Weather

Rain

73° F

Pollen 8

| Traffic

Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > September > 29 > Entry

McCain’s debate demeanor may have crystallized voter fears

By Jay Bookman | Monday, September 29, 2008, 06:49 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

With the presidential race sliding away from him, John McCain needed something big to happen in Friday night’s foreign-policy debate.

He didn’t get it.

McCain did fine, as did Barack Obama. In fact, I personally thought McCain might have gotten the better of the argument. The early polls disagreed, however, suggesting that voters were more impressed with Obama’s performance on a topic that should have been McCain territory.

So what happened? Historically, debates have an effect only if something happens to crystallize some pre-existing doubt about a candidate. When Mike Dukakis was asked how he would react if his wife was raped, his dispassionate response confirmed the sense that the Democrat didn’t have the fire that Americans sought in a president. Likewise, George Bush’s repeated glances at his watch in a 1992 debate confirmed voter suspicion that he wasn’t engaged.

This time, the combative, dismissive approach that McCain adopted toward Obama may have confirmed fears of many voters that as commander in chief, McCain might choose confrontation in a crisis not because that’s what the situation required, but because that is his nature.

That concern was also the subtext of a question posed to McCain in an interview on “60 Minutes” earlier this month. McCain was asked whether as president he would make it policy to “engage in preemptive war against a country that might pose a threat to the United States —- a country that hasn’t attacked us.”

“If it’s a provable direct threat,” the senator responded. “Suppose that the Iranians had nuclear weapons. And you had a whole lot of other information about Iranian intentions and you could make the case to the American people and to the world, I think it’s obvious that we would have to prevent what we are absolutely certain is a direct threat to the lives of the American people.”

Most Americans, including Obama, would agree with McCain. If we are “absolutely certain” that we face “a direct threat to the lives of the American people,” no U.S. president would hesitate to respond militarily.

The problem is, McCain has already demonstrated that his actual threshhold for war is quite a bit lower than he described to CBS.

In 2002 and early 2003, the American people faced the very dilemma posed to McCain on “60 Minutes.” President Bush and his allies were arguing that the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was real and direct, and that if we did not act “the smoking gun might come in the form of a mushroom cloud over an American city.”

In those circumstances, McCain made it clear that he considered Iraq a threat that must be addressed pre-emptively, calling Saddam “a clear and present danger” that could not be ignored.

“In an age of weapons of mass destruction and global terrorists bent on acquiring those weapons, the costs of inaction could well be catastrophic,” McCain warned in a speech on the Senate floor.

However, even at the time Iraq did not pose “a provable direct threat” to the United States, the threshhold for action now cited by McCain. And despite some claims to the contrary, we were far from “absolutely certain” that Saddam posed a direct threat to American lives.

Nonetheless, McCain was avid for military action, to the point that he libeled fellow Americans who disagreed with his stance. He was so eager for war that he claimed Saddam “is using opponents of the war in America to advance his own ends, sowing division within our own ranks.”

McCain’s response to the “60 Minutes” question was also revealing for another reason. He took a question about a theoretical threat and immediately gave it an address, Iran. Both McCain and Obama have said that the military option must remain on the table when dealing with Iran, but McCain’s history suggests he may be too eager to use that option.

With his demeanor Friday night, McCain may have taken a nebulous, nagging doubt about his candidacy and crystallized it into something hard and real.

Permalink | Comments (190) | Post your comment |

Comments

By AJC/DNC Management

September 29, 2008 7:16 AM | Link to this

McCain’s demeanor?

Sen. Barack Obama and his debate prep team were surprised that Sen. John McCain remained calm and collected during the debate. Obama’s continual references to “John,” while McCain referred to Obama as “Senator,” was intended to needle McCain’s patience in hopes for a flash of McCain infamous temper. But McCain was, according to campaign advisers, ready for the needle and didn’t take the bait. -American Spectator

Not to mention barry cutting off McCain four or five times.

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 7:41 AM | Link to this

Jay, I think this is overblown. If you accept his earlier words as being what he thought then, perhaps he has learned since that the Bush Doctrine doesn’t really work well when your intelligence agencies are run by flawed humans.

Calling him by his first name was a “needle”? Also overblown. The American Spectator is pleased that McCain didn’t blow a gasket on TV. Whoopee.

I think a lot of the post-debate analysis has been silly. The only thing that really counted was that neither side made a glaring mistake. I think BOTH sides accomplished what they were trying to do. However, a “tie” favors the front-runner.

We’ll see whose debate goals were flawed in the next day or so. My guess is that McCain’s attacks on Obama are going to be considered “more of the same” politics of destruction. We’ll see.

By Mrs. Godzilla

September 29, 2008 7:41 AM | Link to this

The resemblance between John McCain and Grandpa Simpson was more pronounced than usual Friday night. And it didn’t work out well for John at all!

I think we better get a closer and longer look at his medical records, he does not look at all well.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 7:41 AM | Link to this

As long as the debate results stay relatively even, within 3 or 4 percentage points, their importance in this election is doubtful. A lot of polarized America has already decided who is their candidate. The two deciding factors will be the Bradley effect and the vote of white women. White women have elected every president in this country for the last 40 yrs and so far, it’s a toss up. Clinton has white women to thank for two terms in the White House. The white woman vote is especially important in Michigan. They will decide that state, despite a white, female Demo gov and a predominance of black votes in Detroit. The Annointed One needs Michigan….. without it, he is toast.
I worry about Palin on 2 Oct. She could be the glue who holds this whole thing together for McCain or the wheels could fall off of the Straight Talk Express. Stay tuned…… this is certainly the most captivating election in my lifetime.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this

While out driving last evening I invariably came across the squirrel in the road. You know the squirrel I am talking about, the one that starts to go left, pauses, starts to go right, pauses, then does the same thing again and again until he is about to be road kill.

I thought this reminds me of something…….Hmm……Oh, the McCain campaign! You never know what you are going to get. He tries to morph into a new and improved JM once or twice a week. He is never quite sure which way to go.

His demeanor was right on McCain, angry, impatient old man. You know how those geezers get when dinner is late at 5pm?

McCain/Palin…soon to be road kill

By GOP"S got to go

September 29, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

And what is with that weird looking comb over? Do The Donald and McCain visit the same “Of course it makes you look younger” barber?

By Dennis

September 29, 2008 8:01 AM | Link to this

If wishes were horses then beggars would fly.

To Jay and other Socialist/Democrats: Expressing your wishes and hopes as fact does not make them true.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 8:09 AM | Link to this

Ditto Dennis.

By kitty

September 29, 2008 8:10 AM | Link to this

How many world leaders will McCain use that self satisfied smirk on? Jay is right. Confrontation, not facts, not reality is what McCain thrives on. The original Rebel without a Clue..that is John McCain. He is dangerous to America and we have had enough cowboy diplomacy.

By NHTom

September 29, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla is reasonable to question his health status, particularly given the performance of his back-up, Gov. Palin. Barring release of medical records, is the best information we have: His physicians’ statements at the time of the release of his medical records (quoting a clinical staging of IIa) appears to discount details of the pathology report that was also reported in May, 2008. Based on information published by the New York Times (and subsequently uncontested), Senator McCain had tissue removed from his left temple that included both a 2.2 mm deep lesion AND an adjacent “satellite” lesion. Using internationally accepted, evidence-based pathological criteria (the “Gold-standard”), a 2.2 mm primary lesion plus any satellite lesion yields T3aN2cM0/Mx, using TNM (tumor, node, metastases) criteria. This yields at least pathological Stage IIIb melanoma. If this is NOT TRUE, Senator McCain’s team can easily refute it with release of the pathologists’ report. According to a peer-reviewed medical article on the subject, “The estimated five year survival for Stage IIIb patients is 53%.”(pg.143) A fifteen-year Kaplan-Meier survival curve in the same reference, demonstrates that there is no actual late plateau phase for Stage IIIb melanoma. Only about 40% of patient’s with Stage IIIb disease survive to 10 years. (Figure 4) (Reference: Balch CM, etal. An Evidence-based Staging System for Cutaneous Melanoma. CA Cancer. J Clin 2004;54:131%u2013149)

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this

Dennis @ 8.01, was there a point to that post?

What “wishes and hopes” were expressed as facts, above, that are not true?

I dunno, it sounds like Jay’s trying his best to be even-handed here and give McCain some pretty charitable points. Personally, I think McCain did all right for himself in the debate on balance, but he took a long time to get there (Obama clearly looked better at the start but faded a bit, and didn’t do such a great job with his summary).

And given that it’s uncommitted swing voters, who are presumably not all that engaged in the election campaign to begin with, it’s hard to see that approach as a winner for McCain, since it’s unlikely they watched the whole thing, beginning to end. The critical swing states—OH, PA, MI, most of IN—are all in the eastern time zone. McCain’s points were made after 10pm.

By Ted Striker

September 29, 2008 8:21 AM | Link to this

I’m just waiting for Obama to ask McCain “Did you or did you not order the Code Red for Santiago?”

By Jini

September 29, 2008 8:26 AM | Link to this

I have no trust or respect for any man or woman who refuses to make eye contact with the other party, especially in something as important as a presidential debate. Senator McCain gave the impression that he was alone in the debate, and simply would not even look toward Senator Obama. Would Senator McCain ignore the American people also?

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 8:28 AM | Link to this

NHTom, Or should I say NIH Tom?

I have been blogging about this for awhile now and no one seems to “get it” as McCain likes to say so much.

Melanoma is serious business and results in death over 50% of the time. The first symptom may be a seizure that then leads to a brain met diagnosis, and you’re a gonner in a matter of weeks or months. Much like Ted Kennedy, although his dx is GBM. Melanoma is a very bad actor, goolge the facts yourself.

I think even the most stalwart Repubs have to realize what a complete disaster Palin is. Hopefully with the VP debate coming up more of her “dull tool in the shed” persona will be revealed

By zorg

September 29, 2008 8:28 AM | Link to this

McCain’s handlers are drinking their own kool-aid. They insisted that McCain was likely to blow his stack to set a low bar for victory. Palin’s rambling incoherence is a similar straw man.

Now they believe he won the debate just because he didn’t throw a temper tantrum. And Palin can pre-win her debate by memorizing short yet complete sentences and sticking to them.

McCain’s loss in the post-debate polls was really a referendum on his condescension. Surprise.

By Taxpayer

September 29, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jay.

John’s demeanor was certainly a contributor to my negative assessment of his performance. Many of his “lines” came across more as over-rehearsed rhetoric as though he had stayed up way too long reading and re-reading them in preparation for a grade-school recital. Further, I was extremely disappointed with his inability to address Obama “one-on-one”. He gave me the impression that he was looking down on Obama when he should have been looking him in the eyes. I did notice that John came across as being quite comfortable when talking about his war experiences. Good for him. I’m sure those were some telling years in his life.

By CJ

September 29, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

Bookman said, “*[McCain] was so eager for war that he claimed Saddam ‘is using opponents of the war in America to advance his own ends, sowing division within our own ranks.’”

More evidence: McCain went on Letterman during the runup to the war in Iraq and linked the anthrax deaths to Saddam Hussein. Of course, he made it up entirely, and not even the Bush Administration went that far to sell the war.

Yes, McCain is a warmonger. Anybody who believes otherwise, should watch this video.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this

The Stanford/Yahoo poll is the single most important poll that has been taken in this election and I am surprised that neither of our pundits has initiated debate on it.
The poll states that nearly 40% of white Americans harbor negative feelings about blacks and that includes white Democrats and Independents. Just 7/10 white Democrats support Obama compared to 85% of white Conservative America who supports McCain. More than 25% of Democrats stated that they doubted that Obama could bring about the change that they wanted in a new president. Results stated that Obama’s numbers would be at least 6% higher if were not black. Nearly 17% of Clinton’s backers said that they would vote for McCain.
Among perceptions of black America by white Democrats……. Lazy… 13% Dependable…. 28%… 72% were not Friendly…. 40% Determined…28%… 72% were not Law Abiding…. 25%……75% were not Violent…..14%… 86% were not Smart at everyday things….30% Intelligent at school…..23% Not very good numbers among the people who are supposed to be behind a black candidate from their own party. The white Repub numbers were predictably somewhat higher in every negative catagory. White Repubs only viewed black America as 10% law abiding and 25% stated that they felt that blacks were violent by nature.
These perceptions will follow the Annointed One to the voting booth. Voter registration among our youth and the black vote will struggle to make up the difference regarding doubts among both Democratic and Republican white voters. The debates might make up some ground for either candidate but the groundwork is there and a lot of this has already been decided.

By AmVet

September 29, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

How did we get stuck with this buffoon? Oh yeah! The faux conservative, Bush apologists love him!

Maybe the Large One can pray for us to get enough gas…

Perdue Delayed Asking For Gas Shortage Help

ATLANTA — While other southeastern states were asking for help with gas shortages, Gov. Sonny Perdue waited a week before requesting a waiver freeing up extra gas for Georgia.

Officials in Kentucky asked on Monday, Sept. 15, for a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency to lift restrictions requiring special gas. It was granted the following day.

Virginia and Tennessee also asked for similar waivers after Hurricanes Gustav and Ike struck the Gulf Coast, knocking out oil refineries.

Critics said more gas would be flowing into Georgia if Perdue had acted faster.

By marta fernandez

September 29, 2008 8:39 AM | Link to this

This is a man who looks and is frail. He could pass away in the next four years and the country will be stuck with Mrs. Palin, who is not ready in any way shape or form. Furthermore, McCain is a military man. Confrontation is his way life. He is ignorant of what the world thinks of the USA after the invasion of Iraq and since. I am an American who has lived in Canada, France, the UK, Argentina, New York and Washington DC. I am aware of how the world thinks today. McCain thinks that “friendly” countries will back him in the event of further sanctions to Iran (think debate) and he is sadly mistaken. His mindset is l950’s. He is DANGEROUS, IRRESPONSIBLE, AND RECKLESS, and not very bright.

I liked him a few years back but became aware of his lack of flexibility during this campaign and voted for Hillary. I was not a fan of Obama but will vote for him. It is the only sensible thing to do and I hope he wins. We need a CHANGE. WE HAVE STRUGGLED UNDER BUSH AND THIS WILL CONTINUE UNDER MCCAIN.

By Thomcarl

September 29, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

Sen. McCain came forward as exactly what he is, an arrogant, condescending, elitist who has screwed up most every thing he has attempted. An Naval academy grad (4th from the bottom of his graduating class), only able to make Captan (Col.) after 24 years in the navy with command of a training outfit as the peak of his naval career. A record as a war monger and friend of energy companies and big business in his 26 years in congress in addition to being a Bush crony. As a 68 year old disabled vet (50%) of the Vietnam era I find Sen. McCain to be an insult to My beliefs and values.

By BAKE

September 29, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

Kitty is so right! The McCain smirk and cowboy propensity will get this country into seriously deeper trouble. We need someone who can think, not react, to stabelize and improve our world position and engender hope and faith in democracy for our fellow citizens.

By T

September 29, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

Thought they both did pretty good. I didn’t really notice at the time Obama refering to McCain as John. I’m not sure if personal identifications are used in that type of setting.

Oh, you must see the new Tina Fey as Palin interview.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this

Ray,

This poll sound just like you and most of the other McCain backers here.

I am white, female, middle aged, debt free, upper income and I do not have any of the above bigoted views of blacks. Some of the BEST people I have known are black, and some of the dumbest Budwisers I have met are white.

I want a new direction in this country I love and Obama will deliver that. McCain has shown himself to be a panderer for the Evangelicals. America has had way too much of them over the last 8 years.

By Eric1

September 29, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this

It is absolutely beyond me why anyone who is paying attention to world events, who is aware of the news and who does not get all their “news” from Fox, could support the old gentleman. He clearly is a part of our country’s disgraceful recent past. Obama represents a hopeful future. I only hope there are enough thoughtful voters to make it a reality.

By Dennis

September 29, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this

I have been reading Jay’s opinions for what seems like 20+ years. Apparent even-handedness shows up in his work about 3% of the time. Usually these even-handed/fair-minded opinions are followed by a close-minded/heavy-handed opinion.

Watch for it.

By Paul

September 29, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this

Jay,

LOL! By that train of events, McCain should have picked Biden as his running mate since Biden and many other Democrats, for years, had been saying essentially the same things about Iraq. We’ve had enough people list past statements.

By the don’t go to war record, Obama’s picks of possible running mates would have been few.

But I’ll say what I’ve said before. When it comes to likely military intervention, the Obama-Biden ticket has been more hawkish than McCain-Palin. Within months of election Obama-Biden would be sending our military into Africa, even though there is no UN support. Peacekeeping, famine reliefe, dress it up any way you will, it’s still using the American military to impose American values on a society. And bin Laden has already made the call: US invades Africa, it’ll become a new rallying point for AQ.

Do we ignore Obama’s calls for military strikes into Pakistan? Just which candidate is following the Bush Doctrine for attacking any country we want, at the time of our choosing? At the debate, McCain sounded like the one calling for restraint:

” Now, on this issue of aiding Pakistan, if you’re going to aim a gun at somebody, George Shultz, our great secretary of state, told me once, you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger.

I’m not prepared at this time to cut off aid to Pakistan. So I’m not prepared to threaten it, as Senator Obama apparently wants to do, as he has said that he would announce military strikes into Pakistan.

We’ve got to get the support of the people of — of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan.

Now, you don’t do that. You don’t say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government.”

McCain has shown flexibility of thought by saying we may work with some of those tribal leaders in Pakistan to form alliances and weaken AQ. This is the same fundamental strategy used during the surge - form alliances with those who had opposed us to achieve common goals. Given the criticism of many Democrats and many here, I’d expect they’d reject that Afg strategy - which leaves them with military force as the only option.

Tack on Obama’s strong, provocative remarks in several forums about Iran is a threat (I’ll have to check if he used the same grave threat phrasing Bush used to justify war with Iraq) and that there is nothing he would not do to prevent Iraq from getting a nuke, and Obama-Biden seems like the ticket that’s getting a little itchy on the trigger.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

GOPs Got to Go,

I am not saying that I like the results. Of all the polls taken during this election cycle, however, this one is the most credible. There are probably a lot of white, middle aged, debt-free, upper income ladies like you in the mix. I also have neighbors who are my friends and black that I invite to my home for dinner and go to their kid’s weddings. You miss the point. You happen to be only one voter. Lots of others, it seems, do not have your point of view. I am not happy with our state of race relations in this country any more than you are but denial will not give you a very rational picture of what is going on and how it affects voter’s decisions.

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

GOPs got to go: The poll is indeed the poll. I read the same thing and it helped explain why Obama wasn’t further ahead, considering that most Americans prefer his policies to McCain’s. It’s not Ray’s fault that the poll is the poll.

However, Obama is currently up by 6 and bsaed on debate results, there’s going to be a post-debate bounce to stretch the lead to 8. And the polls aren’t catching people without land lines, so it’s likely to underrepresent younger voters who are Obama’s core group.

The McCainiacs (sm) know they’re losing and have no good message, but they keep up the rhetoric in hopes that something… anything… will work before Nov 5 when they will return to the “outside looking in” where they belong. Those who distrust government should never be put in charge of it.

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this

BTW, I did a poor job making sure it was clear, but I did not refer to Ray as a McCainiac. Just to clarify.

By BDAtlanta

September 29, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this

Obama will sweep in Nov and then we have to get to work fixing the past eight disastrous years of Republican rule.

By jacksmith

September 29, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

Bush, McCain can run. But they cant hide anymore.

What ever congress does to try and fix our stunning economic catastrophe needs to be done very carefully. Congress needs to take their time, and be sure of what they are doing. Whatever is done needs to be sharply focused at helping, and protecting the best interest of the ordinary Americans. In particular the vast American middle class. 700 billion dollars is a lot of the peoples money to spend to bail out a bunch of corrupt Bush loan sharks.

When have you ever known any government plan, or project to only cost what the government said it would. Remember the war in Iraq. Bush and his so-called advisers said it would only cost you about 80 billion dollars. But we now know that the war in Iraq will cost you, and your children, and your grand children over a trillion dollars, and still counting.

So if 80 billion can end up costing you over a trillion dollars. How much could 700 billion end up costing you. Any math wizards out there. I come up with 9 trillion…:-(

My fellow human beings, just as I warned you ahead of this catastrophic economic meltdown, I must now warn you that what is ahead has the potential to be even more catastrophic than what we are going through now. The worlds geopolitical landscape has been booby trapped by the Bush McCain administration and their republican allies in congress. These booby traps are poised to spring at any time.

Fortunately the Worlds Nations have been blessed with many excellent leaders (except the US) who have been careful, wise, strong, and self-restrained in dealing with the provocations, and antagonism’s of the Bush, McCain administration.

Barack Obama and the democrats are your best hope now. Tell your family, friends, and everyone you know to support them as best you can, and vote for them like your life, and the lives of your loved ones depends on it. Because it does. You will not survive 4 more years of Bush McCain.

JACK SMITH - WORKING CLASS…

By dirty harry

September 29, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

By Dennis

September 29, 2008 8:01 AM | Link to this

“If wishes were horses then beggars would fly.”

DENNIS….How do HORSES fly?

Here, let me help…It goes like this!

If wishes were horses then beggars would RIDE…

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

BDA: no, he won’t. He won’t win over most of the south or the plains states, but he will be very competitive everywhere else and likely get more than 300 electoral votes…

Being a cheerleader is nice, but not required.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 9:27 AM | Link to this

The Annointed One needs VA, MI, OH, IA and Penn or a combination of the above. Losing just two, he is toast. He needs 270 and doesn’t have even the states that Kerry won in 2004 when Kerry got 256 total. MI has 17 and would put him over the top but white ladies in that state might say no.
Once again, the most interesting election in memory. Just wish Old John had picked Newt instead of the Moosehunter. A Thompson/Gingrich ticket would have been dy…no…mite. Oh well, we can dream.

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

Ray,

Just looking at the polls in those states, right now Obama has VA, MI, IA and PA. And his numbers have been going up consistently with McCain’s ###s going down.

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

Does anyone know if there is a “Bailout Bill for Dummies” somewhere on-line? I’m WAY to sleepy this morning to read 110 pages.

I know I left the door open and really don’t care.

By AmVet

September 29, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

Ray, interesting breakdown.

All these polls and all this debate “debate” merly confirm what mnost of us know.

If you like Obama, you see him as the winner and leading in the polls.

If you MCain, see above.

But I do strongly disagree with your choice for McCain’s Veep selection.

Imminently unqualified though Palin is, she only succeeds in turning off some percentage of the moderates, centrists and independent - the portion of the electorate both candidates desperately need.

With the hyper-partisan, amazingly uncivil Newt the Neo-con on the ticket, McCain would lose virtually all of them I suppose, and be behind by 20 points…

Off to pay for the occupation (and the bailout).

Pray for gasoline. And rain.

By AmVet

September 29, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

Bosch, here are the highlights.

Sorry if some consider this spam:

Key provisions of the bill

Doling the money out: The $700 billion would be disbursed in stages, with $250 billion made available immediately for the Treasury’s use. Authority to use the money would expire on Dec. 31, 2009, unless Congress certifies a one-year extension.

Protecting taxpayers: The ultimate cost to the taxpayer is not expected to be near the amount the Treasury invests in the program. That’s because the government would buy assets that have underlying value.

If the Treasury pays fair market value - which investors have had a hard time determining - taxpayers stand a chance to break even or even make a profit if those assets throw off income or appreciate in value by the time the government sells them. If it overpays for the assets, the government could be left with a net loss but would get something back on the open market for the assets when it eventually sells them.

If it ends up with a net loss, however, the bill says the president must propose legislation to recoup money from the financial industry if the rescue plan results in net losses to taxpayers five years after the plan is enacted.

In addition, Treasury would be allowed to take ownership stakes in participating companies. Stemming foreclosures: The bill calls for the government, as an owner of a large number of mortgage securities, to exert influence on loan servicers to modify more troubled loans. In cases where the government buys troubled mortgage loans directly from banks, it can adjust them more easily.

Limiting executive pay: Curbs would be placed on the compensation of executives at companies that sell mortgage assets to Treasury. Among them, companies that participate will not be able to deduct the salary they pay to executives above $500,000.

They also will not be allowed to write new contracts that allow for “golden parachutes” for their top 5 executives if they are fired or the company goes belly up. But the executives’ current contracts, which may include golden parachutes, would still stand.

Overseeing the program: The bill would establish two oversight boards. The Financial Stability Oversight Board would be charged with ensuring the policies implemented protect taxpayers and are in the economic interests of the United States. It will include the Federal Reserve chairman, the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, the Federal Home Finance Agency director, the Housing and Urban Development secretary and the Treasury secretary.

A congressional oversight panel would be charged with reviewing the state of financial markets, the regulatory system and the Treasury’s use of its authority under the rescue plan. Sitting on the panel would be 5 outside experts appointed by House and Senate leaders.

Insuring against losses: Treasury must establish an insurance program - with risk-based premiums paid by the industry - to guarantee companies’ troubled assets, including mortgage-backed securities, purchased before March 14, 2008.

The amount the Treasury would spend to cover losses minus company-paid premiums would come out of the $700 billion the Treasury is allowed to use for the rescue plan.

Far-reaching program: Paulson first announced the administration would seek an economic bailout plan on Sept. 18, after meeting with key lawmakers in the House and Senate - a meeting that left lawmakers looking ashen when they spoke to the press afterwards.

If enacted, the rescue plan would be the most dramatic and extensive government intervention in the economy since the Great Depression. President Bush on Sept. 24 gave a prime-time address to the nation in which he urged lawmakers to pass his plan and warned that the “entire economy is in danger.” The aim of the rescue is to unfreeze the credit markets - short-term lending among banks and corporations. The core of the problem is bad real estate loans that have led to record foreclosures when the housing bubble burst and home prices declined.

In the past two weeks, the banking world and Wall Street have been reordered by a wave of collapses and corporate mergers. The most recent development was the seizure by federal regulators on Thursday night of Washington Mutual, once the nation’s largest thrift and a major mortgage lender. The chill of the credit freeze has been felt far beyond Wall Street, as well. Businesses large and small have seen the cost of borrowing spike higher. At the same time, the scale of the administration’s plan - and the quick pace of the debate over it - has given pause to many Americans and lawmakers worried about its potential cost to taxpayers. “We begin with a very important task, a task to stabilize the markets, to protect all Americans - and do it in a way that protects the taxpayer to the maximum extent possible,” Paulson said early Sunday morning.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this

Bosch,

Depends on the poll you are looking at. I’m not much of one for polls but do concede that Old John will have to jump through a few hoops in the next few weeks. Palin’s debate might just seal the box closed unless she can give Joe a run for his money. Have my doubts. It’s funny how our method of picking a qualified candidate is flawed to the point where we don’t get the best one for the job in most elections cycles. Then we defend him/her to the death when we probably would have like to have someone else on the ticket. I think that the liberals would have backed Donald Duck as long as he was not Bush. Think about it.

By Josh

September 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

I felt it was a tie. But add the fact that McCain is 72 I would have to give Mccain the edge. His age does not scare me quite as much now.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

Ray and Byte Me,

Have not most of the avid (and white) bloggers here that love McCain and think Obama is “elitist” put their hands on their bibles and swore to Jesus that it is NOT about race?

I guess your poll has just debunked that little theory. I know Republican speak for “black” when I hear it. Just listening to the convention jargon was even lore enlightening.

Because I am white, I have been spoken to by whites as if I am on their side, they assume this because of my color, and they say VERY candid things they would not otherwise say.

It sickens me to watch. Pigment does not the man or woman make.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 9:54 AM | Link to this

Luckotroool, did you carry on like this when Saint Ronnie Reagan delivered his campaign speeches with a teleprompter? How about Poppy Bush? Bobdole? Chimpy Bush?

WTF is your deal with teleprompters, anyway? They’ve been around since LB frickin’ J!

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Ray,

Real Clear Politics.com. I feel they do a pretty good job averaging the polls. I usually don’t think too much for polls either, but sometimes they are warranted to look at.

I was going to vote for the rabid monkey myself, Donald Duck has that weird lisp, but that’s just me :-)

AmVet,

Thanks!!!!!

By AJC/DNC Management

September 29, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

Look at what the libs tried to lard up the “bail out” with and what the Republicans saved We The People from:

Thanks to the House GOP’s intervention, the Paulson plan is also better than it would have been. Republicans helped to eliminate the Barney Frank-Chris Dodd slush fund for liberal housing lobbies; a plank to let judges shield deadbeat homeowners from bankruptcy laws; and a ploy to stack bank boards with union members.-Wall Street Journal

By Peter

September 29, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

Folks go to the group of U-Tube video’s McLost did…..

BOMB, BOMB, Iran is his funny song………and you think he is JUST saying that ?

McLost gets angry quick, is and elitist, and a CHICKEN…..watch the POW video’s about the “Song Bird of Hanoi”………. he did more hard than Jane Fonda in the Vietnam WAR, more Videos for the communists, and should be considered more of a Turncoat than……. Benedict Arnold !

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Ray,

I believe your GOP has the most cartoon like candidates, not the Democrats. You have Wiley E Coyote in the form of John McCain, “If I don’t recognize gravity, I won’t fall”, “acme economic fix kit” And a lipsticked Bugs Bunny in drag with Palin.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Jay, I have to say I think I agree with ByteMe on this one. You’re basically right about the debate crystalizing fears about McCain’s temperament, but I wouldn’t think it’s necessarily as policy-oriented as you suggest. Rather I think it’s more on a gut level and the proper historical reference is Kennedy Nixon than anything else.

I could be wrong, but what I think will be most damaging was the wrinkly old troll lecturing the younger man, or “McNasty” as Begala put it.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

Dionne says it best:

“However one judges the first debate, it did nothing to block Obama’s progress.”

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Danny the red,

ByteMe and I discussed this last week, but did you see Paul Begala call Bush a “highly functioning moron?”

I heard a guy on CNN this morning, and I believe this to be true for the most part, voters, particularly swing voters, vote with their perception of how each party is performing.

Hate to say it, but McCain’s guy was right about how elections are based on personalities instead of issues.

By Tom

September 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

McCain’s behavior was/is exactly what I’d expect. That of an undereducated common thug. His entire background reflects that fact, from childhood, thru the military, to now. One need only read about it. He fades in the presence of a well-educated, dignified gentleman.

And this self-proclaimed “hero” finds it quite impossible to ever engage in discourse without referring to that phony heroism. “I’ve had experience dealing with those people.” (What “people” would that be, John??) And “When I got out of prison….” It’s disgusting and pathetic and should be self-humiliating.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Ray, I know that I dial up the snark as much as anyone posting here, but believe me when I say your post @ 9.50 was genuinely thought-inspiring.

When you wrote “I think that the liberals would have backed Donald Duck as long as he was not Bush. Think about it” — that’s just what I did.

I think I can understand why you would think that, but I want to offer you a little insight into what went through a lot of Democratic primary voters’ minds.

Time and again, when speaking to fellow progressives, I’d get “I just want someone who can win”. That’s not the same as “anybody but Bush,” although I can see why your side might perceive it that way. The early primary field gave us a comparatively large number of folks “who can win”. I thought Biden and Todd were both suitably “presidential” acting and they had the experience to go the distance. I thought Richardson looked great on paper, but he never lived up to his rep in person; maybe it was just his demeanor or maybe it’s just that he was overweight and the camera wasn’t kind to him. There were times when I wanted Wes Clark to try his luck a second time, older and wiser as a campaigner (he wasn’t good at it in 2004.) Not because these guys were “not Bush,” but because they were all good, solid Presidential campaign material.

Obviously the bright lights, the Big Three, were Edwards, Clinton and Obama. Seven months ago, we knew it was probably down to those three, and I don’t think Obama was picked because he “was not Bush.” I think there were a lot of gut-checks made and in the end we got someone who had a very different style from Clinton, but one that (based on what I’ve seen so far) makes for a very welcome, refreshing contrast from what’s turned out to be a rather hot-tempered, impulsive-sounding Republican opponent.

I know it seems at times as if the only thing that motivates us is some kind of primal hatred of Bush, and yeah, there is some very real personal dislike for the man and his entire Administration. But mostly the motivator is just winning the damn thing, and getting a chance to change the persistent American mindset that Democrats have to triangulate like Bill Clinton to win, that they have to constantly present some Republican Lite persona in order to avoid offending voters. Obama’s our best shot to accomplish that.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

No I missed that one. But “highly functioning moron” strikes me as perfectly on target, esp. after reading excertpts from Woodward’s latest book.

“McCain’s guy was right about how elections are based on personalities instead of issues”. Exactly, and not in the way originally intended. If it goes the way it’s looking, it would go down as one of the great ironies in American political history.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

GOPs Got to Go,

Saying that all Repubs are bigots and that all Demos are not is not very smart. Three of ten Demos said that they would not vote for a black candidate. White independents were not much kinder to Mr. Wonderful. Did it ever occur to you that there are other things in this mix that would make the informed, well read voter not be too turned on by the Annointed One? On Nov 5th we will see how much of a difference race has made but there are other issues facing the voters besides the candidate’s color although in his concession speech, Mr. Wonderful will probably blame it on race. Interesting to note that the Macon police dept plans on putting all of their force on the street on Nov 4th and 5th just in case. And only 23% of Demos and 10% of Repubs felt that blacks were law abiding. Wonder why?

By ncgreybr

September 29, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

Don’t ya just luv it when fools start talking about Obama usiing a teleprompter when giving a speech! Watch McCain sometime. He can’t go four words without looking down (usually to his right) to read his “impromtu” words on the music stand slightly below him.

We already have one MAVERICK in Washington. He’s been in office for 7 years and look at the mess this country is in! We don’t need a second one PLUS Caribou Barbie. That woman is SO dumb that her handlers keep her away from the press. What does that saw to you?

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger,

You can speak for me anytime. The rabid monkey thing was a joke I trust you know.

Anywho - another deciding factor for Obama v. Clinton was the fact that our executive office has been run by a Bush or Clinton since 1988 - 20 years, and I wanted a new family - not the same two dynasties. I think Clinton was a good president, but some of his policies are the ones who’ve gotten us into this mess, or rather his lack of ability to stand up to Congress at the time, and I just didn’t want yet another of what I considered to be the same.

And I certainly could never vote for McCain based on how he stands on the issues of foreign policy and his proven record of his support of deregulation, among almost everything else he’s said about the issues at hand.

Will Obama be better? Who knows. Time will tell, but I’m willing to give him his time and we’ll weigh it out again in four.

Danny the red,

I saw Woodward in a couple of interviews. If his portrayal of Bush is even 1% true, oh gods, no wonder our country is in this mess.

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

He he — Caribou Barbie.

By ce

September 29, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

I agree w/ Tom. Bush and McCain came from priviledge backgrounds. They would have never made it into an Ivy League University by their GPAs. Both were at the bottom of their class and was described as drinking party students. Obama (half-black and entitled to affirmative action programs) did not use affiramtive action to give him a heads up to get into college. Instead his grades got him. His leadership ability and able to work w/ people pushed him forward, not dad’s collegue who owed him favors like McCain and Bush. Finally, Obama knows what it is like to live modestly. McCain and Bush has no idea the day to day struggle of the middle and lower-middle class, and improverish American. Obama understand and is concern about the future of his girls, given that they are not rich like the McCains and Bush. The McCain and Bush family will fare very well dispite America’s economic crisis. They come from old money. On the other hand, the Obama and the Bidens will feel the pinch like the average American. I AM A VETERAN AND WILL NOT SUPPORT MCCAIN. BY THE WAY, DIDN’T MCCAIN DENOUNCED AMERICAN AS A POW. THOUGHT HE SAID HE WOULD DO ANYTHING FOR THE COUNTRY. ONCE A CAPTIVE SOLDIER DENOUNCE HIS COUNTRY, THE TORTURE?INTERROGATION STOPS.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

Ray, you’re really reaching — or should I say “clinging”? — with that bit of rather misleading Yahoo polling info which, for the record, DID get a ton of attention.

It’s not too difficult to demonize a group in a subtle fashion by depersonalizing them. Seen those silly “congressional approval” polls? What do they mean, really? nothing more than a generic notion of “congress” hasn’t been popular for awhile. But people have different reasons, and their dislike turns somewhere else when it gets to their own Representative.

Obama is not Generic Black Guy. He’s someone the nation’s managed to hear a whole lot about, they know him pretty well and will get to know him a bit better over the next few weeks. His good polling numbers aren’t some statistical freak; they’re the result of his talent and hard work.

Also, for the record, the highly touted Bradley Effect is kind of a joke, really.

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this

I think that the liberals would have backed Donald Duck as long as he was not Bush. Think about it.

I think the Republicans would back Sarah Palin, even though she doesn’t know anything; just as long as she says the thirteen magic words, “No Abortion. No Gun Control. No Sex Ed. No Illegal Aliens. More religion.” As long as any politican sticks to that script, Republicans will fall for it everytime. Think about it.

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Obama looked like the proverbial underdeveloped deer-in-headlights. You know, the small-rack animal not comfortable dealing with mature alpha males. Stammers, stutters and constantly looks at the Big Buck (McCain) for approval. Continually tries to makes “friends” with alpha male by using first name.

Telling, very telling.

McCain/Palin ‘08 - both already have big racks.

By GMAN

September 29, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

HEY Ray (10:37 AM), are you saying that more white Democrats believe blacks are law abiding than white Republicans do? Are you saying that more Democrats believe blacks are law abiding than Republicans do? Either way it speaks volumes about the makeup of the Republican party. And by the way, have you ever thought about the fact that the Macon Police may be planning on putting all their forces on the street on Nov 4th and 5th in the event that Senator Obama wins! THINK ABOUT IT!

Bush/McCain - Gambling with your children’s futures!

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this

I consider MYSELF the tuned in well informed voter.

I can read the loud and clear “republican speak” for black. “muslim”, “elitist”, “liberal”, “socialist” “anointed one”, “Mr Wonderful”……

We just have different definitions of informed, and different definitions of socialist and elitist.

One man worked his way up, against the odds, to make something of himself solely by his merit.

One used his father’s influence to get in to the Naval Academy, did very poorly, and continued to display a questionable character, ie “John Wayne McCain” behaviour.

One married a self made woman, only one, and remained married.

One left his first wife and family for a drug dependent heiress with more houses than he can remember.

And yet one claims a moral superiority to the other? LOL

Clearly Republican morals are directly liked to their, or their wife’s, bank account.

By ce

September 29, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

In response to Obama looking like “the deer in headlights.” He probably was astonished that a presidential candidate refused to look at him. Obama appeared as a MAN who could put personal disagreement asside to deal with America’s problem. We need a leader who does not “carry his feelings on his sleeves,” and who can put aside personal differences for the betterment of the country. McCain could not look at a MAN a few inches from him, solely because he opposes him. Is this what we can expect from him if elected president? Will he be hateful, unmoveable, unresponsive because other countries leaders don’t agree with him? Old stubborn man belong in a rocking chair somewhere cussing the younger generation and remembering when.

By Ray

September 29, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Ranger and Debbie,

A certain segment of the right fits your profile. However, there a bucket full of us who a more centrist, own a gun, don’t go to church, believe in life rather than killing our young, are not too full of trust for a segment of our population who is not living up to their responsibility as citizens in this great country. Not all of us are knuckle draggers, and, like many on the left, want to see this country headed in the right direction.
I am sure also, that there a lot of those on the left that also own a gun, go to church on a regular basis, are not too sure about killing off our young and, at least three in ten of which are not too sure about that segment of our population too.
I would like to think that I am not clinging to anything. Voted for Clinton his second term, also JFK in 1962.
My point is that a lot of times, the labels don’t fit and trying to stuff someone into a box with a label on it is a pretty naive exercise.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

BS Aplenty, you can post your “deer in the headlights” nonsense three more times if you like—I still think you may be the only viewer who saw Obama that way.

Obama’s done 22 nationally televised debates, and taken questions / handled follow-ups from far more accomplished pols than McCain.

It’s McCain who wouldn’t look Obama in the eye. Yeah, that’s some alpha dog you’ve got there…

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

BS, You were obviously drunk on cheap beer when watching.

You have also shown your colors with the “Rack” reference.

By ESR

September 29, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Hell, let the Dems have this one. I am sure all the fools down in Clayton County thought after they elected the group they elected it would be on big holiday for them and look what happened. They can’t get thier idiotic thug offspring into a third rated college, not even with race as a factor. Now, that’s bad. Same here, let’s give them this election and with a Democratic controlled Congress they can only blame themselves and we’ll have Republicans in charge from after 2012 for decades to come. They’re expecting Freaknik everyday, let’s show them.

By Kevin

September 29, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

I think that you need to consider the Bradley effect when you are looking at the polls. Until Mr. Obama is up 8% to 10% above Mr. McCain especially in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Virginia can you get an indication that the electorate is swinging toward Mr. Obama.

My other comment is about the debates. Many polls indicated that Mr. Obama “won” the part about the economy. I don’t understand that. When asked twice by the moderator what programs each candidate wanted to implement that would have to be sacrificed depending upon the size of of the bailout, Mr. Obama basically indicated he would give nothing up. Mr. Mcain say he would freeze federal epxenditures. I would say at least Mr. McCain had a sense of what needed to be done

By AJC/DNC Management

September 29, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

When I returned to the office on Saturday, I spoke with callers from New York to Florida who had heard about Obama’s truth squad and were outraged about it.

One caller said he was angry, because people were going to be “prosecuted” and “indicted” for stating their political views.

Another caller said Obama was planning to send police to the homes of elderly women because of their political statements.

A third caller said he wanted information about Obama’s “storm troopers.” - KMOV.com

Seig Heil!

Yes he can!

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

Ah Ray,

Looks like one of your demographics, ESR, has joined the discussion. I believe he just might fit your “poll”.

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

A TEN-SECOND PLAY

Sunday morning worship service at the Trinity United Church of Christ. A young Obama sits in rapt attention. The song service (and the lessons) have just begun.

REV. JEREMIAH: (standing up) Yes, brothers and sisters, sing with me the songs of redemption, the songs sung by our ancestors as they broke their chains of bondage and headed for freedom, yes sing with me now…

(SUNG to Jesus Loves Me)

Foolin’ Whitey’s good to know, Come on in and join our show,
Shoutin’ loud and dancin’ real, *Maybe Soul Train makes a deal.

Yes, foolin’ Whitey, Green’s God-Almighty,
Stacks high & tidy,
My conscience full o’ blow.

Welfare’s payment for your sins, Givin’ Green’s a recompense, Brother’s got to blame someone, You got Greem, so you’s the one.

OBAMA: (singing) …Yes, foolin’ Whitey, Green’s God-Almighty, Stacks high & tidy…

Twenty years later on the presidential campaign trail and the song remains the same.

OBAMA: (answering reporters’ questions) …and I sang so off-key in church that anyone familiar with a capella singing would not believe that I believed a word I was singing unless they were singing more off-key than I was. This issue is a diversion from the true problem in America which is color…(…yes, foolin’ Whitey, Green’s God-Almighty, Stacks high & tidy…).

THE END

By Ray

September 29, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this

GMan,

Sort of doubt it when not long ago the NAACP petitioned the mayor of our fair city to slap a 9:00 curfew on the projects because of the killings and violence in that neighborhood. If your Wonderboy loses, in our community of not so law abiding citizens, a few extra boys in blue will not hurt a thing. You might even look over your shoulder a bit too. I am only saying what the poll said, nothing more. You can put any spin on it that you want.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

“Yes he can!”

And your point?

By ce

September 29, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this

AJC?DNC Management Curse Word, Curse Word. I believe that the majority of bloggers are too intelligent to fall for that one. Ignorant, untrue, and attempting to be divisive. Curse Word, Curse Word. Now on to brainy people.

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Guess I watched a different debate. Very unprofessional or diplomatic to interupt with the “that’s not true”, Obama obviously lacks self control and is impulsive with his words. Also how many times did he say John is right? Did any of you actually hear Obama say which programs he was going to get rid of? He did not mention a single one, but he did talk about cutting taxes. Eventhough of his falty 95% tax cut really only 47% get a tax cut while the other 48% are getting free money because they do not have atx liability to get a cut on. This is simple math.
This is something that has been exposed and no a single democrate wants to answer to. My last statement is this exactly how many times is Obama going to completly flip-flop on an issue and not a single educated democrate will mention it even to acknowledge its presence.
So then what are you all basing the claim that Obama won this debate, HOW, with what information?

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Ray @ 11.03, when I read something as absurd as how you “believe in life rather than killing our young…” — you want to square that with pre-emptive war in Iraq? Screwing over SCHIP? Constantly nickel-and-diming public schools? Crying and moaning whenever a comprehensive overhaul of our crappy healthcare insurance system is brought up?

Belive in life, you say? What you probably believe in is forcing women to carry pregnancies to term, no matter what the circumstance, and no matter the stage of embryonic development. You’d rather criminalize a procedure, you’d rather make felons out of women and their doctovers, than recognize a basic Fourth Amendment right for a individuals to be “secure in their persons.”

If your side doesn’t have the balls to declare a fertilized egg a “person” via a Constitutional amendment, then stand aside and let the grown-ups write rational laws that remain on the good side of the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court for the past thirty five years. Deal, bro?

Kevin @ 11.08, instead of just mindlessly parroting “Bradley Effect! Bradley Effect! Braaak!” you want to provide something, anything, to back up your assertion that white voters are LYING to pollsters about Obama? because I ain’t buying.

White voters have been given plenty of cover to vote for the Generic White Candidate (McCain) if that’s where their hearts take them.

I call BS.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

Well I can see the right’s playbook for today is grasping at Jeremiah Wright straws (see William Kristol). Hahahaha!

Smells of desparation to me.

By MorningStar

September 29, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

By Paul September 29, 2008 9:01 A Within months of election Obama-Biden would be sending our military into Africa, even though there is no UN support. Peacekeeping, famine reliefe, dress it up any way you will, it’s still using the American military to impose American values on a society. And bin Laden has already made the call: US invades Africa, it’ll become a new rallying point for AQ.

Ok, I’m a little late here today, and will not be back (today). Paul, do you really think Obama would jump into a conflict with another country without proving that the “problem is not a proveable direct threat,” as the Bush adm. did in Iraq?

I hope not. I hear, and I hope I’m right that Obama, unlike the Bush administration, would attack another country only as a last resort. Especially, if that country did not prove a threat to our national security. We all know the old WMD business et. al. was just an excuse to go into Iraq.

We simply cannot afford another war! Does anyone in Washington actually do their job any more? I guess not. The saga of an Imperial Presidency must continue, congress and senate must do all they can to protect their majority, and to heck with the American people. National security? Hummmmm…..

Remember the general who tried to tell Bush & Co. about 1/2 million soldiers were needed if we were to attack Iraq? I don’t remember his name (a Palinesque statement), but he was booted out before you could say boo. The bottom line: Decisions are made and no one considers the cost(s), and the country is disintegrating from within!

Example: We’ve known since the 70’s what would happen with the energy situation, and no one, democrats or republicans, have taken any action. That’s just one little example of how those in power have one main objective, and that’s to stay in power.

Personally, I’m praying that real leaders will somehow emerge!

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Why Barack Obama Should Not be President

Barack Obama attended the Trinity United Church of Christ, Chicago, Illinois, for almost twenty years. Attended, taught, learned, worshipped and sang along with his wife and children until his abrupt resignation in May 2008. That resignation was brought about due to heightened national awareness of the “nature” of Obama’s congregation. A nature that was further brought into focus by unsavory sermon tapes of former TUCC minister, Jeremiah Wright. But for all the bluster and ignorance reflected in his sermons, Wright’s ranting from the pulpit only hinted at a deeper, more troubling truth about TUCC and Obama.

What is it that made TUCC such a political liability to the first African-American nominated by a major political party? The answer to that question lies in the doctrine and teachings of TUCC. In short, this congregation, unlike ANY other United Church of Christ church in the United States, adopted, endorsed and promotes the doctrine and teachings of one James H. Cone. Cone systematized what has been called black liberation theology as outlined in his two books, the first entitled, Black Theology and Black Power and a follow-on, A Black Theology of Liberation. These are the only two books sold by the Trinity United Church of Christ on its website. TUCC doesn’t sell or give away the BIBLE on its website – a circumstance I find very telling.

The two books mentioned are, to say the least, “interesting” reads. Black Theology and Black Power is the seminal work on black liberation theology and A Black Theology of Liberation is a follow-on. Cone viewed his theology as, “…complete emancipation of black people from white oppression by whatever means black people deem necessary. So-called (white) Christianity, as commonly practiced in the United States, is actually the racist Antichrist.” “Theologically,” Cone affirms, “Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil’.” And, there’s more but one gets the picture.

So there you have it, the principal doctrine endorsed and promoted by the Trinity United Church of Christ teaches the overtly racist sentiments of James H. Cone. The preaching and “ignorance”, as some say, of Wright is shown to be symptomatic of that larger racism and neglects to see that the entire TUCC congregation accepts the doctrine of Cone under the guise of a Christian church. Wright was just a mouthpiece, it’s the congregation, including Obama, which endorsed and promotes this racist doctrine.

ANY person or group that attempts to systematically demonize another group because of race is, by definition, RACIST.

Needless to say for Obama and his presidential campaign by May 2008 the ‘cat was out of the bag’. And, after twenty years of commitment to TUCC, Barack Obama finally, cynically made a decision to leave. A decision his avid campaign supporter, Oprah Winfrey, made several years earlier as she cynically managed a business agenda of her own. One would have to be patently naïve not to understand the motivation behind both departures. Nor is it much of a political stretch to acknowledge the release of these sermon tapes focused attention on the fall-guy, Wright, while diverting a direct, and potentially, campaign-ending blow to Obama.

What one is left after all the media lights have dimmed is this unsettling fact. For twenty years Barack Obama accepted the racist doctrine of his church – twenty years. And, only when this inconvenient truth was brought to national light did he decide that maybe that doctrine was no longer acceptable.

I give you the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama.

By nm

September 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

Look like the Buddas have awaken… First of all, fat, dumb and happy, Obama’s ancestory were not slaves. He knows geneology: Father from Kenay, Mother from Hawaii. Second, “I rode the little bus,” to denounce whites would mean Obama is denouncing his own heritage, that is, he was raised by his maternal white family. Thirdly, why are you injecting J. White into this blog. Stay focus ADHD.

By nm

September 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

Look like the Buddas have awaken… First of all, fat, dumb and happy, Obama’s ancestory were not slaves. He knows geneology: Father from Kenay, Mother from Hawaii. Second, “I rode the little bus,” to denounce whites would mean Obama is denouncing his own heritage, that is, he was raised by his maternal white family. Thirdly, why are you injecting J. White into this blog. Stay focus ADHD.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

BS aplenty,

You are very aptly named dude.

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this

Hillbilly Rger just curious what is your stance on this issue.

A woman is being charged with negligent homicide for kicking another woman in the stomach. Only problem the woman who was kicked was 19 months pregnant, and as a result of the kick her fetus was lost. So should the kicker be charged with homicide, because according to you and others who feel as you do, the fetus was not alive yet! So what to do? If she is not prosecuted then every man that does not want to be a father should just kick the mother in the stomach, or you have to admit that the fetus has some rights to live.

By JBW

September 29, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

Ronald Regan was an ‘older’ president while in office and if John McCain carries some of the same values for our country then I’m all for him. It beats the alternative of a man coming out of nowhere with NO experience in anything, to lead our country.
I was shocked to see Obama argue military strategy when he has never even served in the military. Nor has he ever voted on anything - what experience does he bring to the table - NOTHING.

By nm

September 29, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

Well I can see Budda has waken up. First of all, “I rode the little bus to school,” Obama ancestors were not slaves. Unlike most African-American, he knows his roots: father from Kenay, mother from Hawaii. Second, “I was the last person to be called on in school (the days I didn’t skip), how could Obama hate whites, since he was raised by his maternal white grandparents. Finally, what does J. Wright has to do with this blog. Stay focus ADHD.

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

GOP’s got to…

Just vote your conscience. Your man’s an outright racist and you are going to vote for him.

Sweet dreams, dude.

By Mike Woorward

September 29, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

Whilst I totally agree with Jay that (in my words) at heart McCain is an old warhorse, the issues are a bit bigger – much bigger — than Senator McCain. Why is it that people (most of Congress, all of the media) are eveready to start wars in the Middle East (or anywhere: Somalia or Grenada, for example)?

Oil is one answer that hits you between the eyes. Never mind that India, China, Western Europe, ALL need oil. But none of them start wars of aggression for the purpose. India, China, Russia: all have good relations with Venezuela. The US alone would rather force water to flow downhill (or not flow at all).

All the countries (all the people) in the world (including Americans) want peace, to live their lives as best as they can, to raise a family. US alone must start wars to achieve peace. And so, for constant, enduring peace the US MUST fight constant, enduring wars. Therefore, US militarism is another answer that hits you between the eyes. As Mad-Lynn Albright once remarked to Colin Powell, “What’s the use of your fine military if we cannot use it?” Now, that is inescapable warmongering logic.

And the third reason? The Torah. The Holy Book says God gave Canaan (translation: Palestine) to the Hebrews (translation: Jews). Historically (and even according to the Bible, “Israel” are a people and never a land (just as Christians and Muslims are a people, not a land). But it also says all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates belongs to “them” (Hebrews/Israel). The Zionist in fact claimed in the UN that “we” have never renounced that claim even (if Atil rather than Jerusalem is their real capital). Christian faith has its capital in Bethlehem and Galilee. Muslims have theirs in Mecca and Medina. But not “all” Christians claim to possess Bethlehem. Not all Muslim can claim Mecca to be their political capital and home. And so the actual people of Canaan have to be liquidated so that Israel can begin its conquest of all the land promised in the Torah. (If God gave all that land to “them”, then it boggles the mind why “all that land” was NEVER occupied by “them”! Nor do we know who the Hebrews were.) But this is not about logic. It is about faith. Faith says Israel can remove the “facts” of indigenous people from their homes so that new “facts” of Jewish homes can be created. Jewish facts are inviolate. Palestinians facts … well: do they have a Book which says their facts are inviolate??

And so for as long as there is Israel, as long as there is oil and as long as there is the US, the Middle East must remain at enduring war as testimony to enduring peace that is coming. It can come any day just as Jesus can descend from heaven ANY DAY to rule the earth for a millennium, a world in which a rich man can live in peace as easily as a camel can pass through the eye of a needle. So, McCain is right on the money. Mike.

By Whatthe...

September 29, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

19 months pregnancy?

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

nm and danyy the red, so you two have no problem with J. Wright? People want to infuse race into this discussion so much, fine. NM and Danny the Red would your opinions be changed if Obama was white and so was Rev. Wright and they were saying these things against black people. My other question how did you feel about David Dukes? This is the same thing only people are too cowardly in the media to acuse Obama hard of being a racist the way they did Dukes. Equal is Equal Good and Bad

By Ray

September 29, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

GOPs Got to Go,

Not making excuses for anyone. Maybe he does fit the poll but he doesn’t speak for all of us on the right. It is a real tragedy in this country when a minority candidate cannot run for public office until he has to carry so much baggage on his shoulders that it has a negative effect on his chances to win. Obama might overcome that percentage of people who cannot vote for a minority candidate but I am not so sure that this country has progressed far enough in our relationship with other races that it will happen. And a good percentage, 40% at last count, seem to feel somewhat the same. Is this a good thing?…… Not by a long shot. Changing racial perceptions for a segment of our population only 40+ years since the Civil Rights Act is a fantasy land dream. Many say that we will not be ready for a minority president until whites are not the majority anymore. Perhaps that is so, sad as that might be. If elected, I just hope that something untoward does not happen to him. You think that Palin would be a downside for this country…… would be nothing compared to the demise, God forbid, of a new black president. And there are enough knuckle draggers out there that will put that at the top of their list. Would make the Rodney King riots seem like a Sunday picnic.

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

BsAplenty: You sure do live up to your name!! But you’re funny though.

Ray: I grew up in Washington State. Can hunt, campout, fish and shoot with the best of them. Have 3 family members who are police officers, 8 in the Armed forces, (including my own husband), and are split mostly 50/50 about Abortion rights, gun control and immigration. However, we’re still a family united with a common goal — why can’t this country become the same thing?

There is more at stake here and now than the 13 magic words. There’s the economy, outrageous gasoline prices, businesses going over-seas with jobs Americans need; and no fiscal control by our current goverment. These are the issues that need to be addressed NOW. Anything else is superflous and trying to 3-card-monty the public’s attention away from the very REAL threat of becoming a third world country; is demeaning.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

“Hillbilly Rger just curious what is your stance on this issue.

A woman is being charged with negligent homicide for kicking another woman in the stomach. Only problem the woman who was kicked was 19 months pregnant, “

My stance would be “19 months? At that point the fetus might be walking and talking!”

Seriously, though…when we talk about elective abortion, in about 85% of the cases we’re talking in the first eight weeks or so of gestation. the farther along in a pregnancy, the less likely a woman is going to have the procedure, for fairly obvious reasons.

The living creature within, such as it is, is not even considered a “fetus” at this point—it’s an “embryo” during the first trimester, i.e. 12 weeks. Best as I can tell, some spinal cord development occurs after that to the point where a fetus has some sentience at around the 20 week mark. That’s when it becomes ideologically problematic to provide a no-conditions pass… but then, you see, Roe v. Freekin Wade RECOGNIZES THIS! And allows a state to place some restrictions at this point!

I’ll be happy to address your scenario if you would give me the actual gestational stage. If it is in fact “9 months pregnant,” and it’s a good pregnancy up to this point (i.e., no obvious, horrific defects like no brain stem…) that’d indicate the fetus is plenty viable, and I could see prosecuting the person who did the violence with at least manslaughter, possibly second degree murder even.

Oh, and BS Aplenty, your charges of “racism” as applied to TUCC don’t pass the smell test. (Well, they’re not YOURS of course, they’re probably copy-pasted from some tiny-d!cked blogger’s site.)

By Hellbent

September 29, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

19 Months pregnant?! I didn’t know a human could gestate for 19 months. Dang!

By Paul

September 29, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

Hello Morningstar 11:27

I too will be gone in a bit - couple days out on business - and should be back Thurs.

I’d like to thank you - other than Bosch, no one else has tackled this. I find it quite interesting, comparing the policy statements of the candidates vs. the perceptions.

I won’t go back over the past forums in which the candidates have made their remarks, but the original cites show up on even a mediocre search engine.

Yes I do think an Obama-Biden administration would use military intervention in an area that was not a threat to America. Biden has, for several years now, advocated intervention in Sudan, even though the Sudanese gov’t and the UN have blocked action. As I noted, Biden’s motivation is American values, but OBL has already made clear the response we can expect - think “magnet for al Qaeda.” And welcome the unintended consequences.

The general was the Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki. Key point: he was asked, not the number of troops to defeat the classic Iraqi military structure but the number to secure the country afterward. That is a key distinction the Bush Administration, the Defense Department and the State Department studiously avoided considering. General Shinseki was not fired - he’d announced his retirement nearly a year before.

It’s that ‘last resort’ idea that’s a kicker. I cited Iran purposely for that reason. Sen Obama has made declarative statements (they are a threat, they are developing nukes) that if McCain has said so definitely this blog would be lit with questions of “where’s the proof! Show me! Fearmonger!” But Obama is perceived differently by many of his supporters and it seems such pronouncements are ignored.

Personally, I’m pleased he’s made them. Shows realism and a definite commitment to protect America’s national interests.

A couple here have taken issue with repeating Sen Obama’s Iran comments - he doesn’t really mean he’d go to war, for instance. One can call a duck a cow, it’s still a duck. They cite his diplomacy/multilateral pronouncements. It still doesn’t change he’s said if such attempts failed, he’d do anything (same as ‘nothing I would not do’) to stop Iraq from acquiring a nuke. And that’s well before they could use one against us. I think that’s called… preemption?

I agree, also with your energy analyis. Every administration, every Congress since Carter has failed the American public. But ask them if they are at all responsible for the current debacle and the answer would be the same as Spkr Pelosi’s response to the question of if Congress has any responsibility for the current economic situation: “No.”

You can fool lots of people lots of the time.

By K_Chub

September 29, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

Is anyone else sick and tired of getting the shaft? What in the hell is going on?

I am not being Liberal or Conservative here I have just had enough. The American taxpayers are bailing out wealthy Wall Street investors and financial firms to the tune of $700 Billion dollars because they made a mess. That’s money that should be going to education, defense, infrastructure or health care. Meanwhile middle America is up to it’s neck in debt and we who elect our leaders get nothing. NOTHING!

I - like everyone else in and around Atlanta - had to spend 45 minutes trying to get gas this weekend. WHY? Why are we still so dependent on Oil? We put a man on the moon almost 40 years ago and you’re telling me we can’t come up with something other than oil to fuel our cars? How much money was spent on that black hole machine in Europe - that might or might not answer a single question - here’s an idea take that money and put it towards coming up with a better fuel source for our cars. I bet if we spent $700 Billion on the problem it would solve it.

Just today we find out the Chinese are at it again - this time it’s chemicals in candy. What - did they figure they wouldn’t kill us off fast enough by just poisoning our kids toys they have to poison the candy too! I am sick of these TOXIC products coming from China. I am disgusted with how we just accept that it’s the cost of doing business with China that every now and then a couple kids will get sick or die from using Chinese products. What the hell is wrong with the world today. Since when did it only become about saving a couple bucks on a piece of crap toy that your kid doesn’t need anyway?

Nobody cares about the people anymore - there is no accountability. The Free Market doesn’t work and the government damn sure doesn’t work.

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

Sorry about 19 months…. The lady was 19 weeks or 1 week shy of 5 months as the story put it. Lost a lil in my terrible attempt at translation. Guess that is what I get for paraphrasing.

Sorry and 1,000 appologies

By centrist2

September 29, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

ESR, your comments reflect an uninformed, biased view of African Americans. Sure, there are some African Americans who commit heinous crimes, but so do Whites, Hispanics, Asians, etc. It is shortsighted to draw a general conclusion about a certain racial or ethnic group when you have not had the “pleasure” of meeting all of them. As a middle-aged, African American female, UGA graduate, mother of a Mercer University graduate who attended on a scholarship and money supplied by ME, a 33 year employee of the state of GA, with no family history, past or present, of being on welfare, your ignorance of the diversity of people in this society is appalling and sad. I am also a conservative. What gives you the authority to make “snap” judgments about people? I have not decided exactly who I will vote for in November, as I am still researching both candidates, which is what Americans need to look into, instead of voting on the basis of race, religion, or political affiliation. This presidential race is too important to the future of our country to be decided on the basis of emotion, or some other amorphorous variable. You’re also incorrect in your assumption that African Americans or any other group are expecting Freaknik or a party everyday if the Democrats win in November because most Americans will continue to take care of Business As Usual ( making mortgage payments, going to their jobs, trying to make a better life for themselves and their families, planning for their retirement, etc.)

By Fred

September 29, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Someone on here was going on about ‘The Big Lie’ where, if you keep repeating a falsehood often enough, it becomes the truth. Yes, the Nazis used it, but so did Saul Alinsky. And Bookmans’ column is an everyday case study in it. Sad.

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

U know what’s so funny? Some posters who are blogging about Obama’s ex-church being made up of racist facists. Did they not SEE the white people in the audience on all those “videotapes”?

They keep bringing out Jeremiah Wright, (a black man); did they not SEE and HEAR the videotape of Rev. Michael Pfleger, (a white man)? Is he racist against whites too?

By Donovan

September 29, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Let me tell you CHANGE people something that will probably fall on deaf ears. Since Democrats have taken over Congress again there has been absolutely no CHANGE in the way of moving forward. This Congress has done absolutely NOTHING nor has it legislated anything of measure since its take-over. It has become the worse body of law makers and has achieved the lowest numbers in voter confidence. What type of CHANGE are you people talking about? Such ridiculous lip service from Democrats and liberals like Bookman is laughable. If Democrats think that an inexperienced junior senator is going to save the world it is pure folly. If liberals are hanging their hat on an emotional saying such as “CHANGE”, they are fools. If you all think that the DNC talking points are any different than in the past, talk is cheap. For good or bad, McCain is the lesser of two evils. He is far and above a more realistic choice for America’s immediate future. Just for the sake of CHANGE or for the sake of voting against the GOP is irresponsible at this time of challenge. The frustation of losing the last two elections is no reason for voting for an Empty Suit. Only fools follow fools.

By nm

September 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

No, I do not have a problem with J. Wrights because the media was not fair in reporting his sermons. The sound bites were not played in its entirely, therefore skewing viewers’ opinion. You asked if Obama was white? Did he become separated from his mother’s race. He is biracial. A racist society gave him identify because of his color. He still has his mother’s blood and, more importantly, her ideas and the teaching she imparted in him. J. Wright spoke his views, not Obama’s. If you are a churchgoer, I would surmise that your pastor has made comments that you have disagreed with. If we left each time a pastor said something we disagreed with, many of us would be church hopping for days. There again, J. Wright’s speech was not completely play and therefore taken out of content. To be upset about something, one needs to listen to the complete message, dissect it and then make an inform decision/conclusion. D. Dukes is not an accurate comparison.

By Donovan

September 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

Let me tell you CHANGE people something that will probably fall on deaf ears. Since Democrats have taken over Congress again there has been absolutely no CHANGE in the way of moving forward. This Congress has done absolutely NOTHING nor has it legislated anything of measure since its take-over. It has become the worse body of law makers and has achieved the lowest numbers in voter confidence. What type of CHANGE are you people talking about? Such ridiculous lip service from Democrats and liberals like Bookman is laughable. If Democrats think that an inexperienced junior senator is going to save the world it is pure folly. If liberals are hanging their hat on an emotional saying such as “CHANGE”, they are fools. If you all think that the DNC talking points are any different than in the past, talk is cheap. For good or bad, McCain is the lesser of two evils. He is far and above a more realistic choice for America’s immediate future. Just for the sake of CHANGE or for the sake of voting against the GOP is irresponsible at this time of challenge. The frustation of losing the last two elections is no reason for voting for an Empty Suit. Only fools follow fools.

By Donna P.

September 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

We need a leader with some “balls”. McCain is that leader. The President has a lot to deal with (the economy, immigration, foreign affairs, etc.). Yes, Obama is promising a tax cut to 95% of Americans but how much of a Federal tax cut is being offered. How much money will I see back in my paycheck (a couple of dollars for gas or what?). Obama is focusing too much on the economy, once that bailout is a reality, things will hopefully stabilize. Then we have to deal with Russia, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Venezuela. I don’t see Obama as an effective foreign leader as McCain. And frankly, foreign issues are more important to me than domestic ones.

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

At 19 weeks, you may not even know that the woman in question was pregnant (re: Palin, 2007). The charge probably won’t stick. Prosecutors file charges all the time; doesn’t mean they’ll win in court. Sometimes they do it for political reasons (I know, shocking!).

At 19 weeks, it’s certainly a tragedy, but not necessarily a crime. I have a feeling this one is better handled in civil court, where the jury doesn’t need to be unanimous.

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

At 19 weeks, you may not even know that the woman in question was pregnant (re: Palin, 2007). The charge probably won’t stick. Prosecutors file charges all the time; doesn’t mean they’ll win in court. Sometimes they do it for political reasons (I know, shocking!).

At 19 weeks, it’s certainly a tragedy, but not necessarily a crime. I have a feeling this one is better handled in civil court, where the jury doesn’t need to be unanimous.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

You know Ray,

You sound like a reasonable guy, but you have to admit that the McCain positive blog on here is 85% racist in motivation. I made that percentage up of course, but I admit that. It seems to me to be about right.

And since we are looking at stats I would be willing to bet that there has not been a “black” assassin of a president, albeit Sirhan Sirhan was not “white”. I also can recall only 2 serial killers that have been black, Wayne Williams and the Sniper Guy, there may have been more. Of course I am talking about complete nut jobs who are not motivated by money. When it comes to scary complete nut jobs, we white people hold that title here in America.

I agree that an above mentioned nut guy with a large cache of guns might try to do him harm. I also believe that those types of people are Palin fans.

Now I am asking you, just between us, do you seriously think Palin can run this country?

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

Okay, I know this is off topic, but I don’t like this part of the “bail-out”

Curbs would be placed on the compensation of executives at companies that sell mortgage assets to the Treasury. [okay, that sounds fine for now] Among them, companies that participate will not be able to deduct the salary they pay to executives above $500,000.

Question: “deduct the salary they pay” from what?

They also will not be allowed to write new contracts that allow for “golden parachutes” for their top 5 executives if they are fired or the company goes belly up. But the executives’ current contracts, which may include golden parachutes, would still stand.

So, if the criminal executives ALREADY have a contract in place, it will still stand.

This is horsesh!t.

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this

Donovan: The democrats have been in power since January 2007. The republicans have been in power (both the house and the senate) since Clinton was in office. You can’t “change” anything overnight. Especially with a group of people who really don’t want “change” — they like things just the way they are; one big quagmire of red tape and fingerpointing.

Before u holler “foul” I’m talking about dems as well as repubs.

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this

No Debbie do right we saw some white people in th audience.
I went to a David Allen Coe concert while in college as well. There were some black people at teh concert, but I can guareentee that the concert was nothing if not racist. Obama attended a radically racial church that spoke of whites as evil and the source of sin, FACT You want to vote for a dividing racist, FACT

This issue effects everything from economy to foreign policy. If Obama thinks that whites are that bad he will have no problem sticking it to whites on every occasion he finds fit.

Also was it not a democrate who said if you are jewish or black do not vote for Palin because she hunts. Where were the hippies of racism at then. Oh it was a black person against awhite in a racial way it does not count I forgot. What a joke our race relations have came to in this country. We should all be very ashamed

By Cal

September 29, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

This just in on Obama. His campaign has asked the police and district attorneys in Missouri to arrest people saying anything negative about Obama. You can watch in on kmov.com. How embarrasing for the democrats. Freedom of speech?

By Lorraine

September 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

Conservatives get your head out of the sand! How can you possibly say you support McCain when this man isn’t truly a conservative? He spits in the face of every Christain when he continues to say that he believes in Evolution(see the article that came out this month on CBS.com). Would you prefer a president who does not believe that God created the world or one who says they are for a woman’s right to choose? How hypocritical to say that McCain’s views line up better with the view of Evangelicals. Dr. Dobson had it right the first time when he said McCain is no conservative!

By ByteMe

September 29, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Bosch: deduct it from their taxes. They can spend that much, but over $500K is no longer deductible for those companies.

By getalife

September 29, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

It is good to read some new people on this blog. The regulars are deadlocked with their ideology like our government.

Our friend from the right, Jim Wooten, who calls himself a con, said vote yes on the bailout and spews McCain won and the gop house won with their stunt.

Horses-hit. The gop house are voting no. C-Span is good today. 3 hours debate but no amendments. It will pass.

Does that make Jim a lib now?

Anyhoo, it does not matter who wins this election. It is business as usual in Washington and we, the people will lose.

By Lorraine

September 29, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

Conservatives get your head out of the sand! How can you possibly say you support McCain when this man isn’t truly a conservative? He spits in the face of every Christain when he continues to say that he believes in Evolution(see the article that came out this month on CBS. Would you prefer a president who does not believe that God created the world or one who says they are for a woman’s right to choose? How hypocritical to say that McCain’s views line up better with the view of Evangelicals. Dr. Dobson had it right the first time when he said McCain is no conservative!

By Obama is The One

September 29, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

Yes, I’ve decided that I don’t want anyone who could be construed as the least bit angry as president. I don’t want anyone who possesses resolve, commitment, determination—no one with fire in the belly, who stands on outmoded, old-fashioned, now unrealistic principles.

I want the dictators the U.S. has to face to know they have a friend in the White House— a sympathetic figure who understands their plight, their situation, their struggle to bring revolution to the people. A man who has been in the street and lived in the street. A man who has pressed the flesh and felt the need and compassion of other people. A president who will grasp their hand and give a knowing glance that “my people” too have faced hardship. That together we can face our common enemy (the U.S.) and we can overcome this mean country.

The very idea that weakness is provocative and that there is peace through strength is an old-fashioned notion penned by presidents of yesteryear. For today we begin a new era—an era where the U.S. realizes that its place in the world is to not tell others how to live or to impose our moral judgments on other peoples and countries. As countries and as citizens of the world, we are all equal and our values are all equally valid.

There is only one man in this race who can meet these expectations. And that man (and I say this without reservation or equivocation) is Barack Obama.

Wouldn’t you agree?

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

Nm which comments exactly were skewed. Show how one thing in any of those clips could even begin to be anything positive. Yes David Dukes is an excellent example and show me how not. Also if Rev. Wright was not in the wrong then why after the media jumped on did Obama jump off. Either Obama is the most unloyal man evr or he knew what wright had been saying then did whatever he could to distance himself. Wright is a racist; plan and simple

Wright is the man who shaped Obama’s views

Wrtight shaped Obama into a racist.

Obama has never said he is white, only 1/2 white but he has said he is black, not half black

Is that the racist society or is that his own words. He chooses what to call himself.

Also no my pastor has never even came close to saying anything about another race like what Rev. Wright did. Unlike Obama I would remember hearing something like that being said in my church as well.

Keep playing the race card you are holding the only racist in the election.

By Therese Persaud

September 29, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

Argue as much as you need to against Jay’s intelligent and thoughtful analysis , racism under any other name is still racism !!!!!

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

ByteMe,

Okay. Well, that makes sense. But, if they already have contracts in place they will honor their contracts?

Um, you know, I don’t mind being the village idiot sometimes especially in matters of finance, so correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t it be safe to assume that all executives already have contracts in place, and therefore will be honored?

By ce

September 29, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

Obama is The One: My sentiments exactly. McCain is old school, old money, old ideas and out of tune with the needs of the average American. He has lived a priviledge life; therefore, when asked his definition of poor he said 1 million. Now many may say he was joking, but he simply did not know. He is a stubborn old man, who feels the country owes him something. We owe him JACK. I don’t understand why he believes the country owes him anything when his rise was due to his father’s money and position and his second mistress (strike that)wife’s money and influence. Obama is able to communicate w/ people regardless of their race, culture, socioecononmic status and gender. I served during the Vietnam Era and will not vote for McCain. He is old, possible suffering from PTSD and Anxiety Disorder, not to mention cranky, mean-spirit and hot tempered.

By Cal

September 29, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

OBAMA TRUTH SQUAD

This is the latest attempt of the Obama campaign to target ads that Obama, well, doesn’t like. The Obama campaign is asking law enforcement in Missouri to target anyone who “lies or runs a misleading TV ad” during the campaign. Prosecutors and sheriffs, at the request of the Obama campaign, are jumping on board to “keep the truth” and remind people that Obama is a Christian who wants to cut taxes for everyone making under $250,000 a year. But they will also “respond” to any statements that violate Missouri ethics laws.

Missouri Governor Matt Blunt has responded to Barack Obama’s “abusive use of Missouri law enforcement.” Here’s a quote from the governor:

“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.”

Appealing to the Justice Department? Sending threatening letters to station managers who air controversial ads? And now getting law enforcement to “respond” to statements on behalf of the campaign. Just stop and think for a moment what things will be like when this menace occupies the White House.

By Whatthe...

September 29, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

When McCain smile he looks like an elderly person relieving himself in his Depends. You know, the look guys have when they releive themselves in public swimming pools. I hate that!!!

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

All right, lets just get down right snarky, why don’t we?

McCain/Palin 08 Both of them have a big rack!

You must be referring to Rack as a verb:

Main Entry: 4rack Function: verb Date: 15th century transitive verb 1: to torture on the rack2: to cause to suffer torture, pain, anguish, or ruin3 a: to stretch or strain violently b: to raise (rents) oppressively c: to harass or oppress with high rents or extortions4: to work or treat (material) on a rack5: to work by a rack and pinion or worm so as to extend or contract 6: to seize (as parallel ropes of a tackle) together7: to place (as pool balls) in a rackintransitive verb: to become forced out of shape or out of plumb

In that case I thoroughly agree with you.

ESR, now in my world that stands for End Stage Renal Disease, But lets try to be a little clever here and ad lib what ESR COULD stand for:

End Stage Retard, End Stage Rhetoric, End Stage Rancor, End Stage Rant, End Stage RiffRaff, End Stage Republican, End Stage Rectum, End Stage Rapture, End Stage Retrograde, End Stage Retch, End Stage Rhubarb (as in veggie) End Stage Right-Wing

Any one else?

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Cal,

That’s Rush Limbaugh and right blogosphere bullsh!t. NO where in the article does it say that they will arrest people.

Go play outside it’s nice today.

By whatever

September 29, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this

I must have watched a different debate. One candidate was clearly experienced, citing numerous cases where he has been tested time and time again. Sometimes the candidate made the wrong decision and stated he learned from his experience, good or bad.

The other candidate simply reverted to the battle cry of “let’s not make the same mistakes of the last 8 years.” I heard nothing that tells me how he plans to do this or what the mistakes were exactly. Just that it wasn’t his fault. I also saw a man that obviously has a disdain for our military and was very disrespectful to a Senior Senator.

I’m extremely worried about our country, that the highest office has turned into a popularity contest, and that goes for the GOP VP pick too. We need experience in the white house.

By nm

September 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

It is impossible to debate with a person who does not have all the facts. Again, the J. Wright’s tape were not completely shown. Example: one scriptures says “Go kill yourself.” Now if taken out of context, a bunch of people would commit suicide. Point, you cannot make judgement unless you have total facts. Second, J. Wright formed Obama? Are you saying that all of his family values, school values, community values when out the window once he met J. Wright? That is absurb. My preacher does not “form me.” I am a free thinker. There again, I do not believe everything my preacher says. Finally, society made the distinction of race during slavery. If a person had a certain percentage of black, he or she was determined black. Society makes the choice by appearance. On his college application he did not make a choice: black or white. Although society was trying to make him choose. Again, David Dukes is not a comparison.

By getalife

September 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

Ah, concern trolls. Suddenly Americans are concerned about our country.

My friends on the left have been deeply concerned about our country for eight long years. Disaster after disaster they have been screaming but fallen on deaf ears.

Welcome to the real world concerned Americans. I hear the same from the drunk, bible thumping, radical right, neighbors and I tell them.

Told ya and welcome to our nightmare.

It’s your ideology stupid!

But you are too late with your concern and your candidate is stuck in this failed ideology.

Country last. Greed first.

By Midori

September 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

here’s another good one

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this

Hey, BS_Aplenty: “So there you have it, the principal doctrine endorsed and promoted by the Trinity United Church of Christ teaches the overtly racist sentiments of James H. Cone”

But you haven’t shown how Cone’s theology is actually racist.

So, tell us. How is Cone’s liberation theology actually racist just because it offends your middle-class, Anglo Saxon white version of Christianity?

By Ray

September 29, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

GOPs Got to Go,

No, I don’t think that she is ready to assume a position of VP, especially with McCain’s past medical history. I do like some of her characteristics, some of her grit, some of her determination and I would like to see her long brown tresses strewn liberally across my pillow. (Had to say that, sorry). At age 71, most any brown tresses would be welcome across my pillow. If McCain wins, she will be, as others are, surrounded by informed advisers (said that about W, too) as would any other top govt elected official. We will hope that she can adapt, like many others have, to become what we need as a good leader and a person of the electorate. You might take a good look at our Congress where “people of experience” have the lowest approval rating of any elected officials in our history. Most are lawyers, some even have a Harvard Law degree. Really don’t think a law degree any more than a dog sled are attributes for a prospective president. I keep bringing up Truman with a high school education. Smart, incisive and a man of the people. With Palin it’s a crapshoot. Maybe we’ll get lucky.

By Swami Dave

September 29, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

Unfortunately, as the campaign nears, it becomes more and more evident that is is playing out as two competing groups shouting at ever-increasing distances at each other.

Whether it is adhominem attacks against a Vice Presidential candidate, outright fiction reported as results from debates, or insulting attacks against a candidate based soley on his race that serve to only demean and disparage an entire class of people, the campaign has devolved from any discussion of issues & policy to bloviating drivel.

For me, I will be voting for McCain. He was not my first choice, but, from a policy perspective, (I perceive that) he is closer to my views than is Senator Obama.

Philosophically, I believe that America needs more engines & fewer boxcars among its population. For our country to overcome its myriad of challenges, more Americans needs to engage and become productive driving growth and productivity within our economy. Policies that support strenghtening our countries economic engines and incentivizing more people becoming engines are the directions that we need to take in these times. Policies that enable people to continue to be (or, forbid, more to become) boxcars expecting others to “pull them along” are the complete wrong direction.

Personally, I am just sad that this campaign appears to be fought as a battleground of attacks, insults, and derision instead of a battleground of ideas and visions. Specifically, such a campaign will only serve to deepen the discord and division further impeding the ability of anyone to get anything done.

The loser being us.

-Swami Dave

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

from tcoach: No Debbie do right we saw some white people in the audience. I went to a David Allen Coe concert while in college as well. There were some black people at teh concert, but I can guareentee that the concert was nothing if not racist.

Since you were there at that concert, does this make you a racist too? Just asking since you’re tarring Obama with the same circumstances you yourself were party to.

Obama attended a radically racial church that spoke of whites as evil and the source of sin, FACT You want to vote for a dividing racist, FACT

Since these are facts as you say, could you please show me a link from the church’s website, books written or endorsed by the church, etc. that states that? Where did you obtain these FACTS from another blogger or from Faux News?

Also was it not a democrate who said if you are jewish or black do not vote for Palin because she hunts. Where were the hippies of racism at then

OK I have this same argument with my mother-in-law, (regarding religious theology). She states, (this is HER opinion only); that since some people in the Catholic church, (mostly priests for obvious reasons), ignore pedophilia that the WHOLE organization supports pedophiles. Of course this is rot. The same as your example above ^^. So since this one democrat supposedly, (and you have yet to provide the link, etc. where this was said), said these things; ALL democrats are tarred with the same brush. That’s ridiculous! There are a LOT of women who have, know how, and ENJOY hunting and fishing, (I’m not one of them. I CAN do it because my father insisted that I learn the same things my brothers learned. My brothers can sew, cook, do laundry, etc. Just as well as I can hunt, fish, do plumbing and carpentry - my father was WAY ahead of his time), anyway there are a lot of women who enjoy hunting and fishing; but again, this has nothing to do with the ISSUES.

Whether Gov. Palin likes to hunt and fish is not the ISSUES that we are facing now — we need to stick with the ISSUES, and stop talking about every superficial thing that divides us as Americans. By certain people focusing on rhetoric, distortions, out-and-out lies, propaganda, and ridiculousness, takes us futher and further away from dealing with the ISSUES.

IF Obama is a racists, well then let’s go down the list of some other Presidents who were too.

Herbert Hoover, George Washington, Dwight D. Eisenhower, (who VEHEMENTLY opposed de-segrating the Armed Forces as well as the US period) and the beloved saint Ronald Reagan, (also a VEHEMENT opposer of desegration—he left the Democratic party when they supported it and turned Republican because of it). America, as the blogger, stating statistics said earlier, is RAMPANT with racism, sexism, and every other “‘ism” you can think of.

Turning a blind eye will not erase history or the facts. They always seem to come back and bite you in the end.

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Ray,

EWWWWW!

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Why Obama Should Not be President

To know a man is to understand the gods to which he kneels.

A man’s speech may be used to misinform others but his worship seeks only to edify his own soul. Rarely is there need for deception. And so any journey to understand the candidate Barack Obama must pass through his place of worship, the Trinity United Church of Christ. A congregation where he worshipped, sang, taught and learned for twenty years. A congregation where he also found a life’s mentor in the person of TUCC’s erstwhile minister, Jeremiah Wright.

TUCC is a numerically significant and unique church among the United Churches of Christ. How unique? Unique in that it has adopted as doctrine the teachings of one James H. Cone, the theologian who systematized black liberation theology. And it is in the doctrine of Cone where one finds candidate Obama’s genuine worship. To many Americans that doctrine would differ markedly from what they view as Christian worship. In fact, one wonders what this archaic, racist doctrine has to do with Christianity at all as demonstrated in a doctrinal passage from Cone’s A Theology of Black Liberation:

This understanding of blackness can be seen as the most adequate symbol of the dimensions of divine activity in America. And insofar as the country is seeking to make whiteness the dominating power throughout the world, whiteness is the symbol of the Antichrist. Whiteness characterizes the activity of deranged individuals intrigued by their own image of themselves, and thus unable to see that they are what is wrong with the world. Black theology seeks to analyze the satanic nature of whiteness and by doing so to prepare all nonwhites for revolutionary action.

In passing, it may be worthwhile to point out that whites are in no position whatever to question the legitimacy of black theology. Questions like “Do you think theology is black?” or “What about others who suffer?” are the product of minds incapable of black thinking. It is not surprising that those who reject blackness in theology are usually whites who do not question the blue-eyed white Christ. It is hard to believe that whites are worried about black theology on account of its alleged alienation of other sufferers. Oppressors are not genuinely concerned about any oppressed group. It would seem rather that white rejection of black theology stems from a recognition of the revolutionary implications in its very name: a rejection of whiteness, an unwillingness to live under it, and an identification of whiteness with evil and blackness with good. [7-8]

It seems that for non-black Americans to know the soul of candidate Obama, that is, to understand what he thinks is soul-edifying for himself, his wife, his children, one must slog through Cone’s racist doctrine of yester-year. The candidate’s ‘Change You Can Believe In’ sloganeering now reveals a typical politician all-too-comfortable with the politics of deception. And, Obama’s genuine worship shows him as wed to a doctrine wherein there is little tolerance for the larger American community.

The candidate then seems easy enough to parse, but what are we to make of his avid supporters who well-know the philosophical background of his church, who cheer on their candidate even with his well-known acceptance of racist thought like Cone’s? What are we to infer about an American media that seems decidedly negligent in reporting this to the voters? I’ll leave that to you good people.

Did I mention this guy wants to be president of the United States?

By T

September 29, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this

tcoach

Obama has never said he is white, only 1/2 white but he has said he is black, not half black

*Is that the racist society or is that his own words. He chooses what to call himself. *

That is true, now days, somewhat. However, no matter how much I would want to answer certain forms do not allow that response. You are either white, asian, hispanic/non-white (that I don’t understand) or black. It is the way society desides to categorize its people.

Those things said about Palin in reference to jews and blacks was just gross. Doesn’t matter what party they are in.

By hillbilly ragger

September 29, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

BS Aplenty, I suppose I ought to thank you.

I know that McCain’s wheels have come off if you guys are resorting to crying about The Scary Uppity Negro Preacher story of—what’s it been now, five? six months ago? instead of crowing about McCain’s brilliant debate performance.

Bring on Palin! Come on, Caribou Barbie—pull McCain’s nuts out of the fire again!

By ce

September 29, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Regarding racisim, McCain voted against Martin Luther King holiday. Apparently, he did not emphathized or sympthasize with minority struggles. McCain born and raised in an era which support segregation. Also, he was born and raised in a family that mingle exclusively with the powerful. McCain called Obama and elite. How ironic, a person born of priviledge, making his way through life by family connections/influences. He owes favor and it is not to the working class or the poor. As Bush said: Fool me once shame on me. Fool me a second time, Uhm, fool me..can’t fool me a second time.

By BS Aplenty

September 29, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

Hillbilly Ragdoll

You, so graciously, state:

Oh, and BS Aplenty, your charges of “racism” as applied to TUCC don’t pass the smell test. (Well, they’re not YOURS of course, they’re probably copy-pasted from some tiny-d!cked blogger’s site.)

Again, as I’ve said before, it’s ALL ME - all the time. I got out of the ‘cut-n-paste’ business about 40 years ago when I left nursery school. You might pass that advice to some of your Dem friends who post here. Originality matters, Clem.

Now, about my manhood…

By getalife

September 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

Boner is crying on the floor again. He doubts it will pass and is playing the fear card.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

Dear Ray,

I don’t shoot craps. My guess is “Putin-Head” is just a real”Puddin-Head”.

Swami,

As an engine, I believe in giving the boxcars a fighting chance with early childhood education. That is the key to the welfare and poverty cycle.

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

T: Obama is stating the obvious. When you look at hime do you see a “half white man” or a “black man”? If he looked more like his mother, “white” would he be more palatable to America? If he looked like his mother, and kept his current wife, would that ride? If he still looks the same as now, but had a white wife; would that help him to be accepted more? It is what it is.

I mean, what does a person have to do to be accepted in your eyes? Hallie Berry has a white mother, but she consides herself black because that’s what others consider her. Mariah Carey has a “black” father, but looks white, but considers herself a Black woman because of her struggles in life. So, who’s right or wrong? Does melanin mean more than substance?

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

nm, no Obama said this is the mqan thast formed my political views. I asked you to show me how they were not racist comments a challenge I supposes you were unable to overcome.

I never said society did not define him. However he also defined himself as I earlier stated. It does not boost your argument for him to be president if he lets society define him as this or that.

Please explain how David Dukes is not an example. Just saying it does not make it true, how are they not alike? One is a racist bigot against black people teh other is a racist bigot agaisnt white people.

By Paul

September 29, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

Bosch

[[So, if the criminal executives ALREADY have a contract in place, it will still stand. This is horsesh!t.]]

Yeah, but isn’t it nice to know those companies are getting something for all those campaign contributions?

getalife

You’re right - seems like newbies are coming out of the woodwork. Nice.

DebbieDoRight

I was considering how things were going with the Army and your husband but did not want to intrude. Thanks for the fill-in. If only our politicians could learn the art of compromise, too.

By mike hussein smith

September 29, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

tcoach, you seem to think that the world is all black and all white, without shades of gray. Just because one person might not be charged with infanticide doesn’t mean folks are free to go around kicking pregnant women in the stomach. A sane person would know this.

Hillbilly Ragger, you are the poet of politics.

Management, you poison Jay’s blog every morning by being first out of the gate. Learn to sleep in. I know it would improve my attitude.

By Danny the red

September 29, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

“The candidate then seems easy enough to parse…”

You mean the text you’re citing is easy to parse, don’t you? Parsing is a textual term. Besides, there is no evidence whatsoever that Obama has absorbed any of Cone’s theology into his actual views. He’s by all indications about as conciliatory and non-radical as can be.

Cone’s assertion is akin to Malcolm X’s statement that “the white man is evil”.

As far as I know, Obama won’t have any of it.

By Can't take it

September 29, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this

I know this was a while back in the comments, but please don’t insult Wil E. Coyote and Bugs Bunny that way—they are both so much smarter than McSame/Caribou Barbie. If we must use cartoon characters, my vote is McSame is Yosemite Sam—going off on people at the drop of the hat and always carrying his guns. For Caribou Barbie, not sure…any other suggestions?

By Bosch

September 29, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this

Paul,

ARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!! Okay, I feel better.

Jay has a new thread and it’s about the IRS/church issue.

You know how I love religion and politics!

By GOP"S got to go

September 29, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

Indeed that was an insult to Bugs, he was the only lip stick wearing, cross dressing bunny I could come up with on the fly.

Wiley E was no Einstein though. He fell for the Road Runners crap everytime, and he only fell when he actually looked down and saw there was nothing under him anymore. If he would only learn not to look he might be OK.

By Paul

September 29, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this

Bosch 1:26

gotta get some work done before the trip….

but the DVR’s set for Terminator so I’m okay. Gotta keep the priorities…

By Chris Salzmann

September 29, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

Here’s a comment by conservative commentator George Will, certainly no Obama fan:

GW: I think Barack Obama came out and looked comfortable and as though he belonged there. So, in a sense, the structure of the debate, indeed, the fact of the debate had to give a mild leg up to Barack Obama.

Joe Scarbarough from his Morning Joe program said that McCain came across as angry or as some of his viewers put it: An angry uncle/grandfather. Some republicans supporters of Joe wrote in to mention that they thought McCain was condescending and rude who couldn’t even look at Barack Obama.

I guess McCain will realize al’a Al Gore that he was “too hot” in this debate; look out for him to act “friendly” in the second debate and maybe hit his stride just right in the third debate.

I think Obama won this debate by keeping an even keel. He lived up to his “No Drama Obama” reputation. I’d rather have that in the White House than “Drama Queen” McCain and “Clueless Barbie” Palin. How anyone with any education or sense of worldliness could admire Palin is still a mystery to me. What was it: 5 Universities and 6 years to get her BA in sports journalism??? As Joe Scarborough said: “She’s out of her depth” or as another conservative columnist from the National Review put it: If BS were currency, Sarah Palin could bail out Wall Street on her own. LOL

By nm

September 29, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this

On Senator Obama and David Dukes: J. Wright became the pastor of Trinity during the 60s.During that time the congregation was predominatetly white. He and other community activists worked fought for racial equality, including the founding of interracial churches.Again, Trinity was founded as interracial, but after 20 years the whites moved to the burds of Chicago. Not to be long winded: David Dukes: He would not attend or support an interracial church, marriage, or co-mingling or whites and blacks whatsoever. Get it?

By hotlanta

September 29, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

We have Russia in Venezula is anyone watching.

By hotlanta

September 29, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

We have Russia in Venezula is anyone watching.

By Chris

September 29, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

It’s funny how so many people don’t want McCain as President, but they want someone that has extreme poor judgement, no experience, no clue to foreign policy, and really doesn’t have a straight answer to anything that wasn’t written for him by his “advisors”. Obama lost the debate hands down! Jini - McCain didn’t need to have eye contact with Obama because he was talking to the American people, not some far left wing jackas*. Marta - people around the world didn’t care for Americans for many years before Bush, so shutup! McCain’s age has nothing to do with anything. Remember he is only a few years behind your worthless VP candidate. Obama showed no class, just like he is when he didn’t say Senator to McCain. McCain should say Osama to Obama in the next Debate. Polls mean absolutely nothing just like they have in almost every election ever held. I haven’t met one person that has ever been polled and every single person I know is Republican. That says a lot. All these polls were probably taken in the ghetto where all the blacks live. Imagine that. McCain will win in November, so you better get used to it. What’s the difference between Obama and Osama? BS! :) Damn, if Osama’s wife isn’t the ugliest man I’ve ever seen. She’s a beast! Uhg! Osama should just concede, so that we don’t have to waist time making sure Obama doesn’t ruin this country anymore than what the democrats plan on doing, if they are ever elected in the white house again. McCain the only choice! Georgia is also a Republican state, so go vote somewhere else where it might help your loser candidate. You liberal tree huggers are a trip.

By nm

September 29, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

Follow up on Obama/Dukes: J. Wright talked about the disparity regarding minority in relations to health care, housing, and legal justices. Often times when a black man speaks out, he appears harsh or angry. WAIT UP, PEOPLE. WE DO NOT LIVE IN A COLOR BLIND SOCIETY. Regarding race relations, there has been some improvement, but we are not there. Due to the David Dukes who believes in genetic inferiorty and the McCains who are out of touch with the masses.

By nm

September 29, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

Follow up on Obama/Dukes: J. Wright talked about the disparity regarding minority in relations to health care, housing, and legal justices. Often times when a black man speaks out, he appears harsh or angry. WAIT UP, PEOPLE. WE DO NOT LIVE IN A COLOR BLIND SOCIETY. Regarding race relations, there has been some improvement, but we are not there. Due to the David Dukes who believes in genetic inferiorty and the McCains who are out of touch with the masses.

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

Ah Ray,

Another of your constitutes, Chris, is on board.

By Whatthe...

September 29, 2008 2:12 PM | Link to this

This is no need to be offended by the harsh and ignorant remarks made regarding Obama and his wife. Have you noticed that people with limited intelligent restort to cursing or insults when upset. That is because they have little opinions, most of which are on their bumper stickers. Their communications skills are limited so they have to make the loudest noise… You know what they say about empty wagons.

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Debbie I would shout from the roof tops I was a racist if I went to David Allen Coe concerts for over 20 years yes I would. However I did not even know who he was until the car ride to the concert. (free tickets) However that was and is still my only appearance to any of his concerts. I can promise you I would not have offered the man to be my spirtual advisor after even one of the comments made by Coe or his band that night.
I do not consider hearing or even being associated with those that choose to spit racially poisoning rhetoric. It shows clear signs that you agree with the racist ideas though when you continue to have a 20+ year relationship and even have them as spirtual advisors, or have them serve over your children’s baptismal, or better have them to marry you and your wife. Obama is a racist or atleast Obama has racist feelings

By BJ

September 29, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

DO ANY OF YOU REMEMBER THAT THE IRAQ WAR WAS STARTED ON A BOLD FACED LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE? PEOPLE HAVE LOST THEIR SON’S AND DAUGHTER’S WITH THOUSAND MORE MAIMED FOR LIFE BECAUSE OF A LIE. THERE WERE NEVER ANY WMD’S EVER IN IRAQ AND MCCAIN KNEW THIS AND IF HE DIDN’T WHY PUSH WITH BUSH FOR THE INITIAL ATTACK? NOW YOU SAME PEOPLE WANT TO PUT HIM IN OFFICE? DUH??? WHEN THE REPUBLICANS TOOK CHARGE THIS COUNTRY WAS IN A SURPLUS NOW WE ARE MORE THAN A TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT. IN 8 YEARS THAT ADMINISTRATION ALONG WITH MCCAIN HAVE TURNED THIS COUNTRY ON ITS EAR. WITH UNEMPLOYMENT THE HIGHEST IT’S BEEN IN YEARS. BIG CORPORATE EXECS ARE TAKING HOME MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN BONUSES WHILE THE WORKING AND EVEN UPPER MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES ARE LOSING THEIR JOBS AND HOMES. NOW WE HAVE TO BAIL OUT THESE CORPORATIONS SO THAT THE RICH CAN KEEP GETTING RICHER AND THE POOR CAN STAY POOR. NO ONE HAS REALLY EXPLAINED ANYTHING TO US AND THIS IS ALL UNDER THE WATCH OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. I AM NOT POOR BY ANY MEANS BUT I AM NOT CONSIDERED RICH EITHER. I AM A MIDDLE AGED FEMALE THAT HAS WORKED ALL OF HER LIFE AND NOW MY INVESTMENTS ARE GOING OUT THE WINDOW. MCCAIN IS TOO OLD TO RUN THIS COUNTRY. PALIN DOES NOT HAVE THE FIRST CLUE ON HOW TO RUN THE COUNTRY. THIS COUNTRY NEEDS FRESH BLOOD TO CONTINUE TO FLOW. OBAMA IS HALF WHITE SO WHY ARE SO MANY PEOPLE SEEING HIM AS JUST A BLACK MAN. I THOUGHT TIGER WOODS CLEARED THAT UP. I WOULD VOTE FOR A DONKEY BEFORE I WOULD MCCAIN. THE UNITED STATES NEEDS AN ARTICULATE YOUNG PERSON WITH NEW IDEAS TO STEP FORWARD AND SHOW US IN THE LIGHT THAT USED TO SHINE WHEN THE WORDS AMERICA WERE SAID. WE ARE NOW FROWNED UPON IN THE WORLD WE ARE A JOKE WITH AN IDIOT FOR A PRESIDENT. WE NEED SOMETHING NEW AND IT JUST HAPPENS TO BE BARACK OBAMA.

By jv

September 29, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

Barak Hussein Obama came off as hostile, rude, and next to John McCain, totally unexp;erienced and unprepared. That anyone could have seen it differently is simply amazing to me

By tcoach

September 29, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

Mike what is the difference exactly between kicking a woman in the stomach and that same woman having a fetus sucked through a vacum into little pieces. They are charging her with homicide for killing the baby. The victim who was kicked is not physically harmed frrom the kick. It is a homicide because the fetus died. So how is that different, the fetus was only 19 weeks much below the level of abortions now. NM good you answered.
My point was not about other issues though. Are both men ethnocentric to a point of racism. Both men put another race down to elevate thier own race. Many of teh whites you talked about moving to the burbs said they were pushed out as well. Debbie I did not get your accepted part. I accept Obama the same way I do the country hick bigot and the same way as I do the executive race supressor. I accept him as he is and for what he has done. I also accept that he is a racist who has not been called on it only because of the color of his skin. You have tried to make this an issue of me being a racist. I know I am not a racist nor do I judge people that way, but I need not or cannot prove that to you. If you knew me you would agree, don’t care if you don’t agree. That is a crafty way to shift the focus. It is easy to accuse me of racism to defend Obama’s racist views. That is the problem there will never be equality and understanding until everyone is on an equal playing field for the good and the bad.
Just replace the word white with black in some of Rev. Wright’s sermons. If you do that and you make Obama look more like his mother’s side of teh family and I think yours and teh reaction of many others would be different. That is a question only you can answer to yourself though. You must ask yourself is it OK for a black person to be racist. If you answer yes then Obama is the candidate for you. If you think racism is wrong then vote for someone else, because if you think racism is wrong you do need to know that EVERY issue will be looked at through bigotry coated glasses.

By JackC

September 29, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this

The man’s name is David Duke, not David Dukes.

Also while we’re at it…

moot =/= mute. their =/= they’re =/= there. here =/= hear.

:)

By Rufus

September 29, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

Jay, how do you sleep at night knowing that you’te taking the AJC’s money for coming up with such inane tripe?

By Rufus

September 29, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Jay, how do you sleep at night knowing that you’re taking the AJC’s money for coming up with such inane tripe?

By halfandhalf

September 29, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this

I want to clarify something with those of you that want to say that Obama is 1/2 white and 1/2 black and that he is only claiming his black heritage. I too am biracial (My mother is black and my father is white). Growing up I was deemed as black even though I have white genes as well. Whites have always seen a person of mixed heritage as black. It has been easier for me to state that I am black because that is how society views me. Maybe this is what BO has experienced.

BTW: ESR - you need help - to call children “idiotic thug offspring” is unbelievable and ignorant. It is my prayer that you don’t have any because your education with or without accreditation fell on a mute brain.

Here is one for you GOP: Extremely (E) Stupid (S) Rhetoric (R) (That is all ESR has spewed)

By Rufus

September 29, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this

Jay, how do you sleep at night knowing that you’re taking the AJC’s money for coming up with such tripe?

By nm

September 29, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

The issue is not Duke or Dukes.. Geez

By nm

September 29, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

The issue is not Duke or Dukes.. Geez

By DebbieDoRight

September 29, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

by tcoach: Debbie I did not get your accepted part. I accept Obama the same way I do the country hick bigot and the same way as I do the executive race supressor. I accept him as he is and for what he has done.

WHAT has he done? WHAT comments has he made that can be attributed to racism. I’ll save you some time and answer for you: NONE. Face it, you want to see racism from Obama, it doesn’t matter if he stood up on Mt Carmel and said loudly and emphatically, “I’m ALSO WHITE”, you would hear “I’m black and destest whites”, because that’s what you WANT to hear. I’ve been asking you for PROOF all day today, AND in the past. But you fail to give me PROOF of where Obama is a racist, has said racially divisive things, thinks as a racist, etc. Not once have you given me proof. What you have given is rhetoric, YOUR opinion and outright LIES.

I mean, honestly tcoach, tell the truth, you weren’t going to vote for the man ANYWAY; so what do you honestly care if he’s racist or not? His melanin was going to stop you. Stop deceiving yourself — admit it. You can’t and WON’T find any supporting documentation for the outrageous claims that you’ve made because if you even look and find out that what you said was WRONG you’d have to finally come to terms with your own ignorant views.

People like you are quick go say: “I’d vote for Colin Powell if he’d ran”, but, as you know, that’s just another lie.

I also accept that he is a racist who has not been called on it only because of the color of his skin.

Oh PLEASE, can’t you at least change the record? At least flip it over to the “B” side and play the “I’m a great american because I believe everything anyone says negative about Obama”.

You have tried to make this an issue of me being a racist. I know I am not a racist nor do I judge people that way, but I need not or cannot prove that to you.

The only proof I’ve asked from you is to PROVE the things you said against Obama — I’m still waiting on that.

If you knew me you would agree, don’t care if you don’t agree. That is a crafty way to shift the focus.

HUH?!!? The focus should be on ISSUES that concern america!! Not rather Obama is racist! As i’ve pointed out earlier REAGAN was racist!! Where’s your moral outrage now?

It is easy to accuse me of racism to defend Obama’s racist views. That is the problem there will never be equality and understanding until everyone is on an equal playing field for the good and the bad.

WTF are you talking about Willis?

Just replace the word white with black in some of Rev. Wright’s sermons.

If you could give me the FULL CONTEXT of his sermons and not the soundbites people like you like to play over and over and over so that the weak minded gullible unwashed masses can feel secure, than I’d read them and/or listen to them. The full context — not just the soundbites.

If you do that and you make Obama look more like his mother’s side of teh family and I think yours and teh reaction of many others would be different.

Are you insane?

That is a question only you can answer to yourself though. You must ask yourself is it OK for a black person to be racist.

Huh? What the hell does that have to do with the ISSUES CONCERNING AMERICA NOW? I’d vote for Strom Thurmond if he had a solid plan to get the U.S. out of this mess!

If you answer yes then Obama is the candidate for you. If you think racism is wrong then vote for someone else, because if you think racism is wrong you do need to know that EVERY issue will be looked at through bigotry coated glasses.

Bigotry coated glasses? You mean the way YOU look at everything. You know I expected this type of backlash from people of your ilk. The first anything that’s not white or male was going to catch hell for breaking out of the norm.

RACISM, RACISM, RACISM. MY GOD!! What about the unemployment rate? What about our economy, healthcare, our 401K’s, Jobs going overseas in DROVES? What about the ISSUES?

It’s the economy stupid. DUH!

By nm

September 29, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this

Thanks Debbie,as tcoach does not have linear thought processes. I was like..What the…? I gave him facts and he came back with a bias arguemnt that he could not rationalize. He/she is all yours.

By BJ

September 29, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

WELL CHRIS TALKING ABOUT EXPERIENCE, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME MCCAIN WAS PRESIDENT? MAYBE YOU JUST DON’T WANT TO SEE WHAT HORRIBLE SHAPE THIS COUNTRY IS IN AND THE FACT THAT ALL ACROSS THE NORTH THEY HAVE GAS WHILE WE NONE. I DON’T RECALL THERE BEING SUCH ISSUES DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. RA!RA!RA!FOR THE REPUBLICAN STATE OF GEORGIA. HOW DID OBAMA’S WIFE’S LOOKS GET INTO IT. IF YOU REALLY THOUGHT MCCAIN WON THE DEBATE WHY THE NAME CALLING? BESIDES BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER AND I AM SURE SOMEONE PROBABLY LOVES YOU. IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH HOW PEOPLE LOOK YOU WILL HAVE TO TAKE THAT UP WITH GOD. HE’S THE ARTIST. MEANWHILE TRY TO KEEP UP AND STICK TO THE FACTS.

By cjn

September 29, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

MCWAR wouldn’t know tactfulness and negotiation if it came up and bit him in the backside! He is an arrogant, racist, ego maniac WAR MONGER who cares to know nothing about Americans or the rest of the world because if he did, he might have to do something right!!!!

By Willie

September 29, 2008 4:21 PM | Link to this

Let us start with the roots…we can learn a lot about a person from his past right….http://patdollard.com/2008/09/pastor-manning-obama-his-bag-o-trash-mama- hypocrisy-toward-bristol-palin/

By nm

September 29, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

Sounds dumb, so I want take the bait and look it up.

By GaNative

September 29, 2008 4:32 PM | Link to this

McCain’s a liar and a cheat. He lied to his first wife about Cindy and he dumped her for Cindy. Now if a man will lie to his wife who he knows and sleeps with every night, do you think he’d have a problem lying to you? This man chases the Lap Pie and is addicted to it more than Bill Clinton. At least Clinton kept his wife. This old geezer with the little stubby arms cannot lead this country. He’s living in the past evident of his repeated references to Dead Presidents and Dead Army Generals.

By cjn

September 29, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this

Thanks to the GOP stalling, you mean, the bill has less regulation and a higher cap for bonuses and parachutes! Like the GOP, a hand for the rich helping the richer!!

By GOPs got to go

September 29, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Changing the subject slightly here, I am watching Oprah right now.

It is a shocking look at middle America’s heroin addiction. And guess what ESR, Chris, Management and the rest of you closet racists, THEY ARE ALL WHITE PEOPLE.

White people that had good jobs, go to church, had families and yet they are now junkies and theives to supply their addiction

They do not look like your basic “thugs” to me Chris. Problem people come in all colors, and some of them look just like you and your kids.

By mkoe

September 29, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

I saw a lot of what others saw about John McCain. I mean hey we’re talking about concerns for our country. Lets all work together,Democrats and Republicans. It sure didn’t shine through John McCains behavor. Plus his misstatement about how Henry Kissinger felt about talking to foreign leaders that we disagree with. Kissinger said without doubt talk first. Mr. McCain needs to know what he is talking about before he actually talks.

By Rufus

September 29, 2008 6:37 PM | Link to this

BJ, you need to do a bit of research before you launch into a tirade like that. You might have a brain hernia. If you just dig a little, you’ll find that the big players in the Clinton administration as well as numerous Democrat representatives and senators were convinced without a doubt that Saddam had WMD and that he was prepared to use them. Those folks didn’t have the gumption to challenge him with anything but “just words, just speeches.” And what about that several hundred thousand pounds of “yellow cake” that was recently shipped out of Iraq to Canada? Do you think that “yellow cake” is used by cooks to bake muffins? If you do just a little more research, you’ll also find that the current “crisis” has its roots back in the ’90s when our government decided that the “American Dream” was not something to be EARNED but something to be HANDED OUT like candy at a Halloween, and most of the goodies were directed at the very people who couldn’t handle them responsibly. Most reasonable people know that they can’t handle a $300,000 home, a Cadillac Escalade, and two 54-inch flat panel TVs on $40,000/year, but our government in the name of political correctness determined that they shouldn’t have to feel “less worthy” than those of us who’ve busted our butts every day to have the privilege to attain the American Dream. That’s right BJ, it’s a privilege not a right. The only guarantees in life are death and taxes to borrow from a noted author. Whose fault is it? You seem to be focused on the Bush administration, but I believe that’s because you’re operating only on emotion and haven’t really done your homework. The problem, my friend, is primarily the fault of 535 public servants on Capitol Hill who are interested in turning this country into a completely socialist nation and in lining their pockets with the outrageous salaries they vote for themselves at our expense and the contributions of all those special interests they’ve promised to assist. They’re willing to sacrifice anything to achieve those goals, even the freedoms we’ve been guaranteed in our Constitution. BJ, going off half-cocked can result in you shooting your own foot off. Be careful. You might make us think poorly of your reasoning abilities.

By STEPHEN

September 29, 2008 6:50 PM | Link to this

What is amazing to me is all those who want to make abortion an issue while at the same time welcoming the Bush/McCain decision to bomb innocent women and children in another country and justify it as just being a casualty of war.

Would you want your wife or daughter to have to carry a baby to term if she was raped..e.g, reliving it on a daily basis for 9 months? Or would you want her to have the option to make a choice. I am not a proponent of abortion, but as a MALE I feel that a women should have the right to choose.

McCain (way too old) + Palin (that voice) + the Religious Right = Scary. If elected, they will have the ability to sway the make-up of the Supreme Court and that alone will impact us all for more than 4 to 8 years of any presidential administration’s term. There is a lot more at stake than most people realize.

By InsideQuestions

September 29, 2008 6:54 PM | Link to this

McCain is a hopeless egotist, who is also rude and controlling. Maybe because his ‘Pa’, and ‘Grandpa’ were “decorated” military men, he believes he should be three times as military minded. He is dangerous, no doubt about it: another blockhead.

I don’t know if Barak will be a great President, and certainly he will inherit really historically tough situations in many different areas, but Obama is, at the very least, a scholar and a gentleman. McCain cannot claim even these two assets.

By McCain choosing Palin, for instance, he proved he cares more about winning an election through trickery, than he does about the American people and this country. Considering his age, you would think even with a HALF A BRAIN, McCain would have cared enough to choose the BEST qualified VP he could. Instead, his greed for political power, showed this man’s mediocrity for decision making, and lack of ability to lead.

What did Ben Franklin say?: “Tis hard for an empty bag to stand upright”.

By InsideQuestions

September 29, 2008 7:11 PM | Link to this

STEPHEN - You made me laugh out loud with the comment you made about Palin’s voice! Yes! You’re not the only one who has noticed how screechy it sounds, and at the same time, monotone. I want you to cheer up about Palin and the rednecks. Soon they will be back to Mayberry in Alaska, and we will hear dribs and drabs in the news about the 17 year old’s new baby. Don’t you like the way they announced “right away”, the daughter and her dumbstruck boyfriend are “getting married”? How proper!

Barak Obama will win the election by a good margin. Relax. The longer the real McCain is exposed, the more votes he loses.

By GaNative

September 29, 2008 7:46 PM | Link to this

Rufus, what’s happening now is not all about bad loans made to minorities. I knoq plenty of white folks who were hard workers, but they lost their job, then lost their home. Some of them had owned the home for many years and no bad loan was involved, just a lack of income and investments that headed south plummeting to nearly nothing. This whole problem is because the Middle Class which Obama repeatedly mentioned is not working because corporations have opted to hire non citizens in their place. Until they wake up and change it, the economy will continue to fall. More banks, more investment firms, more auto dealorships, more you name it. It all trickles down for real when the people who make the deposits, make the investments and buy the automobiles are not working. McCains plan of tax cuts for the rich is ludicrous. Republicans say that the middle class would feel the cuts because of the trickle down effect. Well under the cuts Bush instituted, nothing but SHID trickled down to the average American worker. As this economy continues to erode, more and more white people are going to come to their senses and help elect Obama if they really love America. What it boils down to is do you want God to Bless America or God to Damn America?

By Frederick Douglass

September 29, 2008 11:29 PM | Link to this

McCain lied about the two leters Eisenhower wrote, but I guess when you dump your wife that’s waited on you for 5 1/2 years, what’s a little lie among 30,000,000 TV viewers?

By wbmy zpogq

November 13, 2008 7:30 AM | Link to this

wdtr vgjicm widehpxbu sdqmkgfy cbzen bqdjenya xlonpwqb

By wbmy zpogq

November 13, 2008 7:30 AM | Link to this

wdtr vgjicm widehpxbu sdqmkgfy cbzen bqdjenya xlonpwqb

By wbmy zpogq

November 13, 2008 7:32 AM | Link to this

wdtr vgjicm widehpxbu sdqmkgfy cbzen bqdjenya xlonpwqb

Commenting is open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. M-F

Post a comment



Remember me?

You may use the following formatting:
Bold: **this text will be bolded** = this text will be bolded
Italic: *this text will be italic* = this text will be italic
Link: [text to be linked](http://www.ajc.com) = text to be linked



There will be a delay of up to 5 minutes before your comment appears.


*HTML not allowed in comments. Your e-mail address is required.

 

Take a break

Do Good Locally » Find nonprofit causes near you

Find more causes » List your nonprofit

Kudzu Services » Find the right people for the job