And society further devolves into madness.

The article

My response to the people commenting.

I’m tired of hearing this guy’s lies.

Lets start off by talking about the fact that he’s always saying “Hey, these guys are doing bad politics and I’ll stand up and fight for what I think is right! Change! Change!” He says he doesn’t “Play the political game”, but that’s not true at all.

If he wasn’t playing the political game he’d be campaigning in Florida. He’s not, though, because he knows he’d have most of his party turn their backs on him. Talk about not playing the game, eh? Do Floridians not need change?

Lets talk about the “Race” card now. He’s been playing that since day one, and then when another candidate mentioned race, he totally went nuts on it, calling Hillary Clinton a racist because she said a president had to step up and carry the torch. Come on, if that’s not mudslinging, (which he claims not to do,) then I don’t know what is.

Oh, and lets talk about his attacks on Bill Clinton. It was clear to me that Clinton wasn’t talking about Obama’s campaign when he said, “Give me a break, this whole thing has been a Fairy Tale.” Hell, nobody was talking about the campaign when the quote came through, and until Obama brought it up, nobody thought he was talking about the campaign.

Obama said, “Hey, this ain’t no fairytale campaign,” and suddenly everyone is re-evaluating what Clinton said. Come on, people, it’s obvious that he’s just trying to motivate everyone to see him as the underdog. That’s why he keeps bringing up those “Cold nights in Illinois” over and over again. He wants people to think that it started out as a Fairy Tale and that he overcame adversity.

In fact, that’s why he’s been playing the race card. He’s been using it as a dual edged sword. He can talk about it all he wants, but if any other candidate makes a reference to a black person, they’re suddenly racist!

I wonder if that makes him a sexist because he keeps talking down about Hillary Clinton being a woman?

Lets see. Back in 2005, in an effort to make the president more fiscally responsible with the budget, there was a bill introduced demanding the President not only amend his current yearly budget, but also all future budgets too.

How did Obama vote? He Didn’t. He was there, but he didn’t vote.

How about Abortion issues? He’s been saying that he’s pro-choice, but that doesn’t show from his record. He was present for voting THREE times for pro-choice issues and instead of taking a stand for women’s rights, he instead let others decide without him.

The only thing he did was vote “Yes” on an amendment to add more money to the budget, which was rejected by the rest of the senate.

I hope you’re not hoping for support from Obama if you’re a farmer. The guy just doesn’t have any track record with helping you out. Out of four issues that came up, he only voted one time.

If you’re hoping he’ll help you out on your taxes, think again! Almost half the issues that came up that involved taxes he, once again, didn’t vote on!

So far the only thing he’s shown a real tendency to vote on is appropriations. Business owners better beware, too. He didn’t like voting very much either way about you all, so with him in the White House you can expect a lot of documents to just sit on his desk until they’re “Pocket Vetoed”.

That is, after 10 days, they’re automatically vetoed whether or not he thinks they’re good or bad. This is Obama’s strategy for getting into the White House. Never go against anybody.

In 11 issues on Civil Liberties, Obama chose not to vote.

On Education he was 50/50 with Four of his votes yet again not being one way or the other.

The really interesting thing here is that most of his “Not voting” comes in 2007, as he was gearing up to run for president in 2008. I wonder if that’s a coincidence?

You bet it’s not. He was trying not to step on anyone’s toes so that he could get into office.

What was that about not playing the game, Mr. Obama?

Obama has been in office since 2004. He hasn’t done very much since he got in. He was looking for a quick hop into the presidential office, and then he’ll retire for the rest of his life.

He wants to bring on Fiscal Responsibility? He couldn’t even keep himself on a budget 7 years ago, and yet he’s going to fix our country’s rising deficit? My faith isn’t there.

When you listen to him speak, you’re not really listening to him at all, you’re listening to writers who tailor things for him specifically. When he has to wing it, like he did in the debate against Hillary Clinton, he comes across as bumbling.

Lets talk about his ability to do things, too. He said he’s a leader. An advocate of change. The kind of guy that can get things done. But then he turned around and said that he was just good at getting other people together who will do the work for him.

In fact, that’s all he’s ever done. That’s what his campaign staff is doing for him now. He admits that he loses critical papers, that he can’t actually run anything on his own, and that he needs others to do it for him.

A President is supposed to be a leader. They can’t have others reading their documents for them, or keeping the bills in order. They have to have the courage to stand up and make decisions, the ability to do what they need to do in order to make things work.

If by Candidate of Change he means “Candidate that doesn’t do anything”, then he’s dead on. Otherwise he’s just puffing smoke.

I’m still recovering from being sick, but here’s my take on the greatest strength/weakness comments in the recent debate. I’ll go in order.

Obama:

My greatest strength, I think is the ability to bring people together from different perspectives to get them to recognize what they have in common and to move people in a different direction. And as I indicated before, my greatest weakness, I think, is when it comes to — I’ll give you a very good example.

I ask my staff member to hand me paper until two seconds before I need it because I will lose it. You know, the —- you know…

And my desk and my office doesn’t look good. I’ve got to have somebody around me who is keeping track of that stuff.

And that’s not trivial; I need to have good people in place who can make sure that systems run. That’s what I’ve always done, and that’s why we run not only a good campaign, but a good U.S. Senate office.

Personally, I think that his greatest strength is that he’s charismatic. He couldn’t say that without seeming pompous, but it’s true. He has a way of getting people to think he’s the best guy for the job.

His greatest weakness fits with that strength. He rides the backs of other people who do the real work. He’s a talker; not a doer. The job of the President is delegated to a guy/gal who can lead, not who can talk pretty and let others handle the details. In all honesty, this made me want to vote for him less than I already wanted to.

Edwards:

I think my greatest strength is that for 54 years, I’ve been fighting with every fiber of my being.

In the beginning, the fight was for me. Growing up in mill towns and mill villages, I had to literally fight to survive.

But then I spent 20 years in courtrooms fighting for children and families against really powerful well-financed interests. I learned from that experience, by the way, that if you’re tough enough and you’re strong enough and you got the guts and you’re smart enough, you can win. That’s a fight that can be won.

It can be won in Washington, too, by the way.

And I’ve continued that entire fight my entire time in public life.

So I’ve got what it takes inside to fight on behalf of the American people and on behalf of the middle class.

I think weakness, I sometimes have a very powerful emotional response to pain that I see around me, when I see a man like Donnie Ingram (ph), who I met a few months ago in South Carolina, who worked for 33 years in the mill, reminded me very much of the kind of people that I grew up with, who’s about to lose his job, has no idea where he’s going to go, what he’s going to do.

I mean, his dignity and self-respect is at issue. And I feel that in a really personal way and in a very emotional way. And I think sometimes that can undermine what you need to do.

He makes a convincing argument for his strength. It’s a pretty solid statement. “We need someone who’s strong. I’m strong. We need someone who won’t back down. I won’t back down.” A very good strength for Edwards.

His weakness, though, left me with my eyes swimming. He cares too much? I guess what he’s saying is he’s strong and he can fight except when it involves someone who is middle-to-lower class? The two contradicted each other. A good strength should compensate for a good weakness, turning it into a strength, (Which Obama did, by the way, even though people are claiming he was being 100% honest.)

Clinton:

Well, I am passionately committed to this country and what it stands for. I’m a product of the changes that have already occurred, and I want to be an instrument for making those changes alive and real in the lives of Americans, particularly children.

That’s what I’ve done for 35 years. It is really my life’s work. It is something that comes out of my own experience, both in my family and in my church that, you know, I’ve been blessed. I think to whom much is given, much is expected.

So I have tried to create opportunities, both on an individual basis, intervening to help people who have no where else to turn, to be their champion. And then to make those changes. And I think I can deliver change. I think I understand how to make it possible for more people to live up to their God-given potential.

I get impatient. I get, you know, really frustrated when people don’t seem to understand that we can do so much more to help each other. Sometimes I come across that way. I admit that. I get very concerned about, you know, pushing further and faster than perhaps people are ready to go.

She starts off strong. She’s committed to people, she’s willing to do what’s necessary, and she’s been doing it for a very long time. She wants to help people.

Her weakness? She gets impatient. It seems that everyone has been ripping her apart for this, too. “That’s not a weakness, it’s a strength!” seems to be the general statement. This annoys the hell out of me.

I’m a Clinton supporter, so keep that in mind. There is no ‘rampant fanboi’ attitude here, I happen to think she’s the best for the job out of the current bunch. Everyone has been listening to Obama too much, I think. He’s the one saying, “Change must come now, it must come fast, it has to happen yesterday people, come on!”

Clinton’s talking about change in healthy doses. If you change to fast, it’s like rushing forward on stilts your first time walking on them. Chances are you’re going to trip and fall. Being impatient, (wanting to push to run before you know how to walk,) is a very big problem.

She recognizes that the United States, (as much as we may want it,) isn’t ready for a complete change of society. Trying to push that, (which is what she wants,) too fast could (will) lead the country into more dangerous waters than we’re already in.

You know, a lot of good could probably be said for Obama…

But then he goes off and tries to do something that is a blatant attempt to get voters to think he’s doing more for them than Hillary Clinton. Clinton announced on Friday that she wanted to spend $70 Billion to keep the economy from sliding into a recession.

What does Obama do? He waits a few days and then tells everyone he wants them to spend $5 Billion more.

Obama’s plan is pretty simple and straight forward; there’s nothin’ really special about it; it just costs more than Hillary’s.

Hillary’s however, has a lot of in-depth detail that is diversified amongst various different situations that will help, (in general) bolster the economy.

The real difference? Obama’s looks like it was jotted down at the last minute without really trying; (probably so he could get a jump at Clinton.) Obama’s is also slightly more acceptable to Republicans.

Waterboarding is an interrogation practice that drips (or pours) water up the nose of an interrogation subject.

Many liken it to torture, even the United StatesChief of Intelligence Mike McConnell.

He doesn’t condemn the practice because it might not be seen as torture by others. Personally, I think it’d drive me nuts; it can apparently be used to kill people though.

If you think it sounds like torture, bets are that it probably is.

The ACLU lodged formal complaints against the idea of using REAL ID as a way to help keep people’s identities safe. In effect, they said it would be tantamount to a forced ID card.

The thing is, it’s just stricter guidelines on Driver’s licenses and in order to get on a plane you’ve got to show a REAL ID. (By 2014, anyone under 50 has to.)

17 states are complaining; not because they disagree, but because it costs too much. (Almost 4 Billion.)

I’m cool with it, though. It isn’t infringing on civil liberties and might help catch some criminals. That’s good in my book.

Front runner for the GOP now is senator John McCain. Why? Because he kicked ass in New Hampshire, it seems.

The thing is, he won there before… and it didn’t do him any good against the current president. Why should these polls, (showing him with a 20+ lead) be taken with a grain of salt?

Well, Hillary Clinton is a good indicator. She managed to win in New Hampshire when Obama had a double-digit lead on her. Of course, some publicists said that’s because the ‘poor and stupid’ weren’t polled, but they were just trying to make it sound like you’d have to be stupid to vote for Clinton; backhanded jabs that should be cast aside.

Apparently, (according to NPR.) environmental issues could be a big part of determining who becomes US President.

Breakdown:

Huckabee made it about Religion.

Obama claimed to cut emissions by 80% with a Carbon Cap.

Clinton is a part of a committee that made a Carbon Cap change; the first time it has ever happened.

McCain was the sponsor of the first bill to curb Climate-Warming pollution.

Obama got the Apparently Coveted backing of John Kerry, former presidential candidate against our current Commander in Chief, George W. Bush.

This article talks about how it was a snub to John Edwards, but it was also a snub to the Clinton’s, who offered support, (Albeit belatedly,) to Kerry in his bid for the presidency. There’s been some vague similarities to Martin Luther King Jr. in an attempt to get Obama even more widely accepted, which I feel is underhanded. Sure, people can make those claims, but his campaign staff shouldn’t.

That’s just pretentious.

Ron Paul, a Republican candidate is being slammed for racist comments he says he didn’t make. These are ancient and people change, so even if he did make them then, he might not feel that way now. I don’t see this as a big deal, but then, I’m not the one he was slandering.

Some members of the media are trying to claim that Hillary only won because People are Poor and Stupid, which is pretty tasteless in my opinion, both as an attack on Clinton and the people who vote for her.

Seriously, she has been getting massive amounts of press recently. Take a look at these and then I’ll talk about’em.
One
Two
Three

Alright, done? Good. Lets look at that first article. Clinton’s statements there are obviously a hit at the Nevad Unions who decided to back Obama. I think the idea there was to say that she does care about what’s going on; the release of her plan later today might shed some more light as to what she’ll be doing to help them out.

The second piece was all about how Hillay has been overcoming odds and how Obama and Edwards are trying to attack her at any chance they get. It’s pretty true how crappy they’ve been hitting her; it wasn’t too long ago that everyone thought that she was going to win for sure… and then everyone started talking about how she wasn’t changing anything.

If anything, she’s the embodiment of change. From her Chromosomes to her Policies she’s different than the current president and the negative attack ads are pretty shameful on the part of Obama and Edwards; they should know how to run a clean race and not talk about how ’she can’t change anything’.

That’s just me. On to that third article, though.

It seems to me that this article is more about campaign strategy than anything else. It has some good, solid information about the Former First Lady, and it’s fresh. I liked it, personally. It reminds everyone that Clinton is human and that there’s a lot going on that makes her easy to like. It also had some good solid advice to people who’ve been reporting: Don’t blow things out of proportion.