Palin, McCain and the Weeks Ahead

Hockey Mom, Maverick, Attack Dog with Lipstick, Dingbat, you betcha.

Karl Rove??? Are you kidding? Don't you need to spend your time writing nasty vicious ads for McCain? You don't have time to waste with articles in Newsweek. The original architect of sleaze and lies - - we don't want to hear anything from you. Go back to your bunker with Cheney and don't come out unless you have permission.

Entered Columbia on an affirmative-action lotto miracle, and did absolutely nothing there. In an era of scandalous grade inflation, he was a below-average student with no record of accomplishment (beginning of a theme), *Was granted admission to Harvard Law. No one knows how or why, since his record at Columbia warranted a community college. *Was voted President of the Law Review as a compromise between some militant affirmative-action black racists, and the conservative law students who were admitted to the prestigious school on merit. *Proceeded to do nothing. Search all you want - you'll not find a single published piece of legal scholarship with his name on it anywhere. *Worked in the ghetto in Chicago without effect. *Worked as a lawyer - no one can cite a single case or success. *Worked as a law lecturer - not a single published piece. Ran for congress, lied a lot, lost. *Ran for Senate, got his opponents removed from ballot, Chicago-style, won! *Spent 7 years there, with zero accomplishment. Kept clean by voting "present" over 170 times. Not yes or no, just "present". *Killed a bill (pun!) there in committee which would have more specifically outlawed infanticide, which most people would think is already illegal. Lied about his vote for 5 years, until he was caught during this campaign. The same bill passed the U.S. Senate 98 - 0. And he voted "No". After 170 "present" votes on stupid stuff. You can't make this stuff up. *Ran for U.S. Senate and won when the Chicago Tribune sued to open his opponent's sealed divorce records. The somewhat tawdry information caused his opponent to withdraw. Once again - Obama was running unopposed. Isn't that amazing? *Once in the Senate, he voted against confirmation for our new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, who humiliated a partisan and overmatched group of liberal nitwit Senators in his confirmation hearings. This was supposed to be Obama's only known talent - constitutional law - and he voted against a guy who is so clearly Obama's intellectual master that most thinking observers are still laughing about it. This is the political "change we can believe in"? What a farce. He's never done anything. When his opponent John McCain named first-term Alaska Governor Sarah Palin his running mate, everyone knew Obama couldn't bring up her obvious lack of experience for the office of Vice President, since he has considerably less experience, but is running for the top office. But this arrogant nitwit did it - he started whining about her lack of experience. He called her home town of Wasilla, Alaska "Wasilly", and then referred to Palin with an oafish "lipstick on a pig" barb. So, libs of the north - there's your O'Bama Amateur Hour primer. Enjoy.

The GOP is grasping at straws. They have nothing substantive against Obama, but boy are they good at making up lies. This has been a leading Karl Rove tactic for years, and if America falls for this again we should be ashamed of ourselves. Not to mention the obvious fact that this is all a smokescreen to keep the focus off of the fact that Palin and her Alaska associates are in contempt of court for refusing to testify in the Troopergate hearings. After Nixon and Clinton, Americans are to some extent jaded, but really, would you want a VP who refuses to attend hearings in her own defense, and instructs her employees not to testify? That smells like guilt. It surely doesn't give the impression that she has done no wrong and has nothing to hide.

This year, the GOP offers you an angry old man and a woman who, while personable, is desperately uniformed about national and international issues. Both of them are far right politically. McCain used to be a maverick, but since 2004 he's voted 90% with Bush. McCain's policies are not original or reformist, despite how he's tried to co-opt Obama's popular message of change. Please go to the websites of both of the candidates and read their platforms. Obama's Blueprint for Change has more good ideas than McCain's plan. Compare them yourself. Obama's basic premise is that tax dollars should be spent to make America stronger and to improve the lives and well being of our people. For example, he uses education programs to train a new technology workforce, contributing to energy independence, creating jobs and improving the economy. When you read McCain's plan you will find no over-arching design to get America back on track. Instead you'll find more tax cuts for the wealthy, de-regulation of the health care industry, and a stated intent to overturn Roe v. Wade.

I'm a Republican. Although I embrace some forward-thinking social values, in the past I've rarely voted Democrat. My thinking was that since Republicans grow robust economies, by voting Republican I'd be endorsing a plan that would grow wealth for our nation, and then we'd be able to afford social programs. It was a good strategy for a couple decades, but I have to say that the tenure of W. Bush has changed my mind. Not only is there nothing fiscally responsible about today's GOP, the insidious alignment of the party with religious intolerance has really turned me off.

On the other hand, the intelligent luminous thought of Barack Obama has ignited my passion for politics and my patriotism. I want a President who puts America first and can get the economy back on track. In my mind, values voting takes a back burner when we are faced with a meltdown of the economy. It is time for a change, a real change. The Republicans have controlled the Presidency for 28 of the past 40 years, but they have fallen down on the job. The Democrats have a stellar candidate this year, and I am voting for Obama.

the Obama argument: it doesn't matter that I was "friendly" and worked toward common progressive goals with domestic terrorists...you need to vote for me because my opponent is a Republican, Bush was one of those two.

a Weather Report: Apparently the University of Ilinois has recent released documentation outlining the common work of Senator Obama and Prof. Ayers... their apparent common goal of Radical re-education of urban Public School students...I hope Senator McCain appropriately mentions this during the education portion of the debate tommorrow.

This coming from someone who should be in JAIL for running away from a subpuena. Karl Rove is trying really really hard to get the republicans in the executive office as this is his only hope that he avoid a prison sentence. I think there is a conflict of interest here... Newsweek - I am surprised and dismayed that you print Karl Rove's rantings that are in his own interest.