT. I wonder how Raul will act? They are claiming there’ll be no changes, but what countries say and what they do are often two different things.

It’d have been nice if the people were given an opportunity to choose. Socialism is such an evil beasty. -Rod-

Rod, the voters don’t have a clue what they’re in for if he gets into office. I would think that it would be a couple of years, maybe 2-4 yrs, before Americans realize that their financial situation not only didn’t get better, but it got worse. That Obama will still be fighting a war in Afganistan, a country that is our allie and doesn’t want us in there blowing things up. That terrorist will be running rampad everywhere but Afhanistan, that Iran will be closer to producing a nuclear bomb, that Russia, Chavez, Iran, Syria, China and other communists terroristic countries will join forces and wreak havoc on Americans. Then they’ll realize that the oceans that once kept us safe from countries that want to do us harm would no longer be an obstacle for the terrorists. Then they’ll realize that because we had to be politcally correct by not enforcing racial profiling by the TSA at our airports, that we’re still vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Thank you Obama, for making us feel so much safer.

I especially despise this answer. Typical that he won’t explain his own actions…

About not wearing an American flag lapel pin, Obama said Republicans have no lock on patriotism.

“A party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor they needed, or were sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans’ benefits that these troops need when they come home, or are undermining our Constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary?

Raul became Cuba’s new leader.

Hey Obama…THIS is no answer! Those people at the ball games? THEY are not running for President. Like most liberals I’ve encountered, they deflect when asked direct questions and Obama’s no exception. Here’s a portion of his comments…there’s a link below:

” Asked how he would fight the image of being unpatriotic, Obama said, “There’s always some nonsense going on in general elections. Right? If it wasn’t this, it would be something else. If you recall, first it was my name. Right? That was a problem. And then there was the Muslim e-mail thing and that hasn’t worked out so well, and now it’s the patriotism thing.

“The way I will respond to it is with the truth: that I owe everything I am to this country,” he said. Obama said it was a speech about his love for this country that put him in the national spotlight. He shot down the idea that failing to put his hand over his heart during the national anthem makes him unpatriotic.

“If that were the case, that would disqualify about three-quarters of the people who have ever gone to a football game or baseball game.”"

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/24/obama.patriotism/index.html

You seem to think that keeping vigilant on the homeland and not fighting terror abroad will keep us safe. But you failed to consider the fact that if we leave the terrorists alone they will become stronger. They will invade more countries and eventually set off an attack on our homeland that could be far greater than anything you could imagine. That is the same laid back attitude that Clinton had and look where it got us.

On my site under the tab Fun Stuff is a recent video that was released. It kind of puts things into perspective. http://knowaboutcongress.com/

Observer2 – Thomas Jefferson did not anticipate radical Islamic extremeists to wage a war on America and its allies. That quote was not meant to be the standard by which we should fight war today.

Observer – You shouldn’t be so quick to speak for the majority of Americans and their belief system on this war or any future war. The mainstream media put that out there and you fell for it. Incapable of making your own sound judgement of relying on what our Generals said verses what the mainstream media said. You seem to think that major newspapers know better than our military and its intelligence. You have chosen to ignore the information that was released by the 9/11 Commission which stated that high risk warnings were coming across Bill Clinton’s desk and he did nothing to stop it. OBL and AQ were both wanted and Clinton’s response was to bomb a pharmacuetical company to help divert attention to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I can guarantee you the people who were chosen to take these polls and were asked if they support war, are the same people who do not understand the value of the success of this war and they do not follow politics in general, except for hearing a few sound bites each day by the mainstream media.

You say that people don’t care about what the spouses of the candidates say and their opinions, try telling that one to Hillary and the possible future First Lady, Bill.

Observer,

It’s difficult to debate you when your comments are basd on suggestion, inuendos, assumptions and baseless propaganda. What you’re giving us is your observations that can’t be backed up by facts.

You commented on the subject of guns and insinuated that children are getting the guns from their parents. Where do you get this crap from? Most gun owners who go through the proper channels of legally purchasing a firearm do take proper precautions. The guns that the children are obtaining come from the streets. It’s the Liberal attitude of do whatever makes you feel good and not worry about the consequences. It is those parents who allow their children to be on the streets exposed to this lifestyle where illegal gun sales are adequately made available to these children. Taking away their gun owner’s Amendment right will not stop these children from killing because the source of the problem is not initiated from the legal gun owner.

Observer,

It’s difficult to debate you when your comments are basd on suggestion, inuendos, assumptions and baseless propaganda. What you’re giving us is your observations that can’t be backed up by facts.

You commented on the subject of guns and insinuated that children are getting the guns from their parents. Where do you get this crap from? Most gun owners who go through the proper channels of legally purchasing a firearm do take proper precautions. The guns that the children are obtaining come from the streets. It’s the Liberal attitude of do whatever makes you feel good and not worry about the consequences. It is those parents who allow their children to be on the streets exposed to this lifestyle where illegal gun sales are adequately made available to these children. Taking away their gun owner’s Amendment right will not stop these children from killing because the source of the problem is not initiated from the legal gun owner.

Observer2 – Thomas Jefferson did not anticipate radical Islamic extremeists to wage a war on America and its allies. That quote was not meant to be the standard by which we should fight war today.

Observer – You shouldn’t be so quick to speak for the majority of Americans and their belief system on this war or any future war. The mainstream media put that out there and you fell for it. Incapable of making your own sound judgement of relying on what our Generals said verses what the mainstream media said. You seem to think that major newspapers know better than our military and its intelligence. You have chosen to ignore the information that was released by the 9/11 Commission which stated that high risk warnings were coming across Bill Clinton’s desk and he did nothing to stop it. OBL and AQ were both wanted and Clinton’s response was to bomb a pharmacuetical company to help divert attention to the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I can guarantee you the people who were chosen to take these polls and were asked if they support war, are the same people who do not understand the value of the success of this war and they do not follow politics in general, except for hearing a few sound bites each day by the mainstream media.

You say that people don’t care about what the spouses of the candidates say and their opinions, try telling that one to Hillary and the possible future First Lady, Bill.

You seem to think that keeping vigilant on the homeland and not fighting terror abroad will keep us safe. But you failed to consider the fact that if we leave the terrorists alone they will become stronger. They will invade more countries and eventually set off an attack on our homeland that could be far greater than anything you could imagine. That is the same laid back attitude that Clinton had and look where it got us.

On my site under the tab Fun Stuff is a recent video that was released. It kind of puts things into perspective. http://knowaboutcongress.com/

You’re wrong. Say we stop fighting wars.

Are you saying that OBL and his minions will stand down? Whose lives will you personally guarantee?
We can fight them there, or we can fight them here. Take your choice.

You can fight can’t you? Shoot and kill someone? Stab him if need be? Throttle him with a lampcord? Everyone claims they’ll die for their country, but that’s the easy part. Can you kill for it? That’s what you may face if we allow the fight to come here. Vigilance indeedy! -Rod-

I did not forget about the other 50% I agree there is a possibility Obama and his wife think alike but there is an equal possibility that they do not think alike.
I just don’t think you can assume that they are alike, they are two separate individuals.
You like the glass half full concept, ok hows this the country will be just fine regardless of who our President ends up being, the real difference being one will keep us fighting wars and the other most likely will not, either way we will be ok.

Comment by Karen2 (K2)
February 24th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

Taking away our guns will not eliminate the actions of sick individuals.

Comment by KT
February 24th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

It’s obvious that you have forgotten about the bombing of our World Trade Center, USS Cole, Kenya, Nairobi, Tanzania (Emassy bombings).

Fighting terrorist’s in foreign countries will not eliminate the actions of sick individuals either.
The best solution to keep things that KT mentioned from happening is to stay forever vigilant ( pay close attention ) to what others are doing here in the U.S., screen passengers at the airport etc.

I think you can assume it. He’s a politician…she appears to have been a professional victim.
And the divorce rate is applicable to couples, not populations. You ignore the other 50% for some reason. I thought you were a glass-is-half-full kinda guy? What’s with all the negative waves?

with a better than 50% divorce rate in the U.S. I could certainly argue against the idea that married people think alike, from what I have seen it seems to be just the opposite. LOL
I don’t think you can assume that he and his wife think alike.

Ah but they do. Married people tend to think alike, especially highly educated ones. So a look into his wife’s psyche can tell us much about what he’s thinking, and not telling us. Funny that Princeton is suppressing the document until Nov 5, 2008…the day after the election, eh?

Rod nobody cares about what a candidates spouse thinks, they should keep their mouthes shut, unfortunatly it seems to be hard to get them to do that.

Comment by An Observer
February 24th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

Many people were quite happy with President Clinton, happier than they are now, the U.S. was spending much less money when he was in office and we were at peace.

Comment by KT
February 24th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

It’s obvious that you have forgotten about the bombing of our World Trade Center, USS Cole, Kenya, Nairobi, Tanzania (Emassy bombings).

As many have said, I think that the war in Iraq is almost over, not because we have or ever will accomplish our goal but because the American people and the rest of the world want the war to be over, therefor the real issue for many Americans is not the current war but possible future wars, many believe that a Democrat will not be so quick to go to war in the future.
Many people were quite happy with President Clinton, happier than they are now, the U.S. was spending much less money when he was in office and we were at peace.
I think Americans remembering the peace and tranquility we had during Clinton is the reason that Obama is so popular.
I understand that some will be unhappy with Obama in office but I think there will be millions who will be much happier than they currently are.
I think it is time we focused on the U.S problems for a while, like social security, medicare, unemployment, medical care, the economy etc.
there is always going to be someone unhappy, better to be the minority than the majority, the country is moving closer to the middle and away from the far right or left, unfortunatly for the far right the middle also does not like war.

Michele Obama’s Thesis:

http://www.usapatriotsamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6967

Thomas Jefferson– The price of freedom is eternal vigilance …echoed by Wendell Phillips in 1852-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/22/nartist122.xml

Observer, I almost spewed my coffee across the room when you said we will be just fine just like we were when Bill Clinton was in office. I can’t read things like that when I’m drinking hot coffee.

It’s obvious that you have forgotten about the bombing of our World Trade Center, USS Cole, Kenya, Nairobi, Tanzania (Emassy bombings).

The Islamofascists will not stop killing simply because Obama chooses not to fight them. His ideas about the war make me wonder if we’ll simply have a fox guarding the henhouse. People tend to judge others by their own standards. If Obama is judging the Islamists by his own standard of non-violence, he does everyone a disservice, even the terrorists. They expect to be martyred, so why should we disappoint them? This is a war that’s going to last a generation, maybe two. It’s entirely possible that we’ve been sucked into a war that cannot end, ever. Think of the endless bloodshed between Shiites and Sunnis. They’ve been at each other for 1400 years. Bush has made few errors in this war…one was standing by when the riots started up…his other was in not being tough enough on them. He’s been far too easy on the Islamists, with many getting a pass for political reasons. Al-Sadr? He’s holding a sword over our necks, threatening to unleash his Mahdi Army again if things don’t go his way. He should be killed. Al-Sistani? Killed. The way to win a war is to demoralize the foot soldier. You do that through firepower and by killing off his leadership. Gen. Petreus should be given carte blanche, told to do as he pleases until told to stop.

Rod for President! -Rod-

He’s a troll, K2…

Taking away our guns will not eliminate the actions of sick individuals.

Things to consider about Iraq -
1. If you believe the war there is solely about oil, then, for you, there is no reason to stay.
2. If you believe the war is based upon the need for a more stable middle east and some hope for a free people, then there is every reason to stay.

To rely upon the “we never should have gone there” as a reason to leave, then the saying ‘if at first you don’t succeed, try try again’ is meaningless.

However, we did go in. Based upon Iraq’s refusal to abide by the 17 UN resolutions. Based upon Saddam’s failure to disclose the location or abandonment of his weapons programs.

We are there, and we owe it to the Iraqi people to help them stand on their own two feet. To immediately leave would result in the likes of Al Sadr and Khomeini moving in and using their firepower to suppress the people.

Iraq is improving. Jordan has assisted in convincing the cleric leaders in the remote areas to work with the US. The people if Iraq are now turning their backs on the Al Q types. The people of Iraq do not approve of the actions of Al Q. The government is making progress.

Iraq is doing what Congress has asked. The Iraq police and military are standing up. The government is moving forward and working with all provinces. The people are turning in terrorists.

If we were to leave now, then we will have no basis in the eyes of the world. Doing the right thing is not always equated to doing the easiest thing.

I am afraid Obama’s words on leaving Iraq are to appease the electorate. Perhaps he believes he can. But, once he sees all the intelligence, I suspect he will have a more softer approach. It is true more troops are needed in Afghanistan.

To say having Obama in office will mean No war is a mistake. The war against Islamofascists will not end just because the USA has a new president.

Rod are you an agry white man ?

Obama wants to take the angry white man’s guns away from them, so there will not be anymore of our children killed while going to school, not from terrorists but other children, it’s a long term goal.
Got any children Rod

Rod
Just because someone does not agree with you, that does not make them wrong, have you considered that maybe you are wrong, I understand that you are very upset that more than likely we will have a Democratic President for 8 years but that is no reason to be hostile to others who do not have the same opinion as you.
relax everything will be just fine, look at the bright side with Obama as President you will have someone to complain about for 8 years.
Put your faith in your fellow Americans we will elect the right President and the right congress, it may not be your choice but if it is not you must consider that you could be wrong and the American people are right.

You call the USS Cole ‘just fine’? You call gutting our intelligence services in order to be politically correct ‘just fine’? Why don’t the both of you (which are really just one and the same) go back to observing? Since you can’t analyze the political situation in America, try analyzing the psychology of why you troll instead. -Rod-

I don’t think Obama is our savior by any means, I do think that he will get elected because he is telling Americans what they want to hear, I also believe that he will pull most of the troops out of Iraq as he has said he would do and I do not think anything bad will happen to the U.S when he does, I think the U.S will be just fine just as it was when Bill Clinton was in office.
It won’t be perfect but we will be in better shape than we currently are spending billions of dollars in a foreign country over oil.

I’m off to bed, KT. See you tomorrow -Rod-

KT,

Excellent point on Obama and the war. He’s just parroting what Pelosi, Kennedy, Murtha and the rest of them have been saying…and it’s a stupid strategy.

We could put the entire US Army into Afghanistan and it wouldn’t bring us OBL, not if he’s in Pakistan. Let’s assume for the sake of this conversation that he is in Pakistan, just to simplify things, though I personally have my doubts.

There’s still that border sitting there and unless we violate Pakistani sovereignty or get an invite from the Pakistan government, OBL will sit in Pakistan, safe as can be.

An invite is basically out of the question. While we may be nominal allies with the Pakistani government (on this one issue anyway) their people hate our guts. And even if they didn’t, let’s just reduce the equation down to a practical question: Would the US under any circumstance short of us being invaded by Russia or China, invite a foreign army onto our own soil to conduct combat operations? Not a chance! What makes us think that Pakistan is any different? Were Musharraf to invite us in, his next act would be hanging from a lightpost, for his own population would seize him and hang him. The country would sink into a civil war overnight as the government battled most of the population. Nor can we simply invite ourselves in. We may well get in on occasion, small teams crossing a few miles in, but there’ll be hell to pay if it ever came out. If we crossed the border in force Musharraf would have no option but to respond with force, just as we would if the Mexicans sent a battalion or a division in here. We have to remember too that Pakistan has nukes. So in any reasonable discussion about US troops in Afghanistan looking for OBL in Pakistan, one has to ask the question: Doing what? The next phase of the discussion has to address the Taliban. The fight with AQ would simply move from Iraq to Afghanistan. Iraq’s government would immediately fall and then foreign fighters would show up in Kabul and Khandahar and everywhere else and we’d be facing the exact same problems we’ve faced in Iraq. What do we gain? Nothing. It’d be worse in fact.

But Murtha, Pelosi, Kennedy, Obama…they don’t want us to think that far ahead, which is why they’ve never bothered to mention it. They simply push the hot button, Iraq Bad, Afghanistan good, thrown in the name Osama Bin Laden and figure that’s all it’ll take to get us to look the other way. Mark my words, if we pull out of Iraq and put the troops in Afghanistan, we’ll be hip deep in blood in no time…just as soon as AQ can move fighters in. Alternately, Obama could implement Murtha’s first plan, also parroted by Pelosi, which was simply to redeploy our troops out of Iraq into Saudi Arabia, close enough so they could go back in “if needed”. Balderdash. Once we’re out, we’re out. Congress would have to reauthorize the war in order to send the troops back in, and they won’t do it. Being in Iraq, they have to keep sending the money…troops are in harms way. That’s a far different thing than sending them back into the meatgrinder from a safe zone. It would never happen, even if the Iraqi government fell.

As usual, the Democrats are counting us being too stupid to figure this out for ourselves. Obama’s an even bigger liar than Clinton is. He just lies by omission.

Myself, I don’t think OBL is in Pakistan any longer, certainly not living in any cave. -Rod-

Observer,

You didn’t come here to debate. You came in here as a troll, your first act was to jab a stick into the nest, give a stir to see what would happen. Then you spammed us with an Obama site. You still haven’t offered up an original thought.

Too late to play the victim I think. -Rod-

Observer2… looks like the very thing that you’re accusing is the very thing that you accomplished doing yourself (I, personally feel you may have some personal issues and you take it out on those who don’t think as you do.)

Observer… So let me see if I have this right… you want Obama because you think he won’t bring us to war correct? Did you take into account that he’s planning on increasing the troops in Afganistan? Obama seems to think that if we get OBL then all our problems are solved and there will not be any terrorists to fight, anywhere. This is the same type of idea that if we just keep ourselves safe here on the homeland and not fight terror outside of the US, then we’ll all be ok. Meanwhile, terrorists will infest themselves into more and more countries, become stronger, inherit more weapons and can eventually gain access to nuclear bombs. Then they hit us.

Al-Qaeda is running out of options. They’ve reduced themselves to even lower levels (if you can imagine that) by using unsuspecting mentally challenged women as suicide bombers. Possibly because they’re running out adult males that want to blow themselves up and end their lives. Regarless of what you read about the extremists loving death more then life, it is human instinct to want to live. It is human instinct to be afraid of the pain of bomb exploding that is strapped to their body.

And just for the record, it is Congress who says if we go to war.

Rod,

The purpose of the First Amendment is so one may speak his/her mind freely without having to basically insult people. You seem to have a knack at doing this.

If Observer chooses to express his/her opinion, why do you have to resort to insults? Are you running this blog? If not, please allow those to speak their opinions.

I could not help but notice some comment you made to a Patty here.
Patty, go back to your soaps. So sorry to disturb you. -Rod-

I, personally feel you may have some personal issues and you take it out on those who don’t think as you do.

Your tone denotes confrontation, not one who enjoys debating.

You mean like Bill Clinton? How many bombings did he preside over during his presidency and how many times did he swear we’d bring them to justice? How many did he capture? How many did he kill? I can assure you that Obama will repeat Clinton’s mistakes and then some. He’s told us so…he’ll sit down with Syria. He’ll sit down with Iran. He’ll sit down with Cuba…
You’re a child so are thinking like one. I forgive you.

I vote for the President that will do my bidding. In this cycle, not a single one is willing to do so.

Terrorism is not the greatest threat to the US today. While it has the potential to kill many and trash our economy over the short-term in the process, terrorism is unlikely to bring about the demise of the US. So long as we fight the war on their territory, we are relatively safe here at home. If you can’t stomach that, maybe you’d prefer to see the fighting here in our streets? Can you shoot?

Actually though, as a nation, illegal immigration is the greatest danger we face. By drastically altering the national identity and scewing the demographics of the country, which in turn changes who votes and how, our inability or refusal to deal with the illegals puts us in the position of having our nation essentially voted out of existence. Not one of the candidates has claimed a willingness to do what’s necessary. Sure, they’d call out the Guard if 12 million people rushed our southern border…but because it’s all happened in slow motion, the government sleeps. Someone darned well better wake up.

But you go right ahead and talk in platitudes, quibbling over minutae, and pushing forth a limp-wristed candidate that talks about ‘change’ without defining it. But do it quietly, ok? Some of us are trying to think. -Rod-

Meaning he can make suggestions to congress but he cannot create bills, so really he cannot do much of anything of real substance except control the troops.
I think you vote for the President that has your Military philosophy and you vote for the congress that has your fiscal and social philosophy.
Which is why a Democrat President and a Republican congress makes sense fiscally, socially and Millitarily.

Not everyone is afraid of terrorists.

Yes, and ? It accurately reflects the Presidential -> Congressional roles in legislation: The President proposes, the Congress disposes. -Rod-

Paula Creamer wins the Fields Open in Hawaii:

from your link Rod

The Congress has primary responsibility for the creation, passage, and promulgation of laws (and, of course, raising and apportioning revenue).

Basically congress is responsible for everything but the Military, a Democrat in charge of the Military will be good for our country, Republicans in charge of congress would be good for our country, NO war and low taxes what a good combination for our country.

K2,

I was referring to the answer not forthcoming from Observer…but nevermind

Observer,

Wrong. The President proposes, the Congress disposes. Read up.

http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=1541

Obama can’t do worse than Bush? What prophetic gifts do you possess? You’d be surprised at just how much worse things could get than they are now. He doesn’t have to set out to be bad…he just needs to be stupid. Or naive. Or stick his head in the sand and do nothing. Your platitudes are getting old. -Rod-

K2 the Democrats blame the Republican for everything and the Republicans blame the Democrats for everything that is nothing new is it.
We all know that the President cannot pass anything on his own congress is always the initiator.
Obama is not perfect but he certainly can’t do a worse job than Bush jr. so more than likely the country will be ok with him in office.

Rod – 2/23/08 at 5:20

What? Answer to what?

I am confused, but what else is new!

Yes, let’s elect a liberal…

OMAHA, Neb. — Police say a 4-year-old girl demonstrated to them how to smoke marijuana from a joint, a pipe and a bong — and learned the techniques from her mother.

The mother, 25-year-old Lisa Schuchard, is charged with child abuse and could lose her daughter after being accused of teaching and encouraging the girl to smoke.

Her attorney, Douglas County Assistant Public Defender Doug Johnson, said he would not comment because he hadn’t talked to Schuchard in depth.

Authorities say Child Protective Services received a complaint that the 4-year-old and a 2-year-old son of Schuchard were dirty and living in a filthy home that had drug paraphernalia around.

Police say the daughter told officers that Schuchard and her live-in boyfriend would offer her and her brother the marijuana, then laugh with friends when they smoked. Authorities say the children have been placed in foster care.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332090,00.html