# McCain & Obama



## Bassett (Sep 22, 2008)

They just reported that McCains have 13 registered vehicles that the Dems are complaining about. So what???? And the Obama only have 1.



Yes only one.



Like he** they have only one. That just has to be a lie. Another put down for McCain seeing he said he didn't know how many houses he had. How many married people only have one car? I live in a depressed area and I don't know anybody who only has one car. Obamas must have a chauffeur (sp). Maybe one of them doesn't have a license. Maybe one of them never learned how to drive. I really find this hilarious. How does anybody who works only have one vehicle per married couple. I find this unbelieveable.


----------



## Jill (Sep 22, 2008)

How laughable! No doubt there is more to the story! I bet Barack, Michelle and the kids don't take the bus





Can't wait for the debates... I have a feeling they will be good!!!


----------



## mininik (Sep 22, 2008)

I just love how having one registered vehicle is unbelievable, but 13 is "So what???"


----------



## Bassett (Sep 22, 2008)

Sorry, mininik I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. I would have said the same thing if it was reversed. I just cannot believe that any family only has 1 car in this day and age. Especially someone of Obamas stature.

In our hayday we had 5-6 registered vehicles at one time. (So what??? Hence my remark). Motorhome, my car, Pickup truck, jeep (just for fun),corvair (collector car) etc. But alas those days are gone forever. Husband in nursing home and life is just not what it used to be.



but I have so many memories to think about.


----------



## Jill (Sep 22, 2008)

I follow you 100% and the same thoughts... we have 8!!! Counting a farm use truck, a couple antiques that are H's hobby...


----------



## mininik (Sep 22, 2008)

No problem, it's just that my point is so what if the Obamas only have one registered vehicle? I say good for them! As you mentioned, they may also have a chauffeur and that's okay, too. Not everyone needs or wants to have a bunch of vehicles, or houses, or whatever. It may not be typical, but they certainly aren't the only married couple in this country who work and only have one vehicle for a variety of reasons.


----------



## laughingllama75 (Sep 22, 2008)

LOL, we have 4....that are our personal vehicles. Then we have 4 more that are our company (husbands const. company) trucks. My truck, his 1 ton, our mini van and another truck.....and we use thm all the time. I do find it hard to believe, but maybe someone is taking the bike a lot more than we know.



But hey, maybe it is true.


----------



## Pepipony (Sep 22, 2008)

Wonder how many John thinks they have? If he cant recall how many houses they own, surely he cant recall how many cars LOL I cant fault them anyhow for owning so many cars. They have how many kids that drive? Surely they didnt register them in the kids names, plus they probably have a spare here or there at their other houses. As for Obama having one, while I can see it since he probably is chauffered, I kinda doubt it too.


----------



## Bassett (Sep 22, 2008)

I think McCains answer on his houses was he didn't know bacause it really wasn't anyones business but his. And we ALL know it is NOT our business. It has nothing whatsoever to do with his capability of being President.

mininik How many people do you KNOW who have one vehicle? I'm betting, not many. Just kidding!


----------



## minimomNC (Sep 22, 2008)

I don't see where the number of cars a candidate has would be an issue as to how they run a country. I would rather hear about real issues myself.


----------



## Matt73 (Sep 22, 2008)




----------



## mininik (Sep 22, 2008)

What difference does it make how many people I know with only one vehicle? Like I said, it's not typical, but it's not unheard of, either. I know that if I had the money the Obamas no doubt have, I'd prefer to be chauffered.


----------



## Bassett (Sep 22, 2008)

Don't really know any, do you?


----------



## Matt73 (Sep 22, 2008)

minimomNC said:


> I don't see where the number of cars a candidate has would be an issue as to how they run a country. I would rather hear about real issues myself.






And, how!

And before anyone says that Canadians shouldn't be involved in a discussion on American politics...Your politics/economy very much affects us as ours does yours. So, yeah, I'm entitled to voice an opinion on the American election. As Americans are entitled to voice one on ours (Oct. 14th). I agree with minimomNC. Unfortunately, the personal bashing associated with American politics has permeated Canadian elections as well



. Can't anyone be comfortable/be elected on strictly their views and credentials?


----------



## alongman (Sep 22, 2008)

Matt73 said:


> And before anyone says that Canadians shouldn't be involved in a discussion on American politics...Your politics/economy very much affects us as ours does yours. So, yeah, I'm entitled to voice an opinion on the American election. As Americans are entitled to voice one on ours (Oct. 14th). I agree with minimomNC. Unfortunately, the personal bashing associated with American politics has permeated Canadian elections as well
> 
> 
> 
> . Can't anyone be comfortable/be elected on strictly their views and credentials?


But if we elected people purely on credentials and not on their tv-bashing, mud-slinging commercials, then what kind of voter would I be? WAIT.......what a concept that we actually look at a candidate for their platform.


----------



## horseplay (Sep 22, 2008)

Jeepers creepers, now we have ruined Canadian politics, we can't seem to do anything right, we suck big time



.


----------



## Bassett (Sep 22, 2008)

I've been keeping up on all fronts. I feel I am well informed on all issues. I am retired and do a lot of research everytime I hear something. I have the news on tv ALL day long. Just thought this thread as being hilarious.


----------



## Matt73 (Sep 22, 2008)

horseplay said:


> Jeepers creepers, now we have ruined Canadian politics, we can't seem to do anything right, we suck big time
> 
> 
> 
> .



LOL. No, you don't. Your politics does


----------



## CyndiM (Sep 22, 2008)

Let's see we have a Buick, my car, four pick-ups one is mine for hauling the horses and pulling the republican float (our hay rack) in parades and running around in the winter (it's a 4x4) my hubby has one for his daily driving, one is a farm truck, and one is a '56 Ford, and we have a motor home.

Do I find it hard to believe Obama only has one? Yes. The McCain's probably have all of the family vehicles registered to them.

And just in case it hasn't been cleared up about John McCain knowing how many houses he owns, he doesn't own any of them, or so it was reported, his wife does.


----------



## bingo (Sep 22, 2008)

mininik said:


> I just love how having one registered vehicle is unbelievable, but 13 is "So what???"


LOL I thought the same thing starting to get just plain silly now.


----------



## LisaF. (Sep 23, 2008)

Well, my husband and I have 3 vehicles - we did have four, but just sold one this weekend. So, a two family household with one vehicle is extremely hard to believe.

Before our kids got older we also had their cars in our names. So, at one time we had 6 and we are not rich.

One vehicle in a household is just unbelievable for me for someone that has money.

Although, I would love to have a chauffeur- wouldn't that be great? I know I would love it!


----------



## LowriseMinis (Sep 23, 2008)

minimomNC said:


> I don't see where the number of cars a candidate has would be an issue as to how they run a country. I would rather hear about real issues myself.


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

At the risk of really endearing myself to everyone, I could understand McCain's initial reply about the number of houses he owns. How many horses do I own? Give me a minute, because I'd have to count... and these are living beings that I love and handle daily





What I thought was if they own rental / investment properties -- that can be a number that fluctuates. My family has owned a dozen or so at one time and I know there'd be times where there'd be a pause before an answer...





But I guess we don't want a President who's been too materially and financially successful in his own life??? "Whatever."





For those of you who want to know about the issues and things that really matter --don't wait for important things to be spoon fed to you or until just before elections to become informed. Studies show that most voters get their "information" from the political campaign commercials -- pretty disgraceful if you ask me


----------



## RedWagon (Sep 23, 2008)

We only have one vehicle. I know lots of people that only have one. Don't think it's that odd. I do not, however, know anyone that owns 13 vehicles.


----------



## minimomNC (Sep 23, 2008)

Ok Jill, I had to laugh at that one. I do think however, that the number of horses you own would be alot harder to keep up with than the number of houses you own. Its not like he is filling his barn and pasture with houses.

I also know of a family that only has one car, so what. When it cost an arm and a leg just to put gas in one, not to mention taxes, insurance and maintenance, I wish I only had one. OH, but I do have two horse trailers and I know that doesn't make me different than most everyone else on here. But it also doesn't make me any better or any worse either.


----------



## whitney (Sep 23, 2008)

Its all about excess.

Its hard for middle income families to vote for an individual that has 13 vehicles and who knows how many houses.

Middle class families need to be able to "RELATE" to their candidate.

I own 1 vehicle, which sits in the driveway. I take mass transportation to cut down on fuel consumption and save money.

For those who are so far removed from the lower/middle class I suggest you ride the bus for a month or two. I promise you your prospective will return and you'll also receive a HEAVY dose of empathy for those that are less fortunate than you are.


----------



## Sonya (Sep 23, 2008)

> Its hard for middle income families to vote for an individual that has 13 vehicles and who knows how many houses.


Not for me, I am middle income and I have no problem voting for McCain...

If you look back in history...all presidential candidates have been quite wealthy.


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

I am also middle class. We just have too many cars



We take good care of them and I couldn't replace them with as dependable as they are for what we'd get if we sold the -- so I've kept those suckers.

I have a white collar job and am a business owner, my husband, Harvey, is a surveyor... Very much every day people. We both are happily voting for McCain / Palin.

Don't beleive me... check out my modest, but really cute (smile) house -- this was awhile back but it looks just the same now except for some campaign signs in the yard:


----------



## littlesteppers (Sep 23, 2008)

Now we getting somewhere!! In order to vote for the RIGHT candidate I will need a wee bit more..how many suits do they own..how many pairs of shoes, ties, underwear..and the most important thing..brief or boxers???


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

AND -- do they prefer Coke or Pepsi. OH Obama already has already chimed in about "coke" a/k/a blow: _"Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack [heroin] though."_


----------



## whitney (Sep 23, 2008)

Are you sure your middle class?

Taking into account the percentages provided in the six-class model by Gilbert, as well as the model of Thompson and Hickey, one can apply US Census Bureau statistics regarding income. According to these class models the lower middle class is located roughly between the 52nd and 84th percentile of society. In terms of personal income distribution in 2005, that would mean gross annual personal incomes from about $32,500 to $60,000.


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

Income not an across the board way to evaluate. Income levels and cost of living vary GREATLY depending on where you live. If my income was in that range, I can tell you I couldn't afford something as luxurious as horses.

Additionally, I know there's a huge percentage of the population who feels ANYONE who owns a horse is financially better off than they themselves are.

(For however that may be able to bring home the truth that perception and reality aren't always the same thing.)


----------



## Pepipony (Sep 23, 2008)

Why does it matter how many houses? Well, lets see, that was HUGE talking point that Republicans made last election about Kerry. Doesnt anyone remember that? Do as I say not as I do? It matters how many houses because if you make your stance that 'you are an average Joe' , then you need to hold that up.


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

Pepipony said:


> It matters how many houses because if you make your stance that 'you are an average Joe' , then you need to hold that up.


I don't think any one who's done what McCain has done for his country is an Average Joe. He is a National hero.


----------



## OhHorsePee (Sep 23, 2008)

Pepipony said:


> Why does it matter how many houses? Well, lets see, that was HUGE talking point that Republicans made last election about Kerry. Doesnt anyone remember that? Do as I say not as I do? It matters how many houses because if you make your stance that 'you are an average Joe' , then you need to hold that up.


McCain's wife comes from a very well to do family. She brought goodies into their marriage. Just like Teresa Heinz. That never bothered me about Kerry. I didn't like Kerry but what wealth he married into did not matter to me one bit. I do not think any one intelligent person who is voting for issues alone (either now or then with Kerry) is going to make their mind up about someone because they have real estate or more than one vehicle. It's about experience, trust and who can do the best job. It is my opinion that McCain is that person.

I am, however, surprised that the media hasn't gone on a who owns the most snow mobiles hunt yet.


----------



## Pepipony (Sep 23, 2008)

Jill said:


> Pepipony said:
> 
> 
> > It matters how many houses because if you make your stance that 'you are an average Joe' , then you need to hold that up.
> ...



So that makes him what, special? Anyhow, you are, as usuall, taking one thing said and making it another. *I* wasnt calling him an average Joe, its what HIS campaign is trying to portray him as.

Not going to make a comment on how republicans bashed Kerry about his home ownership? So do the next best thing, go to the POW thing. OMG I am so dang tired of that line. I am SO not diminishing that time either. I am stating that I am tired of his reply to so many questions being about his time as a POW. So John, how do you feel about homelessness. Well, for 5 years I was a POW, I didnt have a home. Come on already. That one thing doesnt make you better. If it did, there is a POW up the road from me a bit that maybe should run for Pres.


----------



## Minimor (Sep 23, 2008)

> For those who are so far removed from the lower/middle class I suggest you ride the bus for a month or two. I promise you your prospective will return and you'll also receive a HEAVY dose of empathy for those that are less fortunate than you are.


Are you saying Obama is less fortunate than "me"...because he has only 1 vehicle and I have 3...one of which does not run and the other two which are old pickup trucks??



If so, that is just plain FUNNY. I do find it a little weird that someone like Obama would have only 1 vehicle.

But, I have no idea what difference it makes how many vehicles anyone has. I just don't see that being an issue for any election--and I don't see why it matters how many houses a candidate has or doesn't have...

I also don't see how US politics ruined our Canadian election...as I recall we've seen plenty of mudslinging in past elections. I know that before the last one I made the comment that I wish they would stop telling us what was wrong with the other parties and tell us what was so good about their own. Maybe Canada actually started the election mudslinging, and this year the American canditates have just picked up on the idea and made it better!


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

Pepipony said:


> Jill said:
> 
> 
> > Pepipony said:
> ...


Did you seriously just ask that as a follow up to my remark about John McCain being an American Hero????? Regardless of if you think he's who should be the next US President, I cannot relate to you not understanding that his service to our Nation and conduct as a POW was absolutely heroic. How is THIS not special???

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2008/0...on-account.html


----------



## Neil (Sep 23, 2008)

whitney said:


> .For those who are so far removed from the lower/middle class I suggest you ride the bus for a month or two. I promise you your prospective will return and you'll also receive a HEAVY dose of empathy for those that are less fortunate than you are.


I would have to walk 15 miles to catch the nearest bus.


----------



## Neil (Sep 23, 2008)

Bassett said:


> They just reported that McCains have 13 registered vehicles that the Dems are complaining about. So what???? And the Obama only have 1.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have only heard this once on the news. My take on it was that McCain had been heard to say that he only bought American (he was probably in Michigan when he said it) and the report on his 13 cars was that one was a VW. OH!

My personal opinion on American cars is that for the most part is American by name and assembly only. I would guess that most of the parts are foreign made. And how many of them are assembled in Canada. What can I say, my car, a Chevy Monte Carlo , was made in Canada.


----------



## LisaF. (Sep 23, 2008)

Whitney - When I said how many vehicles we had - I by far did not mean I was rich. I can tell you it is EXTREMELY hard for me to beleive that Obama only has one car unless they have chauffers ( which as I stated I would love to have).

In my oppinion "IF" Obama has one car it is by choice not because he can't afford it.

OH, and Jill - I love your home - sorry, off topic.


----------



## Pepipony (Sep 23, 2008)

Jill said:


> Pepipony said:
> 
> 
> > Jill said:
> ...




Good one Jill, love how you take a snippet of what I said and twist it to what you need to say. If you had actually read what I said and not read INTO what I said, your point would be moot. Your complete insinuation that his being a POW makes him 'more' than anyone else is rediculous. His use of having been a POW as a talking point on how he can relate to everyone, is rediculous. Its a political ploy. He isnt worth anymore than the millions of GIs. And his being a POW doesnt make him more worthy of being a President. Now make sure you actually read what I wrote, and dont read into it what you want.


----------



## Minimor (Sep 23, 2008)

Neil's car was made in Canada....I have an even sadder story.....my truck was made FOR driving in the California desert, where it is very hot, yet it was sold here in Canada. A Canadian prairie winter is very different from California's desert temperatures...and certain things don't hold together well when it gets down to -40 (or not even that cold!!) The rad, for instance, leaks like a sieve when it gets that cold. In cold the plastic side tanks contract...and seperate from the aluminum rad...and then it leaks. If I were driving in the desert all the time, no more leaky rad.






Yes, I know this is off topic, but it seems it is better that way!


----------



## Reijel's Mom (Sep 23, 2008)

Not that I think any of this is all that relevant, but I would imagine there are a LOT of folks that live in our cities that do not own vehicles.

I never even knew I was an Independent until I saw how completely insane these threads can get with the "my party is better than your party" crap.


----------



## Jill (Sep 23, 2008)

OH! OH! OH! While a POW, John McCain turned down release because he wouldn't allow himself to be freed when there were other fellow POW's who'd been there longer. For this valor, he was treated much more cruelly than the other prisoners. He was a POW for 5.5 years.

Maybe you are ill informed and didn't know the above?



Because McCain was more than a POW, although they all deserve respect and deep gratitude for the sacrifices they made for our Nation.

Like I said, I don't care if you think he's fit to be President, never said that's all you needed in order to be President (as_ if _that's all McCain's got...), but I cannot fathom that you wouldn't find him to be a hero





And I won't even get into how McCain's Patriotism and love of our Nation contrasts to that of Obama. Wow







Pepipony said:


> Your complete insinuation that his being a POW makes him 'more' than anyone else is rediculous. His use of having been a POW as a talking point on how he can relate to everyone, is rediculous. Its a political ploy. He isnt worth anymore than the millions of GIs. And his being a POW doesnt make him more worthy of being a President. Now make sure you actually read what I wrote, and dont read into it what you want.


----------



## laughingllama75 (Sep 23, 2008)

OK Kids,

I may be sticking my snoot where it doesn't belong........but I think I speak for most when I say: Remember, this is just a discussion, not a life or death topic. THIS is why we live in America.....so we CAN have civil discussions like this.





Lets all remain friends, I know it is hard at times to take things with a grain of salt...but we are all adults and none of us are going to "chage sides" politically. We would like the other person to, but it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.





Can't we all just be friends?


----------



## Pepipony (Sep 23, 2008)

I was raised with a WWII Naval Capt for a GF. He instilled in me that while our fighting men and women are fantastic, they do not deserve special treatment. In his generation they did their duty to support their country, not to use their duty to endorse celebrity. Yes, McCains service is valorous and wonderfull, but that doesnt make him special or worthy of election solely because of that. Nor does it make him right in everything that he does. His being a POW doesnt negate his being part of the Keating 5. It doesnt negate his use of Lobbyists even though he claims to now be against them. And on the list goes.

I never, ever once said he wasnt a hero, I said it didnt make him SPECIAL. There is a former POW up the road from me. He is a scam on the system. Never forget one time I heard him pitch a fit at a store because there wasnt another cart for him to use and with him being a POW, he deserved one, he was legally blind and unable to walk. On the way home, he was out digging post holes and running a backhoe. My point is, if McCain is so deserving of a vote just because he is a POW, maybe I should get this guy to run as well. And DO NOT put words in my mouth, I am not comparing them, just the use of POW as it applies to either. Nor does it make him a Patriot over someone else. At least not being a POW in and of itself.

And Jill, what about the discussion about how many homes Kerry had a few years back? Werent you in on it ( if you werent, fine)? If you were, why was it ok to bash him about it, but then make excuses for McCains ownerships?


----------



## Jill (Sep 24, 2008)

Pepi --

My point has never been that John McCain's significant selling point is that he was a POW. His actions while he was speak to his character and are what, to me, makes him a National Hero. There are many different things that make him the best choice to be our next President.

Honestly, I don't recall any thing nor any personal feelings about John Kerry's real estate holdings. Not surprisingly either because I find him to be a pretty uninteresting and unmemorable figure.

Let me also say that I don't feel I've made excuses for John McCain's real estate holdings or the vehicles he owns. I may have explained why I think there's not anything about these things to be ashamed of, but that's not the same as making excuses. An excuse implies there's something wrong or shameful.

What a stark contrast McCain's service to our country and patriotism are to Obama's 20 years of with the racist, anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright as is personal spiritual and moral leader, and his friendship with former terrorist William Ayers. Obama's unwillingness to demonstrate respect for our flag. Obama's lack of pride for our Country...

Jill


----------



## Southern_Heart (Sep 24, 2008)

Jill said:


> What a stark contrast McCain's service to our country and patriotism are to Obama's 20 years of with the racist, anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright as is personal spiritual and moral leader, and his friendship with former terrorist William Ayers. Obama's unwillingness to demonstrate respect for our flag. Obama's lack of pride for our Country...
> Jill


Jill I am glad that you brought this up...as so many people just might not know!

Although I am for McCain/Palin...



speaking of Terrorist William Ayers, He sure was.

*Airing the Ayers-Obama Connection-* This article is a good read. Read it all... I knew there was something about Obama I didn't like. How can anyone vote for a man that has Terrorist connections? Ayers even told the New York Times as saying: "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."



Thats like putting a wolf incharge of the sheep. The sheep being the good Ole U.S.A. JMHO

*Airing The Ayers- Obama Connection*


----------



## anita (Sep 24, 2008)

And Rev. Pfleger, Frank Marshall Davis, Farrakah, Saul Alinsky, Rezko and his friends and so goes on

Did you hear on O'Riley interview

O'Riley asked him " Do you have right wing friends?" Obama said: " Yes, um um um um .........yes, um...."

O'Riley said:" Tell me just one" No answer came just laughter


----------



## Bassett (Sep 24, 2008)

Ayers-Obama Connection. Thanks Southern Heart. Interesting reading. I said right from the start there is something not right with Obama and I still maintain that. I can't quite put my finger on it. I really think the whole American people are being set up by him and his cronies. We are all going to be in a world of hurt if Obama gets in as our next President. JMHO


----------



## tagalong (Sep 24, 2008)

> What a stark contrast McCain's service to our country and patriotism are to Obama's 20 years of with the racist, anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright as is personal spiritual and moral leader, and his friendship with former terrorist William Ayers. Obama's unwillingness to demonstrate respect for our flag. Obama's lack of pride for our Country...


McCain is what - 25 years older than Obama? He thus has had far more years of "service".

There was no disrespect for the flag - even the GOP knows that and has dropped it. I would provide the usual links to factcheck.org or snopes to PROVE that but I think that is a waste of time as some simply will not read them. They only want to know *their* truth about some issues - not necessarily *the* truth - but that is normal for many in this political sparring..





Both McCain and Obama have flip-flopped on issues... and with McCain caught out about his lobbyist and Fannie Mae connections - I guess many will just ignore it.

You shouldn't.

When Bill Ayers was with the Underground as a radical - Obama was a child - so I doubt that he was in there helping out. And decades later - if they were working towards the same goals in the community - "guilt by association" is nonsense. Is McCain guilty by association with a long list of people who might have done things in the past? No. The Ayers thing has been gone over ad nauseum for months - and now it is front and center again as it seems to be the pet project of one columnist... whatever. If some of McCain's connections throughout the past were examined with that same degree of scrutiny - I am sure that there would be issues there as well.

Rev. Wright. You know - I sat in chirch for 20 years and never became the person that minister thought I should be. Was Obama out there stumping for Rev. Wright? Never. Rhetoric does not a belief sytem make... but Rev. Wright has proven to be a lot more about grandstanding than spiritual issues. Have we ever heard Obama spout the same kind of nonsense that Rev. Wright resorted to in some of his over the top sermons? No. Nor would we. But Wright was likely not the best choice to note as being a spiritual advisor due to his affection for bombastic, incendiary rhetoric... so yeah - Obama shoud have disavowed him long ago IMO...

Fingers need to point BOTH ways... and that is what grieves me about the whole election process. Some get upset about Palin being trashed - and yet found it perfectly acceptable to treat Hillary the same - or worse.

Everything Obama/McCain says is perfect - and everything Obama/McCain says must be wrong or proof of something evil. It goes both ways.

For instance - OF COURSE whoever the next President is will have a tax increase... the huge deficit that the past 8 years has thrown us into needs to be dealt with... and yet I am sure that will be held up as an example of some politican's lies. That is a no-win situation for whoever inherits this mess... as is thw war in Iraq. No matter what they do - it will be seen as the wrong choice.

Politics needs to be more like Centered Riding. You need to look at things with "soft eyes" ... noting everything in the area that could be problematical or that you need to be aware of, taking it in and processing it... instead of "hard eyes".. only looking straight ahead and being unaware of what is happening in your surroundings and how such events may affect you.

Simplistic views, amybe - but what would be a refreshing change it would be if we examined all the issues and candidates with the same degree of intensity... and no one got a free pass or had things overlooked...

So I guess I am kind of like factcheck.org... and feel everyone should be scrutinized - by all of us. From all sides of every issue.

Np email fables... no rhetoric.... no partisan stretching of the facts... and commercials that stick to issues an solutions instead of personal attacks.

Yeah - I know I'm a dreamer...





John NcCain is right - even if it is a bit of showboating (DUH! - and yes I would say the same thing if Obama had said it first) - they should call off Friday's debate and get back to Washington to like.... do their jobs... in the face of the economic bailout.


----------



## littlesteppers (Sep 24, 2008)

tagalong said:


> > What a stark contrast McCain's service to our country and patriotism are to Obama's 20 years of with the racist, anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright as is personal spiritual and moral leader, and his friendship with former terrorist William Ayers. Obama's unwillingness to demonstrate respect for our flag. Obama's lack of pride for our Country...
> 
> 
> McCain is what - 25 years older than Obama? He thus had had far more years of "service".
> ...


I beg to differ..watch the "radical connection" video..

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/index.html


----------



## Bassett (Sep 24, 2008)

And believe it or not Obama claims HE SAID IT FIRST. Fox news. 2:15 cst


----------



## Jill (Sep 24, 2008)

Makes me feel so frustrated with some people that they either don't care enough to learn about / dig into Obama's background and shady relationships or they know and they think it's okay to have these kinds of moral leaders and terrorist friends... you do not look up to and befriend those kinds of people if you do not hold similar beliefs and feelings


----------



## tagalong (Sep 24, 2008)

Jill said:


> Makes me feel so frustrated with some people that they either don't care enough to learn about / dig into Obama's background and shady relationships or they know and they think it's okay to have these kinds of moral leaders and terrorist friends... you do not look up to and befriend those kinds of people if you do not hold similar beliefs and feelings



*Jill* - it frustrates me when people assume that just because someone may not agree with them about everything or accepT that everything that is dished out is a fact when it can be easily checked... or does not buy into all the rhetoric at face value... that "they do not care enough" or have not checked into things. You proved that you did not actually even read or care to understand my post.

I do pay attention. I do read. About everyone - and not just the partisan, carefully crafted stuff. And I never have blinkers on. I criticize everyone. I may lean left - but no one gets a pass with me. I have shown that in many discussions. I have used factcheck and snopes to show when McCain has had crap spread about him as well - on many boards.. but you "know" that I do no not "care enough to learn"? Okey-doke.



> And believe it or not Obama claims HE SAID IT FIRST. Fox news. 2:15 cst


I did not see that noted anywhere yet - but to be honest - _who cares who said what first??!!_





It is stilll calculated grandstanding and showboating to make such announcements - even if it is the right thing to do... no matter who does it!

*ISSUES* like the economy and the war should be the focus.... not the personal bashing odf each candidate. REAL ISSUES.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 24, 2008)

Without talking about any specific posts that have been going on and on and on about your soon to be election I am absolutely amazed as an "outsider" (non-american) to see the what is transpiring on this forum. I have a question - do you care at all about any of the issues without starting the rah-rah



stuff? The economy is going down the toilet big time and I don't see a serious debate about that. Does the economy in the U.S. not touch each and everyone of you? it touches many other countries so those of you who say that we in other countries have nothing to lose or gain by your elections need to open your eyes. I am truly shocked that we have threads about "how many cars".... and other ridiculous things. Heaven help us all.


----------



## littlesteppers (Sep 24, 2008)

Danielle_E. said:


> Without talking about any specific posts that have been going on and on and on about your soon to be election I am absolutely amazed as an "outsider" (non-american) to see the what is transpiring on this forum. I have a question - do you care at all about any of the issues without starting the rah-rah
> 
> 
> 
> stuff? The economy is going down the toilet big time and I don't see a serious debate about that. Does the economy in the U.S. not touch each and everyone of you? it touches many other countries so those of you who say that we in other countries have nothing to lose or gain by your elections need to open your eyes. I am truly shocked that we have threads about "how many cars".... and other ridiculous things. Heaven help us all.


Well Danielle..would you care to explain to us just what is going on with the economy? Maybe than we can have a discussion


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 24, 2008)

You can be as flippant as you want, there seems to be a theme of that kind of behaviour in many threads here. I am just going to hope that the majority of Americans are looking at the issues and finding out what each side has to offer in order to make a non-biased INFORMED decision instead of wasting their time on the most trivial and ridiculous things. And I certainly hope that your election goes a certain way for you, that who you want to be elected does in fact become President because if he doesn't your comments in here are going to look pretty pathetic.


----------



## Jill (Sep 25, 2008)

What works for me is to not give the Canadian argumentor's opinions any more weight than they'll be getting on November 4


----------



## Reijel's Mom (Sep 25, 2008)

tagalong said:


> > What a stark contrast McCain's service to our country and patriotism are to Obama's 20 years of with the racist, anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright as is personal spiritual and moral leader, and his friendship with former terrorist William Ayers. Obama's unwillingness to demonstrate respect for our flag. Obama's lack of pride for our Country...
> 
> 
> McCain is what - 25 years older than Obama? He thus has had far more years of "service".
> ...


GASP!!! How DARE you try to be rational, Tagalong!


----------



## Bassett (Sep 25, 2008)

Danielle_E. said:


> You can be as flippant as you want, there seems to be a theme of that kind of behaviour in many threads here. I am just going to hope that the majority of Americans are looking at the issues and finding out what each side has to offer in order to make a non-biased INFORMED decision instead of wasting their time on the most trivial and ridiculous things. And I certainly hope that your election goes a certain way for you, that who you want to be elected does in fact become President because if he doesn't your comments in here are going to look pretty pathetic.



You know what I wish? I wish Obama lived in Canada and was running in their election. I really wonder how many people would be voting for him if he was pushed off on them. Oh I know a couple very opinionated ones who would.


----------



## Jill (Sep 25, 2008)

Me too, Bonnie!!! See how much they like him up close and personal


----------



## Southern_Heart (Sep 25, 2008)

*Obama Worked Closely with Terrorist Bill Ayers*

For those whom think not... Read it... not just part of it... but all of it. * And you want this man to be your President? *



God save us all!





Obama Worked Closely With Terrorist Bill Ayers


----------



## OhHorsePee (Sep 25, 2008)

That's a great article Southern Hart! I especially liked reading this paragraph:



> *Ayers' wife, Dohrn, also has served on panels with Obama. Dohrn was once on the FBI's Top 10 Most Wanted List and was described by J. Edgar Hoover as the "most dangerous woman in America." Ayers and Dohrn raised the son of Weathermen terrorist Kathy Boudin, who was serving a sentence for participating in a 1981 murder and robbery that left four people dead.*


How can anyone overlook the obvious?


----------



## tagalong (Sep 26, 2008)

The "obvious" is that when Dohrn and Ayers were activists - Obama was a child. He had no part in that. The guilt by association thing starts sounding pretty tenuous and desperate to me... when you can serve on committees and panels and/or work with someone who has a past or specific views - and instantly that person's opinions and past are determined to be part of what you are. Are you guilty of whatever your coworkers or friends may have done - and do you share the same beliefs?

It works both ways - as I said earlier. Tenuous "connections" are everywhere. But I guess some only want to see things from one side... and nothing else. Whatever.


----------



## Southern_Heart (Sep 26, 2008)

No.. Obama is connected to Ayers now. He has even taken money from him for his campaign! Oh Well..... Beleive what you want....





An electorate that doesn't pay attention to the choosing of its leaders will end up being led in unexpected ways.


----------



## littlesteppers (Sep 26, 2008)

tagalong said:


> The "obvious" is that when Dohrn and Ayers were activists - Obama was a child. He had no part in that. The guilt by association thing starts sounding pretty tenuous and desperate to me... when you can serve on committees and panels and/or work with someone who has a past or specific views - and instantly that person's opinions and past are determined to be part of what you are. Are you guilty of whatever your coworkers or friends may have done - and do you share the same beliefs?
> It works both ways - as I said earlier. Tenuous "connections" are everywhere. But I guess some only want to see things from one side... and nothing else. Whatever.


The partnership between Ayers and Obama is about much more than the number of occasions on which the two were recorded together in the same room. As CAC board chair, Obama was essentially authorizing the funding of Ayers’s own educational projects, and the projects of Ayers’s radical allies. And especially in CAC’s first year, Ayers was largely in charge of the process. One of CAC’s own evaluations notes that during 1995, CAC was a “Founder-Led Foundation.” That is, Ayers was not merely an ex officio board member that year, but as the key founder and guiding spirit of CAC, he was effectively running the show.


----------



## Jill (Sep 26, 2008)

Also, former terrorist Bill Ayers, and his wife, hosted a meet-and-greet party -- at their home -- for Obama in 1995. He wasn't a kid then. Just someone with close ties to people who are shady and disturbing... former terrorists (William Ayers)... anti-American racist reverends (Jeremiah Wright)... community organizations that were in the business of voter fraud (Acorn)... Come on people! THINK!!! You shouldn't have to "explain away" these things about someone you would elect President of the United States. And, that's not even touching on his total lack of ability and the experience required to lead our Nation.


----------



## bingo (Sep 26, 2008)

tagalong said:


> The "obvious" is that when Dohrn and Ayers were activists - Obama was a child. He had no part in that. The guilt by association thing starts sounding pretty tenuous and desperate to me... when you can serve on committees and panels and/or work with someone who has a past or specific views - and instantly that person's opinions and past are determined to be part of what you are. Are you guilty of whatever your coworkers or friends may have done - and do you share the same beliefs?


Isn't that the truth.I think people on both sides can agree we might be mortified if someone assumed that us being here in LB meant we have the same opinions as others on the board or that their past actions of all members are a direct reflection of us. I know I would be!


----------



## anita (Sep 26, 2008)

Irans President gave his Anti- America speech in NY to UN. Three hours later he was on CNN/ Larry King.

Remember Obama comment: Iran is a little country and NO danger for USA

Yesterday, folks in NY gave a reception for Iran's President in Hyatt Hotel NY. Guess who was the host? Obama supporter from Chicago who gave millions to Obama for his election and before as Ill Senator, she was also a Hollywood sponsor a few days ago. Her name is Pfitzner or like that, a German or Polish name. She is the owner of Hyatt Hotels


----------



## Minimor (Sep 26, 2008)

> You know what I wish? I wish Obama lived in Canada and was running in their election


 GASP. Now that is a nasty wish! You can keep him, just because a couple on here like him so well, doesn't mean we all like him.


----------



## OhHorsePee (Sep 26, 2008)

tagalong said:


> The "obvious" is that when Dohrn and Ayers were activists - Obama was a child. He had no part in that. The guilt by association thing starts sounding pretty tenuous and desperate to me
> 
> 
> 
> Tag, they were terrorists. Obama lied about his connections by saying he didn't know them then it came out he served on a board with them. He was in their home. I do wish I could understand how some people see them as an activist only when they hurt so many people. And that it was ok that he lied about it. Could you please help me understand your point of view?


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 26, 2008)

Minimor said:


> > You know what I wish? I wish Obama lived in Canada and was running in their election
> 
> 
> GASP. Now that is a nasty wish! You can keep him, just because a couple on here like him so well, doesn't mean we all like him.


He is a heck of alot better than what we have to chose from in Canada at the moment. I won't comment more than that or I can't BUT I work for the Canadian government and I see exactly what has been going on with this last Prime Minister



. Heaven help us if we bring in a majority is all I can say. Just remember I said that.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 26, 2008)

anita said:


> Irans President gave his Anti- America speech in NY to UN. Three hours later he was on CNN/ Larry King. Remember Obama comment: Iran is a little country and NO danger for USA
> 
> Yesterday, folks in NY gave a reception for Iran's President in Hyatt Hotel NY. Guess who was the host? Obama supporter from Chicago who gave millions to Obama for his election and before as Ill Senator, she was also a Hollywood sponsor a few days ago. Her name is Pfitzner or like that, a German or Polish name. She is the owner of Hyatt Hotels


Iran president slams U.S.

LUCAS JACKSON/REUTERS

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addresses the United Nations Sept. 23, 2008, giving a speech with a rambling theme of God, justice and morality. Email story

Print

Choose text size

Report typo or correction

Email the author

Ahmadinejad ridicules Bush with a thumbs-down, then rails against Israel in speech at UN meeting

Sep 24, 2008 04:30 AM

Comments on this story (43)

Olivia Ward

Foreign Affairs Reporter

Taking a high moral tone, Iran's gadfly president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ridiculed the United States as a spent force in a speech to the United Nations yesterday, railing against Israel, and insisting that his country's disputed nuclear program was purely peaceful.

Ahmadinejad, whose visit to New York was marked by angry demonstrations, appeared calm and relaxed, wearing a grey tailored suit and a stylishly trimmed beard as he faced his critics across the podium.

Earlier in the day, he shrugged off a speech by U.S. President George W. Bush – who had named Iran as a supporter of terrorism – while turning a visible thumbs-down at the American leader, whose final UN exit lines were overshadowed by America's financial crisis.

"The American empire in the world is reaching the end of the road," Ahmadinejad told the General Assembly. "And its next rulers must limit their interference to their own borders."

Ahmadinejad's speech, with a rambling theme of God, justice and morality, stressed Iran's peaceful nature and love of "creativity, mercy, kindness, wisdom."

But he broke into a bitter condemnation of Israel similar to speeches made in the past: "Today the Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse and there is no way for it to get out of the cesspool created by itself and its supporters."

And he said, he would submit a "peace plan" to the UN Secretary General to solve the problems of the Palestinians. It would include "a free referendum under the supervision of international organizations," allowing them to decide on the type of government they want. Ahmadinejad dismissed the American occupation of Iraq as a failure. But he also aimed ridicule at Canada and other NATO countries in Afghanistan.

"NATO troops in Afghanistan are an expanding presence," he told reporters after his speech. "Ever since they arrived, illicit drug production and extremism have increased."

"Even if they increased military forces they wouldn't succeed," he added. "They are going into a well with their heads down. I feel sorry for them."

Although a confrontation looms over Iran's uranium enrichment program, which Western countries believe may lead to the production of nuclear weapons, Ahmadinejad smiled at suggestions that it was anything but peaceful.

Answering accusations by the U.S. and the UN's atomic energy watchdog that Iran was holding back on vital information on its nuclear program, he retorted that "as far as we are concerned it is resolved. The rest is propaganda."

Foreign ministers for six nations negotiating on Iran's nuclear program were scheduled to meet tomorrow. But Russia, one of the six, said that the week of speeches by world leaders at the UN was too packed "to make us toss everything else aside and urgently meet to discuss the Iranian nuclear issue."

Iran has benefited from the tensions between Russia and the U.S. over Moscow's invasion of Georgia last month – as well as Washington's economically weakened state and the end of Bush's term in power.

Russia said it opposed new sanctions against Iran for failing to accept a deal to halt its enrichment program in exchange for economic and energy aid. But it called on Tehran to co-operate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, a statement echoed by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in a speech earlier in the day.

During his UN appearance, Ahmadinejad repeatedly denied Iran was in a race for a nuclear bomb.

"A few bullying powers have sought to put hurdles in the way of the peaceful nuclear activities of the Iranian nation by exerting political and economic pressures against Iran, and also through threatening and pressuring the IAEA," he said in his speech.

And he told reporters: "People who seek the use of nuclear weapons are backward. The time for the atomic bomb has come to an end. Whoever seeks it will lose in that pursuit."

But he warned threats against Iran would be disastrous, saying, "If there is a hand raised against our nation ... it would be cut immediately."

Responding to accusations of supporting terrorism, Ahmadinejad took a more tranquil tone, saying that "anyone who is ready to fight terrorism will find the Iranian people their partner."

Since Ahmadinejad made his first visit to the UN, he has become more confident and relaxed, chatting amiably with reporters and seemingly at home at the podium. In an earlier appearance in New York, he had brusque exchanges with the media and appeared tense and ill at ease.

"We seek relations based on justice and mutual respect," he told reporters yesterday. "Force is not a relationship, but an imposition."

And he said, the door was not closed to dialogue on Iran's nuclear program. "We are in favour of dialogue and talks, but we will not accept the language of force."

With files from the Star's wire services


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 26, 2008)

removed (sorry this for some reason ended up in this thread and not the one I thought I was putting it under)


----------



## Danielle_E. (Sep 26, 2008)

I think their is a bit more of this "anti-american" speech - I think it started with the below...

UNITED NATIONS -- Iran's leader flashed a thumbs-down Tuesday as U.S. President George W. Bush denounced Tehran as a sponsor of global terrorism in his farewell address to the U.N.

AP

President Bush, sits in the chair reserved for heads of state before addressing the U.N. General Assembly Tuesday, Sept. 23 2008. Then Bush got less than 10 seconds of polite applause at the end of a speech in which he urged world leaders to take "an unequivocal moral stand" against suicide bombings, hostage taking and other terror tactics.

It was a decidedly low-key appearance, rehashing familiar themes, devoid of the passion Bush displayed in the early years of his presidency when he summoned the world after Sept. 11, 2001, to a battle against terrorism and tried -- but failed -- to win U.N. backing for the war in Iraq.

The president, humbled by economic turmoil that has darkened the final days of his presidency, also tried to speak reassuringly to the leaders about the financial upheaval on Wall Street that has forced him to set aside core principles of capitalism and authorize government takeovers of failing companies.

"I can assure you that my administration and our Congress are working together to quickly pass legislation approving this strategy," Bush told the General Assembly. "And I'm confident we will act in the urgent time frame required." Bush scrapped a planned political trip to Florida on Wednesday to return directly to Washington.

Bush's 22-minute address in the packed, 2,000-seat hall was mostly a restatement of his previous condemnations of terror, calls to advance democracy and criticism of the United Nations for "inefficiency and corruption" and "bloated bureaucracies." Still, Bush said the U.N. and other multinational organizations are now "needed more urgently than ever" to combat terrorists and extremists who are threatening world order.

With only 119 days remaining in his presidency, Bush found his usually busy schedule of one-on-one meetings with other world leaders had dwindled to a bare minimum. He talked with Pakistan's new president, Asif Ali Zardari, about Saturday's truck bombing in Islamabad and held a last-minute meeting with Uganda's leader, Yoweri Museveni. Peace talks have faltered between Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army, which has been waging one of Africa's longest and most brutal rebellions.

Bush also met on Governors Island with a political dissidents from a dozen countries, from China to Cuba, and attended a USAID conference on food security.

At the General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sat in the massive hall and seemed intent on showing disinterest as Bush spoke. He waved to the people in the galleries along the side and flashed a broad smile. Turning to an aide as Bush spoke, Ahmadinejad made a fist and turned his thumb down to the desk.

The Iranian leader has defied demands from the United States and other powers to halt a suspected nuclear weapons program. Ahmadinejad has vowed that Iran's military will "break the hand" of anyone targeting the country's nuclear facilities. In a series of interviews, Ahmadinejad blamed U.S. military interventions around the world in part for the collapse of global financial markets.

Bush said regimes like Syria and Iran continue to sponsor terror but that "their numbers are growing fewer, and they're growing more isolated from the world."

But he warned: "As the 21st century unfolds, some may be tempted to assume that the threat has receded. This would be comforting. It would be wrong. The terrorists believe time is on their side, so they've made waiting out civilized nations part of their strategy. We must not allow them to succeed."

Bush said the international community must stand firm against the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran. He said that despite past disagreements over the U.S.-led war in Iraq, members of the U.N. must unite to help the struggling democracy succeed. And he scolded Russia for invading neighboring Georgia, calling it a violation of the U.N. charter.

"The United Nations' charter sets forth the equal rights of nations large and small," he said. "Russia's invasion of Georgia was a violation of those words."

Bush called on the U.N. to focus more on results and aggressively rally behind young democracies like Georgia, Ukraine, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Liberia.

He said that instead of issuing statements and resolutions after terrorist attacks, the U.N. and such organizations must work closely to prevent violence. Every nation has responsibilities to prevent its territory from being used for terrorist, drug trafficking and nuclear proliferation, he said.

In the meeting with Pakistan's president, Bush and Zardari discussed the weekend bombing of the Marriott hotel in Islamabad that killed 53 people and U.S. military incursions into Pakistan targeting militants using remote areas of the Muslim nation to launch attacks in neighboring Afghanistan and elsewhere.

"Your words have been very strong about Pakistan's sovereign right and sovereign duty to protect your country, and the United States wants to help," Bush said about the incursions, which have caused a rift in U.S.-Pakistan relations.

On Tuesday evening, Bush was to co-host an Iraq coalition meeting with President Jalal Talabani of Iraq, consisting of those countries who participated in the coalition on the ground in Iraq. The coalition is shrinking from about 30 countries to a handful in the next 90 days or so. Iraq is drafting bilateral agreements with the U.S. and other countries to replace a U.N. mandate authorizing their presence expires at year-end.

"A lot of people around the world have made sacrifices along with the Iraqi people that enabled a country to emerge from the shadows of tyranny," Bush told representatives of the nation during the meeting. "I want to thank those around the table for showing courage and vision and resolve."

Talabani and Zardari were among foreign leaders slated to meet on Wednesday with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee.

After Bush spoke, Iran's president told the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday that "the American empire" is nearing collapse and should end its military involvement in other countries.

Ahmadinejad said terrorism is spreading quickly in Afghanistan while "the occupiers" are still in Iraq nearly six years after Saddam Hussein was ousted from power in Iraq.

"American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road, and its next rulers must limit their interference to their own borders," Ahmadinejad said.

He accused the U.S. of starting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to win votes in elections and blamed a "few bullying powers" for trying to undermine Iran's nuclear program.

Ahmadinejad's hardline rhetoric came as no surprise and offered little in the way of compromise at the U.N., where he faces a new round of sanctions if no agreement is reached on limiting Iran's nuclear capabilities.

While he reiterated that the country's nuclear program is purely peaceful, the U.S. and others fear it is aimed at producing enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons.

Iran already is under three sets of sanctions by the U.N. Security Council for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment. Washington and its Western allies are pushing for quick passage of a fourth set of sanctions to underline the international community's resolve, but are likely to face opposition from Russia.

"A few bullying powers have sought to put hurdles in the way of the peaceful nuclear activities of the Iranian nation by exerting political and economic pressures against Iran," he said.

Ahmadinejad also lashed out at Israel on Tuesday, saying "the Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse, and there is no way for it to get out of the cesspool created by itself and its supporters."

The Iranian president is feared and reviled in Israel because of his repeated calls to wipe the Jewish state off the map, and his aggressive pursuit of nuclear technology has only fueled Israel's fears.

Ahmadinejad accused "a small but deceitful number of people called Zionists ... (of) dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers of some European countries and the U.S."

Israeli President Shimon Peres reacted angrily to Ahjmadinejad's criticism. "It is again a repetition of the darkest accusations in the name of Hitler and almost anti-Semitism," Peres later told journalists.

In discussing the U.S. war in Iraq, Ahmadinejad said, "Millions have been killed or displaced, and the occupiers, without a sense of shame, are still seeking to solidify their position in the ... region and to dominate oil resources."

He suggested that the presence of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has contributed to a sharp rise in terrorism and a huge increase in the production of narcotics.

He predicted that the alliance would not be successful.

"Throughout history every force that has entered Afghanistan has left in defeat," Ahmadinejad said.

His speech came just hours after President George W. Bush made his eighth and final appearance before the U.N. General Assembly, urging the international community to stand firm against the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Sep 26, 2008)

I am displeased that Obama faked ignorance about Ayers. I agree that there's no way he didn't know. I still think the point is moot, though. Obama has never been tied to illegal activity, period. He hasn't DONE anything, IMO, to warrant all this worry.

McCain, though...McCain is one of the Keating 5, where he was investigated and chastised for his 'poor judgement'. In case anyone forgot what he did to earn his place in the Keating 5.... http://www.latimes.com/news/columnists/la-...,1039504.column

"Once upon a time, a politician took campaign contributions and favors from a friendly constituent who happened to run a savings and loan association. The contributions were generous: They came to about $200,000 in today's dollars, and on top of that there were several free vacations for the politician and his family, along with private jet trips and other perks. The politician voted repeatedly against congressional efforts to tighten regulation of S&Ls, and in 1987, when he learned that his constituent's S&L was the target of a federal investigation, he met with regulators in an effort to get them to back off.

That politician was John McCain, and his generous friend was Charles Keating, head of Lincoln Savings & Loan. While he was courting McCain and other senators and urging them to oppose tougher regulation of S&Ls, Keating was also investing his depositors' federally insured savings in risky ventures. When those lost money, Keating tried to hide the losses from regulators by inducing his customers to switch from insured accounts to uninsured (and worthless) bonds issued by Lincoln's near-bankrupt parent company. In 1989, it went belly up -- and more than 20,000 Lincoln customers saw their savings vanish.

Keating went to prison, and McCain's Senate career almost ended. Together with the rest of the so-called Keating Five -- Sens. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.), John Glenn (D-Ohio), Don Riegle (D-Mich.) and Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), all of whom had also accepted large donations from Keating and intervened on his behalf -- McCain was investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee and ultimately reprimanded for "poor judgment."

But the savings and loan crisis mushroomed. Eventually, the government spent about $125 billion in taxpayer dollars to bail out hundreds of failed S&Ls that, like Keating's, fell victim to a combination of private-sector greed and the "poor judgment" of politicians like McCain."

And ONCE AGAIN McCain been tied to one of these failed loan companies in a not-so-great way. I know I've talked about his campaign manager, Davis, as a shareholder in the company. Turns out he's not just a shareholder. Reports today say that continued to be both TREASURER and CORPORATE DIRECTOR of his lobbying firm for at least a part of this year.

So we have evidence of something iffy McCain did in his past. Not conjecture, not iffy people around him-but something he DID. And now we have evidence of something just as iffy going on at this moment.

That's far more concerning to me.


----------



## Bassett (Sep 26, 2008)

Lowrise. I can't even read and keep up with your posts but think about this. If McCain has done so many bad things, according to you, in 26 years (All government people are guilty of wrongdoing at one time or another) (In fact anyone alive is) (We all are) (Except maybe you) (you appear to be perfect in your eyes) JUST THINK how much Obama would do in 26 years. Hes only just started. Not even a full term as senator yet and almost 2 years on the campaign trail and much of his past doings are following him already. And they are a lot of ugly ones that have been proven. And don't ask me what, like you don't know, because you know very well what is being said about him. You just choose to not see it. I know California is a Democratic state but you are almost to the point of being out of control with yourself. Better settle down a little. Bad for your blood pressure.


----------



## Jill (Sep 26, 2008)

Well said, well put, Bonnie!!!


----------



## LowriseMinis (Sep 26, 2008)

Actually Bonnie, I don't know what bad things Obama has done. I'm aware that he has connections to people who have done bad things in the past, and one group who did something wrong but that we have no evidence that he was directly involved in (ACORN and voter fraud, I think?), but I have seen nothing where he was actually charged or investigated on anything. Oh, and at one point in his life he did take drugs. That was bad. Bad Obama. And Bad Pres. Bush for doing the same. And bad, well...I don't have stats in front of me, but I would venture a guess that close to half of Americans-if not more-have taken or tried some kind of illicit substance in their lives. Edited: I do have some stats. From a recent study about marijuana usage: "Researchers found that 42% of people surveyed in the U.S. had tried marijuana at least once, and 16% had tried cocaine." http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,...1821697,00.html

If there is something I missed, PLEASE show me.

What part of what I'm doing is out of control? IMO, I'm providing facts about McCain and Palin, and finding the information to back what I am saying. I'm sorry if you think taking a stand and backing my opinions with fact makes me out of control.

I just checked my BP a few days ago and it's a-OK, but thank you for your concern. I'm young, I can take it.




I don't recall ever saying I was perfect, though. If you have a link to where I said that, I'd also appreciate it.


----------



## bingo (Sep 26, 2008)

Bassett said:


> but you are almost to the point of being out of control with yourself. Better settle down a little. Bad for your blood pressure.


And this is any different then the same 3-4 posters that repeat the same thing over and over again on all these threads how? Oh I know how they are for McCain/Palin .





I guess posting your opinion or finds is only ok if you are for one side. Interesting I do not hear the McCain/Palin side telling those Canadians who agree with them that their opinion is totally invalid


----------



## Bassett (Sep 26, 2008)

> I guess posting your opinion or finds is only ok if you are for one side.


Exactly, it is what some of you are doing over and over again. Can't see both sides. Like looking in a two way mirror. Can only see things one way.


----------



## bingo (Sep 26, 2008)

Bassett said:


> Exactly, it is what some of you are doing over and over again. Can't see both sides. Like looking in a two way mirror. Can only see things one way.



Ahhh once again the pot callng the kettle black!



Typical at this point.


----------



## susanne (Sep 26, 2008)

Just for the record, Keith and I had only one used car for many, many years. We only added our ancient farm truck when it became available from a friend.

Keith took the bus every day into work and I worked from home and took the bus whenever possible to meet with clients, and we rode bikes or walked whenever possible.

Many cities offer car co-owndership programs for those who only need a car on occasion, so if we were living in town now we would most likely go that route. Our egos are not based on our vehicles.

Many people who live in large cities (New York, etc.) prefer not to have the hassle of parking and dealing with traffic. It is not that far-fetched that the Obamas would have just one car.


----------

