Debunking the Bradley Effect

What do you really know about Obama???s economic philosophy? Since he has never run a town, state or business, he has no record to look at. Oh, he has made lots of promises, but given that he broke his promise to be limited to public campaign funds, you can???t put much faith in that, and there will be means to keep those promises anyway.

But you do know that Obama, along with his democratic buddies in Congress, personally and professionally advocated for a residential housing policy favoring forced sub-prime lending, which subsequently resulted in massive defaults and foreclosures, leading to your loss of significant equity value in your home, to the point that it destabilized your banks, which panicked the stock market, which wiped out your savings.

Look and listen to Obama for yourself. Obama in this video, addressing his community activist work and his work representing ACORN in litigation against the banks and relating to the Community Reinvestment Act, and addressing the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as those actions relate to the destruction of our economy by causing the current real estate and subsequent financial crisis, states that, and I quote:

"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."

Acknowledging the catastrophe, but as apologist for the Democrats, Obama then offers this justification.

"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."

Yah, great idea. Economically unsound, but embraced by Obama. Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:

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

Below 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 in the tank with Fannie and Freddie to kill the regulations. Hear that, the article admits that Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie, and Democrats were trying to stop it from happening as a means to facilitate the Community Reinvestment Act.

See also: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."

In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, etc., and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

Their failed policies are what brought us to ruin. Even Bill Clinton says so. Obama and a supermajority of Democrats simply is not the change we need, nor is it change we can afford.

Are there any McCain-Palin supporters who retain any objectivity, who are able to limit their biased / prejudiced thinking and rationally evaluate and recognize the desperate and low-class, unconscionable and dishonest efforts rendered by their candidates? To continue to support them, like Bill O???Reilly, Russ Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Elisabeth Hasselbeck, seems to demand a real questioning of the intelligence and conscience of the supporters. The obvious absurdity and blatant dishonesty of McCain???s and Palin???s behavior seems to literally challenge supporters to remain loyal in spite of insulting them with despicable and irrational self-focused behavior. The McCain-Palin campaign has become ridiculous and obnoxious with undisciplined self-concerned behavior that takes politics to a new low. To remain tolerant and supportive of that would have to reflect on anyone???s self-respect and self-esteem. If not McCain-Palin supporters, at least everyone else should reject their performance as you can???t trust them to do anything about the significant problems and real needs we face today because McCain and Palin clearly demonstrate they think everything is just about them. McCain just wants to be president before he retires and Palin simply wants all of the attention she can get and that is obviously where it is at for them. We have seen this mentality before and more of the same is really not acceptable.

The NYT's just reported that new permits to build nuclear power plants are coming in at a record, 34 new plants so far. We haven't had a single request since 1973. This is in anticipation of an Obama administration. Hillary Clinton was opposed to nuclear power.

Today in the NYT's:

"Not since 1973 had anybody in the United States ordered a nuclear plant that was actually built, and the obstacles to a new generation of plants seemed daunting.

But now, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 21 companies say they will seek permission to build 34 power plants, from New York to Texas. Factories are springing up in Indiana and Louisiana to build reactor parts. Workers are clearing a site in Georgia to put in reactors. Starting in January, millions of electric customers in Florida will be billed several dollars a month to finance four new reactors."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/24nuke.html?e

In an article entitled "Catch-22: Water vs. Energy" in Scientific American Earth3.0: "Nuclear power plants use enormous quantities of water, usually drawn from rivers and lakes, to cool their big reactors." The Farley Nuclear Plant in Alabama was almost shut down. Same in Georgia. Same in North Carolina. "Lake Norman dropped to less than a foot above the minimum allowed level for Duke Energy's McGuire Nuclear Station."

Nuclear is also dependent on uranium: "The diminishing availability of high-grade uranium ores will pose a hard limit to the future growth of nuclear energy."

Exelon has leaked millions of gallons of radioactive contaminated water into the environment. Not once or twice but eight times. They covered it up for years. There is a large class-action suit against them. The state of Illinois is also suing.

Obama has deep connections to Exelon and the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's lobbying group. He is pro-nukes even though he has denied it. He voted for Cheney's disastrous energy bill and the GOP's class action reform bill that prevents families from bringing class action suits against corporate polluters. He authored a bill to waterdown regulations on radioactive leaks. "The bill also contained the new wording sought by Exelon making it clear that state and local authorities would have no regulatory oversight of nuclear power plants."

MSNBC is owned by General Electric. GE builds nuclear reactors. MSNBC has been in the tank for Obama since day one. Hillary didn't have a chance. MSNBC, TIME, NEWSWEEK, THE WASHINGTON POST and SLATE have an agreement to share editorial content and journalists among other things. That is why Hillary was thoroughly thrashed.

The Democratic party is heading in the wrong direction under the leadership of Pelosi and Obama. They have caved in on oil drilling. Environmentalists defeated oil drilling even when Congress was controlled by the GOP. Ironically, environmentalists didn't even get a chance to fight the bill with Democrats

Ohio for McCain/Palin, didn't you guys help the current Bush win! Hey, I'm a teacher therefore my job is secure. For those of you trying to put McCain/Palin in, I sure hate it, but you will suffer first because for some odd reason some of you guys do not vote your interests.

Republicans with integrity!!! Don't make me laugh. Starting from the idiot in the White House that cannot be seen due to his ineptness, the weasel known as Dick Cheney, the outright crook know as Karl Rove and the current "Rookie Idiot of the Year" Sarah Palin, the quality of GOP Character and Values is painfully clear! Obama - Biden 08!!!

A former Newsweek reporter admitted in an article this week that he has no objectivity and imagined disabling Rudy Giuliani so he wouldn't run in the presidential primary race last year.
Michael Hastings wrote in GQ magazine that he had a "recurring fantasy" that he could somehow stop the former New York City mayor in his tracks.
"I quickly realized Rudy was a maniac. I had a recurring fantasy in which I took him out during a press conference (it was nonlethal, just something that put him out of commission for a year or so), saving America from the horror of a President Giuliani. If that sounds like I had some trouble being 'objective,' I did. Objectivity is a fallacy," he said.

http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_7484&pageNum=2

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/55_say_media_bias_bigger_problem_than_campaign_cash

55% Say Media Bias Bigger Problem Than Campaign Cash

http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2008/cyb20080819.asp

Media Credibility Plummets, Just 30% Believe 'Most Trusted' CNN

I blame the Democratic Politicians for the economical mess. I am so sick of the Democrats. I don't think Obama will win. Obama has virtually no integrity, empty suit! His radical associations and crazy statements in his book are enough for me not to trust this man. McCain/Palin 2008 and Palin 2012!

Point of Interest: Friends, who made their presidential choice based on their religious commitment, have recently made the McCain-Palin recommendation to me and I have real difficulty understanding that. First, I think that the strong memory of what has transpired over the last eight years makes anyone???s 2000/2004 decision to support Bush-Cheney, based on their appeal to conservative Christians, highly questionable. Next, talking about ???Christian values??? amounts to more than just ???pro-life???, marriage between a man and a woman and stem-cell research ethics, to really include honesty, integrity, equitable consideration of others and responsibility in government and also should be seen as appropriate ???human values???, not just Christian. Additionally, it has always been my understanding that all religions teach that connecting with God/Allah/Yahweh/? is only achieved through humility, by getting out of one???s self rather than being egotistically ostentatious (which is then about one???s ego rather than God). Too many times it appears that many who are running around yelling ???alleluia, alleluia, praise be to thee??? are actually just saying ???look at me, look at me, aren???t I something to see???. I???ll match my faith with anyone without ever needing to flaunt it, personally feeling that the quiet connection has the real quality and sincerity. All of that said, I really question the forthrightness of those who solicit the benefit of the religious vote based on what they say and on how demonstrative they are yet lack honesty, integrity, compassion and humility as clearly demonstrated in what transpired over the last eight years, in their supporting that and in how they conduct themselves when campaigning. Once considering these things I then have no hesitation in giving Obama and Bidden credit for their superior conduct and more convincing faith orientated consciences and feel that when I vote for them I won???t be co-responsible for ???more of the same???.

Nice line of BS there!! If you want to blame someone for this economic nightmare start with Bill Clinton, because he was the beginning of the housing meltdown in america. Obama just tells lies and he has no integrity. This nation will fall with people like obama in charge!! Vote McCain/Palin 2008

It should not be a factor, as American people are smarter than that. Throughout the history of mankind, we human beings have limited knowledge, and all we know is McCain is on God's side, and for the country, country or national security first. Unless it is America's destiny otherwise, as chances are Joe Biden will be our president, and Michelle Obama will follow Hillary Clinton's footsteps. Is it America's destiny? Is Obama a cigarette-smoker (a good example for the youngsters, the future generations)?

Some are getting very desperate. As an Independent I???ve tried to be and advocated being objective and rational while, as we all realize, there is simply a lot of pressure to keep us from doing either. It would be easy to say that we can???t trust anything said but then how could we ever measure. Today all of the candidates, including John McCain, find fault with the Bush-Cheney administration and strongly advocate that real change is absolutely needed, so it could be as simple as determining who to believe? By anyone???s measure Sarah Palin is different, short on qualifications and extremely bold for sure, yet many feel she is impressive and then Senator Obama doesn???t have real extensive qualifications either and presents, impressively but none the less, a bold approach. McCain accuses Obama of flip-flopping yet anyone would have to be blind not to recognize that McCain has literally been all over the place. Obama is attacked for all kinds of irrational, far fetched, off the point things but that seems to say more against the critics than against Obama. McCain and Bidden both have long running experience but nothing that impresses as being with commanding control or to the point of instilling complete confidence. We could just identify with the political parties but then that leaves us divided between conservative and liberal, between more of the same or change, concentration on Special Interests and a select few or on everyday concerns and there really is no end to those emotional debates. It goes on but the result is simply the same as there is little reality to base a rational and objective decision on, no real help to be counted on as being honestly complete and yet the problems today are drastic and our needs are formidable. For me it comes down to simply accepting some of what the candidates say, finding a consistency I can identify with, and then on seeing it supported in their history and in logical probability. In my thinking, John McCain has a history of doing whatever works best for him politically, including strongly supporting the Bush-Cheney policies and only now, at the last minute when desperate, faulting those same policies and advocating change. Sarah Palin???s bold, aggressive, self-focused personality (to even using her baby as a prop) disgusts me and is as if she would be a real problem if in any higher office (it could be said she already has been a problem in her current office). Joe Bidden seems to be very qualified and as if he would be a real asset to the president and to the country as vice-president. Barack Obama???s history and current presentation seems very consistent in offering a thoughtful, rational and conscientious approach to everything, including being able to solicit cooperation and provide direction in getting things done and to honestly benefit everyone. Rationally and objectively, to me, the decision seems to be logically sound for Obama-Bidden.

THIS CHICK IS LYING!

Has anyone kept up with this? A McCain supporter posted a comment regarding this incident yesterday asking why Obama supporters are so violent. I replied to this poster asking why the B that was supposedly carved into her face by the "Scary Angry Black man" Of Course ! was backwards. The B looks the way it would if a right handed person did it to themselves.

Anyway the police have found several inconsistencies in her story and she had now remembered new details such as a sexual assault. She did not mention this sexual assult initially, this is a new memory. The police. Also she first stated that she walked to the bank and the attacker got mad when he saw the McCain button on her jacket, then she stated that the attacker got mad when he saw the McCain bumber sticker on her car??????????????????????????

The police are giving this woman a lie detector. I am listing the links to several articles regarding this incident. Please note the major differences in Ms. Todd's stories. In one version Ms. Todd states that the man sat on her chest and carved a backwards B into her cheek. In another version she told the police that she passed out and when she woke up she felt a stinging on her cheek but did not know what happened to her face.

link to article: http://www.huliq.com/1/71280/mccain-volunteer-ashley-todd-attacked-mutilated-pittsburgh

link to article 2: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/24/mccain.sticker/index.html?eref=time_us

link to article 3 including Police video statement: http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/17789356/detail.html

By JIM RUTENBERG and MARJORIE CONNELLY

updated 9:11 p.m. ET, Thurs., Oct. 23, 2008

Senator Barack Obama is showing surprising strength among portions of the political coalition that returned George W. Bush to the White House four years ago, a cross section of support that, if it continues through Election Day, would exceed that of Bill Clinton in 1992, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News polls.

Underscoring the building strength of Mr. Obama???s candidacy in the final phase of the campaign, he was ahead of Mr. McCain among various groups that voted for Mr. Bush four years ago: those with incomes greater than $50,000 a year; married women; suburbanites; white Catholics, and is even competitive among white men ??? a group that has not voted for a Democrat over a Republican since 1972, when pollsters began surveying people after they voted.

Stick a fork in it, baby.....This thing is over!!!!!!

GOBAMA!!!!!!

Now, Obama taking advantage from economic meltdown, he should get at least 20 points ahead in poll but not??? Let see if he can use his gold finger to pull up the stock market IF he elected as President. if he really do, he should be name "Barrack Jesus Obama".