The Case for Barack Obama

McCAIN HEALTH IN QUESTION...............

The Armed Forces pathologists suggested that the left-temple melanoma had spread from another melanoma, known as a metastasis or satellite lesion. ???The vertical orientation of this lesion,??? the report said, ???with only focal epidermal involvement above it is highly suggestive of a metastasis of malignant melanoma and may represent a satellite metastasis of S00-9572-A,??? which is the ???skin, left temple, lateral??? biopsy.

The pool report was by nature unable to provide a complete portrait of Mr. McCain???s recent medical history. It left several questions, including about the number of biopsies and when they were done. On Aug. 18, 2000, Dr. John D. Eckstein, Mr. McCain???s personal physician at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, noted in Mr. McCain???s records that there were two biopsies of the left temple. Dr. Eckstein???s note did not say where and when the biopsies were performed. The Armed Forces report cited one biopsy, so presumably a second was performed in Scottsdale. The Armed Forces pathologists said a melanoma had developed over a skin scar whose origin was unclear..........

The Armed Forces pathologists did not speak in the teleconference in May 2008, and questions raised by their report have remained unanswered. The selected reporters did not ask about that report, and the Mayo Clinic doctors did not discuss it. A complete Mayo pathology report was apparently not included in the pool summary...........

If Mr. McCain???s 2000 left-temple melanoma was a metastasis, as the Armed Forces pathologists??? report suggested, it would be classified as Stage III. The reclassification would change his statistical odds for survival at 10 years from about 60 percent to 36 percent, according to a published study..............

McCAIN HEALTH PROBLEMS = PALIN S PRESIDENCY! HELLOOOO!!!!!!!

Corporate Welfare Versus Social Welfare
by David Wildman

As the U.S. Congress debated welfare policy, the media spotlight focused on the need to cut spending to the poorest people in the nation. At the same time, there was no or minimal coverage of policies that send billions of government dollars to corporate interests from oil companies to agribusiness to firms producing arms.
Looking across the breadth of the U.S. budget and policies, a key question arises: Whose welfare is the government serving -- the people???s or corporations????
It???s not a new question. Upon leaving the U.S. presidency in the late 1800s, Rutherford B. Hayes wrote in his diary:
"The real difficulty is with the vast wealth and power in the hands of the few....It is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people no longer. It is a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations."
U.S. presidents since have shared Mr. Hayes??? concern. For example, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangerous power of the military-industrial complex in his farewell address. In his last weeks in office, President Bill Clinton stopped further subsidies to logging, mining and oil companies by preserving millions of acres of public lands.
Too often those in power only find courage and wisdom to address injustice of the powerful as they themselves leave power.
Today a rising number of voices -- environmentalists, workers, faith communities, family farmers, indigenous peoples and some public officials -- are calling for an end to corporate subsidies and privilege they label corporate welfare. Like forces that called for an end to social welfare "as we know it" in the early 1990s, these forces are calling for an end to corporate welfare "as we know it."
These groups refuse to be silent in the face of corporate efforts to transform government into a shareholders??? meeting where only those with money vote and earn dividends.
Full article: http://gbgm-umc.org/Response/articles/corporate_welfare.html

Most firms pay no income taxes - Congress
Study finds that the majority of domestic and foreign corporations in the United States avoid paying federal income taxes.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Nearly two-thirds of U.S. companies and 68% of foreign corporations do not pay federal income taxes, according to a congressional report released Tuesday.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
The study showed that 28% of foreign companies and 25% of U.S. corporations with more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in sales paid no federal income taxes in 2005. Those companies totaled a combined $372 billion in sales for the largest foreign companies and $1.1 trillion in revenue for the biggest U.S. companies.
Full article: http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/
August 12, 2008

WHERE IS THE PRESS? NOBODIES IS TALKING ABOUT THIS REPORT!

WHAT ABOUT THIS DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH?? And these are FACTS, not suppositions.........

HAPPENED UNDER BUSH WATCH, WHO ARE THE SOCIALISTS HERE?

For those talking about Obama supposed friends...

Well you should ask McCain about his pals Gordon Liddy, Pastor Hagee, Keating five, Mustafa Abu Naba'a, Ali Jawad, Oliver North, John Singlaub and U.S. Council for World Freedom, Kemper Marley, Don Diamond, Marylin Shannon have shaped his views.

What about his association with segregationist senators and ex- KKK like Byrd, has that make him a segregationist as well? Good question to ask, maybe you should just assume like you are doing with Obama, why not?

And what about Sarah and Todd Palin membership with Alaska Independence Party ??? the party of anti-American Joe Vogler What is Todd s influence as husband and shadow governor getting involved in her job and policies. And Sarah s friend Mark Chryson and Steve Stoll members of the AIP as well. Let s assume as well that they have influence her being friends for so many years, no?

Read more on:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-lux/guilt-by-associations_b_133758.html

After 9/11, the US government started rounding up Muslims without cause and without due process of law, and put them in prison camps like we did to the Japanese Americans in WWII. The Bush administration called it's main internment camp Guantanamo Bay. While there are certainly many guilty terrorists held in Guantanamo, there are also many innocent American citizens who have been held illegally for years without even being charged with any crime. They have been tortured by our government. Some of them have died.

Recently the Supreme Court ruled against the Bush administration in the matter of Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court Justices were NOT on the side of the terrorists. They were on the side of the Geneva Convention, that says you can not torture POWs, and on the side of US laws that state you can not imprison a person without charging them with a crime and bringing them to trial. I'm sure that like most Americans, the Justices who voted against the illegal, immoral doings at Guantanamo didn't feel sympathy for the terrorists. They felt sympathy for the laws of AMERICA, the land of the FREE, where even rat finks get a fair trial.

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the Bush administration is busy trying to build a smokescreen to hide the CRIMES they have committed. Those pesky weapons of mass destruction. Just think, the National Debt went up over 6 trillion dollars under Bush. More than 2 trillion of it went directly into the pockets of Halliburton, a corporation owned by the Cheney family. Halliburton is now a DUBAI corporation and therefore is not subject to US taxes. All that money they took out of the US Treasury is going into the coffers of a MUSLIM country.

Did you hear about how the US government is being charged millions for Halliburton deliveries of sand into Iraq from Kuwait? Sand. Like there is a shortage of sand in Iraq? Another contractor shipped sand from Idaho to Iraq at our expense. Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz discusses these and other excesses of our current government's out of control spending in Iraq.

Your grandchildren will be working like slaves to pay off this debt, so that the Bushes and Cheneys can live the high life in Dubai.

Yeah, they're patriots, Bush&Co. They wear flag pins. And hide the money they stole from America in Dubai.

And they want me to believe that Obama is a socialist. Right.

In case you think McCain is any different than Bush, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJUCU1UH2w

As always, well said. But McCain has, in fact, approved racial smears against Obama by simple word-association: He, Palin, and his supporters are using the same talking points: "Say 'Obama' and 'terrorist' in the same sentence again and again." They know it's spurious, but their entire strategy is to make false associations.

This is so true about how the election is already bought and paid for:
http://www.againstobama.com/2008/10/what-is-it-that-barack-obama-knows-that-the-rest-of-us-don%E2%80%99t/#comment-1929

Everyone has been very measured in making assessments of John McCain (a war hero) and Sarah Palin ( a female with middle class roots). However, at some point, we must remove the restraints and clearly state what we all have been aware of for some time. I do believe that is what Colin Powell has done. That is what patriotism is about. Our country deserves the best leadership in these troubling times. Thank you Fareed for speaking up. Thanks for not being deterred by the name callers. We simply cannot allow certain forces to distract us. . It is clear that their policies have failed. Failed policies and politics that divide will not move us forward. We need fresh ideas. We need leadership that has the capacity to think through problems, generate new ideas, decide on appropriate solutions and carefully implement these policies. The world is much more complex than simply black and white - there are varying shades of gray. John McCain and Sarah Palin are stuck in the past with old worn out ideas about how the world is and how it ought to be. With them at the helm we are doomed!

Nims: Funny how fast Newsweek took that article : AP IMPACT: Mortgage firm arranged stealth campaign, http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 , came off the general table of contents for this site once they figured out that, instead of being a bit on those evil lobbiest, it in fact admitted that the Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie in 2005 and were targeted by Freddie, and the no Democrats were targeted because they were all in the tank with Freddie and Fannie not to regulate them as a means of promoting the Community Reinvestment Act. I don???t think that article stayed up 24 hrs before they took it off the main screen.

I love watching F. Zakaria. I am not intellectualy- even close -to his equal, but he is my teacher on Sundays.-
I watch his show faithfully.

Look and listen for yourself. Hear Obama in his own words discusses his links to both ACORN and the mortgage meltdown, and praises bundling and securitizing mortgages by banks as a means to float loans to the poor. Never mind the link commentators point of view, just listen to what Obama says in his own words. A picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe more in the case of the last half of the second link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related

See also:
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=808692&boardsparam=Page%3d2

This is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
See also
http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 from this web site. (oops!) stating that Freddie Mac was spending tax payer money to target Republicans in 2005 who were trying to regulate Fannie and Freddies fraud. Democrats were not targeted, as the were all on board to not regulate Fannie and Freddie. Hear that, Republicans were trying to regulate, and Democrats were trying to stop it/

The link below contains a purported list of the top 25 in Congress who got contributions from the folks at Fannie and Freddie. Obama is listed third, after Dodd and Kerry, even though Obama is just a junior Senator. Obama is followed next by Clinton. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on the list as well.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918

And the link below describes how some Democrats in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money eventually recovered to groups like ACORN, a group Obama has a long association with. See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj