An Apostle of Alaska

SEA Observer said....
How many dems on this blog work two jobs or put in 60+ hrs/wk????
Iron Horse said....
Well, my sister and brother as well as their spouses (all Dems voting for Barack Obama) work 7 days a week from 8 a.m til 9 PM. They have little time to be with their kids, but they cannot afford to be off work in this time of economic crisis. What did Bush do to help them? Nada, just icut taxes that help mostly rich folks (I am a computer programmer and make sufficient money, yet I am an Independent, not Dem voting for Obama).

First of all, to all you liberals who were saying such horrible things about
Senator McCain when he was a few points behind: I forgive you! But now that it is
evident that he is going to win, maybe you should start referring to him as "President
McCain" or"The Prez" or "The Guy I Was Way Wrong About".
Please know that we who knew all along that Obama would somehow blow his lead, even
with his unlimited budget, we forgive you because it's really not your fault.
=================
It is too early to call him that... I will continue to refer to him as "President Hotheaded". He is still the thickskulled dude or, as paris Hilton called him, "white-haired dude".
My blog analysis shows he (Obama) is much more better positioned to win in November, although McCain may also be able to win if he stops using the "change" slogan and focuses on his platform of "experience"....

Lori! you rock..... give me your best guess how many dems on this blog hold two jobs or work more then 60hrs/wk? and they have the gall to challenge Palin????

Where in this article is any discussion of Palin's views on the environment? The total omission of this major issue is a disappointment. For example, does Sarah Palin deny that global warming exists?

I look to your magazine for information. This is the kind of information which would sway my vote one way or the other and it's disappointing that you are not supplying it when it would be most timely.

Palin has continued to repeat the already exposed lie that she said "No, thanks" to the famous "bridge to nowhere" (McCain's favorite example of wasteful federal spending). In fact, she said "Yes, please" until the project became a symbol and political albatross.

Back to reality. Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 2 1/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska's government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it. Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook.

Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state's unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can't afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.

As if it couldn't support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.

Karl Rove's Electoral Map Favors Obama as Discussed on Fox news Sunday Morning (260)

Looking at Karl Rove's electoral map which was done by polling in all the states, Obama currently has (260 Electoral Votes) based on states that are solidly in the democratic column. You need 270 to be president.

The biggest changes since 2004 so far is that Obama now leads by double digits in two states that Bush won solidly in 2004. Those two states are New Mexico and Iowa which combined is an additional 12 points for the democrats and minus 12 for the republicans. Obama only needs 10 electorial votes out of the remaing 7 battle ground states which combined is 57 electoral votes.

looking at the electoral map, I would put most of my resources in Ohio, Virginia and Colorado if I were Obama. I say Colorado because if Obama some how lost both Ohio and Virginia, Colorado combined with any one of the remaining states would put Obama over 270. We all know Nevada is leaning democratic so Colorado and Nevada would do it. Colorado has to be in that state "combination mix" if Obama loses Ohio and Virginia because Colorado has 9 electoral votes. (just looking at the worst case scenario) If Obama wins either Ohio or Virginia, it would put Obama over 270. There are other combinations of Obama winning but it would require him to win alot more states which may be difficult to do. But because of Obama picked up Iowa and New Mexico, it has allowed him to be able to win the presidency without Ohio and Florida.

Keep in mind in most polls Virginia is tied. The state hasnt been this close in turning blue since the 1960s. Its a state in which the black vote could put Obama over the top in Virginia which would then give Obama the presidency.

with less than two month til the election we can now get a clearer sense who is likely to win. I tell people dont focus so much on national polls. Both the campaigns are focusing on the electoral map and where they are up in each state. The map favors Obama which is why McCain made such a bold move by picking Sarah Palin to energize the republican base. But I think its too little to late. Obama has a strong foundation laid in these battleground states and he has a good chance in taking Ohio. John Kerry loss Ohio in 2004 by 200,000 votes. If John Kerry had won Ohio, hed be president now. The Obama campaign has registered almost a million new voters in Ohio while republican voter registration has declined in the state. Do the math. Kerry lost by 200,000 votes and Obama has gain almost a million voters through a kind of aggressive voter registration campaign which won him his seat in the US Senate. But even though Colorado, Nevada and North Dakota are toss up states in the margin of error, all three are slightly leaning towards Obama. So this is a good sign for the Obama campaign.

Floridave, Lori, et.al.
Perhaps you joined in too late to see the posting. We are asking all those who were so dim as to vote for our current disaster of a president TWICE to refrain from posting so that those who have proven themselves more politically astute may have a mature political discussion. Thank you for your understanding.

Guys, objectively now, did you see how Obama's fumbling around on O'Reilly about his affiliation with the "Hate America" crowd without a single straight answer? It really disgust me when he attempts to make excuses for the unrepentant terrorist Ayers................. Go McCain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you have a problem with Wal-mart and their labor practices....DON'T Shop
there!
And you are not smart enough to understand Bill Gates, unlike the rest of us who
ARE smart enough to figure out why Bill Gates is where he is AND how he got there.
=============
Darn, my point was that while Bill Gates is a hard working nerd/geek, he does not make all the enhancements to his operating systems, it is his thousands of engineers who spet thousand of hours. But Bill Gates is the guy who initially established Microsoft and initially did the basic coding of his systems, but the advanced and modern coding of his products is done by his engineers who are ordinary folks, not millionaires (some of them make hundreds of thousands, of course).
As for WalMart...... Again, Sam Walton established it as a small store in Ark. This company mostly expanded and became the #1 retailer in the world because of its harsh, questionable, and even demeaning labor practices. It tried hard to crush unions and ensure that tis workers don't always have labor nion memebrship.
Well, you can preach to WalMart. I don't shop at WalMart, idiot... And its prodts are cheap because its labor is cheap.