Posted by Incognito (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, I really didn't expect to be the first to post a comment relating to this article.

McCain went to Washing for a photo opp. Negotiations were well on the way when he arrived! During meetings, it is well noted that McCain hardly said anything, he just sat idle. So now he plays the blame game.

Oh well.........

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 12:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If you want to see political deception in action, look at the Republican Party and how they do things. McCain is TOTALLY more of the same.

Whenever a party that is 38% of the country wants to rule 100% of the people, you gotta figure there will be some blue smoke and mirrors involved -- and more than a few distortions and performances.

What is amaziing is how Bush, Rove, Tom Delay and company were talking OPENLY just a few years ago about how they could gerrymander and rig it so the kept a PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY. That should have scared patriots to send them packing. Republicans were wanting to make democracy obsolete! THROW THEM OUT!

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 5:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081001/us...

Latest TIME poll --Read it and weep -- or celebrate

Posted by time4change (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People who like the way the economy has been run under President Bush's policies should vote for Senator McCain. He would be a continuation of the Bush policies. If you like Bush's policies, you will love McCain's. But if you want change, vote for Obama. He is the only hope for change.

Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 6:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Below are a few lines from Obama's books; In his words!

From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'

From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

And FINALLY the Most Damming one of ALL of them!!!
From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 7:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I saw that list being circulated on the right-wing-nut sites.

Notice how much of the Obama slur is quotes taken by Obama opponent folks out of context and offered as a line or two?

Quotes offered by folks who NEVER read the books.

Best story on that I heard was posted a while back that had a clip of Rev. Wright's sermon that was clipped to make him look radical -- the whole sermon -- was actually a great sermon. The clips looked like he was a madman.

Pundits are saying to expect McCain to turn on the nasty factory, since the population seems to be rejecting him and Palin on their own merit. Every Republican since Eisenhower has used extreme nasty tactics except Ford -- and he lost. That's what it takes to elect a minority party.

Her's an example for folks smart enough to understand context:

"Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant
communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging.

They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

You see Fire, not even your quote is accurate or honest.

Posted by jrn59 (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 7:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

fire39212: interesting observations, but watch out, hate mail is coming! I have nothing against the man, just think he does not have the leadership skills to keep this country safe and feel he would do better for our country if he would remain in the Senate and perhaps somehow gain more knowledge. McCain/Palin the best there is! JMO

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I would say that the hate mail is not only coming it has arrived. In the form of fire's list of quotes. It's a stealth mail, disguised as serious quotes.

Truth is, all of those quotes have contexts that make them different than advertised.

If we want government to get better we have to resist electing people who get elected by telling us simple lies. If all politicians lie we have to dump the ones who lie the most.

Posted by jrn59 (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 8:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Senate just passed bailout bill! Obama & McCain both voting for the bill!!!

Posted by Teach4Peace (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 5:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Now that McCain HAS decided to vote for the bill, has he now put Washington before the people? Typical pandering and slandering.

Posted by jrn59 (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 6:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama voted for the bail out, did he put Washington before the people? Typical pandering and slandering ya think?

McCain/Palin - the best there is!

Posted by notfromnatchez (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's all applaud. Obama ACTUALLY voted.

Posted by Teach4Peace (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama/Biden! The BEST there is!!!

JRN59, my comment was based off the FACT that McCain is the ONE who in the beginning, wanted it to appear that he was so pro-voter until he RAN back to
Washington, "suspended" his campaign, all in a move to pander to the public but this didn't work. He accused Obama of only caring about Wall Street and not the voter because Obama stayed on the campaign trail. Your comment is foolish at best because your choice for President did in fact pander, it just did not and is not working for him.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

notfromnatchez -- are you trying to slur Obama's voting record? What was he a hundred less missed votes than McCain?

I remember you were the one who "knew" Sarah Palin and she was so wonderful and smart and all that.

I wonder what McCain has said to himself about Sarah in the last few weeks. Wonder if he blames her or blames himself.

My wife said McCain was cruel to put Palin and family through such embarrassment.

There are good reasons the more educated you are the more likely you are to be a Democrat.

Posted by jrn59 (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Republicans are the most educated, have attended college, have degrees, maintain good ethics and good jobs. Therefore, educated people lean toward Republicans.

Just wonder after this is all over and Barack Hussein Obama is YOUR president, will you stand proud, when the money is depleted, sent to Kenya or wherever, there is no military and no one, but no one protects America. Think about it! The very best, knowledgeable, educated and so ready to serve: Senator John McCain; however obama is leading in electoral votes & thats what counts.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Pew Research Center says you are wrong jrn59.

Read the whole article -- to see the truth.

As usual you say things are not true and just don't care enough to check on yourself.

http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=9...

A few quotes -- it is a complicated study that shows me right. Read it.

"Liberals have the highest education level of any typology group ­ 49% are college graduates and 26% have some postgraduate education. But the Enterprisers also include a relatively high percentage of college graduates (46%), although fewer Enterprisers than Liberals have attended graduate school (14%)............

Huge disparities in education also divide both Democratic and Republican typology groups. Just 13% of Disdvantaged Democrats have completed college (9% college grads, 4% postgraduate), compared with nearly half of Liberals. Educational differences between Liberals and Conservative Democrats are nearly as large (49% vs. 16%).

Among Republicans, just 15% of Pro-Government Conservatives have completed college, compared with 45% of Enterprisers. There also are wide disparities in education among the three independent groups, with Upbeats (37%) far more likely to have completed college than Bystanders (13%) or Disaffecteds (11%)."

Read the article to see how they classify the various groups they compare. This is one of many studies on this matter.

DEMOCRATS tend to be better educated than Republicans. People in the Deep South cannot believe that because they see Democrats as the blacks of the state.

We have a lot of poor,uneducated people PERIOD here, due to the fact it is a conservative state and run by conservative principles. Face it. It only hurts for a little while.

Posted by notfromnatchez (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have stated before...MS and LA are strong republican states and nothing Yeahuhuh, oldhip "replacement" or southernwhiner say will make a difference.

Why don't you guys go to another blog in one of the swing states and try arguing your case there?

Perhaps you might be out of your league trying to spread your propaganda there.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes you are right notfromnatchez it would be easier for you to perpetuate the untruths were we not here. But I think your judgement about Sarah is going to snuff itself out.

I know it's hard seeing your election unravel. But we care about our town.

You see, liberal types are capable of discussing these matters endlessly, and your side is much more preoccupied with payoff. You don't really care what is true or not, as long as you are winning or whining -- consoling each other.

We put a different twist on "love it or leave it". We are not going to leave it because we love it. I already am working blogs in the swing states. The miracle of the internet means we can do both.

Posted by natchezsouthside (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"McCain/Palin the best there is!"

If they are the best, we are royally screwed.

Posted by natchezsouthside (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 3:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If Republicans are so smart and highly educated, how come all the republican politicians can't figure out how to get Mississippi out of the bottom of all the state rankings?

Republicans have been running MS for decades, and yet there is rampant poverty, illiteracy, disease, and teen pregnancy. In addition, the social welfare programs in the state are overwhelming. They are NEVER cut back.

Why don't the Republicans who run MS solve the problems? Cut social welfare programs? Cut taxes for working people? End free handouts in the state? Why??? Why are my taxes always going up? I thought Republicans were for less taxes!

Why is MS so poor, stupid, broke, fat, sick, etc etc? Seems obvious to me that it's because it is a Republican dominated state and they don't know how to do anything but tax and spend.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeahuhuh, Palin is going to blow Biden out of the water tonight.

You and everyone else in this country is going to find out just how much Obama replicates Carter just as his VP replicates Carter's in 1976. In 1976, the vice presidential debate between Walter Mondale (D) and Bob Dole (R) took place. And, more than likely WORD FOR WORD, Biden's opening speech will sound exactly like Mondale's opening speech.

If Obama becomes president, let's hope there will be another Reagan running in 2012. Above many other things, Obama lacks leadership skills the most. You Obama supporters are greedy and delusional to think this economy can handle Obama's "changes".

Posted by Incognito (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To be honest, I feel sorry for Sarah. Did anyone see the interview with Katie?

People are talking about Obama's lack of leadership, but what I can't understand is where was this so called qualification when GWB ran for the White House? Obama is a Harvard Grad. and former Professor of Consititutional Law.

I read an article yesterday that stated if Obama wasn't black, he'd be up in the polls an additional 7percentage points. One individual interviewed said that he would not vote for Obama because Obama is black. For some reason, there seems to be this misconception concerning black people in America. People have stated, "Oh, Michelle is an angry black woman" but what's left out of the media is that she is a Princeton and Harvard educated mother of 2, who has enjoyed a career in the legal and management/administrative professions.

It seems that in America, it's fine to have a double standard, and yet say, All men are created equal(ly).

Posted by jrn59 (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thomas Sowell, Syndicated Columnist said,"although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things-using the mantra of "change" endlessly-the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s. Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not-all this is a re-run of the 1960s. We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in the years that followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit unemployment. During the 1960s, ghettoes across the countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully recovered to this day." And Barack Hussein Obama appears to be the presidential choice for many. God help us, I experienced the 60's & it was not a pretty sight. Yes McCain/Palin IS the best there is. So think of this when you vote.

Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 6:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Below are a few lines from Obama's books; In his words!

From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

And FINALLY the Most Damming one of ALL of them!!!
From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

Posted by Whisper (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 7:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Does anyone remember having to smack your old record player to make it move on?????????

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 9:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I feel sorry for everyone being brain-washed by the bias media (a good example would be this article courtesy of Natchez Democrat).

And as much as everyone wanted, Sarah Palin did not look foolish or stutter. Biden was a windbag full of blabber.
What parent sends their kids to school anyway? What happened to Tops or getting a part time job and putting yourself through school like everyone else?

It is not the middle class who is hurting, it is the lower class who is too lazy to get out and get a job. WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE TYPES OF PEOPLE?

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 9:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And incognito, if Obama wasn't black, would he still have over 90% black votes? Think about that. Once again, racism works BOTH WAYS. Quit bringing up one side without providing info about the other. And if you want to talk about Michelle, try researching her thesis concerning black inequality from Princeton.

You can state all you want, but if Obama was white, would you go to these lengths to show your support?

It is so upsetting and unfair that the black people can talk about black communities, black equality, black power... BUT if a white person said ANYTHING remotely similar to this, riots are started. WHY?

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 10:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well yomama it looks like Palin didn't blow anybody out of the water. I'm happy she didn't embarrass herself.

You sure do seem insecure about that 15%of blacks in this country, yomama. You know that's why I quit being a redneck -- I decided rednecks were often at least as obnoxious as blacks, and all of a sudden I didn't have to worry so much about blacks taking over. Whooda thunk I would be voting for one, one day for president?

If white folks could be racists in lockstep for 100 years when they owned blacks and another 100 after they got free, I would expect a little racism still around from blacks only 50 years after the Civil Rights bill. And having pride in electing one of their own is the most reasonable type of racial preference.

If he was offering policies like McCain I bet he wouldn't get the black vote. Are you saying he would? That black folks are that racial about their voting that the policies don't matter? Say it.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 11:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In the matter of foreign policy he is not that different Yh, at least not if he intends to accept advice from Brezinski. 'The Grand Chessboard' is not that different an ideology than 'Rebuilding America's Defenses'. They are both a doctrinaire of Anglo-American supremacy- how fitting that Obama would be chosen to help carry it forth.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeahuh, Policies based on a person's race SHOULD NOT BE WHAT GETS THEM INTO OFFICE. I am sick and tired of hearing all of the blabbering about racial inequality when it no longer exist. Now, how about on to something else such THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY! Yeahuhuh, you are a judgemental fool. You come on here and try to throw you radical opinions around as if they are all that should matter.
And since when do you "Stop being a redneck", sorry buddy, but that is in your system for life.

And Palin did blow him out of the water. What an idiot for him to say things like "It is man who is causing global warming", since when is he a scientist. I spoke with a Oceanographer last week about this topic. This person stated that this earth is going through the same cyclistic warming/cooling behavior which has existed millions of years. What a fool Biden is... Go follow your fool and allow yourself to be part of the destruction of this country. They are just using global warming as another excuse for people to vote for them.

Like I said before, I hope there is a Reagan running for office in 2012 to fix what the young (and inexperienced) Obama has destructed. Oh and what happpened to your generic excel charts you so heavily relied on before? It made since what I said about Clinton right? SAY IT!

And enkikur, leadership skills require more than being a Harvard graduate as well as a teacher. If that was the case, several thousands of people could be qualified for that position.

McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by destiny (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well if all the obama fans have their way and put obama in office, they will soon see their mistake. The only pitiful thing about it, they will probably never trust another Black man. That is a great shame for there are many Black people who love America and want only what is best for the people. The only difference is the color of skin. Their wants, their desires are the same. They want a good solid America, full of hope for the future for their children. Red, Yellow, Black and White, all good people have all the same desire for America. Obama is not one of these people. Please wait until the right one comes along for there will be many more and when he/she comes along the animosity will fall to the wayside and we will be able to elect a good leader. Obama is not the right choice for now and probably never will be. But one day a fine gentleman or woman of our many nationalities will come to the fore front and be elected by a landslide. In your rush to put a Black man in office, I beg of you to wait. The right one will come along. He or she is out there somewhere and God will bring he/she to the forefront. obama is not the one.

Posted by natchezsouthside (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

destiny: You are a proven racist and your opinion is invalid because of it.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

ntzsouthside, the fact that over 90% of Black Americans voted for Obama in the primaries only shows that racism is everywhere. Their opinion seems pretty valid to me.

Quit trying to make racism such a white to black agenda when it WORKS BOTH WAYS!!!!!!

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah, it really makes since to RAISE taxes when unemployment in this country is down for the 10th straight month.

Posted by drawpaintsing (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

..................and 80% of whites won't vote for Obama, because he is black.

So you are correct, Obamayama, this race agenda does work both ways.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 10:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

NO sorry to break it to you drawpaintsing, but over 40% of whites in some states voted for Obama. YOU ARE WRONG, sorry, nice try.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And where did you get those statistics drawpaintsing, your ingenius mind? Please do not throw around numbers on here without have sources to back them up. IF you want sources from me, try doing some research. Any opinion I form is a result from ACTUAL DATA and FACTS, not some made up mumbo jumbo.

Posted by drawpaintsing (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, Obama, you are right. Maybe I should have done my homework, instead of giving an unresearched figure. I chose to respond to you because I thought you were the only one on here that I can at least kid around with. Maybe I chose the wrong day and wrong article to joke about this. Maybe I forgot to include, LOL! My little ingenius mind is just as smart as yours. On the contrary, my post was half right. Therefore, I will take my ingenius, but very well-educated and intellegent mind and mind my business from now on. You do what you do best. I'm just as smart as you are.

Posted by Incognito (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Republicans preped her well enough. Did anyone hear her say that (concerning financial cuts), "I didn't make any promises, I've only been at this for 5 weeks". Huh? Palin brings this soccer mom presence that should be found on the soccer field. This country consists more of just soccer moms and joe six pack.

Obamaya... Please note that at the start of the Democratic Primary, Clinton had more than 50% of the black vote. It has been noted that some white voters will not vote for Obama because he is black.

Posted by Incognito (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

A recent article stated that if Obama wasn't black, he would be up an additional 7 percentage points.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If he weren't a socialist it would be up more than that Incognito, and a radical socialist at that.

I predict that within twenty years we will be choosing our president from a television show called something like "America's Next President!".

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The US has shed 159,000 jobs, the 9th straight monthly drop so LET'S RAISE TAXES. The truth hurts incognito and enkikur. Dance around it all you want, but the truth is raising taxes right now when our economy is this unstable will only hurt the US people more.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Since we already have reduced taxes to the point that we are writing red-ink checks, maybe we better think of another way to stimulate jobs other than spending ourself into the hole in a way that has not worked well enough so far.

If you give tax rebates to people who export hiring overseas it won't work to stimulate OUR economy.

If you want to stimulate our economy you give tax rebates to the middle class, not the investor class. The middle class tends to spend their money here.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing for the 1000th time and expecting a different result. That describes Bush/McCain policies perfectly.

Posted by Incognito (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Taxes will increase for those who earn $250,000. Look, Obamaya, let's be straight, taxes will probably increase no matter who becomes president. Remember this, "No new taxes" from GWB senior.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

An exercise in logic from Obamayamama:

"Any opinion I form is a result from ACTUAL DATA and FACTS"

"And Palin did blow him out of the water."

"Oh and what happpened to your generic excel charts you so heavily relied on before?"

"What parent sends their kids to school anyway?"

"It is not the middle class who is hurting, it is the lower class who is too lazy to get out and get a job."

"Yeahuhuh, Palin is going to blow Biden out of the water tonight."

"Biden's opening speech will sound exactly like Mondale's opening speech."

"Your hypocritical name-calling followed by your illeracy is certainly entertaining. You must NOT have went to school in Vidalia."

"Judgemental people are still alive and well in Natchez, MS. Yet another reason why I am so proud for "cheating the system" and not going to Ntz schools."

"Try zipping that smart-elick mouth of yours once in a while and maybe someone will listen."

"if you feel so bad for those Iraqians, THEN GO OVER THERE."

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are right Yeah., But additionally Obama will GIVE TAX REBATES to BUSSINESSES that create JOBS HERE!! The AMERICAN PEOPLE want CHANGE and while McCain tryed to jump on the "CHANGE" Wagon but Biden pointed out the fact last night in the Debate that he hadn't heard one thing that the MCCain/ Palin Ticket would do different from The Bush Admn.. McCain has pulled his people out of Mich. and give up there. If he looses one more of the five remaining battle ground States,( all of which are within a point or two)......

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oops, to continue the above....... He can't get enough Electorial College Votes to win..........

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 4:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CAN'T GET ENOUGH ELECTORAL VOTES TO WIN

That's what I'm talkin about!!!!!

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

WOW yeahuhuh, I feel really flattered that you actually went back though all of my comments to spit all of them back. You must not be too attractive... to have that much time on your hands shows me that you must not have much of a personal life.

You forgot this one: I just hope that there is another Reagan running for office in 2012 to fix all of the screw up that Obama will make.

And this one: The only difference between Obama/Biden and Carter/Mondale is... wait, there is no difference.

How about regurgitating all of those comments I made that you ignored such as my comments toward those excel charts (which by the way, since pointing out the statistical implication, you haven't mentioned those again)? Oh and how about how Obama says he wants this country to be rid of foreign oil in 10 years YET he stands behind "No Drilliing" in the GoM? How insane is that???

You think you are so intelligent, but in reality, you are really no more than a joke and you know it. SO you spend you days soaked in admiration for another human being waiting for someone to dare insult the admired Barack Obama so you can pounce. Really pathetic... and creepy. You know, I would go back through all of your unwitty, arrogant remarks you have made toward other non-Obama supporters, but I have MUCH better things to do. It is Friday, time to get in the convertible, let my hair down, cruise around, and have some fun. After all, I HAVE A LIFE!

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Face it. It only hurts for a little while.

How long will it take you this time yeahuhuh?

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Like everyone else on the planet, I watched Governor Palin attempt to debate Senator Biden last night.

In general, there wasn't a car crash of moose-killing proportions. It was just more of the same -- someone who was so far out of her league on the issues that she could not help but be as nervous as a baby seal at a polar bear pot luck. This came out when she kept calling General David McKiernan, our commander in Afghanistan, "General McClellan."

I worked for General McKiernan for a few months in 2002-2003. A damn fine officer who does his job and does it well. A good commander, loved by his troops, who has one of the hardest jobs on the planet. Thanks to the Surge and the war in Iraq, he's had to fight his war -- the real war against Al Qa'ida and the Taliban, those fellows who planned and attacked the United States on 9/11 -- with a bare minimum of troops, sketchy logistical support and one of the most hostile terrains on the planet. And he is doing a good job.

I never worked for General George Brinton McClellan, but I know who he was. McClellan was the commander of the Army of the Potomac in 1861-1862. He was beloved by his soldiers, but was far, far from a good commander. His Grand Army landed on the James River Peninsula in the spring of that year, and after a series of battles (called "The Seven Days" battles), was soundly thrashed by the Confederates led by Robert E. Lee. He was temporarily removed by Lincoln, only reassuming command after the debacle of Second Bull Run. He led the Federals at Antietam in September 1862, but after failing to destroy Lee's army, was finally removed by Lincoln.

Governor Palin, I know General McKiernan, and he is no George McClellan
Robert Mackey

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yo mama, you are such a blow-hard, I should have added these:

"And this one: The only difference between Obama/Biden and Carter/Mondale is... wait, there is no difference." You forgot to say "to me".

"You must not be too attractive... to have that much time on your hands shows me that you must not have much of a personal life." (You should ask my hot wife and my friends)

"You think you are so intelligent, but in reality, you are really no more than a joke and you know it." (you should ask my hot wife and my accountant about that, too.)

Now yomama -- and I think it a Freudian choice your username,

About your constant fascination with Excel? Do you think if you graph something in Excel it somehow makes it -- book larnin' or something your vodoo doesn't quite get? A liberal trick?

It makes you look dumb to rag on about which program those graphs were prepared in as if it was the word "liberal" or something that damned them to disbelief.

You should call them "Graphs of Deficit Spending that show Republicans are always Deficit Spenders." Don't hold it against them that someone used Excel to make the graphs -- in makes you sound like a software racist!

If you're too dumb to understand those charts, exactly how resonsible for it can I be Yomama? Take some credit for your own sorry understanding.

The only thing worse than a crackhead welfare mama is a white, conservative who can't understand a graph and whines like a baby and blames someone else for it. No, there are plenty of worse things, he,he! McCain for president and Palin for National soccer mom VP would be two.

Lighten up Yomama or I'll whip you down and have you writing me another nasty retort in private.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fact check on CNN today showed that Biden was right on the quote from General McKiernan, and that Palin was wrong.

Biden didn't correct Palin for not knowing the man's name but he did just repeat -- "yes, he said that". Classy man.

Palin is a hero for people who think perky is superior to right and who don't think it is important to answer the questions.

She looked like a little girl who insisted she was entitled to not answer the questions at the debate -- preferring instead to steal 90 minute of free advertising for canned sound bites.

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 6:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'll give Sarah Biden one/fifth of a star for her debate performance since she didn't say the bailout was all about health care as she did in the Katie Couric interview.

I was also impressed that she didn't drag a gun or pit bull (not even a moose, for that matter) up on the stage with her and didn't threaten to shoot or physically attack Senator Biden.

That's all I could find to admire.

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

SouthernWoman, you forgot that she didn't loose Blader controle, LOL. I had heard previous to the Debate that expectations had been set so low for her, that was all she had to avoid. LMAO !!

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes Yeah., I saw that today and Keith just pointed it out again. He also did George Bush and Sarah Palin, juxtaposed and projected simultaneously and there was so much semilarity that it was scary.

Yes, the Media had already tiped off McCain's people that Biden was going to be walking on Egg Shells to avoid being called a bully, so she just re-hashed her acceptance speech in 90 sec. segmants.............

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

[ similarity ]

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well just look at y'all down here chattering away amongst yourselves. I guess all the Republicans are down at the streetdance having fun. :)

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad,

Are any sorta scruffy-looking people allowed into the dance?

Did the Republicans party planners invite any southern Democrats who turned Republican after the civil rights legislation was passed (the republican leadership uses another term for this group) or the religious right (the republican leadership also uses another term for this group).

I think not - the Republicans leaders mouth some buzzwords on the tv to keep these groups voting Republican but they sure won't dance with 'em.

I bet they are dancing to the tune of "Twist (as in spin) and Shout".

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

southernwoman, I think everyone is allowed into the dance and I doubt a party membership card is required for entrance. You should trot on down and enjoy yourself. Wish I could be there myself.

You reckon California's "first couple" know how to dance without it turning into a fight?

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad, oh, I think Arnold may be a closet Democrat. It could be a conspiracy!

James Carville & Mary Matalin seem to do just fine but if anything happens to their relationship, I'll be on his side.

I have some republicans in my family (true) but I don't speak to them (kidding).

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

southernwoman, I understand completely. I could be in family trouble if I did not post anonymously.

By the way, I see that the Episcopalians have voted to apologize for slavery.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/E...

Can you tell me if the Democrats have apologized for it yet? Sorry, but I don't remember.

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Old Grand Dad,

Thank you for the link. I read the article and admire the Episcopalians for apologizing for slavery. I'm sure many of the major slaveholders were Episcopalian, as I've noticed more Episcopal churches along the river, where the most fertile land and many plantations were located, than in other parts of Mississippi. Too, as a group, the Episcopalians seemed to be wealthier (and better educated) than other religious groups at that time and maybe even now.

The U.S. has apologized for slavery. Here is an excerpt from the apology and you can read the entire apology at the address below the excerpt if you would like:

"The fact is, slavery and Jim Crow are stains upon what is the greatest nation on the face of the earth and the greatest government ever conceived by man. But when we conceived this government and said all men were created equal we didn't in fact make all men equal, nor did we make women equal. We have worked to form a more perfect union, and part of forming a more perfect union is laws, and part of it is such as resolutions like we have before us today where we face up to our mistakes and we apologize, as anyone should apologize for things that were done in the past that were wrong. And we begin a dialogue that will hopefully lead us to a better understanding of where we are in America today and why certain conditions exist."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...

I believe you would be a great mentor for some disadvantaged young man!

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 11:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Southernwoman, thanks for that. So many different groups are apologizing for past stuff nowadays its hard to keep track. But after reading the article about the Episcopalians I remembered having read what this nice lady had to say:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/0...

I'm not always up and up on the finer details of history. If Episcopalians were major slave holders I wonder what party they would have belonged to? I'll have to research it one day I guess. :)

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad,

I don't know what party the Episcopalians favored either, but I'd guess they were mostly Democrats (as the party was defined in that era; polar opposite of the modern Democratic party). If I can find a good source, I'll post it.

The problem with the gatewaypundit article is that the author would have me believe that today's Republican party has done more to move our black population into the mainstream of American life than today's Democratic party has done. Nice trick, if she could have pulled it off.

Sorry, I was around when Lyndon Johnson signed the civil rights legislation and said he was turning the south over to the republican party for many years to come and that's what happened. Do you know any self respecting klan sympathizer who would join the Democratic party today?

I remember in parts of Mississippi when, in some counties, there was not a single black person registered to vote and black men were prohibited from wearing white shirts and on and on. That changed during Lyndon Johnson's presidency.

Also, I remember when some of the current republicans and/or their parents and grandparents cussed Eleanor Roosevelt because she was a you know what lover and how they loathed Jack Kennedy when he introduced meaningful civil rights legislation.

Now some of these same people are praising JFK. I'm trying to sort that out.

Some congressmen and senators reluctantly changed their stance on civil rights legislation and historians point out that it took Lyndon Johnson's knowledge of the operation of the Senate and knowing "where the bodies were buried", arm twisting, shaming and promises of goodies for their states and districts to get it done.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 3:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"today's Republican party has done more to move our black population into the mainstream of American life than today's Democratic party has done"

I don't see that they (Republican Party) have been successful is this, but I do believe they have tried. Recent Secretaries of State and National Security Advisors come to mind. Earlier administrations used tokens in positions like HUD.

"Do you know any self respecting klan sympathizer who would join the Democratic party today?"

Not fair, since I don't know any klan sympathizers. And those that may exist deserve respect from none including themselves.

"I remember in parts of Mississippi when, in some counties, there was not a single black person registered to vote and black men were prohibited from wearing white shirts and on and on. That changed during Lyndon Johnson's presidency."

Oops. I will plead too young to remember that. But it sounds like gang stuff to me. Dispicable.

"Now some of these same people are praising JFK"

Ain't that the way it is? Thats sort of like the Democrats who now want to praise Reagan. Go figure. :)

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Grandad, look at it this way, you know for sure Klan sympathizers or the still-racist families of former klan members will be voting with white racists, anti-socialist elements, pro-gun elements, and anti-choice elements AGAINST Democrats, especially right now. And THAT is quite a party mix.

And it has always been that way, since Johnson signed the Civil Rights Bill and southern whites fled the Democratic Party. It doesn't matter who Dems and Republicans were before that happened -- the party roles reversed insofar as the black vote and the anti-black vote then.

Southern whites have always been in lockstep because so many of them vote for whatever cultural, economic and political force there is that stands against southern blacks. No need to even mention blacks directly, but that is what the vote comes down to I am afraid.

Unless I am mistaken, the Episcopal Church was once called the Anglican -- also the Republican Church. It was a primary tory faith, the faith of the landed gentry in the South in the ealy 1800's. An apology for slavery would be appropriate from them.

I think most of the Democrats who praise Reagan are confused or kissing tail so Republicans will listen to them for a minute. And I think most Republicans that speak kindly of Kennedy are trying to absorb some credit for Kennedy's actions to help blacks with liberty.

There are a lot of Republicans that cite how the Dixiecrat-Democrats were the racists and the Republican Party was the champion of freedom for blacks. Half true at best in modern times ending in 1964. That might have been true 150 years ago when it was Industrial Republicans against agricultural Democrats, but that is a bit of a fib since the Civil War, and absolutely a fib since 1964.

It was the national Democratic Party that finally had enough and launched the Civil Rights Bill -- pushed through by northern Democrats and Republicans who no longer would tolerate the racism of the South. THAT ACT caused the Dixiecrats to go where white racists were more comfortable -- directly to Nixon and the Republican Party. That is where they remain.

IF Republicans did vote in the majority for the Civil Rights Bill, it was in the next election that Buchanan and Nixon openly decided to forget courting black voters and stroke the former Dixiecrats -- it was a good political deal for the GOP. An easy exchange and will show how easily Republican priorites can compromise themselves for political advantage.

To the moral of the story, you don't have to be a white racist to be a Republican -- but if you're a white racist you probably won't be a Democrat. Southern whites became one of the cobbled together special interest votes that gave the GOP a coalition so the 38% Party can get elected.

I don't vote on racial grounds, but all of this is history of how the parties have used race to win. And still do.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeahuhuh, You are mighty brave to write so many words when we have no idea how soon the Democrat will send this into oblivion. Seems like they would at least pass them to the back pages for a few days or so.

"you don't have to be a white racist to be a Republican -- but if you're a white racist you probably won't be a Democrat."

I absolutely agree with that. But I also agree it has an opposite side. :)

Color blind politics maybe one day.........

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I wonder how others feel, and I know how a lot of people feel.

The white majority decided -- well 50 something percent of them did in 1964 -- that we were done with racism.

Here 50+ years later a lot of white people still have not jumped on the bandwagon. Crime statistics show an alarming skew in black incarceration, leading to the overwhelming conclusion that law enforcement seeks blacks out more than whites -- far more statistical incidence than just the racial percentage in society would represent -- suggesting blacks are actually stopped more and prosecuted more than whites in this country.

Blacks still rightly see this as racism. Yet a great many southern white racists seem to think that blacks are already not discriminated against therefore they should be showing impartiality in racial matters. I think that is an insane double standard and among the stupidest of expectations.

As long as we see the double standard in law enforcement, salaries and pay, I think you will see blacks working the welfare system more proportional to their population, and you will see them returning racist instincts to society. I don'rt expect them to be free from racism until they don't suffer it.

White racists thinking that blacks should fall in line better and quicker is nothing new at all. they always thought that, even when they owned blacks.

Posted by frogprincenessntz (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

You can call me a racist if you like. I am not one, but there is no way I could ever vote Democratic even if my own brother were running. One of the main tenets of that party is a woman's right to murder an innocent child. Over 4000 are murdered every day! There has been such breakthroughs in technology that there is abundant proof that that seed at ten days has a beating heart and fully formed tiny feet. If not interrupted, a human will emerge from hiding at nine months.

In my opinion, the whole Democratic party and all supporters are complicit in murdering the innocent. When a Democrat comes asking for my vote, I see them covered in the blood of these tiny defenseless people. And to be a Christian and not acknowledge that God created that being (black, white, yellow, or red) is impossible in my book.

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad,

Or should I say NotSoOldGrandDad, anyway, just a quick look at Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission documents posted on the following website showed Carroll & Jefferson Counties, Mississippi were two counties where no black citizens were registered to vote in 1959. A more thorough search would probably turn up others.

mdah.state.ms.us/arlib/contents/er/sovcom

Such things as black men being prohibited from wearing white shirts were not documented and are harder to substantiate, but, believe me, there were many unwritten rules.

You are correct. It was dispicable.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

frogprincess you make agood point, but there seems to be a difference of opinion in who is most involved with murdering.

Democrats feel it is crazy to make women bring children into this world against their will -- within certain guidelines for when a child could survive without the mother. They also think it is crazy to kill so many folks -- outright KILL them with US tax dollars in wars against Muslims for oil and ideology -- like Republicans do in the Bush wars.

Republicans -- some -- think it is ok to force women however crazy, sick and lame they are, to bear children -- then after using government to force them to bear kids, they don't want to help them raise the children, or even guarantee health care to the kids. They support US warfare for oil and ideology that kills babies AND mamas and makes terrorists strike us back.

I think the anti-abortion group is just one of the special interest voter blocks the GOP uses so they can cobble together enough voters to win elections. When you look at Republican stands on war and toxic pollution -- killing some innocent folks is obviously ok.

I don't call the GOP "pro-life" because they aren't. I call them "anti-choice". The tree-huggers and whale-lovers of the Democratic Party are pro-life -- all life -- and pro-freedom for women and mothers even if the mothers think they cannot bring another child into this world.

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad, see document no SCR ID # 2-51-0-6-1-1-1 at the state sovereignty website mentioned above.

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

frogprincenessntz )
In my opinion, the whole Democratic party and all supporters are complicit in murdering the innocent. When a Democrat comes asking for my vote, I see them covered in the blood of these tiny defenseless people. And to be a Christian and not acknowledge that God created that being (black, white, yellow, or red) is impossible in my book.

<<<<<<<< Froggy, what has always amazed me with your position is the fact that you guys are hell bent on the survival of every single Fetus in the World, but once they pop out and breath air, their someone elses problem and your only concerne is that they don't take any of your "TAX DOLLARS". You have no problem sending them off to war in a Country that did absolutly nothing to us, where they blasted hundreds of thousands of Men, Women and CHILDREN to smitherines, not to mention over four thousand of ours being shipped back in a wooden Box. But then you never see that on TV, so you can pretend it's not true, just another of those Democrat lies. I say all of this to point out to you what a Hypocrite you and all who think like you are. You n3eed to take a trip to a WAR ZONE sometime and see what a seventeen year old l0ooks like with the entire back half of his Head blown off, a dose of reality just might do you some good........>>>>>>>>>

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah., I'm sure you know, but racism is passed down from the older to the younger generation, primarily through the Male lineage, but not always. It's like the Elders want to pass their hatred down to the next generation. I will never understand that.....

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 4:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I just tell my kids to be prejudiced about everybody. That way they won't discriminate -- he,he!

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 4:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, its fair and ballanced, LOL. I gues,( in hindsight) I was fortunate to have been raised up as poor white "Share Croopers". We were in the same economic status as most of the Black people and lived in the same neighborhoods. I played with black kids and ate in their Houses and we're talking Adams County, late fortys/ early fiftys. As a mater of fact My first dealings with discrimination was when we moved to Natchez,( from the Country) and I saw the seperation of the races in resturants and Movie Theaters. Then in 57 I went into the Military,( which was intergrated by then), so I never was "Brain Washed" with that Racist crap, although it was going on all around me, I was un-aware of it............

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NO LIFE AND UGLY, must be a horrible way to live for yeahuhuh.

And I understood the charts, you Nerd, I understand after taking two statistic courses in college that when drastic peak or trouph occurs in a chart, there is something to be alarmed about. Like I said before, and you ignored, Clinton took the gravy from Reagan's and Bush's mashed potatoes and left the crap for the next Bush to deal with.

You know, I was making nicer excel graphs in my first computer course in 10th grade! You should teach your kids about more than being prejudiced, you should be teaching them to get out of the house, away from the computer, and GET A LIFE. You should be teaching them not to look at everyone in the world as either stupid (Republicans) or smart (Democrats). You should be teaching them to not be judgemental. You should teach them not to be so obsessed with another person as you are. HAIL TO BARACH OBAMA!
You should be teaching them HOW NOT TO BE YOU!

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hah! Whip me down when I bet you can't even get out of your chair!

You should do yourself a favor: Instead of exercising those fat fingers of yours, perhaps you should be doing jogging, lifting some weights, maybe even get a haircut. Then maybe more people will want to associate with you and you won't have to resort to your social life on the Natchez Democrat website!

HAHAH! You are too easy and that is what makes it so fun. You make my day!

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 8:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

southernwoman, Jefferson County??? Ouch!!! That's Family!!!
Oh well, maybe I shouldn't be too surprised. I know of one long gone family member who was a card carrying member of the State Sovereignty Commission; the "Coat and Tie version of the Klan" as one person told me. Ain't it awful what family connections can put us through? Of course, that was all on the Democrat side of the family. :)

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Of course, that was all on the Democrat side of the family. :)

<<<< Pre. 1964 huh GranDad, when all of the Racist,( keep them Ni**ers in their place) croud switched to the GOP :~)>>>>>

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"that when drastic peak or trouph occurs in a chart, there is something to be alarmed about"

yomama -- when you chart a graph of something like deficit spending the peaks and valleys represent distinct specific figures of expenditure at different times. When expeditures go up or down they do so to different graph-able points.

You appear like happybunny to think that graphs should look like what you want them to look like, regardless of the facts that make up the graph. That is what bunny said about polls.

I don't know what I can offer you to help you understand. You seem so angry that you have no recourse but to make sweeping assessments of me, and we all know you too well to be upset. You show more warts on your own self than you are revealing about me.

You go back and look at those charts and write me a dissertation on how figures can be graphed, and how congress can spend money in ways that would be represented in ups and downs on a graph. Then we will talk about psychology, fat fingers and such. In the meantime I think is it obvious that the reason you talk about those other things is because you do not even understand graphs.

What is going to happen here is that you will have to call me an elitist so-and-so because we are at the limit of your education and your ability to admit that you do not even understand graphs -- this appears to be a common theme among Republicans on this board.

Republicans collect people like you for your votes then go about doing government the way they want to, confident you guys can't understand anything about what they really do. You are a special type of stooge they depend on to get elected. Prove me wrong and class up your statement about graphs if you want even a nickle's worth of credibility.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

oldhippie01, I guess family is family. What can we do? :(

By the way, speaking of family, do you remember if my cousin (distant) Howard Dean apologized for that boorish racial joke he made in Jackson a few years ago? Sorry, but I can't remember.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sarah Palin now called racist...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/P...

But hey, I think EVERYONE knew that was coming. It's actually shocking it took them so long. I guess they were busy picking on her children and simply forgot. :)

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought that article was rather studious Grandpa.

Yes Palin is a desperate little girl saddled with an impressive task -- pulling McCain out of the mud being both cute and nasty.

All one has to do is to re-ignite the claims of Barack's "muslim faith" and mention the Rev. Wright's fiery sermons to excite all the white racists in the country against him using racial slurs without having to utter them directly. If you're not very smart you won't even call that racism.

I personally would not call her racist yet. She is very nieve and perky -- and acts like that is enough. With their failure in the polls they will now get nasty -- that is the nature of the beast.

You can fool Alaska citizens with that and a $2,000 per citizen check from the government oil tax -- I don't think she's up for her present job as VP and her proven method won't scale up for the nation.

Poor girl, McCain should not put her through all this just to fail.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm surprised you fault her for dividing up the oil money Yh. Isn't that what we liberals want? The oil is just like air and water, it belongs to everyone so everyone should have a share of it, regardless of who goes and gets it. Of course, those who go and get it should be compensated for their time and expenses and they should get an equal share of the commonwealth, but beyond that they are due nothing.

The thing I find most disconcerting about Palin is her accent. It works on Jesse Ventura but she doesn't carry it off as well. The thing I find second most disconcerting is that the Republicans now have some charisma to put up against our charisma and that is just not fair. It seems like every time we come up with a good idea, like change, they want to usurp it for themselves.

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

GDad, I agree that we are not responsible for our Famalies, as long as we aren't ourselves guilty. I don't know the answer to the Howard Dean question, he gas never been a hero of mine.

As for the charge on Sister Sarah, I think the fact that she just recently came out with that tactic, would have something to do with the recent criticizm of her for that. That is, of course someone else's idea, above her pay grade, but they are desperate to try to get the Amereican people thinking about anything else ,other than the Economy!! The "American Eloctorate" not being very Smart,(My opinion),( They elected George Bush), They may get away with it.

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

" It seems like every time we come up with a good idea, like change, they want to usurp it for themselves."

Thanks EnKiKur, you gave me an idea. I am going to write the Obama Campaign and tell them to let it slip to the McCain Campaign that Obama is going to have a Turd hanging around his neck Tuesday Night for the Debate, LOL, ROTFLMAO!!!

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 1:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3ecA2L-V...

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4egXbhSO...

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwtayJCK5...

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cziN3gt-h...

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Now Enkik, I didn't take issue with her doing what she did with the oil tax in Alaska. Let's remember the state has decreed they own all mineral rights in Alaska, to be split with the federal government. Federal lands and minerals in Alaska belong to all of us.

I said her methods won't scale up to her present task. First, she could not seize everyone's minerals for her own socialist management program, then claim to be a free market reformer. She can do it in Alaska. She is just a hypocrit or a liar about her stated pristeen capitalist Republican motives.

While we are at it, her method there and associated kudos are not compatible with the job McCain picked her for. They are philosophically opposed to windfall profits taxes on oil and government payouts. People should work for their own stuff, not expect government to give it to them.

What is Alaska doing taking their oil money they should use for improvements and then giving it to the citizens there and taking federal money to finance their infrastructure? A reformer would reform, not hire lobbyists. She doesn't care about the rest of us.

I can call her a bimbo for her hypocrisy, her air-headed responses, and her whiney insistence she would not answer questions in the debate -- she was going to steal the 90 minutes to address the American people with her self-serving BS designed for dupes who wanted to love her anyways. Off with her head !! he,he! Figuratively of course.

You are so busy ascribing elements of cult conspiracy and tending alliances, Enkik that you forget to read the letter of my comments. I too find her accent and delivery both to be grating. But her charisma seems limited to her already-won voter base, and they use it like bunny uses polls and yomama uses graphs -- It's a little too much like self-pleasuring to interest me or make me jealous.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I've given up the cult theory and become a liberal Yh, can't you tell? I was laying in my bed and a beam of light came through the window and I had an epiphany, I raised my face to the Light and wiped away a single Indian tear and confessed: I must vote for Obama!

I didn't know those Republicans were against windfall taxes for oil companies! That's awful. They should be taxed when they block the wind from hitting the wind powered generators.

I do know Exxon made 100 billion last year and only paid 30 billion in corporate taxes and only contributed 6.6 million worldwide to environmental causes. The Federal Reserve made 400 billion and paid no taxes whatsoever and made no environmental contributions at all, but they did give Obama 2.2 million through their holding company Goldman Sachs. Better to water the tree at the root, especially when it is our tree!

You say Palin hired lobbyists? Those are some pretty underhanded people. I am glad to know our party doesn't do that!

Jai Guru Obama!

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I know some other things about Exxon since I am in and out of their US facilities frequently. They have an excellent pay scale and benefits package and a labor union inside the company. The guy who turns the valves gets to sit down and wait while the guy who has the lock comes down from the break room to unlock the valve. The guy who operates the crane gets to wait while the pipefitters bolt up flanges. Working for Exxon is great if you can get a job there.

Exxon is ahead of the environmental curve too. They stand to profit big time on the carbon exchange because they started twelve years ago with their sequestration projects and it is about to pay off big time for them, their equipment is in place and the things they are sequestering are worth multiples of the base carbon credit. Most people don't know this, but Exxon is exceptionally environmentally minded, they have volumes of procedures for protecting the environment, and they have people hired to watch the people actually doing the work to make sure they follow the procedures. And people watching the watchers too, everything has to be signed off on, its called ISO 9000. You can't even do business with Exxon unless you can document you follow those same standards, and they send people out for surprise checks to make sure you are following the plan.

As a new and eager liberal I am sorry to have to report this because I would like to believe otherwise, but I promise you it is true. What used to be done with two men at Exxon docks now requires a whole team. What used to be done in minutes now takes hours. It is nothing for us to rush a barge to dock and then wait for six, twelve, eighteen hours for all the Exxon required checks to be done, and if there is any deviation the barge must leave and fix the problem.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am madder than ever Yh. Back in the days when I was a Bush supporter no one ever mentioned to me that our party money was being used on lobbyists! The nerve, the deception!

And when I donated money to them to fight against partial birth abortion they didn't point out to me that I was aiding in the fight against a woman's right to choose to kill her baby. The Republicans are so mean spirited and deceptive!

Thank heavens I've seen the Light. I feel washed clean.

Sam, where are you? Come on in, the Water is Fine!

Posted by j_bravo (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by time4change

"People who like the way the economy has been run under President Bush's policies should vote for Senator McCain. He would be a continuation of the Bush policies. If you like Bush's policies, you will love McCain's. But if you want change, vote for Obama. He is the only hope for change"

'The Wall Street Journal's Steve Moore says Obama's tax plan would add up to a 39.6 percent personal income tax, a 52.2 percent combined income and payroll tax, a 28 percent capital-gains tax, a 39.6 percent dividends tax, and a 55 percent estate tax. In other words, Sen. Obama is a very-high-tax candidate'

Peter Ferrara in the Wall Street Journal said:
"Consequently, to say, as the campaign does say, that the candidate's tax plan is a tax cut on net -- and that it would limit taxes to 18.2% of GDP -- is grossly misleading. The Obama tax plan would sharply increase real taxes. It also would come nowhere near to paying for the massive increases in federal spending he has proposed, including the spending that is disguised in the form of refundable tax credits"

Go read the NY Post which states Obama's plan would be the largest tax hike in at least a decade.

Go read the article in 'The American' by Alex Brill & Alan Viard

This goes on and on, so I am still looking for the "Change"..

So then go to his almost 1 TRILLION worth of new spending.

Increase taxes, and then Increase spending...

Where is the “Change”?

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 6:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok. I found something concerning it. Looks like it was back in 2005. I had to look back in the family archives. :)

http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.ph...

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by j_bravo (

Why don't you just quote :Fix News" or" Sister Sarah", eithir of those would be as non- biased as the people you quote. If you were even remotely interested in the TRUTH, as opposed to a right Wing smear,( Code talk for a lie), you could simply go to Obama.com, its all spelled out there in detail. As for his proposed spending, most of it is revenue neutral, in that it creates jobs, which generates revinue, which will eventually "TRICKLE UP" to the FAT CATS that will have to pay their fair share of TAXES, etc.,etc...........

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 8:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

'The Wall Street Journal's Steve Moore says Obama's tax plan would add up to a 39.6 percent personal income tax, a 52.2 percent combined income and payroll tax, a 28 percent capital-gains tax, a 39.6 percent dividends tax, and a 55 percent estate tax. In other words, Sen. Obama is a very-high-tax candidate'

Yes, for those whose annual incomes are over $250,000.

The Wall Street Journal and FOX news (the purveyor of lies and half-truths) share the same owner.

Obama's plan would cut taxes for most middle class families.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 8:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

oldhippi, as an eager new liberal please help me get onboard with the talking points I need to use in combating the opposition. These revenue neutral jobs President Obama is going to create, is taxing those jobs at 100+% part of his plan? I am a little confused on this point. It seems like if we create a job and pay someone a hundred dollars a year and that person pays 10 dollars in taxes the government is still out 90 dollars. To be neutral that job would have to be taxed at 100 dollars, and to generate revenue the jobholder would actually have to get another job to pay all the taxes on the first job. But that can't be right, who would want a job like that?

Give me an example to use when the opposition brings up arguments like this.

Obama for President!

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, you need to play that game with yeahuhuh, I'm 68 and too damn old for silly mind games. You know the answer to your own question, but if you need any additional information, go to Obama.com and shop around. If you don't find what you want, contact them and someone will answer your question...........

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 9:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Does the word "Cantankerous" come to mind? :)

So keep on playing those mind games together
Doing the ritual dance in the sun
Millions of mind guerrillas
Putting their soul power to the karmic wheel
Keep on playing those mind games forever
Raising the spirit of peace and love
John Lennon (1940-1980)

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 10:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The German asparagus are fabulous."
George Bush (1924- )

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 10:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 10:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' the 'security' of the nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important." Sen. John F. Kennedy

:)

Posted by southernwoman (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 11:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And we were told to be afraid, to be VERY afraid, of electing Jack Kennedy because he was a CATHOLIC and would get all his instructions from the pope....the more things change, the more they remain the same.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 12:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well I don't reckon we have any worry about that happening now. Looks like the Vatican is calling the Democrat Party the "party of death".

http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/313...

:(

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 7:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Obama has an answer to McCain's "PIT BULL" and her lying Smears of his Character with the truth that McCain was praying everyone would forget. I've been wondering when he was going to pull this trigger..........

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo

Posted by j_bravo (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

oldhippie claims my quotes are "biased" and then throws up Obama.com as his source. Ridiculous

I'm sorry oldhippie, I stand corrected. If it comes from Obama.com I will take it as the new gospel, just as you do.

Oldhippie:
"As for his proposed spending, most of it is revenue neutral, in that it creates jobs, which generates revinue, which will eventually "TRICKLE UP" to the FAT CATS that will have to pay their fair share of TAXES, etc,etc..........."

What exactly is someone’s fair share? You can find easily on the internet that the top 10% of income earners already pay over 70% of the taxes. What according to you is the fair share they should pay? 100%

Revenue neutral? You have got to be kidding. Maybe at Obama.com it is revenue neutral, but in the rest of the world people keep saying that "he can't raise enough taxes with his plan to pay for his spending". That doesn't sound very neutral to me. But if they say it on Obama.com, I guess it just has to be right.

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Enkik, you don't make a very good liberal. I'll tell you why.

You don't seem to be much fun (no offense). Your wit is too sardonic. It smacks of the bittersweet insecurity of nerd devotion. I, as a liberal schooled in tolerance will just tell you if you have a history of going off the deep end, you are still there. But you are beautiful and a very special person.

Liberal cosmology and lifeways are actually a careful balance of work, earnestness, fun and indignation. Any one of them gets eliminated and the whole being suffers. And an out-of-balance liberal is a pitiful sight.

Exxon can do what they will. They fund both environmental causes, and the choking of the planet, and try to make a buck off both. Liberals know this. They made a company off of profit and consuming other companies, resources, entire technologies -- they are good and evil combined. Like most, despite their environmental PR they have ducked paying their fair share of their own damage in many parts of the world. No sweat. I own a chunk of their stock. I don't know anyone who would seriously like to take them apart. They are in balance. They will be a leader in whatever technology heats us in the future.

Sarah Palin on the other hand -- Sarah would be MY employee. I can hold her to a higher standard of truthfulness with that cute-but-not-very-sincere-mouth. I don't make a profit from her, she offers no stock. She seeks to perpetuate the rule of the ogre-emperors, the rule of warfare as the only alternative -- she is shallow and without manners -- tailors rules to her liking and is openly unqualified to rule as surrogate for the cancer-plagued codger. Her stupid statements on the powers of the Vice Presidency should strike fear in even a dead politician. Were she not so beautiful her self-absorption and stupid bug-eyed mannerisms would brand her an absolute nut. That's the truth.

McCain has been a full time public employee in a family of full time public employees. Nothing wrong with that but this -- the problem is his pretend love of private enterprise, his inability to validate peace as a tool, and therefore -- he is a nasty unbalanced chimera.

He dumped a dumpy wife and married a beer heiress, then he deigns to represent a cadre of Bible-thumper temperance freaks and pretends he will fairly represent all of us. His stories of his life and his wife's are self serving from a couple who have been served their whole life -- ewwww gross. Even his greatest government service was borne of failure of his mission, in a war he should not have chosen to participate in -- there is no heroism there. Dedication to small self -- to a family's pride -- to a corrupt party, and now he is not even a very good liar. Poison to liberals. contd...

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Us liberals are into cycles. The Republican cycle is over. We are joyous about that. Folks can lie and cheat, BS and pontificate all they want. We have already won by making the GOP choose it's most liberal member -- but his first mistake of selecting and air-headed liar for his running mate has cost him his slack. If he weren't so old it would not matter so much -- but he is.

So McCain managed to tweak liberals' strategic military readiness nerve. What an incredible blunder for a future Commander in Chief -- to make liberals feel insecure on a national security matter. How stupid can you be? If Barack had made such a move we would feel better because of his youth, and if someone shot him dead -- as the guys on the other side are prone to do -- then they would precipitate their own armageddon. But the old codger doing that is an affront. The support Palin gets as a candidate is just the lusting of the stooges that still like Republican standards of honesty.

These things I am talking about are what concerns liberals. Your ideological wanderings don't qualify you as one of us, Enkik, though we would gladly take your vote and use your van to take folks to the polls.. You don't get it. You mentally zig when you should zag, and don't seem to know the difference in liberal terms. You care about liberal causes and alliances like a conservative cares about his own bank account. That is not what we do.

You can come to the rallies, though. And we can sincerely like you -- and one day -- you might fit in with us. We are very good at hope under bad circumstances,and we have just come through 8 years of a political nightmare. Even so, we will just stop the stupidity and are not so inclined to say "I told you so" as the other side is.

Posted by oldhippie01 (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by j_bravo (anonymous)

oldhippie claims my quotes are "biased" and then throws up Obama.com as his source. Ridiculous<<<< "Turn about is FAIR PLAY>>>>>>>>>>>

I'm sorry oldhippie, I stand corrected. If it comes from Obama.com I will take it as the new gospel, just as you do.<< No, thats the difference in you and I, There is no "GOSPLE", Obama's numbers only represent a general direction he wants to take the Country in. The TRUTH is that neither of the Candidates may be able to do anything the first four years. It appears that George Bush Inc. is going to drive the "Ship of State" off of the Cliff and into the abiss.

Oldhippie:
"As for his proposed spending, most of it is revenue neutral, in that it creates jobs, which generates revinue, which will eventually "TRICKLE UP" to the FAT CATS that will have to pay their fair share of TAXES, etc,etc..........."

What exactly is someone’s fair share? You can find easily on the internet that the top 10% of income earners already pay over 70% of the taxes. What according to you is the fair share they should pay? 100% <<<<I don't believe your 70% figure, could you provide a link?>>>>>>>>

Revenue neutral? You have got to be kidding. Maybe at Obama.com it is revenue neutral, but in the rest of the world people keep saying that "he can't raise enough taxes with his plan to pay for his spending". That doesn't sound very neutral to me. But if they say it on Obama.com, I guess it just has to be right.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Well, just hide behind your "Portfolio" and watch. You also might want to get a book about how the Democrats pulled us out of the last DEPRESSION that your REPUBLICAN buddies got us into.............>>>>>>>>

Posted by j_bravo (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

oldhippie01:
What exactly is someone’s fair share? You can find easily on the internet that the top 10% of income earners already pay over 70% of the taxes. What according to you is the fair share they should pay? 100% <<<<I don't believe your 70% figure, could you provide a link?>>>>>>>>

Absolutely, here are some:
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/08/tax-...
Top 10% pay 70.79%

Another:
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/nov...
Shows top 10% pays 68%

Another:
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=...
Shows top 10% paying 70.79%

Another:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/2...
Top 10% paying 70.79%

I got nothing else going on today, how many you need?

Oldhippie:
"Well, just hide behind your "Portfolio" and watch. You also might want to get a book about how the Democrats pulled us out of the last DEPRESSION that your REPUBLICAN buddies got us into.............>>>>>>>>"

My portfolio? HaHa..
You like to post links to video, here is one making the rounds on the net showing your Democratic buddies pulling us out of trouble:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7...

See all the Republican's bringing up the problems? See all the Democrat's saying nothing is wrong? Good to see them Democrat's are there to pull us out of trouble.

Posted by obamayamama (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Once again, YEAHUHUH has danced around what I have asked 1000 times concerning drilling on the US GoM. Let me ask again and see if I get another irrelevant, cocky response.

HOW IS THIS COUNTRY GOING TO BE RID OF FOREIGN OIL IN 10 YEARS WHEN BARACK OBAMA IS AGAINST DRILLING OF THE GULF OF MEXICO CONTINENTAL SHELF (which is responsible for over 25% of the United States oil)?????

There, maybe, just maybe I may get a reply.