My reason for not voting for Obama...

• My reason for not voting for Obama... - voteinde
  • have you/DH helped anyone less fortunate? - nm
    • So your idea of helping the less fortunate is - MSMT
      • Totally wrong because the most educated people vote for Obama sm - Christian without the hate
        • Obama is the real deal! lol - sm
          • You are so right. You educated yourself to the issues and now sm - Barlyston
        • Oh honey, you know better than that....they ain't - the brighest in the world........... MSMT
          • Your precious Bush turned Wall St socialist and the banks TRUE - Christian without the hate
            • Sorry honey.....I didn't vote for BUSH - you're so desperate.......nm
              • I'm sure you did vote for Bush but now u are embarrassed nm - Mike W
      • Dumb and uneducated followers? - McCain camp has already cornered that market.
        • I don't have to promote, I see it every day - and MSMT
    • That's a silly question, of course we have...most people do - voteinde
      • I loved your post - simply stated
  • Let me get this straight... you and DH sm - Christian without the hate
    • So what? My husband does very well - ya know why?............. MSMT
      • Your husband... - HaHaHa
        • No, sorry, but he did dig ditches and sewers - one time..... that was before
          • And... - HaHaHa
            • I agree, DH's wife is bitter/naunaw - Adeline
            • Probably because you hide behind your anonymous - indy
      • You have a really bad attitude and I will never answer any more of your posts because - Christian without the hate
        • There you go again....you seem to be fixated - with FOX news for some reason....
          • Great post! You just know that if - voteinde
            • Even the republicans blame BUSH, where have u been? nm - Mike W
    • To the gal that e-mailed me...I'm not - voteinde
      • To the "gal"? Are you 90 years old or what? - Adeline
      • It's probably the same one that has e-mailed me - twice with nasty bitterness...
  • think you meant "no incentive", but I totally agree - with you, 'voteinde' --great post! nm
    • I did...so angry I can't type straight!...nm - voteinde
      • How's that trickle down thing been working - for you and DH? sm
        • We're actually fine, thanks for asking... - voteinde
          • Oooh, O lovers don't wanna hear that....that's - called self sufficient........nm
          • So what about the rest of the post - about the coporate welfare? sm
            • Isn't the poor the ones that get the welfare now? - MSMT
            • Sorry I can't answer your question.... - voteinde
              • In a civilized society government does the less fortunate - Christian without the hate
                • You seemed to be lost as to what a government - is for............. MSMT
                • I never said we should not help the less fortunate... - voteinde
                  • It's obvious why this poster seems to think - MSMT
                    • Bush made Wall St Socialist and our banks so why do you even bother - Christian without the hate
                  • I don't understand??? - anon

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

1.  TRUST. Don't trust O.

2. TRUTH. He is more truthful than the O. I didn't hear him waver much from what he has been saying through the whole campaign, while O has changed his mind a few times.

3.  AMERICA. He believes in this country and its freedoms. O wants to curb our freedom.

4.  "MAVERICK". He does cross party lines and buck the system. O will vote specifically with the dems all the time,,, and I really hate the word Maverick.

5.  SAFETY. He will keep us safer. O would rather talk. Talking gets you nowhere with the radicals in the world today. The radicals give their word and the next day will kill.

6. I believe he will TRY to cut government spending. This one is iffy since it depends on who runs the house and senate, but I believe he will try his darndest to get this done.

There are so many more reasons why I chose McC and those include those in the below posts.

from you too. DH and I aren't voting for him because of the taxes he is raising on the 250K an up. You should be worried too if your income is in that range like ours.

Integrity.  Belief in his own vision for the future.  Distaste for repub tactics of dividing Americans over issues such as anti-choice, pro-choice, gay rights, etc.

Barack Obama addresses issues that mean the most to me.  Simple as that.  His wife seems to be a caring mother and caring human being in general who is intelligent and well educated.  I think those are great qualities for a first lady.

Obama inspires me with his speeches.  He reminds me of JFK in that way.  He won't fly on private jets because his vote has not been purchased by any large corporations, and he does not want to give that appearance.  In other words, I do not think he has been corrupted by money and greed, and in Washington that says a lot!!  When I look at the big picture he is my #1 choice.  Go Obama.   Sorry, couldn't resist the cheerleader! :)

//

The more McCain/Palin's ratings are going up, the more the democrats are panicking, and the attacks about Palin are becoming more vicious - AND nobody is posting anything positive about Obama, like "I'm really excited about his health care plan or his energy plan or his housing fix plan or 100 other reasons we should be voting for someone.  No, nothing positive about him...AND I'm not even hearing anything negative against McCain's plan.  It's just vicious rumors, lies, and conjectures about Sarah Palin.  Let's see.  I've heard she hunts, she's for killing innocent soldiers and civilians in Iraq, she has a tanning bed, her daughter's pregnant, she didn't answer questions the way you would answer them (which in all fairness to her the interview was a bait & trap situation - especially when half the country was asking "what part is he asking her about?").  So for all those who say she didn't get it, neither did half the country (but those must be the people who cling to their guns and religion).  Let's see...what else.  She's selling her baby on e-bay, the father of her daughter's baby is skum, she believes in God, etc, etc.  Oh yes, the best one was someone didn't like her because she is pretty and was in a beauty pagent (although I can't decide whether that is the best or that someone believes she was selling her baby on e-bay).  Yet you refuse to list any of her good qualities like she cut out pork spending, she balanced the budget, she stands up to the big guy, she gave refunds to all Alaskan citizens who paid too much in money to the oil executives, she's smart about energy and she's for drilling here in the states (which will cut our gas and oil prices in half), and the numerous other good things she has done.  I've heard she's not experienced (but you won't admit that neither is Obama). Then of course when someone posts something positive about her you jump down their backs and are just really nasty.  And then what kind of comments do I hear about McCain?  He doesn't use the computer (someone was actually complaining about him not sending out emails himself on September 11th), and someone else was making fun of him because he doesn't comb his hair.  I hear that and think that there are people who have small minds.  He can't do either because he was beaten without mercy and he can't lift his arms up to do these activities (and you have the audacity to make fun of him for that?)  But you know what?  At least he can still put his hand over his heart when the pledge of allegience is being said and the national anthem is being played. 

You know, if your going to say something negative about someone at least have a comeback with something negative that is halfway intelligent and counter it with something positive from the candidate you support.

And for petes sake, use John McCain's real name, not the phony acronyms you like to use.  He was in a POW camp for five years beaten til near death every day.  He's earned the respect to at least call him by his real name.  Whether or not you hate him so much, he is not Bush and he is not more of the same.  His policies and voting record proves differently.  You can't say he voted the same as Bush because Bush doesn't vote.  Anything that's been voted on that you want to blame Bush for you need to take a look at the democrat congress.  Their the ones voting, and its the democrats who have stopped the impeachment hearing for Bush.  Why????  McCain's policies, health care plan, his reform plan, his economy plan, and everything else about what he will do when he becomes president is different than what Bush has done.  Bush is Bush, McCain is McCain.  If anyone is to be compared to Bush it would be Obama because the people who are directing Bush are also the same group that is directing Obama.

So, can we please be civilized adults, and come up with hard facts before accusing one candidate of something that is obviously false.  Stick to issues and no rumors.

Obama is change you can believe in until you have to take it to the bank.

Our jobs have been offshored until now because of greed.  Under Obama and his taxation of small businesses, they will be offshored not because of greed but because of survival.  

You could make a difference for our country by not voting for Obama, but instead, if you vote for him, you are selling out to deception.  You are embracing a socialist, a communist, a Marxist, a liar, a cheat, and someone who legally cannot run as President of the U.S., much less the Illinois senate.  But, you make your choice.  You believe the consumate liar and his lies who sat for 20 years under the teachings of a black racist preacher filled with hatred for the U.S., whose association with Bill Ayers is recent and documented down to the fact that Ayers himself wrote Obama's best-selling book (best-selling in the eyes of far left liberals that is), who is a documented member of the socialist party, whose friends and close allies are extremists who not only bomb innocent people and are unrepenetent but who intend to eliminate (kill) 25 million Americans who they cannot "re-educate" in communist ideaology (gosh dog it, those dreadful capitalists), who refuses to hand over a certified copy of his birth certificate and educational records (my goodness, don't you have to provide your birth certificate to any number of entities who want to know if you are legal, i.e., social security, DMVs, etc., and your educational records would show if you had received aid as a foreigner and in 1963 would have shown you were a negro instead of an African-American which Obama's falsified record shows, please speck up on history), and who thinks Joe the Plumber is so stupid not to realize that if he wants to achieve the American dream, he is going to achieve it only if he lets Obama take what he makes to give to those WHO WILL NOT WORK.  I'd like to see you, liberals, give a share of your 7.5 cpl to those who don't work as hard as you, but then with Obama, that's what you will have to do.  Don't be fooled by his rhetoric that only those making over $250,00 will be taxed.  We will all be taxed, and there will be no incentive to work for any of us because we will all have to give up a piece of our pie so those who do not work can have a piece of our pie.

Here is the dividing line, folks.  We are at a crossroads in our history.  The Lord Jesus puts it this way, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction; and there are many who go in by it."

Choose which gate you enter, the wide or the narrow.  It not only determines your eternal destination, but it determines the destination of this country.  If anyone here calls themself a Christian and can vote for Osambo, I daresay you are a liar and cheat just as he.  One cannot be a Christian and vote for a party and a political candidate who is in total rebellion to God's Word.  That is a fact, and if you think any differently, then you, too, like the Obamanation, call God a liar.  May He have mercy upon your soul.  As He makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust because He is no respector of persons, we will all suffer as this country is destroyed and our Constitution that guarantees our freedoms is trampled just as Bill Ayers is pictured standing upon our flag in total disrespect, and we will thank you liberals that we are all in bondage, reduced to third world status, just as the Israelites were in Egypt.  Only Obama ain't no Moses but a Muslim and has no favor with God, and there will be no one to lead us to the Promised Land coming from the Democratic party. 

his own personal reasons.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php

The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.

Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."

Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.

In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.

"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"

Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.

Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.

Conversations With Bush The Candidate

Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.

The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.

I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."

Debating The Timeline For War

But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.

The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.

On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"

I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."

"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …

"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.

Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.

Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"

Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.

Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."

Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.

Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.

Please direct me to where in the Constitution that it says that voting is a RIGHT?  It is not a right.  We have a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness!!

but I tend agree with you.  I think it is sad race still matters all these years later, rather depressing really.  You can keep your nose clean, do all of the right things according to society's standards and color still matters.  Why?  Who cares about color what about his policies? Shouldn't they matter more?

blessings,

Small polling place, only 4 machines, 1 of which was already belly up and I was just 15th in line.  Anyway, vote is in, and I didn't vote a straight party one button.  I punched each one separately...I wanted to savor the moment!  :-)

I have enjoyed the debate and I for one am glad there are so many in our profession engaged in the process and concerned for the country, no matter which side you fall on.  So, hats off to you, and may the best man and woman win! :-)

you should be ashamed for posting such a hateful insulting post

Sam:  Would you have posted this is McCain had won??

Bush gives new reason for Iraq war

Says US must prevent oil fields from falling into hands of terrorists

By Jennifer Loven, Associated Press  |  August 31, 2005

CORONADO, Calif. -- President Bush answered growing antiwar protests
yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in
Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said
would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.

The president, standing against a backdrop of the USS Ronald Reagan,
the newest aircraft carrier in the Navy's fleet, said terrorists
would be denied their goal of making Iraq a base from which to
recruit followers, train them, and finance attacks.

''We will defeat the terrorists, Bush said. ''We will build a free
Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and
sanctuary.

Appearing at Naval Air Station North Island to commemorate the
anniversary of the Allies' World War II victory over Japan, Bush
compared his resolve to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's in the
1940s and said America's mission in Iraq is to turn it into a
democratic ally just as the United States did with Japan after its
1945 surrender. Bush's V-J Day ceremony did not fall on the actual
anniversary. Japan announced its surrender on Aug. 15, 1945 -- Aug.
14 in the United States because of the time difference.

Democrats said Bush's leadership falls far short of Roosevelt's.

''Democratic Presidents Roosevelt and Truman led America to victory
in World War II because they laid out a clear plan for success to the
American people, America's allies, and America's troops, said Howard
Dean, Democratic Party chairman. ''President Bush has failed to put
together a plan, so despite the bravery and sacrifice of our troops,
we are not making the progress that we should be in Iraq. The troops,
our allies, and the American people deserve better leadership from
our commander in chief.

The speech was Bush's third in just over a week defending his Iraq
policies, as the White House scrambles to counter growing public
concern about the war. But the devastation wrought by Hurricane
Katrina in the Gulf Coast drew attention away; the White House
announced during the president's remarks that he was cutting his
August vacation short to return to Washington, D.C., to oversee the
federal response effort.

After the speech, Bush hurried back to Texas ahead of schedule to
prepare to fly back to the nation's capital today. He was to return
to the White House on Friday, after spending more than four weeks
operating from his ranch in Crawford.

Bush's August break has been marked by problems in Iraq.

It has been an especially deadly month there for US troops, with the
number of those who have died since the invasion of Iraq in March
2003 now nearing 1,900.

The growing death toll has become a regular feature of the slightly
larger protests that Bush now encounters everywhere he goes -- a
movement boosted by a vigil set up in a field down the road from the
president's ranch by a mother grieving the loss of her soldier son in
Iraq.

Cindy Sheehan arrived in Crawford only days after Bush did, asking
for a meeting so he could explain why her son and others are dying in
Iraq. The White House refused, and Sheehan's camp turned into a hub
of activity for hundreds of activists around the country demanding
that troops be brought home.

This week, the administration also had to defend the proposed
constitution produced in Iraq at US urging. Critics fear the impact
of its rejection by many Sunnis, and say it fails to protect
religious freedom and women's rights.

At the naval base, Bush declared, ''We will not rest until victory is
America's and our freedom is secure from Al Qaeda and its forces in
Iraq led by Abu Musab alZarqawi.

''If Zarqawi and [Osama] bin Laden gain control of Iraq, they would
create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks, Bush
said. ''They'd seize oil fields to fund their ambitions. They could
recruit more terrorists by claiming a historic victory over the
United States and our coalition.