Obama -- most liberal senator in the senate based on his votes. Biden -- 3rd most liberal. That means more government, more spending, more programs...no thanks. As for "voting with Bush..." Anything that passed was also voted for by the majority of Democrats. As President Obama can't vote for anything, as Bush can't, so I don't see how Obama is going to change anything. That's how it works. Nice try, no cigar (no pun intended).
JM did not adopt Obama's exit strategy. If anyone did, Bush did...he's the President now and the strategy is being applied now. Obama admitted on O'Reilly that the surge succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams. That one he voted against too. Biggest national security/foreign policy decision during the war and he voted against it. Enough said.
If you had watched his speech, he outlined it. He said his administration would be completely transparent. I believe him. Obama says he is going to change things. He doesn't say how. You believe him.
Oh good grief. You don't even know what pork barrel spending is, and it is the same on both sides. It is attaching things to bills to help your financial supporters back at home and selling your vote to get the earmark. Has nothing to do with social programs. Both sides do it, and it needs to stop. Politicians should be there to take care of ALL of us...not their fatcat supporters, and yes...Obama has fat cat supporters...Moveon.org to name one.
Boy, you have that class warefare mantra down. Trouble is, you buy it, I don't. I know better. Name one evil corporation who does not employ tens of thousands of Americans, who will loose their jobs if Obama taxes them into oblivion. Name just ONE.
American imperial delusions of grandeur. What does that even mean?? Look at T. Boone Pickens again. He said: "Yes, drill EVERYWHERE, drill NOW. But that is not enough." John McCain says the same thing.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database Yes, and check the voting records for how many times...
he voted "present." He has never made an executive decision in his life. He has not managed a government of ANY size. In Congress you have committees and panels and discussion and debate and it takes weeks to get anything done. That does not work in the white house...you can't get a committe or a panel or vote present. She has more executive experience than he has. Fact. And she is the #2 on the Republican ticket. He is the #1 on his ticket. I agree with Joe Biden's initial assessment.
Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still voting for evil. sm
The 2 main choices are horrible. They only offer a continuation of the status quo. Nothing on bringing the troops home (now not 5 years from now), no sound monetary policy, reinstating our civil liberties, etc. Third party candidates have better platforms. People should be voting principles over party, or you deserve whatever you get.
Many repubs voting for Obama in my experience..OR NOT VOTING ..only
only a few stragglers left, like the 26 percent who don't hate Bush. Most people voting for Obama are voting on emotion...sm
You may be the exception.
All that matters is hope and change. At what cost, my friend, at what cost, will your hope and change come at.
He will try to change the very foundation of this country, the constitution, and our very way of life.
If I wanted that, I'd move back to Russia where some of my ancestors came from.
I can recognize socialism and Marxism, even if half the country cannot.
They only care for hope. And change.
We have records of it. NM EHR records
EHR is not just about voice recognition. It is about getting hospitals to have their records computerized instead of paper charts so that they are easily accessible.
Medicare and Medicaid already have a program in place that will subsidize a hospital's cost to change to EHR so that it makes it easier for them to process claims.
I did look at the records
of McCain and Obama. I always research who I'm voting for before I vote. I don't want to be one of those uninformed voters like the ones that were interviewed and said they had no problem with Sarah Palin being Obama's VP. I mean....come on. If you are that misinformed that you don't even know the candidates VP choice....you shouldn't be voting.
My problem was that I didn't have faith in either McCain or Obama. I voted for McCain because I felt he was the lesser of two evils and I didn't want to throw my vote away by voting for an independent. I'm not doing that any more. If I think an independent is better, I'm bucking both parties. Maybe if both parties lose, they may open their eyes and see that both parties have screwed up and both parties have p!ssed us off.
I agree. I think the media is way out of line with that. Judge Roberts and his wife should be commended and respected for having the love and compassion in their hearts to adopt these children.
The more I see of him, the more respect I have for him and the more I like him.
No one should have to release their medical records...
to run for office. If one has to release them they all should. What is Obama's family history? Is he on antihypertensives? Is he on any kind of mood altering meds? Does he have high cholesterol? lol. That is none of my business, and neither is McCain's medical record.
First of all, Obama did not seal his records....sm
Only the person named on the birth certificate has access to a copy of it. He got a copy and presented it, period.
Secondly, he did not seal his college records. The colleges did this. Apparently it is common practice with presidential candidates as they are flooded with requests during the campaign.
looked at her financial records lately?
she is definitely not a poor girl in my opinion. I think she could afford to buy her own clothes...
"People have to start looking at records
when they are voting" so what in McCain's record was so appealing? Firstly, he cheated on his wife who was in a horrible car wreck, and then eventually married for money. Not much appealing going on there. Secondly, his record of Keating-5 not very appealing. Thirdly, he doesn't know anything about the economy, handled himself erradically; that's not appealing to me, for sure. So as far as the choice, Americans have chosen the right person for prez in these dire times.
"A prez/rep has of the people has to hold the constituents thoughts in mind when they are voting." If I understand this, I think you mean the prez/rep has to remember why they were voted into office. What has Obama done in one week that has not shown that he is doing just that? He most certainly has done, in one week, a lot that the American people who voted for him want done. So far, so good.
"People have to get involved by writing to their reps." Did you write to Bush when he invaded a country without reason, when he was killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people? Did you write to your rep when he and his cronies sanctioned torture? Did you write to your rep when they put in jail PFCs for the Abu Ghraibe deal, which goes much higher than Private First Class!! Did you write to your rep when Katrina hit and thousands of people were stranded, and some even killed by police officers who are sworn to help people, when they had nothing to drink for 5 days? Did you write to your rep when Halliburton stole Billions of bucks? Did you? No? didn't think so. So much for your involvement.
>> John McCain has not yet released his medical records to the public. McCain is 72 years old, and has been diagnosed with invasive melanoma. In May of this year, a small group of selected reporters were allowed to review 1,173 pages of McCain’s medical records that covered only the last eight years, and were allowed only three hours to do so. John McCain’s health is an issue of profound importance. We call on John McCain to issue a full, public disclosure of all of his medical records, available for the media and members of the general public to review. >>
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press WriterMon Apr 10, 4:55 PM ET
Key figures in a phone-jamming scheme designed to keep New Hampshire Democrats from voting in 2002 had regular contact with the White House and Republican Party as the plan was unfolding, phone records introduced in criminal court show.
The records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 — as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down.
The national Republican Party, which paid millions in legal bills to defend Tobin, says the contacts involved routine election business and that it was preposterous to suggest the calls involved phone jamming.
The Justice Department has secured three convictions in the case but hasn't accused any White House or national Republican officials of wrongdoing, nor made any allegations suggesting party officials outside New Hampshire were involved. The phone records of calls to the White House were exhibits in Tobin's trial but prosecutors did not make them part of their case.
Democrats plan to ask a federal judge Tuesday to order GOP and White House officials to answer questions about the phone jamming in a civil lawsuit alleging voter fraud.
Repeated hang-up calls that jammed telephone lines at a Democratic get-out-the-vote center occurred in a Senate race in which Republican John Sununu defeated Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, 51 percent to 46 percent, on Nov. 5, 2002.
Besides the conviction of Tobin, the Republicans' New England regional director, prosecutors negotiated two plea bargains: one with a New Hampshire Republican Party official and another with the owner of a telemarketing firm involved in the scheme. The owner of the subcontractor firm whose employees made the hang-up calls is under indictment.
The phone records show that most calls to the White House were from Tobin, who became President Bush's presidential campaign chairman for the New England region in 2004. Other calls from New Hampshire senatorial campaign offices to the White House could have been made by a number of people.
A GOP campaign consultant in 2002, Jayne Millerick, made a 17-minute call to the White House on Election Day, but said in an interview she did not recall the subject. Millerick, who later became the New Hampshire GOP chairwoman, said in an interview she did not learn of the jamming until after the election.
A Democratic analysis of phone records introduced at Tobin's criminal trial show he made 115 outgoing calls — mostly to the same number in the White House political affairs office — between Sept. 17 and Nov. 22, 2002. Two dozen of the calls were made from 9:28 a.m. the day before the election through 2:17 a.m. the night after the voting.
There also were other calls between Republican officials during the period that the scheme was hatched and canceled.
Prosecutors did not need the White House calls to convict Tobin and negotiate the two guilty pleas.
Whatever the reason for not using the White House records, prosecutors tried a very narrow case, said Paul Twomey, who represented the Democratic Party in the criminal and civil cases. The Justice Department did not say why the White House records were not used.
The Democrats said in their civil case motion that they were entitled to know the purpose of the calls to government offices at the time of the planning and implementation of the phone-jamming conspiracy ... and the timing of the phone calls made by Mr. Tobin on Election Day.
While national Republican officials have said they deplore such operations, the Republican National Committee said it paid for Tobin's defense because he is a longtime supporter and told officials he had committed no crime.
By Nov. 4, 2002, the Monday before the election, an Idaho firm was hired to make the hang-up calls. The Republican state chairman at the time, John Dowd, said in an interview he learned of the scheme that day and tried to stop it.
Dowd, who blamed an aide for devising the scheme without his knowledge, contended that the jamming began on Election Day despite his efforts. A police report confirmed the Manchester Professional Fire Fighters Association reported the hang-up calls began about 7:15 a.m. and continued for about two hours. The association was offering rides to the polls.
Virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number, which currently rings inside the political affairs office. In 2002, White House political affairs was led by now-RNC chairman Ken Mehlman. The White House declined to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002.
As policy, we don't discuss ongoing legal proceedings within the courts, White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said.
Robert Kelner, a Washington lawyer representing the Republican National Committee in the civil litigation, said there was no connection between the phone jamming operation and the calls to the White House and party officials.
On Election Day, as anybody involved in politics knows, there's a tremendous volume of calls between political operatives in the field and political operatives in Washington, Kelner said.
If all you're pointing out is calls between Republican National Committee regional political officials and the White House political office on Election Day, you're pointing out nothing that hasn't been true on every Election Day, he said.
WASHINGTON — Director Leon Panetta says agency records show CIA officers briefed lawmakers truthfully in 2002 on methods of interrogating terrorism suspects, but it is up to Congress to reach its own conclusions about what happened.
Panetta's message to agency employees came one day after Speaker Pelosi said bluntly the CIA had misled her and other lawmakers about the use of waterboarding and other harsh techniques seven years ago.
Panetta wrote that the political debates about interrogation "reached a new decibel level" with the charges.
He urged agency employees to "ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission."
Pelosi Accuses CIA of 'Misleading' Congress on Waterboarding
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the CIA of misleading Congress about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terror detainees.
"Yes I am saying the CIA was misleading the Congress, and at the same time the (Bush) administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, to which I said that this intelligence doesn't support the imminent threat," Pelosi said at her weekly news conference.
"Every step of the way the administration was misleading the Congress and that is the issue and that's why we need a truth commission," she said.
Under a barrage of questioning, Pelosi adamantly insisted that she was not aware that waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques were being used on terrorism suspects.
"I am telling you they told me they approved these and said they wanted to use them but said they were not using waterboarding," she said.
Growing increasingly frustrated throughout the briefing, Pelosi slowly started backing away from the podium as she tried to end the questioning.
As she backed out, she continued to accuse the CIA of not telling Congress that dissenting opinions had been filed within the administration suggesting the methods were not lawful.
The CIA immediately disputed Pelosi's accusation, saying the documents describing the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed are accurate. CIA spokesman George Little noted that CIA Director Leon Panetta made available to the House Intelligence Committee memos from individuals who led the briefings with House members.
"The language in the chart -- 'a description of the particular EITs that had been employed' -- is true to the language in the agency's records," Little said. "The chart I'm referring to is, of course, the list of member briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques."
Republicans also questioned Pelosi's charge.
"It's hard for me to imagine anyone in our intelligence area would ever mislead a member of Congress," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said at his weekly news conference. "They come to the Hill to brief us because they're required to under the law. I don't know what motivation they would have to mislead anyone."
The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., told FOX News that Pelosi's accusation against the CIA is "not credible."
"I am afraid she has disremembered what she went through," he said. "We have had not only the records from the CIA but the contemporaries who were there with her had other views on it, so I am afraid that this is not a credible explanation."
Pelosi said she was briefed only once on the interrogation methods in September 2002. She acknowledged that her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, informed her about another briefing five months later in which Bush officials said waterboarding was being used on CIA terror detainee Abu Zubaydah.
Pelosi said she supported a letter drafted by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who also attended the briefing in February 2003, and sent to the Bush administration, raising concerns over the technique.
Pelosi's account has changed several times in recent weeks as she has sought to clarify what she did or didn't know about the interrogation methods that she is pushing to investigate.
Pelosi said last month that she was never told that the controversial interrogation methods were being used. But a national intelligence report later showed that she was briefed seven years ago on the tactics while she was on the House Intelligence Committee.
Her spokesman then said the speaker thought the techniques were legal and that waterboarding was not used.
Democrats will hold a series of hearings on Justice Department memos released last month that justified rough tactics against detainees, including waterboarding and sleep deprivation.
While Democrats want the hearings to focus on what they call torture, Republicans have tried to turn the issue to their advantage by complaining that Pelosi and other Democrats knew of the tactics but didn't protest.
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!!
I'm sorry, but I just do not believe that our voting is for nothing... nm
x
I'm voting........
For George W. Bush. He stands for everything this country was founded on. He is a true patriot. He is a republican. He's the bestest!! Just ask Harriet Myers. Better yet, why don't we write in Dik Cheney? He's a true-blue American and a republican to boot! He even knows how to shoot a gun! Let's pack the house and the senate with republicans because they have US in their best interest. They are for the people! Just look at the last 8 years - success story after success story. I am living the life of my dreams! Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see which side deserves to run this country! Let's run all these democrats and filthy liberals out of this country!!! My way or the highway!!! We can't second guess Israel. ATTACK Iran!!! We need to get Georgia hooked up with NATO so we can go to war with Russia (which is Alaska's neighbor, BTW - can see it right from Alaska). Let's all get on the same page here so we are a UNITED nation. End this division of party!! All for one and one for all!! We can call ourselves Republicrats. Feel the loveI'm voting...
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,
I'm not voting for him because he is a dem -sm
and historically they have raised our taxes. However, I personally think it's awesome that whichever candidate wins, there will finally be some diversity to the office of the president. We will have either our first black president or our first female vice president.
I'm certainly not voting for him but
if he is elected, I certainly would not want to see anything happen to him. That would be devastating. But you're right, the republicans probably would get the blame or if not the republicans, it would take on a racist tone, which would be another blow to this country.
I am voting for O but
i too believe we are in a recession and have been for a while. But repubs are not the only ones not wanting to admit it. I have heard NO ONE say it. They dont want to admit to it, no matter what party.
I will tell them I'm voting for O, but am really voting for M
That's why the polls don't mean anything.
Besides who in their right mind would tell people your not for O because you'll be yelled at and called a racist. Got enough bashing on this board, don't need any more on the phones or in public.
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! :-)
Sam: Would you have posted this is McCain had won??
voting
We've been doing that for many, many years now. It doesn't seem to be working. It just seems that even before the Bush admin, laws have been changing and our rights have been decreasing. It seems that many people do not want O in office again. However, if ACORN or any other company is involved in census taking, he will be voted into office again.
Oh yes....voting.
We vote for people and we usually end up voting for the lesser of two evils. Both parties have shown that they like to spend. They only complain about government spending when it is their particular party that isn't doing the spending. Our government is corrupt and until we show them that we are tired of this craziness....it won't matter which lies we fall for and vote for. I'm truly surprised that Obama voters aren't outraged by all the lies that he has told. You continue to stand by him and blame Bush for everything. Where is the outrage on your part? We are still in Iraq. Gitmo is still open. We will all very soon be taxed one way or another. They are even talking about taxing our health care benefits to pay for Obama's health care plan when he openly ridiculed McCain during the campaign and stated that McCain was going to tax our healthcare and how dumb that was. I guess now it is okay. Why can't you see the constant lies? It isn't like Obama tries to hide them. He does them so bluntly and fo all to see and yet the mainstream media and his blind followers continue to praise him. I don't get it?
if we were all sheep we would be voting for another
duh
Voting for Ron Paul
Go Ron Paul!
Would love to see a true statesman like Ron Paul be President of our country.
A politician is a man who thinks of the next election; while the statesman thinks of the next generation. -James Freeman Clarke (1810-1888)
that your vote is based on the dislike of an anonymous poster on a tiny little chat board, it was not worth much anyway.
why i'm voting democrat Just in case you wondered...... I'm voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would. I'm voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it. I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people. I'm voting Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius. I'm voting Democrat because I'm not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive. I'm voting Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit. I'm voting Democrat because I believe three or four pointy headed elitist liberals need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters. I'm voting Democrat because I believe that when the terrorists don't have to hide from us over there, when they come over here I don't want to have any guns in the house to fight them off with. I'm voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse. I'm voting Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 7% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't. Makes ya wonder why anyone would EVER vote Republican , now doesn't it? Yes...I'm voting for McCain.
From the beginning, I've always known I would not vote for Obama. His plans will not work. He will destroy small businesses with his taxes causing loss of jobs. His plans of taking from the rich to give to the poor will only enable the low-life scum we have in this country to remain lazy and worthless. His associations with certain individuals and his membership for 20 years to a church designed on black power and the hate of whites........I cannot trust this man to be the commander and chief. I do not agree with his plans for healthcare. I do not agree with his extremist view point on abortion. I do not condone gay marriage. I cannot under good conscience vote for Barack Obama. If we elect Barack Obama to be the president, we will sorely regret it.
So bash me as you will. Obviously, from posts below, this is a support Obama political board and should anyone differ......OMG....you should be thrown off of the board. You all have been sucked into this mainstream media love affair with a man that we cannot trust, a man who doesn't have the experience, and a man who promises change that he cannot bring. The one thing I can agree with Obama is this.....his campaign does give me hope.....it gives me hope that enough people get their heads out of their butts and John McCain wins this election and becomes the next President of the United States of America!!!!
Since everyone is at least a bit familiar with John McCain’s record when it comes to strolling through a market in Baghdad with hundreds of his closest guards, or how he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years (except when he flip flops on that).
But not that many really, truly know just how horrific his voting record is when it comes to the troops. And it is pretty consistent – whether it is for armor and equipment, for veteran’s health care, for adequate troop rest or anything that actually, you know, supports our troops.
This is chock full of links to the roll call votes, and the roll call votes have links to the actual underlying bills and amendments. I present this so that there is support and things that can be rattled off when saying that McCain is not a friend of the military. Feel free to use it as you want, but this can be tied into the "Double Talk Express". But here is a very quick statement - John McCain skipped close to a dozen votes on Iraq, and on at least another 10 occasions, he voted against arming and equipping the troops, providing adequate rest for the troops between deployments and for health care or other benefits for veterans.
In mid 2007, Senator Reid noted that McCain missed 10 of the past 14 votes on Iraq. However, here is a summary of a dozen votes (two that he missed and ten that he voted against) with respect to Iraq, funding for veterans or for troops, including equipment and armor. I have also included other snippets related to the time period when the vote occurred.
March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes. Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs.
October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.
So there it is. John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military. Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military. If he can’t even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn’t have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?
Feel the same and won't be voting for
nm
Same could be said for Barack. Many are voting for
because he is any more experienced than SP (who is only running for VP, lest we forget-McCain's not dead yet, though some like to exaggerate he's teetering on the brink of death). Like it or not, POTUS is partially a popularity contest. Personally, I prefer to vote for someone who isn't seeking the popular vote and who doesn't put on a front to earn it. However, if you're going to shoot people down for liking SP, it won't work because just as many have sided with Barack for the same reason.
Once again, anyone not voting for your party
I haven't seen you say one thing yet that wasn't something I already heard stated on the news. If listening to the media and buying into their opinions is reasoning, then I don't wanna be a "reasoning" voter. I'm not for Barack or McCain, but I don't see the purpose of insulting someone because they DO like one or the other. Something tells me you don't need a purpose or reason to insult, though, it just makes you feel better about you.
if you plan on voting
you will need to keep things like OBAMA and OSAMA straight. The political system was based on the assumption that voters would know the difference between a tall black man running for president and a tall man in a sheet running for cover. Study up. Only a few more weeks . . . I'm betting you can do it.
marks the location of current message within thread
