The eve before the Presidential election. And the media is losing it’s mind.

As I was playing in my Monday night 8-ball pool tournament (I’m currently 12 for 12) and happened to look up at the television. It was about 7:30 and on ABC News there was George Stephanopoulos and a reporter. The 2 were discussing projections of who will win the Senate races in various states. This is a day before anyone has voted!

Tell me how ABC is not influencing voters a day before they go to vote. All of this ‘projection’ was based on the early votes made so far. And the early vote is never the majority of a State’s vote. Just doesn’t happen. So they are telling the public what might well amount to blatant lies once votes are done on Tuesday. Unless they influence the voters to not show up, since the outcome has already been decided – by that news media organization.

While ABC News is busy trying to garner Democratic votes, in an act that has never occurred in an election ever before, there is more news hitting the air.

Senator Obama has apparently stated that he will bankrupt coal power plants. This of course will drive electricity costs through the roof and leave tens of thousands unemployed. I’m shocked that this has been so well hidden up til now.



This goes along with the plans of Senator Biden to end coal power usage



The defenders of Senator Obama will rant away about Fox News publishing this video and how not to trust Fox News, but those are Obama’s words coming out of his mouth. The same is true of the video of Biden.

I have raised these issues before over the summer. This is not new information. But for some reason Senator Obama was never connected with what he has said.

Under an Obama Administration the American public will pay more for electricity, as a punishment and a means for reducing energy use. In the next video you don’t need to pay attention to the editorial words added, just listen to what Obama says.



Again these are the words of Senator Obama.

When you go to vote tomorrow remember these facts:

• Obama is in favor of higher electricity prices to force people to conserve energy
  
• Obama is aware that his plans could cause higher unemployment and difficulty for Americans
  
• Obama is aware that the higher costs would be felt directly by Americans and not corporations
  
• Obama promises to raise costs of corporate taxes, but does not believe this will be passed on to the public
  
• Obama does not believe that the higher unemployment will affect America negatively since he will take money from Americans to give to Americans he chooses
  
• Obama disagrees with secret ballots, at least when it comes to unions
  
• Obama supports spending more money the Government doesn’t have to create another stimulus plan (Nancy Pelosi’s idea, cost $300 billion and increasing, did you notice how well the last one worked, and you will pay for that from taxes)
  
• Obama defends Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and the others responsible for lying to the public in July about how safe Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were – the failure of which led to the bailout you will pay for in upcoming years
  
• Obama’s foreign policy plans are disputed by his Vice Presidential pick Biden
  
• Obama voted in March 2008 to raise the taxes of every American making $31,850 or more
  
• Obama believes the Government that can’t run the post office or the VA can make better healthcare decisions than you can
  
• Obama believes the Government can run a healthcare department efficiently, yet there has never been a department or agency of the Government that has cost less than the year before in 40 years – paid for with your taxes
  
• Obama has never explained his relationship with the self-admitted terrorist William Ayers – who helped launch Obama’s political career
  
• Obama and Biden routinely punish news agencies that ask questions they don’t like – Florida television, and newspapers alike can’t ask questions any more even if you want an answer to that question
  

Every item is something I have covered about Obama since 2007. Every item can be found on my blog, or you can search the net and verify it yourself. Every single item is an important issues for the next President of America.

Are these issues you can live with?

You get one vote, make it wisely. Be informed.

Labels: ABC News, George Stephanopoulos, news media, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden

In response to my post on Barbara West’s interview with Senator Biden I have heard many people excuse the response of Senator Joe Biden, and defend Senator Obama’s flexible tax plans. Even more have chosen to attack or dispute the questions of Barbara West.

First is a fact that this election seems to have avoided, at least in the sense of the major media. There are few questions that can be asked of candidates that are unfair. Any question that is based in whole in the words and meanings of a candidates statements is always fair and deserving of an answer.

In addition it is the responsibility of the major media to ask the candidates tough questions that some or all citizens have. When the media in question is more local those questions should be more locally motivated, but otherwise the questions should be asked. This has rarely happened with Senator Obama, even as far back as the Democratic Primaries.

The statement in question is Senator Obama definitely stating and standing by his desire to “share the wealth” of Americans, and doing so via Government mandate. This is beyond taxation and a statement of redistribution of wealth forced upon Americans. This is in no part an ideal of Democracy. The closest style of Government that reflects such attitudes is the socialism that Karl Marx discussed and wrote of – communism being a far more extreme form of that same government style.

Taxes are not meant as a means to check the power of Americans. In fact it is impossible to do so as a billionaire is still drastically wealthier than the middle class or less Americans. Yet they have only one vote and are equally as restricted in their campaign contributions. Taxes are a means by which the Government is able to enact policies it believes are in the best interest of the nation as a whole.

Barbara West did not ask the same question twice because the first is speaking on a Gallup poll and the effect of the Obama tax plan. The second question on the tax plan is asking to clarify the distinction of the tax plan versus socialism – which really does not exist as redistribution of wealth is a core point of socialism. That is the reason I believe that Senator Biden refused to answer the question, besides the fact that he was visibly upset at being asked tough questions which is rare for the Obama campaign.

And it should be noted that virtually every independent study of news coverage of the election has shown that Senator Obama has been treated with an unfair bias. He has been asked fewer tough questions and has had less complete investigation of his policies and past political votes.

Were the major media fair there would be questions on how Obama could claim he is a moderate when he has been consistently ranked by his voting as far back as the Illinois Senate as extremely liberal, as an example. The media has avoided coverage of several gaffes by Senator Biden that refute or question Obama policies. The media has failed to ask for clarification of several controversial or unclear policies and statements of the Obama campaign. Even right now you can go to Yahoo and see a poll result for the Presidential election that is unmatched by several of the most reputable polling companies including Rassmusen.

But the question at hand is the comment of “sharing the wealth”. There is no question of what Senator Obama has meant. He has repeated and defended his belief. Such a belief is liberal at the least and socialist in definition. It is effectively a cap on the productivity of all Americans.

A friend of mine explained this to her son who asked what it meant as follows:

“Say you were to do a job, like rake leaves, and be paid $20 for it. The guy across the street did nothing but watched you. Before you get paid the Government would take $15 dollars out of your $20 and give $5 to the guy across the street that watched you, and another person like him down the block, and another. But you get to keep the $5 for all your hard work.”

Her son felt this seemed unfair since they did nothing. I agree that giving people money that they did not earn and cannot justify, based on the will of the Government, is unfair. And in my experience, having lived in Moscow and Tsblisi while the USSR still existed, it does reflect aspects of the socialist style of Government.

I did not open my business to share the wealth I generate. When I chose to make a donation that is my choice, and any donation will go to something I support. I do not trust the Government to spend my money, and neither does Warren Buffett, John Kerry or other famous Democrats.

If Warren Buffett were so confident of the Government he would have left his money to the Government as opposed to a foundation run by Bill Gates. If John Kerry and other extremely wealthy Democrats were so in favor of sharing wealth with Government allocating the funds they would have donated millions (Kerry is worth in excess of $300,000,000) without any change of lifestyle. And I won’t even go into the donations of Senator Biden, which I outpaced.

But again I detract. Barbara West was justified in asking the questions she did. Senator Biden had an obligation to the citizens in Florida and the nation to answer the question. Senator Biden failed his obligation, not Barbara West. And the Obama campaign compounded that failure when they then had a tantrum and canceled the access of that media organization (including its Philadelphia affiliate) to the candidates. Because not being presented to Americans just prior to an election benefits whom on Election Day?

Labels: Barbara West, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator John Kerry, Warren Buffett

I recently made a Youtube video where I mentioned several questions that should be asked by each voter before they make their vote. The now famous Joe the plumber had a question that he asked of Senator Obama. Joe has been raked over the coals by many part of the media and internet for that. Much of the major media was also embarrassed that the internet and an average guy are asking the toughest questions of the Obama campaign since he decided to run for President.

But now we may see why



After that interview the Obama campaign pulled all interviews with Biden and his wife. The station, for those not familiar with Barbara West and Florida television, is the number 1 news channel for the last 20 years in Florida.

Over and over it seems that every news organization that challenges the Obama campaign is labeled as rude, outlandish, and biased. Every tough question has been branded Right-wing propaganda, and refused to be answered.

Everyone admits that the media overwhelmingly is in favor of Obama and has been unfairly easy in asking Obama questions. And even when Obama has been on “difficult” news media, like Fox News with Bill O’Reilly, and treated fairly he has turned around and blasted the organization as being unfair in their coverage.

Why is it that Obama refused to answer, and attack when asked, the tough questions. Why is it off-limits to question the direct similarities of Obama’s self-stated desire to redistribute wealth and socialism (which is a moderate form of communism)? Especially when socialism has part of its definition as redistribution of wealth? Why is it wrong to note the on-the-record comments of Obama from his past?

Do you think this is unfair? Is this a question that the news media can’t ask? And what else that might be of interest that cannot be asked.

By the way Biden stated directly that only Obama would be challenged by an international crisis. Colin Powell never addressed this in statements I read. And the Obama campaign did in fact give $800,000 to an ACORN subsidiary.

Labels: Barbara West, Bill O'Reilly, Colin Powell, Joe Wurzelbacher, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden

The following is a transcript of the video. Just in case you missed something or wanted to quote and/or respond directly.

Over the next few days there will be a slew of television ads discussing the views of each candidate and why you should vote for them. Some will make sense to the one part of the public or another. But they are just polispeak and no decision should be made based solely on a 30-second ad.

Before you decide who to vote for in this critical election I suggest you think of these things:

In the last 20 months we have come to know Senator Obama, but do you know the relationship that exists with Bill Ayers today – He is an admitted terrorist and self-described anarchist without remorse as late as 2001 while he helped start Obama’s political career?

Senator Biden believes Obama will be challenged on the international stage if elected within 6 months, as he directly said. This is because Obama is inexperienced. Can America afford an international crisis while in a financial crisis and fighting 2 wars?

The major media is overwhelmingly biased in favor of Obama. They have used this bias to avoid asking tough questions, such that a plumber asked one of the hardest questions Obama has received in this election cycle. What has the media failed to let you know? And what will they receive as a benefit for this lopsided support?

The Government has not been able to balance it’s spending in over 40 years, which you and I do everyday. Considering that every department and agency of the Government costs more and runs less efficiently year after year, why would bigger Government cost less or be better?

After a century of running the post office, the Government still can’t get that right. What would make you think that they will be able to run the incredibly complicated task of healthcare better than delivering the mail?

We all want the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to end. But how they end is important. If you think an immediate retreat is best, think of the 3 million that were killed in Viet Nam after America retreated there. More importantly think of the fact that Al Quida and Iran will use a U.S. retreat as a sign of weakness and fear of their radical beliefs, which would spur future attacks. How we leave is as important as when.

Senator Obama promised to take public funding for the race against Senator McCain. He backed away from that promise. Senator Obama promised to speak to America with McCain in at least one if not more town hall events. Again he backed away from that promise. What other promises is Senator Obama capable of backing away from?

Higher taxes on business sounds great, but small business creates jobs. Higher taxes means less money to hire or employ workers. With business slowing down, less money means more unemployment. Is your job recession proof, especially if business taxes are higher?

I don’t proclaim to know all the answers. I admit I support Senator John McCain. But that doesn’t change the fact that you should know the answers to these and other questions before you vote.

Vote for whomever you believe in, but know what you are voting for. Vote for a reason, not a 30-second soundbite. Vote because you love America.

I’m Michael Vass, owner of M V Consulting, Inc. and I approved this message.

Labels: Iraq War, Michael Vass, nationalized healthcare, Polispeak, political ads, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator John McCain, tax policy, That's why I vote

Senator Biden has recently warned that Senator Obama, and exclusively Obama, will be challenged by international events due to his inexperience if he is elected to the Presidency. He continued to state that the response, to at least 1 of 4 or 5 different scenarios would at least look wrong, and that supporters would need to stand by and wait while the events play themselves out. And Biden finished the thought with a comparison of Senator Obama to President John Kennedy.

Since that time, the Obama campaign has wasted no time in backing away from the comments, while the major media has done it’s best to ignore the statements altogether. It is now stated that Biden was speaking of any President, which is a direct lie as he named Obama and only Obama – going so far as to be very clear that it was an Obama only issue when he made the original comment.

But putting aside the willful rewriting of fact, I want to focus on the comparison to President Kennedy. This is a popular comparison for Senator Obama. Both men were young and relatively inexperienced so in some ways the comparison fits, but the question is how much.

President Kennedy was rich. Very rich. Senator Obama was not.

President Kennedy was a family man, as is Obama.

President Kennedy was an adulterer, Obama is not.

President Kennedy came from a politically elected and connected family, Obama did not.

Before becoming President, and before WWII, Kennedy lived as a young adult in Europe and had a degree in international affairs. He also wrote a thesis on the appeasement, “Appeasement in Munich”. In addition his father was ambassador to England. Thus he had some degree of international experience and understanding, none of which Obama has.

President Kennedy volunteered for military service, and was accepted due to the influence of his father (before America was attacked at Pearl Harbor). He served a total of 4 years. Senator Obama has never served a day in any branch of service, and has in fact blamed U.S. servicemen for various acts that are inaccurate at best. (He has claimed U.S. forces have bombed villages and civilians)

President Kennedy was decorated with Navy and Marine Corps Medal, Purple Heart, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal, and World War II Victory Medal. Again Obama has never served.

President Kennedy served in the House of Representatives for 6 years, and was a Senator for 7 years. In that time he broke several times with President Truman and the Democratic Party. Senator Obama has served 4 years as Senator – 2 of which have been during his time campaigning for President. He has never voted against the Democratic Party line, and is the most liberal member of the Senate.

President Kennedy had to fight against the belief that his religion, Roman Catholic, would affect his ability to lead the nation. Senator Obama has had to fight against the lies of his being a Muslim. In addition he has had to contend with racial prejudice.

President Kennedy failed in one of his first major international confrontations when he ruined the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. His inexperience led to the failure of support, naval and air, for the men that were attempting to overthrow Fidel Castro. The invasion attempt was planned before Kennedy was President and there was no action by Cuba to justify the revolt – beyond their support of Communism. Senator Obama has no international experience, and had his perhaps first major mistake in looking to have the U.N. punish Russia for the invasion of Georgia. (Russia is a member of the security counsel in the U.N. and thus could veto any action against it)

In 1962 Kennedy faced down the Soviet Union, which was emboldened by the Bay of Pigs result, as they tried to ship nuclear weapons into Cuba. It has been stated that America was within hours of a nuclear war before the Soviet Union backed down. Senator Obama has indicated that it prefers to speak with nations that are seeking nuclear weapons development, and hold a declared desire to see America destroyed – no matter what person is President. He has also threatened to attack the sovereign soil of an ally nation (given that Pakistan is volatile at best).

President Kennedy increased U.S. troops in Viet Nam from 800 to 16,000 in support of France (who was getting their butts kicked by the communist forces) to defend America against communism. Senator Obama intends to reduce the troops in Iraq from roughly 130,000 today to an unannounced number (though in his polispeak it is assumed to be 0) within 18 months of his being elected. Many dispute the effect of this, and I believe it to be a guaranteed manner in which to create greater instability in the region, empower Iran, and will lead to attacks on American soil within 5 years of the removal of troops.

President Kennedy also did vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1957 which many at the time opposed. But he also voted for the Jury Trial Amendment, which in effect nullified the Act, thus engendering the support of segregationist Senators James Eastland and John McClellan and Mississippi Governor James P. Coleman. There is no directly comparable law that Senator Obama voted for or against. But he has voted against funding troops in Iraq, an act that his own Vice Presidential candidate opposed very publicly, which was publicly a mixed decision.

So in looking at both men what do we get?

President Kennedy was a man who was familiar with events in the world and was active in them. He was dedicated to the nation and willing to put his life on the line to protect it – going as far as using political pressure to ensure his enlistment. He was willing to work against his Party on issues he felt were important, though he was also willing to compromise those issues for political favor. He made bad decisions early in his Presidency that caused near nuclear war at a time when few had such means but great fear. He was willing to use U.S. troops to enforce the views of America, even when there was no direct provocation or danger to America – though he foresaw future danger.

Senator Obama is unfamiliar with involvement with world events. He has preferred to make decisions based on political advisement instead of active investigation (he has visited Iraq and Afghanistan twice, the second time for both after he gained the nomination of the Democratic Party). He has framed himself as a far-left liberal and as such is against the military. He is a Party line supporter and has no real bi-partisan interests. He is interested in discussion as opposed to action, to an extreme. Enemies of America believe he is weak as well as inexperienced (much like Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs). He has served virtually no time in nationally elected office.

Overall there is in fact little connection or positive comparison of Senator Obama to President Kennedy. It might be summed up that both men were Senators (though for far different amounts of time, and Kennedy serving in both Houses), both had religious misunderstandings they had to overcome, both are Democrats. In addition both men can claim intelligence, families, wealth, and a dedication to America. Both men are charismatic and excellent orators.

Beyond that, there really is no comparison. Both men are very different and it would be fair to say that President Kennedy would likely oppose most of the campaign promises of Senator Obama. In fact it would be fair to say that President Kennedy would support Senator McCain and his policies – even if that meant breaking Party lines which he was wont to do.

So when we return to the promises of Senator Biden, keeping in mind the real comparison of President Kennedy and Senator Obama, it becomes clear that Obama is not the person that should be elected.

The media may not like to make that fact based comparison, the Democrats might prefer the romanticized pairing of the men, but when you really look at the truth and not the polispeak there is an obvious difference.

Labels: Polispeak, President John F. Kennedy, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden

For as long as Democratic candidates have been mentioning their desire to run for President most of the major media has been promoting them. Going back as far as 2006 the media was virtually guaranteeing Senator Hillary Clinton would be the next President of the nation. Once Senator Obama took the national attention they began they love affair with him.

While that is not as important a reaction when we are speaking about bloggers, though many of my colleagues are more than capable of swinging independent votes as I believe I am, the major media is meant to be independent. It is the purpose of the media to ask questions, tough questions, of the potential candidates. It is their purpose to inform the public of facts and comments of note by the candidates. It is the fact that they receive more attention and response than bloggers of most any size that we rely on them.

But the media has been remiss in their responsibility. There is no question about this. From the New York Times refusing to allow Senator McCain to write editorials, while approving 8 of Obama’s, to the failure of the media to investigate the relationship of Bill Ayers, the media has failed America.

Gov. Sarah Palin has had her kids, her husband, and her friends investigated by the media. Senator Obama has yet to have his friend Bill Ayers confronted. Yet audio tapes of Ayers decry his belief in anarchism, and interviews has clearly stated his lack of remorse and desire to have inflicted more terrorist acts against America. All of that while he served on a board with Senator Obama, and while he was supporting – if not creating – Obama’s political career.

We have heard about every aspect of Senator McCain’s health. His reports have been reviewed and questioned multiple times. So we know that he is in excellent shape for a man of younger years than he is. But there was no question asked of Senator Biden, who denied to present information about his health which is important because of his past health problems.

And just this week Senator Biden directly stated caution if Senator Obama is elected President. He directly stated that Obama, AND ONLY Obama, would be challenged on the international stage because of his inexperience. He further went on to state that the response of Obama would look inappropriate or bad initially. He even went as far as to say that there are 4 or 5 scenarios that could happen.

The major media failed to ask what those potential national threats might be. They failed to ask how America might protect itself, regardless of who is President. They even failed to notice this dramatic and important fact. Because they don’t want to affect those that might chose to vote for Obama. So they would spite America to satisfy their own wants.

In fact, in a moment of honesty, while interviewing Gov. Sarah Palin one of the few honest views on this matter was recorded.



So think of this. What else is the media not telling you about on the Democratic candidates. What other facts that are they withholding because it can affect your vote. What gain are they expecting in return for their targeted help and support of Democrats?

When the media is willing to ignore facts, and report polarized views, how is the public served? And where will it end? Will they ignore important facts about laws that Democrats want to pass that the public may not support? Will they gain tax or other incentives for their support? Are they being bought or allowing themselves to be compromised?

Most importantly, is Senator Obama and Senator Biden really the best choice for America if the public is not being told all the facts? Or are they the best choice for selected groups with targeted agendas that can mold public thought through deception and omission?

Labels: Gov. Sarah Palin, media bias, news media, Polispeak, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator John McCain

Senator Biden never made sense to me as a Vice Presidential pick for Senator Obama. He has made racist statements, and has made claims to equal the invisible bullets of Senator Clinton. He disagrees with the policies of Senator Obama on key issues, and he has declared (until selected for the VP) that Obama is not qualified and experienced enough to be President. Now he has made further statement s that are confusing at best.

Senator Biden stated

“Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America.” he told a fundraising crowd in the Pacific Northwest on Sunday. “Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“He’s gonna have to make some really tough - I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s gonna happen.”

So in Biden’s own words the Democratic candidate for President, that he believes is unqualified and inexperienced, is going to face an international crisis just because he has been elected. That perhaps Iran, or some other nation that is opposed to the existence of America no matter who the leader is, will cause a situation that requires a serious and immediate response from the nation. And he implies that this event could involve nuclear weapons, as it did for President Kennedy in the Cuban Missle Crisis.

Now considering the mistakes and failure of Senator Obama’s response to the invasion of Russian troops into Georgia – an ally of the United States, and the universal acceptance of Obama supporters in the fact that Obama is inexperienced (something that even Colin Powell noted when endorsing Obama) you have to wonder what would happen.

Will Obama try to sit down and talk with a leader of a nation that hates America as say crude oil shipments are held hostage? Or perhaps North Korea will openly renew efforts to build a nuclear weapon. Or perhaps Russia will invade another nation, threatening our allies in Europe. And even Biden cannot imagine bama’s response or style.

If Biden is right, and Obama is to be tested as he believes, are you sure he can repond well? Even Biden is not sure.

What I really don’t understand is why Biden would suggest such a scenario so close to the election. Why would he shed light on the fact that Obama’s inexperience and recent mistakes. How does clarifying and promising the likelyhood of international crisis – something Obama tries to avoid speaking about and is often wrong about – help his campaign.

I see the benefit of this statement. But I endorse and support Senator McCain. I have no question that McCain could handle such a situation. But according to Biden such a scenario would never be placed before McCain because he is experienced and strong on international affairs. Only because of the inexperience of Obama, like Kennedy, would this be done.

So the question should be, do we want a President that will be challenged internationally at a time when we are still reeling from monetary instability, engaged in 2 warfronts, and headed by an Administration that is internally conflicted?

Labels: Democratic candidates, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Biden, Vice Presidential candidate

The following is a complete video of the Biden Palin Vice Presidential Debate.

The debate was very interesting, and I need to review it a 3rd time before I can truely say who did the best on this. I can say that both had good moments in the debate. Overall my initial impression is that Governor Sarah Palin really came to life after the first 1/3 of the debate. And towards the late second half of the debate she started to hand it to Senator Biden.

But that is an inital impression. I'll go into detail shortly.

Labels: Gov. Sarah Palin, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Biden, Vice Presidential candidate

Oh My God, Democratitis is spreading. If you are unaware Democratitis is an affliction where liberal minded political officials spontaneously are bombarded with invisible non-life threatening bombs and bullets. A side effect of this condition leaves those affected driven with an undeniable urge to describe the harrowing attack on national television.

A related disease is Liberal Media Love Syndrome. This tends to affect those working in the newspaper industry more than most other forms of media, but all news media workers are at risk. Those infected have the inability to perceive lies and polispeak spoken by those with Democratitis unless large amounts of reliable facts are rammed up an orifice.

Ok, so much for my fun.

On a more serious note, we all are familiar with the infamous invisible sniper bullets that assailed Senator Clinton during a trip to Bosnia with her daughter. The uproar was huge, once people actually investigated the facts of the trip and found out she was lying… excuse me, had misspoken. Her misremembrance of the facts of this trip, and her attempt to garner votes from it, were immediately pounced upon by the Obama campaign.

Yet the fact that Senator Biden made exactly the same kind of lie… excuse me misrepresented fact has gone unmentioned. Until now. Of course when he said in 2007, during the Democratic Primary debates, that he came under fire – no one cared because the chances of him becoming President were as good as Barney Frank regulating banks. But now that we are looking at potentially the next Vice President this is important.

If Senator Clinton was discredited and shown to be willing to corrupt facts to sway the American public, are the comments of Senator Biden no less?

“Let’s start telling the truth,” he said. “Number one, you take all the troops out — you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die, number one.”

That’s what he said. The implication is that Senator Biden is Patton-esque in nature and that he was not shot at once but several times. The truth is

“Biden described three incidents on two separate Iraq trips in which he felt that he was shot at or might have been shot at. Only one of them took place inside the Green Zone, he said, and involved a “shot” landing outside the building where he and other senators were staying…

Biden said the incident happened in the morning while he and at least one other senator were shaving. Although he said it shook the building, he wasn’t rattled enough to duck and cover.

“No one got up and ran from the room—it wasn’t that kind of thing,” he said. “…It’s not like I had someone holding a gun to my head.”

Hardly the kind of event that evokes images of Iwo Jima, a soldier, or danger. I mean he didn’t even mention cutting himself shaving when the building shook.

But this is not the end of the embellishments.

“If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where Bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are.”

and again the truth is

“But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February.”

So the real question of all this is not the Democratitis or Liberal Media love Syndrome, but in fact Senator Obama’s judgement that he wishes to replace actual experience when voters consider him as President.

Without question the Obama campaign researched and knew of this inaccurate (to say the least) comment. And the Afghanistan quote is from about a week ago. Yet the Obama campaign has no comment on these statements.

If Senator Obama wants you to vote on judgement, and the world of new politics, you have to wonder why he thought a person who lied, or whatever you wish to call it, to the nation was the right choice for Vice President. If that’s new politics how is it different than what Democrats complain about President Bush or said about Senator Clinton?

Well before more of the media, and worse yet the nation, get infected with Liberal Media Love Syndrome I suggest a cure. Vote Republican.

Labels: Democratic Party, Polispeak, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Biden, Vice Presidential candidate

What reason do I have to feel that an Administration of Senator Obama and Senator Biden will be bad? What makes me feel that they can’t work together?

Well besides the thoughts I have stated before in my post Obama - Biden: Where are the positives? I have another item to add.

When Senator Obama okayed political ads attacking Senator john McCain’s ability to work with computers it failed to mention that McCain has problems because of the wounds he received as a Viet Nam POW. Those injuries to his arms make it very difficult for him to properly use a computer. There may be other issues on the use of a computer, something that is more the tool of those 45 and under – as we grew up with these innovations – but I am not aware if that is a factor.

Senator Biden is aware of this limitiation to McCain. And he had this to say on the subject.



If he had known he wouldn’t have done it. That is critical. He wasn’t informed about the ad. So in this simple answer we get that Senator Obama does not confide or discuss his decisions with his number 2. And Biden disputes the decision of Obama.

It may seem like a little thing, but if they differ and disagree on political ads what about significant issues like Pakistan and international policy, healthcare, Iraq, and the other major issues that they debated before and through the Primaries? What kind of Presidential Administration will they provide if they don’t speak and discuss, and oppose the actions of each other?

That is an issue Democrats want to gloss over, and the major media refuses to acknowledge. But that is an important fact to me, and my vote. How about you?

Labels: healthcare, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Biden, Senator John McCain, Viet Nam

Let’s really compare the Democratic and Republican Presidential tickets. First I will look at the experience of each ticket. (Part of the information is derived from the information found at Politifact)

Democrats:


• Senator Obama has been a teacher (at a college) for 11 years part-time. He was a community organizer for 3 years. He has worked as a lawyer 12 years (8 of them part timer as he also served in the State legislature). And he has been a Senator for 4 years (2 of which have been spent on the campaign trail for President).
  
  
• Senator Biden has been a lawyer for 4 years. He was a county council member for 2 years. He has spent 36 years as a Senator.
  

Republicans:


• Senator McCain has been a military officer for 22 years (Navy – includes 5 ½ years as a P.O.W. and 4 years as a liason to the Senate). He then went on to be a Senator for 26 years.
  
  
• Governor Palin has been a TV reporter for 2 years. She has owned a business for 9 years (including part-time work with her husband’s businesses).She has been a city council member for 4 years and Mayor for 6 years (re-elected once). She was an appointee to Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission for 1 year, before becoming a whistleblower of corruption within her Party. She is the current Governor of Alaska for 2 years.
  

So what does that really mean?

Well one interpretation is that the Democrats have little connection to the lives of average Americans. While being a teacher is very respectable and common, that would apply to elementary, middle, and high school teachers. College professors are considered elite in the field of teaching by most all I believe.

The Democrats are very familiar with re-interpreting laws for the benefit of their clients, whether that interpretation is accurate or not, which is the job of a lawyer. Lawyers are also considered a non-common elite profession.

Political office is generally accepted to be elite and separate of normal American life. Working with the community is directly involved with the people, but on a limited scale of population and responsibility.

And on the Republican side?

Military service is defined by average Americans volunteering to serve the nation. While television work is not common it is not necessarily extraordinary. Local newscasters are parts of the communities they report on.
Business ownership is a tenant of the American dream. It is a difficult enterprise at best, and requires 3x’s the work of the owner than any employee. But it’s reward is the benefits it provides to family and the lifestyle.

While politicians are generally reviled, as opinion polls often show, their local level counterparts are often far more connected and respected by the communities they serve. And whistleblowing is always difficult in any industry, even moreso when in politics where corrupt money and positions of power are very intimidating.

Now at this point, which Party – more importantly which Presidential ticket - sounds more likely to be connected to the public and their concerns?

Now let’s look at the lies both Presidential tickets and their respective Parties have made. I’ll start with Republicans this time.

• First I must refute a statement that was made by Fred Thompson. As revealed by Senator McCain’s autobiography he did eventually give up some information to his interrorgators. But we must also keep in mind a serious point on that, interrogation does not end until wanted information is gained, that is the point of it. And thus eventually everyone breaks, and every prisoner that has been interrogated will attest to that. So anyone that holds that against McCain is a f****** idiot in my opinion.
  
  
• But now to a blatant lie of Senator Obama. He stated on national television that abortions have not gone down since President Bush has been in office. According to New York-based Guttmacher Institute stated that
  
  

  “the number of abortions also fell, to 1.2-million in 2005, which it said was 25 percent below the record high of 1.6-million abortions in 1990.”

  
  
  In fact the number of abortions, as reported by several institutions proves that abortions are down since 2000.
  
  
• Another lie of Senator Obama’s, and the Democratic Party is that oil and gas companies have 68 million acres of leased land they are doing nothing with. That answer is only true if you go by the standard that a non-producing lease is one without an oil or gas rig pumping on it (which is what the Government classifies it as). So in fact oil and gas companies can be, and are, exploring for proven resources and are still considered non-producing. The companies can be in the process of getting clearance for actual drilling, which takes a long time, and the land is considered non-producing.
  
  So to say they are doing nothing with the land is a blatant lie.
  
  
• But McCain is not without fault either. His claim that he has a perfect voting record with veteran’s groups is false. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and Disabled American Veterans rate McCain at 58% and 20% respectively. With all the other major groups like the VFW and American legion he is correct. But it is not perfect.
  
  
• But Obama has no problem quoting ambiguous information. Like how much the U.S. spends on energy research. He claimed that it was less than
  
  

  “the pet food industry invests on its own products.”

  
  
  But there is no factual data to explain what the pet food industry invests in research. The trade industry for pet food, the Pet Food Institute, does not keep records on this. At the best guess, based on Booz Allen Hamilton study of companies, the industry may spend only 3.8% of revenues on research. Which would be about $500 million a year, which would be 1/6 of the $3 billion the Government spends.
  
  But since this cannot be determined by any factual evidence, and the best guess is massively incorrect, the lie is outstanding.
  
  
• But math seems to be a weak point for Senator Obama. Back before Hurricane Gustav there were floods in the mid-west (in June of 2008). During those floods Obama stated that the National Guard was stretched to thin to give effective help and that there was a shortage of helicopters. Lie.
  
  In fact there was no shortage of helicopters (which the campaign did later acknowledge – without public fanfare). As for the troop shortage due to efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan:
  
  
  Iowa National Guard – 850 overseas, 9,400 total troops = ~90% available
  
  Missouri National Guard – 1,800 overseas, 11,000 total troops = ~ 80% available
  
  Illinois National Guard (Obama’s home state) – 800 current (adding 2,700 later in the year but available during the flooding), 13,000 total troops = ~90% available at the time of flooding and ~70% if you counted the future soldiers out as well.
  
  
  In fact no state is overburdened. The statement sounds scarry, but it’s a fabricated lie.
  
  
• Again McCain is not without his math problems as well. McCain mentioned in June that everyone agreed that Iran was pursing nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency and various U.S. intelligence agencies were not as sure, or in agreement at the time. Thus everyone did not agree and he lied.
  

There are other lies and half or partial truths going back in time, as I noted in other posts, but these are recent.

Let’s look at the flip-flops, an important part of the polispeak used in every political campaign and speech of politicians. Where have the Presidential tickets made a u-turn in favor of votes?

Democrats get to start again.

Senator Obama said in July that he would not tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to resolve short-term energy needs and prices. In August he fully reversed that position.

“The strategic oil reserve, I think, has to be reserved for a genuine emergency.” July

“We should sell 70-million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks.” August

As is readily known Senator McCain was completely against the President Bush tax cuts when first proposed. Today he is for them. It’s well documented and commented on by Democrats, but it is a flip-flop.

Back to Obama. On financing his run for President

“If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
- Barack Obama, fall 2007

“We’ve made the decision not to participate in the public financing system for the general election.”
- Barack Obama, June 19, 2008

And the Vice Presidential candidate share in the penchant for complete reversals as well.

I will go with age before beauty.

Senator Biden strongly and with emphasis declared that Senator Obama was not experienced enough or prepared to be President during the Democratic Primaries in live debates and interviews. After accepting the nomination for Vice President he declared that Obama was ready to be President.

Governor Palin is noted for her refusal to accept funds for the “bridge to nowhere”. But it seems she was for it when she was running for Governor

“Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now — while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.”

Though once elected she

“After taking office and examining the project closely, she consistently opposed funding the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ and ultimately canceled the wasteful project.”

Was it for the political good will or the public’s is unclear – but it’s a 180 degree turn either way.

Now there is much more that can be found about the candidates. You can just check the site for other items the candidates have done in the past. But you have an overall view.

Generally I would say that Democrats have lied more, and on bigger issues than Republicans in this election cycle. The Democratic Ticket is less in touch with the average American than Republicans.

And neither Presidential candidate seems to be any good at doing math on their own.

Now what is most important to you I cannot say. Some don’t care about blatant lies, or flip-flops, or past experience. Some love the polispeak all politicians spin, and others cannot break with their political party no matter their personal view. I do, but that’s me.

The most important thing is that you know who it is you are voting for. The good and bad that each candidate has. Make your own decision what you can live with and without. And once you are sure, for yourself, vote and campaign, and encourage others to do the same.

The purpose of this post is not to ask you to vote like I will or accept my views on the candidates. You have to do that work. But the purpose is to give you a reason to vote for someone. And as long as you do that, my efforts since 2006 are worth the time.

Labels: Gov. Sarah Palin, Polispeak, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator John McCain

Now for my commentary on Fred Thompson’s speech.

I thought it was a great speech. One of the most important things about it was the fact that unlike similar speeches by Democrats he did not really attack Senator Obama. He got in a few jibes, and they were accurate and well placed, but overall he focused on Senator John McCain.

Fred Thompson was focused on the character and experience of Senator John McCain. Without trying to make a comparison one could not help but see it. And with no disrespect to Obama, McCain towers over his Democratic rival.

Fred Thompson said,

“It's pretty clear there are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, "Who is this man?" and "Can we trust this man with the presidency?"

Well even Democrats have stated unequivocably that they trust McCain as President. Senator Obama’s own VP pick stated that clearly and without hesitation. His polispeak since rings hollow and Democrats know it.

Senator McCain is a war hero. We all know that. But Democrats seem to want to forget that McCain is the most bi-partisan candidate in this election. It was noted all night, by Thompson and then later by Lieberman (the Democratic VP pick in 2000 for Al Gore) that the difference is doing versus speaking.

But Thompson was not without strong attacks.

“They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the "other" side of the bucket! That's their idea of tax reform.”

Colorful and accurate when you consider that it was Senator Obama himself that noted he would ensure tax cuts for

“95% of those who RECEIVE A PAYCHECK” [Emphasis is my own]

Only those willfully wanting to believe that statement cannot see the connection of business owners, the price of their goods, and the hours and employment individuals receive. Tax one side of the equation and the response hits the other. A basic law of nature and physics, unless you are a Democrat.

To be fair Thompson did focus intently on the history of McCain. There is no question that in the past 18 months the voting record of McCain and President Bush have been similar. But most seem to miss the fact that it has mostly been President Bush moving towards Senator McCain’s view than vice versa.

Fred Thompson went on to say

“History-making in that he is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for president. Apparently they believe that he would match up well with the history-making, Democrat-controlled Congress. History-making because it's the least accomplished and most unpopular Congress in our nation's history.”

Now to be fair, in the past there may have been Senators that have run for President that have been more liberal in their voting records than Senator Obama. I’m willing to give Obama the benefit of doubt on this. Though he has been easily found to be the most liberal Senator currently.

Thompson also stated that Obama is the most inexperienced. Again I have not checked the entire Democratic past. But the fact that he has had 3 ½ years in the Senate, of which about 2 have been used to run for President, speaks for itself. Still credit should be given to his time in the Illinios Senate. Though in comparison to McCain, or even Vice Presidential candidate Biden he is weak in that argument.

As for the Democrat-led Congress, well I’ve already stated how ineffective they have been. Their quest to look good on news video clips dominated their time, and the historic lowest-approval ratings, and consistent lower (by about 10 points) ratings than the unpopular President Bush says more than any other argument.

John McCain is hardly the perfect Presidential candidate. He is even less perfect a Republican. And neither of these qualities is bad, especially when compared to a candidate that is even less perfect a candidate and more radically aligned with the furthest portion of his Party.

Some have criticized Fred Thompson’s speech at the RNC for not stating clearly that Senator McCain is not President Bush. I have to believe only the most myopic or the most blindly far-left cannot note the difference.

The differences between the 2 men has been noted in Primaries, policy decisions, and support from other politicians. Even just listening to the 2 men speak makes it apparent. But I do not fault the Democrats for their attempt to polispeak an illusory connection to a Senator that mere 2 years ago was the “Democrats Republican” and lauded by their Party.

Fred Thompson spoke at the Republican National Convention about the past, the experience, honor, and character of John McCain. Whether or not anyone likes or agrees with these things there is no dispute that they are facts. I cannot give a more detailed critique of something that is steeped in fact and avoided conjecture.

Labels: Al Gore, Fred Thompson, Presidential election race 2008, Republican National Convention, RNC, Senator Biden, Senator John McCain, Senator Lieberman

I searched through Youtube a bit and came up with this compilation on Gov. Sarah Palin. For those who are unfamiliar with her, here are her words on various interviews. You can make up your own thoughts on how she sounds and what she has to say on various subjects.

Energy




Education


Military


Giving Birth in Office


Life and Background


General


Scandal (name one candidate without one)


With Troops (I do not support every aspect of this video)


Security


Now this has not been the most comprehensive study of Gov. Palin’s past and her comments to the public. But I believe it does give some insight to the candidate.

I’m really interested in her debate with Senator Biden, and future speeches she makes.

Labels: Gov. Sarah Palin, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Biden, Vice-Presidential candidates

As the Democratic National Convention is about to start I want to step back and address a question I am often asked. Why am I not a supporter of Senator Obama?

I have been asked that by dozens of White Americans that presume I must be for Obama because he is Black. I have been asked that by almost as many African Americans for the same reasoning. And there are the far smaller group of Americans, of all color and ethnicity, that wonder because they presume I must agree with the Democratic Party policies.

So let me state this clearly, I do not support Senator Barrack Obama at this time. I doubt if I will ever support him. And I disagree with the Democratic policies he supports.

It’s not because I was a democrat and want to switch parties like the bitter Clinton Democrats. They are often White women, upset that a White woman was denied the chance to run for President. Their switch of support, like Debra Bartoshevich, seems like sour grapes more than anything else. And Democrats are responding in kind, splitting their party.



Which leads these Democrats to the right choice for the wrong reason.



Besides the fact that I think Democrats are a split party, created by the Clinton campaign, there are other issues.

Senator Obama has no experience. His own Vice Presidential pick has said he thinks Obama is unqualified. If Senator Biden, and Senator Clinton, agree with Senator John McCain how strong and qualified is Obama?

Senator Obama will be increasing taxes. He has already voted to do so for those making $31,850 or more. My belief he will limit himself to those making an unknown and ambiguous amount qualifying them as rich is shaky at best. His expressed view that businesses, of all sizes, need to pay more in taxes strikes me as harmful to a weak American economy.

Senator Obama has stated often that our dependence on foreign oil is bad. No surprise. Yet he still only considers the idea of domestic drilling. But how else will there be a stopgap to allow us to fund and create alternative energy sources? And his position on oil shale is directly Party line. How about cleaner coal? How about Nuclear energy?

Senator Obama is exclusive in his plans, targeting only the renewable energy plans that benefit stock positions held by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. How is that a grand benefit to America when only options that profit a few are considered? How is that different than the claims made by Democrats that Republicans are in the pocket of big oil, aren’t they in the pocket of Wind and corn ethanol (which has already increased the cost of food)?

Senator Obama has stated he would speak with any threat to America, no matter the provocation. He would speak with Iran, a nation that has sought the wholesale destruction of America and Israel for 30 years now. Like mere words would stop them from their declared God-given need to wipe us off of the earth. Obama is not God, especially to the

Senator Obama would run from Iraq as quickly as possible. There is no consideration for the outcome of such actions. There are no qualms about the probable increased threat to average Americans in their homes. Terrorism has not stopped since 9/11, it just hasn’t hit our homes stateside. But thousands of orphans given no choice and every reason to blame America will grow up looking to kill America. Just as they did at the end of the Gulf War, in 5 – 10 years they will strike American soil after a retreat that will be viewed in the Middle East as a defeat of America, and thus a vindication of Al Quida and other such groups.

Senator Obama wants to give millions the support of the Government. That in itself is not a bad thing, except that it is funded by Americans and perpetuates the ideal that America would rather feed the hungry rather than teach them to fish for themselves. It creates a culture that cannot support itself; and for those that think this means minorities remember that there are more Whites in prison, on welfare, and/or in Government care than all minority groups combined.

As I mentioned the Democratic Party is split. Not on substantive differences – as the voting records of Clinton and Obama are virtually the same. It is split on racial lines, due largely to the efforts of the Clinton campaign.

It is split with a Vice President that disagrees on key issues in a massive manner from the Democratic Presidential nominee he would work for. A VP that would not vote for a less experiences candidate, one that has done less bi-partisan work than he has in a decade. A VP that embodies the ‘old’ politics that Obama has railed against throughout the primaries.

So what makes Senator Obama the right man at this time?

Labels: Democratic National Convention, Democratic Party, energy alternatives, Iraq War, Nancy Pelosi, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator Hillary Clinton, tax increase

Well the political campaign ads for the Obama – Biden ticket are already coming out.



I notice that this ad finally notices that Darfur exists. Too bad Senator Obama did not have the balls to comment on it during the Primaries. Then again he had nothing to say about reparations either, just the same as Senator Joe Biden.

Of course the McCain campaign has already come up with a response.



I am glad that Senator Clinton is nowhere on the ticket. My thoughts on her are unchanged. She is too dangerous for America.

That said, she is right that Senator Obama has been scant in details on his plans. His definition of rich is ambiguous, his promise to lower taxes completely ignores small business owners. I disagree that Senator Obama’s friendship with Rezco is a definite problem. If it was some Chicago reporter would have found it by now.

But this Vice-President choice had me checking back to see what inconsistencies might be in the Obama campaign.

There is of course the fact that Biden disagrees with Obama on the experience needed for the Presidency, ‘old’ vs ‘new’ politics, healthcare, and of course Iraq. But that lead me to find the crazy polispeak of Senator Obama on Iraq.



Of course Senator Joe Biden disagrees with Senator Obama on Pakistan too. And has been to Iraq more.

Imagine the message this sends to the rest of the world when we know that the VP thinks the President uses “shorthand“ to discuss international policy, and the “wrong policy” at that.



If Democrats are happy with this match up, I can only imagine it’s because Senator Obama is the most liberal senator and Biden is in 3rd place. Other than that it will have to be political ads, because nothing else will work – without massive flip flops and polispeak to spin your head.

Labels: Polispeak, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Senator Clinton

To even be fairer to Senator Biden than I think he deserves, I’ve decided to look around and see what he has said directly. I won’t bother with comments that are purely passionate polispeak, but his statements on substantive issues. I’m looking for his comments on taxes, national security, energy, international policy, immigration and healthcare.

But before I get to those points I what to highlight another factor that is just as important. How does the potential Vice President relate to the various peoples of the nation. As is stated clearly by the moderator in this video clip, Biden is known to create more anger than he resolves.



Statements Biden has made include the comments against Senator Obama, insulting African Americans backhandedly. And there is his thoughts other ethnic groups as well



Or his pride about representing a former slave state, as if this is a motivation for southerners.



Now on taxes, Biden is the Democratic Party line. Tax the ‘wealthy’ and investments. Of course there is no thought given to the fact that average workers own investments too. And there are millions of IRA’s and 401K’s that potentially will be affected as well. But that’s not as important as symbolically saying that having money is evil.



In terms of Iraq, he is nowhere near his Democratic colleagues. Not that his plan is worse
than their ‘run and hope for the best’ plans, in fact it is better though I feel inadequate.



A bit on his views on religion in politics



Which I would have loved to follow with his thoughts on abortion, but I could not find. So I moved on to energy. Please note that his view is somewhat different than Senator Obama.

He speaks about foreign oil, but ignores domestic drilling (which would be an obvious way to give America more flexibility on energy independence – though it wouldn’t help the stock options of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats invested in renewable energy). He correctly mentions that corn ethanol is not the answer, but leaves out the fact that the use of this is and will continue to push up food prices. He says he’s for alternatives, but negates nuclear power, which Europe uses. Basically he is a Democratic drone on the subject.



National security? Nothing. Sounds like most Democrats.

Darfur? Nothing, though he has quoted how we helped end the genocide in Bosnia, and that no U.S. troops have died there in the last 10 years. He’s concerned about Bosnia, but could care less on Darfur it seems.

On immigration he flips in a live debate. He is against making a fence to stop illegal aliens, because they can get around it, but he voted for a fence, because it will stop drug trafficking. Now if illegal aliens can get around or over a fence how will it stop drug trafficers? And he wants to give the illegal aliens in the nation citizenship. Essentially saying that breaking a major law is ok and should be rewarded. Might as well just give citizenship to everyone who asks for it then, by that logic.



On healthcare he reminds us that he is not exactly a clean bill of health. But beyond that he wants the Government to provide funds for Catastrophic injuries and children. Which sounds great, but where does the Government come up with the extra trillion or hundreds of billions of dollars each year? Taxes, and not on just the rich, bet on that. And what if your company cannot afford the required insurance for each employee? And since there is no department of the Government that runs efficiently or on budget, ever, where does the money come for the inevitable increases?



But lastly these might be the most stinging and telling comments of Senator Joe Biden, yes in a commercial form from McCain’s campaign, about his thoughts on Senator Obama, and McCain.



So I leave you with this thought. If after all the polispeak and Democratic Party speaking points, Senator Biden has believed and said that McCain is ready and worthy of being President or Vice President and that Senator Obama is not, why would anyone vote for Obama – Biden?

Labels: Democratic Party, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Vice-Presidential candidates

So the Democratic Presidential ticket has been revealed. It’s Obama – Biden for 2008. Has this pick really done anything to help Senator Obama win the Presidency and become the first Black President? Has this improved the confidence of the nation in selecting these men as our leaders?

No. At least by me.

I reviewed some of the things that Senator Joe Biden has said in the past, his record in the Primary race, and what I noted about him. The summary is as follows.

Biden was able to take 5th place in the Iowa Primary, gaining a total of 1% of the vote which is inauspicious at best. In polls before the South Carolina Primary, when Stephen Colbert was seeking to enter, the results of potential voters placed Biden a mere .4% ahead of Colbert (Stephen Colbert was projected to have 2.3%, Biden had 2.7%}. Overall his total delegate count was 0. Biden never won a single state.

In my own unofficial polls, found on Black Entertainment USA, M V Consulting, and this site, which were available from 2007 until February 2008 Senator Biden garnered 3% of votes in a competition of Republicans and Democrats. That poll also showed that Senator Obama would win the Democratic Primary with 51%, and Senator McCain would win the Republican with 16%.

Senator Biden has in fact failed to win the Democratic Presidential nomination twice. In 1988 and again in 2008.

Senator Biden is older (56) than Senator Obama, and has far more experience in Congress as he holds the 6th longest term length ever. So it can be said that when viewed by the Obama campaign motto of Change; Senator Biden is the ‘old politics’ that Senator Obama is trying to ‘replace’.

Like Senator Obama, Biden is a lawyer. He attended University of Delaware and the Syracuse University (where he was found to have plagiarized a law review article in his first year). Unlike Senator Obama he has been found to be a liar about his time in college. He has claimed in the past that he had 3 degrees; he has 1, and graduated in the top half of his class, actually place just above the bottom 10%.

His views on Iraq and Afghanistan are mixed, and oppose the declared views of Senator Obama. While Obama favors the retreat in failure policy advocated by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Moveon.org and Code Pink, Senator Biden has offered an option that differs. He supported troops in Afghanistan. He voted for the War in Iraq – along with virtually every Democrat in elected office at the time (Senator Obama was not in elected office then). He was in favor of larger numbers of troops in Iraq, and has not quibbled about funding our troops (which Obama has). His ultimate plan for Iraq is the creation of 3 states and allowing each of those states to be semi-independent and semi-autonomous but still working as a nation together.

Also of note is the fact that in the 2004 Presidential election, Biden advised John Kerry to pick Senator John McCain as a Vice-President. If that is not a statement of how close to political center and bi-partisan Senator John McCain is I cannot imagine what is.

But of major significance to me is the comment of Senator Biden about Senator Obama. Before Obama was the Democratic nominee, back when Biden was still in the Primary race, before the media had fallen in lust with Obama, Biden said what he thought.

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man"

To which I ultimate stated

“Senator Biden needs to apologize to more than just Senator Obama. Every Black American deserves an apology. These comments are reminiscent of the mentality that necessitated the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s. These comments belittle every success and successful Black American in the nation. Hiding behind one term in a statement whose total purpose is too subtly insult will not fool us. The mainstream media may not wish to address this but I will.

For me, Senator Biden will never get my vote… But the underlying thought of his statement cannot be warmed-over by platitudes or a plea of a single term misstatement. The meaning of the full comment does not change. That meaning places me and 14% of America in a second-class, less than meaningful position. I will not accept that of an American President or politician if possible.”

So I will add this to my comment.

I would not vote for Senator Biden as President when his opinion of over 14% of this nation is demeaning and a throwback to the pre-Civil Rights years. That same reasoning prevents me from voting him into the 2nd highest position in America.

Senator Obama may feel that Biden is a solid mix, but I find his thinking flawed. Biden is an example of old politics – the kind that failed to come up with any energy alternatives in 30 years (Biden was first elected to office in 1972 before the Oil Crisis). Biden is a proven liar and cheat. Biden conflicts with Obama on how to resolve Iraq, and he has a proven zero appeal among Democratic primary voters.

If there was a question about how well Senator Obama could do in the Presidential election I feel it is now answered. I cannot fathom how he can win with Senator Biden on the ticket. Prepare for a McCain Presidency.

Labels: Democratic National Convention, Iraq War, moveon.org, Nancy Pelosi, Presidential election race 2008, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Biden, Stephan Colbert

I don’t think Senator Biden is a racist. I really don’t. I think his comments though betray a mindset that pervades America and is implicit of the double standard in American society. This mindset is deeply entrenched in the 45 and older age group in America. Sadly they are also the ones that do the most voting, helping to pass laws or failing to do so.

I think most have heard of what Senator Biden said. "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," he said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man." These comments have started a flurry of comments. I have been waiting to hear more from Sen. Biden, and I have been unsurprised at his follow-up.

Some have readily accepted that Senator Biden misspoke. That the reactions to his words are extreme. Some feel that since he is a Democrat, the media and therefore the public are taking this in stride; and that if a Republican had said the same words an uproar would have occurred. To some extent all are correct. But I have no doubt that there was a clear secondary meaning that he did not even notice he made. It’s so subtle that he just blew past it.

To say Senator Obama is ‘articulate’, ‘clean’, and a ‘nice-looking guy’ is to belittle him. It’s a back-handed compliment at best. And not much of a compliment at that. Perhaps the Senator meant clean-cut, though that implies a description of looks and not quality of character. Senator Biden has said he intended, and should have used, the term fresh. Again that implies a description of look and not quality. The only positive part of the comment is that he called Senator Obama bright. Of course that was mitigated by his further stating that Senator Obama is a storybook, which implied that he is unreal or something that only little children would believe. Wow, what a nice compliment.

I am highly upset with the articulate comment. It implies that African Americans are generally incapable of being eloquent speakers. While rap and hip-hop may be popular, there are millions of African Americans that speak as well, if not better than Senator Biden. Several entertainers in fact speak better, when not in their on-stage personas (like Mr. Eddie Murphy, Mr. Marin Lawrence, Queen Latifah, Mr. Dave Chappelle and many others). This same kind of thinking was used to describe Former Secretary of State Colin Powell. It is this mentality that is used to insult African Americans while seeming to compliment us. It directly attacks the thought that intelligent African Americans are anything but a rare occurrence.

The use of the term clean, where many have focused, is very straight-forward. It implies, like all of his statement, the look of Senator Obama. This troubles me. From the mistaken thought that African Americans are dark because we are ‘dirty’ to bring the thought that the average Black American fails to have good hygiene. Both are false, shallow-witted thoughts.

The fact that Senator Obama is not ugly, detracts from his abilities. Most Senators, and Presidents, are anything but model quality in looks – to me. Yet I do not recall hearing that as part of their platforms which the public votes on. American Idol yes, politicians no. The looks of a politician have no bearing on their ability, but when a person seeks something nice to say – and they have no real positive comment – statements about superficial, transitory, subjective fluff fill in nicely for real substance. If done right it can even be used as a positive soundbite to gain attention.

So while Senator Biden, Democrats and some bloggers (like the one at Main and Central by Lurch who is mostly neutral but supporting the misspoken view) wish to try to turn this into a one term gaff, the totality of the comment do not reflect that in my view. The fact that there are no other politicians that are referred to in such belittling and cursory terms further supports my thought. That is unless the figure is an African American – such as Ms. Condolezza Rice, Mr. Colin Powell and so forth.

The belittling is further compounded in that Senator Biden relegates all other Black Americans that have run for President as insignificant or non-existent. Sen. Biden may wish to compliment and acknowledge Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, and former Representative Shirley Chisholm now, but his thought at the time as conveyed by his words and full context of the statement is clear to me.

This was not a misstatement. This was not a miscommunication. The theme is clear and supported by the totality of the statement. Words are very powerful, and when taken as a whole make a visceral comment that can go beyond the actual words. Sadly many in America don’t fully understand the words being used, as opposed to college English majors, teachers, salesmen, or a politician as examples. Those that rely on words to convey their thoughts to achieve a goal do understand completely what they say.

Senator Biden needs to apologize to more than just Senator Obama. Every Black American deserves an apology. These comments are reminiscent of the mentality that necessitated the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s. These comments belittle every success and successful Black American in the nation. Hiding behind one term in a statement whose total purpose is too subtly insult will not fool us. The mainstream media may not wish to address this but I will.

For me, Senator Biden will never get my vote. He will not receive a letter to investigate his views, as I have done of other Presidential candidates. Perhaps this is rash, or an over-reaction. I accept that it may be. But the underlying thought of his statement cannot be warmed-over by platitudes or a plea of a single term misstatement. The meaning of the full comment does not change. That meaning places me and 14% of America in a second-class, less than meaningful position. I will not accept that of an American President of politician if possible.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: African American, Colin Powell, Condolezza Rice, democrat, republican, Senator Barak Obama, Senator Biden