Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 325

• 0%

  TheRealizer5 months ago

  I find it disturbing that in a nation of 300 million citizens the three front runners are the BEST we can choose....!!!!

  Reply

  69 Replies

  • 0%

    blinkers5 months ago

    Yes, that's certainly true (though Obama looks rather distinguished to me), but you'd find similar sentiments expressed in most of the genuine democracies around the world, about the choices before the electorates.

    Japan and Italy, in particular stand out in this regard. Fukuda and Berlesconi seem to be, respectively, a nonentity and a rogue!

    I wonder if there are any academic studies on why this seems to be so widespread.

    Reply

    17 Replies

    • 0%

      Beau78905 months ago

      Here's one. This was written about America, but its basic principles have been borne out in all democracies.

      http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/toc_ind...

      Reply

      11 Replies

      • 0%

        blinkers5 months ago

        That looks a good link Beau, I'll study that with interest. Thanks indeed.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          blinkers5 months ago

          Ah, de Toqueville, early 19th century but much of this is of timeless relevance.

          Reply
      • 0%

        Blackacereturn5 months ago

        WOW there is 11 attempts to sink this. I think you are gett under someones skin. Look, how long can you lie to people before they realize that you are. I am just shocked that it took these guys this long to realize this fact about the GOPers.

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          Blackacereturn5 months ago

          I can see why McCain would run from this, it's soo extrema he wouldn't be elected with these thought processes in place, if even he was handing out free cars to every American. Your Time Is Up.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months ago

            This doesn't bode well for McCain at all. Nope. My guess is that a lot of Republicans who were thoroughly disillusioned, duped, and basically repeatedly lied to by Bush are going to stay home and chill out on the barcalounger on election day. And who could blame them, really? The party had control of all three branches of government for 6 years and what do they have to show for it? Extreme and disgraceful failure everywhere you turn. It's like they can't even turn on the TV without being reminded that what they got for their loyalty to Bush, Cheney and Big Oil are record national debt, $4 gas, $4 milk, incompetence, corruption, lies, destruction of the planet, and the disgust and disdain from the international community. Cosmic failure beyond all comprehension. McCain will be lucky to get a quarter of the vote Bush got in his second term. Oh well...

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              Lurch4 months, 4 weeks ago

              McCain has all the passion and sex appeal of Bob Dole, BEFORE viagra, combined with the failures of the Bush admin.

              This is the weakest Republican candidate in my lifetime.

              Reply
      • 0%

        Beau78905 months ago

        libsRfunny,

        I usually don't call people out for negative votes--it's your prerogative.

        But why would you neg my comment that included a link to the full text of Tocqueville's "Democracy in America," which is still taught today in most high-school history classes as one of the most incisive analyses of the pros and cons of democracy?

        Is it simply too long for you to read?

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Goppy5 months ago

          Its all part of the craaazie neo-Con ideeologie Beau.

          All part of the craaazie neo-Con ideeologie.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            Beau78905 months ago

            He negged democracy in America. That's almost like the Republicans voting against motherhood.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              blinkers5 months ago

              I was surprised by that too, Beau. I guess he doesn't see any "timeless relevance" in democracy in America.

              Reply
        • 0%

          Blackacereturn5 months ago

          Beau7890 - He does that to anyone that doesn't agree with his way of thinking, He will neg anything I post, if even it says god is good! I will make a post that gets 50 pos and one neg, however, this is how you know you are on point because he only does that to those who's makes sense. It's just stupid because he doesen't like McCain!

          Reply
    • 0%

      dunkirk5 months ago

      Id hesitate a guess to say the figures being presented are the ones who can be manipulated by the real powers that be. If you look at the REPUBLICAN candidates since RayGun they have fallen into the senile, althzhiemer, idiot category (with possibly the exception of Bush I who is a string puller). They can easily be manipulated by the men behind the curtain.

      Reply

      4 Replies

      • 0%

        DaneL5 months ago

        dumbkirk,

        Your observations amaze me.

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          dunkirk5 months ago

          Well actually Dane what Ive noticed is reality tends to amaze you.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            DaneL4 months, 4 weeks ago

            dumbkirk,

            You know I am amazed with reality. I wake up every morning and know that anything I want to accomplish I can if I want it bad enough and willing to work for it.

            You on the other hand wake up everyday and see nothing but negative. I really feel sorry for you.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              dunkirk4 months, 4 weeks ago

              ROFLMAO, No Dane I wake up every morning realizing I can laugh as long and as hard as i want by just reading your posts.

              Reply
  • 0%

    Lurch5 months ago

    Obama is the first candidate I have ever been excited about in my life.

    He is a populist instead of a `party` candidate. The establishment on the right has chosen YET another immoral, unethical flip-flopping puppet in John McCain. The establishment on the left has chosen Hillary, because let`s face it, the Clintons are a huge part of that establishment for good or bad.

    Which is why of all three candidates, I am excited about Obama! It`s time to take back OUR govt.

    Reply

    49 Replies

    • 0%

      JoseMadre5 months ago

      "Obama is the first candidate I have ever been excited about in my life."

      That's because his "feel good" propoganda has overshadowed his pro-Marxist positions. Read his books. He makes Hillary look like Ron Paul.

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        Lurch5 months ago

        > has overshadowed his pro-Marxist positions.

        Such a ridiculous post. Like you know what a Marxist position is.

        Anyway, can you back up that claim with evidence, such as a pro-marxist quote from Obama`s book, or are you just spewing hate and smear again?

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          scott42615 months ago

          I doubt he's ever read a book written by Barack Obama either... He's just repeating what he's heard from his beloved FOX News pundits...

          Reply
      • 0%

        Goppy5 months ago

        Thank you Jose!

        I was waitin for one of us from the Christian Conservative Political Right dumb down the essential Obama for us.

        Our nation NEEDS folk liek you to bandy bout useless 'code words' that ... while we really dont understand what they mean ... we know we should be afeared of em'.

        This has worked sooo well for us righties. So well, in fact, that we was able to elect a man who was a draft dodger, a cocaine user, an alcoholic, ... and GET THIS (if you REALLY are opposed to MARXISM) ... he got the city of Arlington Texas to STEAL LAND from middle class citizens so to build a baseball stadium..

        AND GUESS WHAT!

        He got the CITY to force the middle class citizens to PAY for it by raisin their TAXES!!

        Soooo, Jose, if you REALLY dont liek pro-Marxist positions ... I am SHURE you dint vote for Goerge W. Bush ... now DID you?

        Reply
      • 0%

        Wolfie20075 months ago

        Lurch

        Talk about being ridiculous, as if you know anything about pro-Marxist positions. Your post sort of proves you don't much about politics or anything else for that matter. You're best at being rude.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          Lurch5 months ago

          Any Con who wants to debate facts, I am right there.

          If they want to repeat smears and BS, I will smack them down as they deserve.

          In this case, the smack down fit the smear.

          Reply
      • 0%

        Blackacereturn5 months ago

        Well JoseMadre Bush feel bad propaganda um, oh well it made us feel BAD...if there was ever a Marxist government in the US it would be your beloved bush, Mr decider. This guy who has ******ed on our constitution and say it doesn't stand with the time. Who remove the rights of the citizen if evidence is found in an illegal search...the list goes on and on too many to mention, well just one more illegal wiretapping!

        Reply
    • 0%

      memestryker5 months ago

      I'm with TheRealizer on this one. Obama has beautiful rhetoric, for sure. He also had no positions on issues when he started campaigning, and voted "present" instead of making decisions on hard issues in the senate

      He's also supporting what democratic author Naomi Wolf warns against. He is very anti-second amendment (although he's tried to downplay it), and has served on a foundation that actually funds key gun-ban advocates.

      I don't trust anyone who thinks s/he knows more than Thomas Jefferson, and I don't feel very comfortable with any one of the candidates.

      Reply

      24 Replies

      • 0%

        mesodude5 months ago

        "I'm with TheRealizer on this one. Obama has beautiful rhetoric, for sure. He also had no positions on issues when he started campaigning, and voted "present" instead of making decisions on hard issues in the senate"

        --You sound extremely dangerously misinformed (like someone who has been reading right wing campaign literature without using your brain even once to research the other side). Lots of talking points in your post which makes you sound like an obvious plant or a conned sheep. What have you bothered to do in the way of research to understand why Obama holds the positions he does? I suspect very, very little. ;-(

        Reply

        6 Replies

        • 0%

          Tangent0015 months ago

          It's an interesting change of tactics. The anti-Obama crowd use to claim Obama has no substance and that he has no clear policy direction. Now that it is obvious he DOES, they are switching to, "We'll he HAD no positions early in his campaign."

          WTF?

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months ago

            I hear ya...I'm always suspicious of posters whose comments are spiked with stale sound bites about Obama. For instance, why must I read for the million time (and yet phrased in a way that clearly suggest the poster believes he or she originated the observation) that Obama is articulate? Or about this voting "present" nonsense (which he has responded to repeatedly)? LOL Is there a living soul left on the planet who doesn't know that Barack Obama is a liberal? That Obama "has beautiful rhetoric" isn't some groundbreaking news and when I see simplistic CRAP like that post, I don't have to wonder how our country has deteriorated to the sh*thole it is today. WTF, indeed.

            Reply
        • 0%

          memestryker5 months ago

          meso, I've reviewed every bill he's sponsored and many he has cosponsored at the national and state levels; read his own words; reviewed his activity with groups such as the Joyce Foundation, the U.N., etc.; and pretty much read everything I find about him.

          On key presidential-level policy, he pretty much parroted Clinton until he found his own legs (which he did). "Change we can believe in" just seems empty to me.

          Thanks for the ad hominem attack. I'm flattered you read my post.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months ago

            "meso, I've reviewed every bill he's sponsored and many he has cosponsored at the national and state levels; "

            --I see...I find it breathtaking that, after reading all of the more than 800 bills he submitted in the Illinois State Senate, somehow you were still left with the impression that he "had no positions on issues." Fascinating. Even more intriguing is the fact that you are perplexed that Hillary and Obama hold similar (if not identical) views on certain issues. You see, the problem I have with your post above is that there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that you've done any kind of fact checking about Obama. I've lost track of the number of times the question of his voting "present" came up in interviews and debates, but you write as if you're just learning of his voting record today. And why are you pretending that you're *completely* clueless regarding the Democratic Party's political agenda? This is the part I don't get...

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              memestryker5 months ago

              Sorry to disappoint, especially if I contributed to your not "getting" it.

              Reply
            • 0%

              memestryker4 months, 4 weeks ago

              MD-btw, I didn't say "read," I said "reviewed." I have no idea how many there are--I just looked up his name and the bills he sponsored and skimmed through them. You can stop putting words in my mouth, if you don't mind. And you seem clueless yourself if you think all the democrats follow the same political agenda. That's one reason we have primaries. The nuances can be significant even if a candidate adopts an entire general platform.

              Reply
      • 0%

        CRYMTYPHON5 months ago

        How can he have no positions on issues, but be very anti-second amendment? I hear that a lot, in variations.

        Does that go with him being an elitist but a socialist?

        And Obama probably feels he knows better than Jefferson, on at least one subject.

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          mesodude5 months ago

          memestryker's post reminds me of one of those cute little campaign postcards some candidates send out at election time. You know, the ones with a photo of the candidate kissing a baby or hugging a bunny or planting a rainforest or whatever politicians do to appear human these days and with a handful of bullets listing their opponent's shortcomings. Anyway, it's as if some people read the bulleted statements on the card but the critical thinking switch in their brain (the one that in normal people says, "find out what the opponent is saying in his or her defense) shorts out and remains stuck in the off position. Wow...

          Reply
        • 0%

          memestryker5 months ago

          He was weak on major issues like healthcare at the beginning of his campaign, and then started to sound like Clinton before he finally developed it later in the game.

          He's been doggedly anti-second amendment, even serving as a board member on the Joyce Foundation, which spends huge sums of money funding the most extreme anti-second amendment organizations, and he supports the U.N.'s citizen disarmament program (see their Millenium Declaration at http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares55...

          Elitists like to disarm everyone else. Here is a taste of what others might be calling his "socialism": http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2433/show

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months ago

            "He's been doggedly anti-second amendment, even serving as a board member on the Joyce Foundation, which spends huge sums of money funding the most extreme anti-second amendment organizations"

            --See, again you're writing as if these are bombshells. I believe the majority of Democrats support some degree of gun control and, in general, Democrats are for diplomacy over senselessly funding the military industrial complex. These aren't issues that require super sleuthing to learn what his positions are. Yet, based on your words, it would seem that this was the first Presidential election in the entire history of elections and you're discovering the Democratic party's platform this year. Are you a new citizen? I'm just curious...

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              memestryker5 months ago

              md, The individual right to keep and bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with senselessly funding the military industrial complex.

              Have a great life.

              Reply
      • 0%

        Ratskii5 months ago

        meme, I think the voting present was from his days in the state legislature and it was a tactic used to reduce the effectiveness of the anti-abortion lobby. If you have other information, by all means share it.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          memestryker5 months ago

          No problem.

          http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id...

          Reply
      • 0%

        Ciera-Marie5 months ago

        Okay, memestryker can you provide the proof to back up your allegations against Obama?

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          memestryker5 months ago

          I think he's unbeatable, with the right running mate. He's well-spoken and inspirational. I honestly hope he's as good as people believe he is and not just another Jimmy Carter.

          I knew he was in the game when he clearly and publicly stated his own opinion with respect to those expressed by Pastor Wright. He took care of business.

          I think I already provided links and data to support my "allegations" in an earlier post. Let me know if there is something specific I missed.

          Don't get me wrong--I may well vote for him (after I see his running mate).

          Prohibition (alcohol, abortion, guns, or most products and services) simply pushes items onto the black market. I remember when abortion was illegal--and common. Restrictions are moving it back into the black market. Drugs are illegal and common. Guns are easy to make, so criminals would love to capture that market. I'd like to see Obama state the obvious.

          Reply
      • 0%

        Blackacereturn5 months ago

        You try living on the West Side of Chicago and see how pro guns you would be. If you are using the fact that Obama said that people cling to their guns and whatever in hard times to mean that he is anti guns then you are an ass!

        Reply

        7 Replies

        • 0%

          Blackacereturn5 months ago

          Sorry not an ass, I meant an IDIOT!!!

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            memestryker5 months ago

            Instant Karma, Blackacereturn.

            Reply
        • 0%

          memestryker5 months ago

          I would be especially FOR my constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense if I lived on the West Side of Chicago.

          Do some homework on his involvement with the Joyce Foundation (who funds anti-gun extremists who pose as "non-violence educators to get 501(c)3 non-profit status so donors can make tax-deductible donations); his support of disarming the U.S. under the auspices of the U.N. in the Millenium Declaration; his endless attempts to ban semi-automatics, handguns, and rifles (using Horwitz' "assault weapon" terminology to scare people), and it goes on.

          I am totally with Mr. O on many issues, but I think he is dead wrong on thinking that disarming law-abiding citizens or making laws that turn them into instant felons is going to stop lunatics and criminals from manufacturing, distributing, possessing, and using guns. Prohibition doesn't work for abortion, for alcohol, for drugs, and it won't work for guns. Period.

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months ago

            Americans in general are too violent and poorly educated for us to distribute guns to everyone as if it were candy. If the people in Congress pushing for expanded gun rights were as enthusiastic about extending statehood rights to DC where I live (instead of imagining that every black person they see is armed and dangerous) their motives wouldn't be so questionable. By no means do I want to see more and bigger guns in the hands of people who voted for Bush. It's terrifying enough knowing they actually have the right to vote.

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              memestryker4 months, 4 weeks ago

              MD, Thomas Jefferson and a lot of other very bright people disagreed with you. They thought ordinary citizens were trustworthy, and would normally do the right thing. We've seen it play out repeatedly--at Appalachian School of Law in Virginia, New Life Ministries in Colorado, etc. See, for example, http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/04/when-m...

              The Supreme Court actually upheld a lower court's ruling that the police have no duty to protect you. Citizens are responsible for their own self-defense. See http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protec...

              Concealed carry weapon permitholders are less likely to commit crimes than the general population. Prior to the late 1960s, when most children were routinely taught safe firearms handling and played with toy guns, were around their family's hunting rifles and shotguns and dad's service pistol; drew them in school; could buy them at 14, etc., accidents and violence were rare.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                memestryker4 months, 4 weeks ago

                I should add that, given the number of guns in private hands, accidents and violence is still very rare. Certain groups commit most of the violence, and it's not families that hung on to dad's pistol they once kept loaded in a drawer in case of home invasion (now it's locked up and unuseable in an emergency).

                The statistics on dropped 911 calls are horrific--and 911 is useless if a violent crime is in progress. Most rapes and child molestations don't involve guns, and I consider those the most heinous crimes of all. Also--something that amazed me--about 95% of the time, all one has to do is show a gun--not even point it or use it, and the attacker will retreat or be controllable until police arrive.

                Criminals and lunatics are the ones breaking the law, so abridging the constitutionally-protected rights of law-abiding citizens jeopardizes their safety and is unconstitutional.

                Kids used to make guns in shop class, so banning them won't stop criminals from manufacturing them.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  memestryker4 months, 4 weeks ago

                  In all fairness to McCain and Obama, until recently we didn't have the statistics to show this. We still have funny stats floating around because of all the so-called "anti-violence" groups that are shills for gun-ban orgs so they can keep collecting those tax-deductible donations while they attack our Bill of Rights and give the U.N. more power over us.

                  Take the time to read the federalist/anti-federalist history to see what the Second Amendment means. The Supreme Court knowingly used their popular "judicial activism" in the 1930s to sideline the 2nd.

                  We're talking about the same SCOTUS that upheld unwarranted searches, seizures of private property with guilty until the accused proves himself innocent, and freedom of those providing tax-payer funded services to hire and fire based on religion.

                  Clinton knows the assault weapons ban was an abject failure and the stats never supported it to begin with, yet she's still for it.

                  Reply
    • 0%

      IanFraigun5 months ago

      Then you are obviously too young to remember Kennedy (JFK and RFK) back in the 60's. Both would have been elected had RFK not been assasinated in 1968.

      Those of us who do remember those years see Obama as the same type of candidate. At least our generation has seen this twice in our lifetime.

      Reply

      7 Replies

      • 0%

        tbkennedy535 months ago

        If you look at JFK he was for tax cuts. Obama? He was a hawk. Obama? I could go on and on. Same type as LBJ maybe.

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Blackacereturn5 months ago

          It's Amazing how sure these people are of what Obama is but in the same vain will remind that they don't know what he stands for, and have no idea whet he is all about.

          This can only make sense to a person who follows like a lemming and does no thinking for themselves. I listen to rush for a bit yesterday and he is saying this same foolish crap. For the love of country please start to do some thinking of your own! It really makes you seem silly repeating what this guy says he is an idiot.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            memestryker5 months ago

            Blackacereturn, Do you think you help Obama's cause with your posts? You may want to try advocacy instead if you are serious about helping him get elected. I'm just saying.

            Reply
        • 0%

          scott42615 months ago

          JFK DID cut the marginal tax rates (at least as the percentage of tax appears on paper), but he actually raised them by closing the loopholes that the rich were using to avoid taxes. The result was that the rich actually DID pay more of their fair share...

          Reply
        • 0%

          Lurch4 months, 4 weeks ago

          JFK was a fiscal conservative. Something a contemporary Republican would attack.

          Obama sounds like he`s hawk enough to me. He intends to go after the terrorists and finish the job that Bush could not be bothered to start, despite Bush`s promises to not rest until OBL was brought to justice. Remember 9/11?

          McCain has raised taxes, stolen private property for cronies, flip-flopped on the most important issues because of pressure from his own party (if he thinks that is pressure, how do you think he will stand up to the heat of the WH), he is for handouts for cronies, he is the opposite of a fiscal conservative, he is anti-vet, anti-child, anti-healthcare (hypocrite gets best socialized medicine in world), etc.

          Many of the Republicans I know would rather vote for Obama than McCain.

          Reply
      • 0%

        memestryker5 months ago

        Interesting fact, IanFraigun: When RFK was young he aligned himself with McCarthy (communist witch-hunter). My perception is the democratic party has actually moved left since then. RFK was certainly well-loved.

        Obama needs to be wary of Soros and keep him at arm's length, since Soros has actually stated that he welcomes the economic decline of the U.S. and the rise of China. Of course, Soros made his own money in the U.S.!

        I actually suspected that, due to the extreme right turn of the Bush administration, we were going to have to snap left. My biggest concern is the Supreme Court, if you want to know the truth. I'd much rather see a dem appoint the next judge/s than a repub. That's the real legacy of a president.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          scott42615 months ago

          "My biggest concern is the Supreme Court, if you want to know the truth. I'd much rather see a dem appoint the next judge/s than a repub. That's the real legacy of a president."

          You deserve a positive vote for that!

          Reply
    • 0%

      lum-chate5 months ago

      Look at Chicago! Do you want the rest of the Country to be like that. Obama District is FULL OF MURDERS AND SLUMS!

      That is a Clear Example of His Leadership!

      With all the talk of YES WE CAN! HOW COME HE DID NOT DO IT FOR CHICAGO!

      Reply

      8 Replies

      • 0%

        Shadowolf5 months ago

        Dum-Chaps...

        More smearing...you conveiniently overlook that Hillary is a Chicago area Republican...

        you are now blocked, like all hate filled partisan hacks!!!

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          tbkennedy535 months ago

          Was she ever elected in ILL or run for office there? Or was it AR and NY? I don't get the comparison. As senator he represents the whole state anyway.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            lum-chate5 months ago

            He's a senator now but he got his start in politics by earning the seal of approval from community activist like Ayers & Reverend Wright and soon climbed the political ladder by gaining the trust ogf the Cook County Crooks who throughout Illinois history have stolen more elections than they actually won.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              Lurch4 months, 4 weeks ago

              obama could have taken the easy route and gotten any federal clerkship he wanted. He did graduate top of his class at Harvard Law, he`s a minority, and is internationally experienced. He could have had a job at any law firm in the nation in fact.

              So, if all he was interested in was politics, do you really truly honestly believe he would give all that up to become a lowly community activist in a poor neighborhood in Chicago? Come on man, use your own head.

              Its not like he dumped his wife and the mother of his three children for the money, political connections, and easy street or anything.

              Reply
      • 0%

        mesodude5 months ago

        "Look at Chicago! Do you want the rest of the Country to be like that. Obama District is FULL OF MURDERS AND SLUMS!"

        --That sounds eerily similar to the transformation the Bush administration has brought to Iraq over the past five years. ;-(

        Reply
      • 0%

        Beau78905 months ago

        lum:

        You are an idiot. Obama doesn't control the police or the housing authority in his district. He's a senator, and he used to be a state senator.

        America is full of murders and slums. How do you propose dealing with it? How does McCain or anyone else propose to deal with it?

        Reply
      • 0%

        memestryker5 months ago

        lum-chate,

        The problem is that legislators focus on abridging rights--that's what they do all day. Since only law-abiding citizens obey laws, the laws are not that useful for catching criminals, who ignore them and are resourceful enough to work around them. But legislators just pass more and more laws to cover every little needling hole they think they may have left open, until more and more law-abiding citizens are in jail and the criminals continue to run loose.

        Reply
      • 0%

        memestryker5 months ago

        lum-cate, give the man a break. We don't know how to solve poverty and crime, and we keep trying things that don't work. Social programs don't do it, corporatist programs don't do it, putting more people in prison doesn't do it, prohibiting more goods and services doesn't do it.

        The real problem is both the repubs and dems think criminalizing more things so more ordinary citizens will go to jail will actually make a difference. It won't. They may jail them using different abridgements of rights, but it really doesn't matter much.

        Right now we are suffering much like Mexico, where gangsters and cartels have backfilled behind laws with black markets. We need to figure out how to improve parent quality and mainstream the disenfranchised. Criminalizing behaviors and building more prisons doesn't do it.

        Reply
  • 0%

    SpareChange5 months ago

    Well, you get candidates like these when it takes $100 million to run for president.

    Change how campaigns are funded and we'll get different candidates.

    Corporations are buying the candidates they want, we, as citizens, need to buy the candidates we want - and then not abandon them when the swift boaters show up.

    Reply
• 0%

  not2needy5 months ago

  Of course McCain and his camp are in doubt, NOW! They thought and hoped that Hillary was the nominee, they had plenty they could throw at her. Obama is a different story, and Democrats are registering in droves, especially young people. It's time for them to get scared.

  The free pass the media gave McCain got him the nomination very early in the primary, it's not going to be as easy for him in the general.

  CNN needs to get rid of Wolf Blitzer!! I hope he's not one of the debate moderators in the general, he is too biased.

  Reply

  9 Replies

  • 0%

    PresidentBuckheadd5 months ago

    I hope John Hagee publicizes himself, that'll show McCain.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      mesodude5 months ago

      I just hope McCain's response isn't to "throw him under the bus" because I think we all know how painful *that* can be. ;-P

      Reply
    • 0%

      Lurch4 months, 4 weeks ago

      Hagee`s all apologies now! I bet he regrets the day he endorsed McCain.

      Reply
  • 0%

    rightfromwrong5 months ago

    wolf blitzer is a baffoon. A X jewish lobbyist and patriot of Israel.

    Ron Paul would be great and I think in most cases the voting was rigged...his website always most got a massive number of hits and he had lots of donations from mostly small donors as he is not held hostage like the other candidates by corportism or the Jewish lobby group.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Spadecaller5 months ago

      rightfromwrong

      I don't care for Blitzer either; but my reason isn't rooted in anti-Semtic propaganda.

      Are you a supporter of Hamas?

      Reply
    • 0%

      Goppy5 months ago

      behindthe curtain? Is that you?

      Reply

  • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.1 Reply

    • 0%

      joeeddie5 months ago

      Or "Doubts are plentiful this election cycle."

      Reply
  • 0%

    memestryker5 months ago

    The ratings will end Blitzer if no one's watching. Otherwise, I'm for giving him the same right to free speech we give the other jerks.

    Reply

• ML2007Comment removed: User banned.32 Replies

  • 0%

    lum-chate5 months ago

    And Obama's faces doubts with those who cling to their guns and religion and are wary of people unlike them. Not to mention Catholics, Latino's & Asians & the retirees. Obama's constuency of blacks, Muslims, intellectuals & intellectual wannabees couple with gullible utopian thinking youngsters is the same gang who nominated McGovern in 72.

    Reply

    28 Replies

    • 0%

      blinkers5 months ago

      So, lum-chate, there are no Catholic, Latin, Asian or elderly intellectuals, (let alone "wannabee" intellectuals)? No black Catholics or Asian Muslims? No "utopian thinking youngsters" among non-whites, etc., etc.?

      Your simplistic division between supposed voting blocs is as specious as it is discriminatory.

      Reply

      17 Replies

      • 0%

        lum-chate5 months ago

        Blinky,

        Please try to make sense in responding. I know your hopping mad at my analysis, but honestly what in the world are you trying to say. A contrary view to mine requires a more eloquent elaboration!

        Reply

        15 Replies

        • 0%

          blinkers5 months ago

          You hypothesized two groups -- one against Obama, the other (McGovern-like, in your words) for him. I merely pointed out that this was a specious grouping by indicating various glaring overlaps. For example, if you place Latinos on one side, and "intellectuals" on the other, it would seem to indicate that you consider the two groups mutually exclusive. Or perhaps this is not the way you think?

          I apologize if my comment was too difficult for you to understand.

          Reply

          12 Replies

          • 0%

            lum-chate5 months ago

            I'm saying that Obama's coalition is almost indentical to that of McGovern in 72, and it's obviously a losing coalition.

            By the way, there are intellectuals & wannabees of all stripes I will agree on that but I was generalizing speaking of the groups I mentioned that will not support Obama. The groups I mentioned will be an albatross around Obamas neck if he manages to win the democrat nomination. I can state that without any fear of RESPONSIBLE contradiction!

            Reply

            11 Replies

            • 0%

              Lurch5 months ago

              lum-chate,

              You wouldn`t know McGovern`s position in 1972 if it bit you in the behind.

              You are just parroting some wing-nut talking point memo.

              I could just as easily say that McCain is almost identical to the worst president in our history Bush. Well, no, that`s not a fair comparison because that is true.

              Yeah, right, young people, people who read, and people with money are an albatross around Obama`s neck. Do you believe any of this yourself, really?

              Reply

              9 Replies

              • 0%

                lum-chate5 months ago

                I remember, I was a teenager & most of the young people were for McGovern a few tried to convince me "Hey, McGovern will legalize pot" and all that.

                By the way, McGovern just endorsed Obama. I think he has an

                obvious motive, before he leaves us he wants someone to break his record of losing the presidential election by an astonishing 18,000,000 votes!

                Reply

                8 Replies

                • 0%