Viewing details of messages, sorted by time of last reply
It Was Me !
For those who missed it , It was me that made to offending post by calling another memeber a psuedo-name . A varation , if you will , of her screen name . I see this person as nothing but a media whore for "O" and blind of the facts . My original post was not nasty and neither is this one . This person will not accept any opinions or respect anyones opinions other than those who side with her . I have tried to respond intelligently and she will not give an intelligent response when I do so .
Hillary is still out there....
Notice she "suspended" her campaign, she did not end it. No delegates asked to support Obama yet. She's still up there
circling....waiting.
She may be the smartest politician in this whole election cycle. And she may be president.
circling....waiting.
She may be the smartest politician in this whole election cycle. And she may be president.
Can We Agree On This ?
In your life you hae met people you didn't like right off . You have met some you liked right away . Then there are those who had to prove themselves before you warmed up to them . Is that right ? It is for me anyway .
Obama was one who had to prove himself . He kept shooting himself in the foot over and over again . I finally took the position that I didn't like him . There is nothing the man can do at this point to win me over . His explanations weren't enough for me when he had the chance . His wife , as are all spouses , is a liability .
I would like to point out that I was a Perot Supporter at one time . I honestly felt he could have been elected at one time had he asked Jesse Jackson to run as Vice President with him . I was a lot less informed at that time . I didn't know Jesse was a convicted felon .
Obama was one who had to prove himself . He kept shooting himself in the foot over and over again . I finally took the position that I didn't like him . There is nothing the man can do at this point to win me over . His explanations weren't enough for me when he had the chance . His wife , as are all spouses , is a liability .
I would like to point out that I was a Perot Supporter at one time . I honestly felt he could have been elected at one time had he asked Jesse Jackson to run as Vice President with him . I was a lot less informed at that time . I didn't know Jesse was a convicted felon .
Clinton supporters not buying it...
Jul 6 - The Economic Times
Clinton's supporters not yet reconciled to vote for Obama
WASHINGTON: In an ominous sign for Democratic nominee Barack Obama's campaign, a new survey has found that Hillary Clinton's supporters may not cast their ballot for the African American candidate in the November presidential election.
A week after Clinton made a public show of unity with Obama after being trounced in a racially devisive contest for the party ticket, the survey suggests supporters of the New York senator are increasingly less likely to follow her lead.
A growing number of Clinton supporters say they may stay home in November instead of casting their ballot for Obama, who hopes to be the first black-American president, a clear sign the party has yet to coalesce around the Illinois senator four weeks after the most prolonged, bitter primary race in modern American history came to a close.
The number of Clinton supporters who plan to defect to John McCain's camp is down from one month ago, but in what could be an ominous sign for Obama as he seeks to unify the party, a growing number of them say they may not vote at all, according to a new survey from CNN and the Opinion Research Corporation.
In a CNN/ORC survey conducted in early June, entirely before the New York senator officially ended her White House bid, 22 per cent of Clinton supporters said they would not vote at all if Obama was the party's nominee.
Now close to a third say they will stay home. In all, only 54 per cent of Clinton backers say they plan on voting for Obama.
(I posted this to another group but what the hey..)
Clinton's supporters not yet reconciled to vote for Obama
WASHINGTON: In an ominous sign for Democratic nominee Barack Obama's campaign, a new survey has found that Hillary Clinton's supporters may not cast their ballot for the African American candidate in the November presidential election.
A week after Clinton made a public show of unity with Obama after being trounced in a racially devisive contest for the party ticket, the survey suggests supporters of the New York senator are increasingly less likely to follow her lead.
A growing number of Clinton supporters say they may stay home in November instead of casting their ballot for Obama, who hopes to be the first black-American president, a clear sign the party has yet to coalesce around the Illinois senator four weeks after the most prolonged, bitter primary race in modern American history came to a close.
The number of Clinton supporters who plan to defect to John McCain's camp is down from one month ago, but in what could be an ominous sign for Obama as he seeks to unify the party, a growing number of them say they may not vote at all, according to a new survey from CNN and the Opinion Research Corporation.
In a CNN/ORC survey conducted in early June, entirely before the New York senator officially ended her White House bid, 22 per cent of Clinton supporters said they would not vote at all if Obama was the party's nominee.
Now close to a third say they will stay home. In all, only 54 per cent of Clinton backers say they plan on voting for Obama.
(I posted this to another group but what the hey..)
Trading Away America: Time For a Trade Policy
That Works for Main Street, Not Just Wall Street
THE FACTS
America has lost millions of jobs due to trade policies designed for multinationals, not for the nation. Every year, about 400,000 American jobs are lost because of our foreign trade policy—and that number takes into account employment created by increased exports [Dean Baker, The American Prospect; Associated Press]. The manufacturing sector has been hit the hardest, with 3.4 million jobs—one out of every five manufacturing jobs—shipped overseas over the past seven years. Under current policies, as many as 40 million more jobs will be at risk over the next 10 to 20 years [Associated Press].
America's trade deficit has nearly doubled during the Bush presidency. Last year's trade deficit was $711 billion compared to $365 billion in 2001 [U.S. Census Bureau]. In 2007, the trade deficit with China alone hit a record $256 billion [U.S. Census Bureau]. Almost half of our trade deficit—$327 billion—is attributable to oil imports [Petroleum Intelligence Weekly]. To finance this debt, we must either borrow from countries like China or sell off American assets at the rate of $2 billion every single day.
full article view link
THE FACTS
America has lost millions of jobs due to trade policies designed for multinationals, not for the nation. Every year, about 400,000 American jobs are lost because of our foreign trade policy—and that number takes into account employment created by increased exports [Dean Baker, The American Prospect; Associated Press]. The manufacturing sector has been hit the hardest, with 3.4 million jobs—one out of every five manufacturing jobs—shipped overseas over the past seven years. Under current policies, as many as 40 million more jobs will be at risk over the next 10 to 20 years [Associated Press].
America's trade deficit has nearly doubled during the Bush presidency. Last year's trade deficit was $711 billion compared to $365 billion in 2001 [U.S. Census Bureau]. In 2007, the trade deficit with China alone hit a record $256 billion [U.S. Census Bureau]. Almost half of our trade deficit—$327 billion—is attributable to oil imports [Petroleum Intelligence Weekly]. To finance this debt, we must either borrow from countries like China or sell off American assets at the rate of $2 billion every single day.
full article view link
Logical Fallacies
Meaning arguments that are not rational.
like many on political forums.
The rest in reply
like many on political forums.
The rest in reply
Why I am leaning towards Obama
This is just my personal take. It's not comprehensive, but it covers most of the basics that matter to me and a few smaller points. Some of you will have seen this before on another group, but there was a request here in “Politics for Any and All” (love that name!) to see something here that detailed why some of us like Obama. It's my pleasure to reply. See first reply for my list.
'We' are not a minstrel show!
Never thought I would have to say this, but, language from the era of Jim Crow and the clsn snd segregation should never see the light of day on this posting page! Because we are such an active group, with many postings coming in every day, the offensively posted title has long been pushed off our site, but please remember that we seek real conversation--with civility. We are not here for 'shock' value or to embarrass or ridicule public figures or other group members ( and especially with crude or vulgar language from the dark side of American' history. Our group has been overwhelmingly successaful at keeping to the true spirit of PFAAA, but the 1% of our failures will not be allowed to continue without rebuke !
If the Media Weren't So Mesmerized By McCain
Edward Humes, SPECIAL TO LOS ANGELES TIMES
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
More than a few people have been puzzled by Sen. John McCain's dogged opposition to the updated GI Bill of Rights. The dissonance between McCain's military-man image and his actions on this issue have introduced a jarring note to his presidential aspirations — and have highlighted the shoddy treatment many Iraq war veterans have received.
Why would a Vietnam War veteran and former prisoner of war, a man who is personally acquainted with the difficulties vets can face in returning to civilian life, join President Bush in opposing a popular bipartisan bill to support the troops? Isn't fixing the education benefit in the bill — one that has shortchanged far too many veterans for years — a political no-brainer in an election year? The 75 senators who recently voted for it certainly thought so. Over the Memorial Day weekend, Sen. Barack Obama expressed astonishment at McCain's opposition; the two have been feuding about it since. The media and pundits seem perplexed, suggesting: That's not the McCain we know.
Which is true: It is the McCain they don't know. If the media weren't so mesmerized by the McCain image and instead got to know the McCain record, they would realize that there is nothing surprising or inconsistent about his position on the GI Bill. For years he has opposed legislation that veterans and their advocates deem vital. In doing so, he is simply being true to the contemporary conservative wing of the GOP in opposing social programs and benefits for individuals, even if those individuals happen to be veterans. The only surprise is that anyone finds this surprising. This time, though, McCain is swimming against the tide of history. The original GI Bill — signed into law in 1944 — was one of the most important laws ever adopted by Congress. It transformed the nation after World War II with generous college benefits, stipends, subsidized mortgages, business loans and job training and placement.
Veterans got free rides to any college that would accept them. Tuition, books, housing and living expenses were all covered, giving rise to a new generation of scientists, inventors, teachers, doctors, civic leaders and artists. Low-interest, no-money-down home loans backed by the government made it less expensive to buy than to rent. The GI Bill reinvented the American dream. Former U.S. senators and presidential candidates Bob Dole and George McGovern went to school on the GI Bill. So did Clint Eastwood and Paul Newman. So did 14 Nobel Prize winners. So did 7 million other World War II veterans.
continued on 1st reply
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
More than a few people have been puzzled by Sen. John McCain's dogged opposition to the updated GI Bill of Rights. The dissonance between McCain's military-man image and his actions on this issue have introduced a jarring note to his presidential aspirations — and have highlighted the shoddy treatment many Iraq war veterans have received.
Why would a Vietnam War veteran and former prisoner of war, a man who is personally acquainted with the difficulties vets can face in returning to civilian life, join President Bush in opposing a popular bipartisan bill to support the troops? Isn't fixing the education benefit in the bill — one that has shortchanged far too many veterans for years — a political no-brainer in an election year? The 75 senators who recently voted for it certainly thought so. Over the Memorial Day weekend, Sen. Barack Obama expressed astonishment at McCain's opposition; the two have been feuding about it since. The media and pundits seem perplexed, suggesting: That's not the McCain we know.
Which is true: It is the McCain they don't know. If the media weren't so mesmerized by the McCain image and instead got to know the McCain record, they would realize that there is nothing surprising or inconsistent about his position on the GI Bill. For years he has opposed legislation that veterans and their advocates deem vital. In doing so, he is simply being true to the contemporary conservative wing of the GOP in opposing social programs and benefits for individuals, even if those individuals happen to be veterans. The only surprise is that anyone finds this surprising. This time, though, McCain is swimming against the tide of history. The original GI Bill — signed into law in 1944 — was one of the most important laws ever adopted by Congress. It transformed the nation after World War II with generous college benefits, stipends, subsidized mortgages, business loans and job training and placement.
Veterans got free rides to any college that would accept them. Tuition, books, housing and living expenses were all covered, giving rise to a new generation of scientists, inventors, teachers, doctors, civic leaders and artists. Low-interest, no-money-down home loans backed by the government made it less expensive to buy than to rent. The GI Bill reinvented the American dream. Former U.S. senators and presidential candidates Bob Dole and George McGovern went to school on the GI Bill. So did Clint Eastwood and Paul Newman. So did 14 Nobel Prize winners. So did 7 million other World War II veterans.
continued on 1st reply
