Hey 'Now For' CAN THE SPAM!!!! -back me up here people!
Hey 'Now For' CAN THE SPAM!!!! -back me up here people!
See Barney Franks comments on the news, including face the nation last week, stating that Democrats in Congress intend to greatly raise taxes and go on a spending spree.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Mazjm_A5k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJGnSAlqjoU
See http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html
And again what was Frank saying at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
So who really is the liar that soaked the American people?
See also: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/08/politics/main2335631.shtml
In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we found 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. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE
Obama and a supermajority of Democrats simply is not the change we need, nor is it change we can afford.
Obama's programs require him to tax, and his health care plan alone is a substantial hidden tax on all business, large an small. In reality, it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. He has to tax, because it is they only way he can pay for his massive social engineering experiments. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like Hoover and FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.
See e.g. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4499465.shtml
And
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
Vote Now, seriously. CAN THE SPAM! Let the repubs play that game. Back me up here people.
Everyone I know that is going to vote for Obama doesn't know a dang thing of what he stands for. I don't like the idea of big government and the fact that people are voting for him because he makes them feel good or because everyone is telling them to. I don't think Obama has what it takes.
Well you know me now. What would you like to know? If you don't know anything about him, it isn't because there's nothing out there, it's because you didn't look and probably weren't interested. No one is forcing you to vote for him, go ahead and do what you like, but don't fall for the line of BS that he is 'unknown' because that is far from the truth. He has also put forth many, many more specific and detailed policy points than the McCain campaign. I suggest you go to his website www.barackobama.com. all of his major policy initiatives are listed there along with much of his biography etc. None of this is hard to find, unless you want it to be.
People on these bogs are fond of saying that the current economic meltdown was caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac underwriting bad mortgages. While Fannie and Freddie obviously are guilty of writing bad mortgages, and worse, guilty of lobbying Congress to allow them to do so with impunity, their actions are just a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to determining who (or what) caused the financial crisis we face today.
In 1929 the stock market crash caused the banks to fail, because the banks were in bed with the stock market. Back then, banks owned investment houses, so when the stock market fell, the banks fell too. This triggered the Great Depression. So in 1933 the Congress wrote laws that regulated banking, making it illegal for banks to own investment companies, mortgage guaranty companies or insurance companies. The idea was to keep key industries separated by a fire wall, so that if one industry failed the whole economy would not go down in flames.
But the Republicans under Bush deregulated the banking industry. Senator Phil Gramm wrote legislation (the Gramm Rudman Act, the Gramm Leach Biley Act, etc.) that stripped away the regulations in the financial and insurance industies. He pushed them through the Republican Congress and they were signed into law by Geo. W. Bush. John McCain voted in favor. Everybody said how great it is to deregulate and create free markets.
Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch each gave over a million dollars to Senator Gramm's re-election campaign.
The economic collapse that happened later was a direct result of the deregulation, and here's how: the banks wrote bad mortgages, then bundled the mortgages into investment vehicles that they sold all over the world, and they even got firms like AIG to insure the investments. It was all a house of cards.
If there had been no deregulation, sure we would have had a bunch of bad mortgages, and the mortgage guaranty and real estate industries would have suffered, but there would not have been a global financial meltdown, since the problem would have been contained in one sector of the economy. You can thank Geo W. Bush, Sen. Phil Gramm and Sen John McCain for the meltdown, since they were strong proponents of deregulation.
Furthermore, although Fannie and Freddie are now holding the bulk of these bad mortgages, Fannie and Freddie did not originally write most of these mortgages. They bought them after the fact, bundled by banks/investment companies. Fannie and Freddie got screwed by the Wall Street fat cats. And so did you, if you pay taxes.
What is Phil Gramm doing today? He works as a lobbyist in Washington, trying to make it legal for the Swiss bank he represents to sell Death Bonds in the United States. Nice guy, Phil Gramm. Incidentally, John McCain has said that he wants to appoint Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Some people just can't learn from their mistakes.
People on these bogs are fond of saying that the current economic meltdown was caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac underwriting bad mortgages. While Fannie and Freddie obviously are guilty of writing bad mortgages, and worse, guilty of lobbying Congress to allow them to do so with impunity, their actions are just a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to determining who (or what) caused the financial crisis we face today.
In 1929 the stock market crash caused the banks to fail, because the banks were in bed with the stock market. Back then, banks owned investment houses, so when the stock market fell, the banks fell too. This triggered the Great Depression. So in 1933 the Congress wrote laws that regulated banking, making it illegal for banks to own investment companies, mortgage guaranty companies or insurance companies. The idea was to keep key industries separated by a fire wall, so that if one industry failed the whole economy would not go down in flames.
But the Republicans under Bush deregulated the banking industry. Senator Phil Gramm wrote legislation (the Gramm Rudman Act, the Gramm Leach Biley Act, etc.) that stripped away the regulations in the financial and insurance industies. He pushed them through the Republican Congress and they were signed into law by Geo. W. Bush. John McCain voted in favor. Everybody said how great it is to deregulate and create free markets.
Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch each gave over a million dollars to Senator Gramm's re-election campaign.
The economic collapse that happened later was a direct result of the deregulation, and here's how: the banks wrote bad mortgages, then bundled the mortgages into investment vehicles that they sold all over the world, and they even got firms like AIG to insure the investments. It was all a house of cards.
If there had been no deregulation, sure we would have had a bunch of bad mortgages, and the mortgage guaranty and real estate industries would have suffered, but there would not have been a global financial meltdown, since the problem would have been contained in one sector of the economy. You can thank Geo W. Bush, Sen. Phil Gramm and Sen John McCain for the meltdown, since they were strong proponents of deregulation.
Furthermore, although Fannie and Freddie are now holding the bulk of these bad mortgages, Fannie and Freddie did not originally write most of these mortgages. They bought them after the fact, bundled by banks/investment companies. Fannie and Freddie got screwed by the Wall Street fat cats. And so did you, if you pay taxes.
What is Phil Gramm doing today? He works as a lobbyist in Washington, trying to make it legal for the Swiss bank he represents to sell Death Bonds in the United States. Nice guy, Phil Gramm. Incidentally, John McCain has said that he wants to appoint Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Some people just can't learn from their mistakes.
fter 9/11, the US government started rounding up Muslims without cause and without due process of law, 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
fter 9/11, the US government started rounding up Muslims without cause and without due process of law, 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
Simple fact: The USA has a huge foreign debt!! Someone needs to pay it, the haves or the have nots? I think if one considers themselves a "patriot" then they would be happy to pay more taxes for their hard work if they earn over $250k and can live a comfortable lifestyle, vs a struggling household on a low income saddled with a credit card debt and a mortgage. These low income earners are both Republican and Democrat. Probably more Republicans.... My point is quit your whingeing and be willing to pay more tax you fools...
This is unfortunately the problem ArJay, the American Dream has devolved since Reagan, from "The land of opportunity" to "keep your hands off my stack!". As long as we all approach life that way, we are in trouble. Those in the suburbs may not think that the people struggling in the inner city matter, but if we keep being selfish and ignoring the problems of others, it is going to come home to rosst sooner than later. We rise together and we fall together. Time to choose.
"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
Pew Research finds Media Credibility Plummets, Just 30% Believe 'Most Trusted' CNN
NEWSFLASH: The republicans are losing the election! Quick everyone, quit reading the paper or watching TV! (unless it's Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity) Good idea there Now For.. let's see if anyone takes you up on it... :) 10 days left!
mrjungles and neos....you both are obviously the type looking for handout. beluclar has a point and you are simply unwilling to swallow the reality. If i make $251,000 why the hell should have to give some of my hard earned money to someone making 249,000? drawing a line in the sand blindly makes no sense at all and who the hell is Obama to define rich anyway? It is a joke. The funny thing is the top 5% he talks about starts at roughly $140K. Please, somebody exaplain this redistribution of wealth/bttom up theory because nobody including Obama has done it in a way that it makes sense for anyone other than the governement.
What makes you think that just because we support social programs, we are "looking for a handout"? This is the part pf the Reagan Revolution that has rung so hollow over the years and is causing so many republicans to abandon the party now. There is nothing wrong with working hard and making money, but the idea that because you make 800Grand a year, you should be able to pay the same amount of tax as a school teacher who makes 30,000 is ludicrous. That school teacher is not asking for a handout, she is just asking those who are wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes relative to what she pays, as currently they do not. You are falling for the over simplified, dumbed-down line of BS that McCain is trying to put over on the country. Wake up a smell the Folgers my friend, just because you may be doing well personally, does not mean the country is doing well. A community where people can't attend a decent school or afford to feed their family is not a healthy community, and no one is asking yuo to foot the entire bill, just pay your sahre along with the rest of us. That's not a 'hand out', that's called doing what's right.
I AM SHOCKED AT THE LACK OF INTELLIGENCE OR THE ABILITY OR WANT TO RECOUNT BY REPUBLICANS
SOMEONE HAS TO BE TAXED!!! IF MCCAIN'S THEORY WORKED-WHICH IS THE BUSH TAX POLICIES-WHICH WE ARE LIVING UNDER NOW.....................THEN WHY AREN'T THEY F'N WORKING RIGHT NOW?!
THE TRUTH IS EVEN BUSH'S OWN FATHER HAD TO RAISE TAXES AND THAT'S AFTER SAYING "READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES." YOU THINK HE THEN WANTED TO RAISE TAXES KNOWING IT WOULD PROBABLY COST HIM RE-ELECTION? BUT HE HAD TO...................IT WAS JUST TOO BAD HE PICKED THE MIDDLE CLASS TO DO IT TO.
OBAMA WILL TAX THE WEALTHY THE WAY THEY WERE DURING THE CLINTON YEARS AND GIVE GOOD TAX BREAKS TO LOW AND MIDDLE CLASS.
THE IRONIC PART ABOUT THE SUBJECT IS THAT LOW INCOME AND MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO KEEP SMALL BUSINESS ALIVE. MERCEDEZ BENZ OWNERS TAKE THEIR MERCEDEZ BENZ TO MERCEDEZ BENZ DEALERSHIPS TO BE FIXED. NOT FRANK AND JOE'S AUTO STORE. THEY SHOP AT SAKS FIFTH AVENUE WHEN THEY GET MORE MONEY(SEE SARAH PALIN) THEY DON'T TRICKLE IT DOWN.............MAYBE INTO THEIR OWN POCKETS. WHICH EVEN BUSH'S OWN FATHER CALLED "VODOO ECONOMICS"
-ASK ANY, I MEAN ANY SMALL BUSINESS IF THEY DID BETTER IN THE NINETIES OR ARE THEY DOING BETTER TODAY.....................THAT'S IF THEY'RE STILL AROUND. THEY MAY HAD BEEN GETTING TAX A LITTLE TOUGHER BUT THEY WERE DOING BETTER BECAUSE THEY HAD MORE OF WHAT KEEPS THEM ALIVE "PAYING CUSTOMERS." JOE THE PLUMBER(WHO IS AS CLOSE TO BUYING HIS OWN BUSINESS AS I AM THE NEW YORK YANKEES) IS JUST ANOTHER PERSON VOTING AGAINST THEIR OWN ECONOMIC BENEFIT OVER JIBBIRISH, DIALECT AND OVERLY PATRIOTIC MANTRA, MUCH LIKE THE MANY IN 2004. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY HE TALKS ABOUT OBAMA'S TAX PLAN......................IT'S NOT LIKE HE PAYS TAXES ANYWAY.
Marley07, you do understand the concept of the progrssive income tax, no? And you are spreading the wealth big time every time an uninsured poor person usse the ER as his primary health care source (we all pay for that and ERs tend to be really expensive compare to conventional health care made available to all. There is plentty more I could cite, but "spreading the wealth" happens to be a rather Christian concept, as well as a precept in many other religions. Some people tithe as a requirement of their churches. Others support food and clothing closets. This is nothing new, except that the Repubs have made it into a dirty concept., implying things that aren't there.
Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read " Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed. Once in the restaurant my server had on a "Obama 08" tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.
The redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.
I can see you're pretty proud of youself over this whole smart-assed experiment, so may I suggest another? If you are so unhappy with the idea of having to give some of your money to a cause other than buying yourself more stuff you probably don't need, then might I suggest not paying anymore taxes? Since taxation is the primary means for redistribution, simply don't pay. I'm sure the IRS will lovingly explain to you in their court summons exactly why the law deems it 'fairly important' to pay your taxes, even if you think all those 'pansy social programs' aren't worth it. I mean, why pay for things like schools and roads? Especially in America, where we can all 'pull up our socks' and look after ourselves right? they can always get some home schooling, or buy an F150 to dodge the potholes in the road... either way, I'm sure your lawyer will be able to make the IRS see it your way! :)
You are responding to a person who laughs at the homeless. What are the odds of him 'getting it.'
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.
Wrong Morgan, his record is that he voted with Bush 91% of the time, his record sucks. Then he picks a VP that hasnt even read the job description, so his judgement sucks also. Shes the boss of the senate? Maybe she should wait till she gets the job before she attempts a coup on the senate.
That's 10 percent against Bush. It's also 10 percent more than Obama has ever bucked his own party. The only time the "most liberal" person in the Senate would ever do that is to make his party even more liberal than it already is.
I thought that Obama bucked his party pretty good by voting against the Iraq war...You know since most voted for it like idiots.
BTW, he will do the same with Iran! It makes one wonder why he's going to bother to have tea with Mahoud Imanuttajob?
I have to agree with you there. But that's the only time I can think of.
You are wrong. He has bucked his own party. I support Obama, but one of the items he bucked his party on was the Class Action Fairness Act. As an attorney, I don't like that it past, but I still think he is better than McCain. In fact, Obama has worked with both parties. McCain has had a checker history with his own party as evident when he couldn't even get them to pass the bailout bill (the version without pork). And, after McCain's campaign -- real and unreal americans -- I think he has burned a lot of bridges with the other side. With the exception of Lieberman (who really wanted the VP slot over Palin), I have not seen any DEMS crossing the isle to endorse McCain. On the other hand, there have been plenty of GOP endorsements for Obama.
Ok then, lets spend 10 bill a month on a war that cant be won. Lets kill some more of our children and mame 1000's more in the name of...WMD's?...oh thats right, there arent any, terrorism?...oh no, wrong again, Iraq had nothing to do with it...hmmm, Oh I know, liberation? nope, Bush declared mission accomplished 3 years ago.
How about a VP candidate that doesnt know that taking over the senate is a bad thing. She doesnt get to do that, I hope she apologized to the 3rd graders for not understanding the job shes applying for. But, we can forgive her, she was probably absent the day they taught the law in law school...maybe she was shopping, it takes awhile to spend 150k, even at Neiman's.
Besides the issue of steering away from my post, you're really getting out there. Every bit of your post is non factual opinion. And at least Palin is not out there saying that we'll have a major international crisis as soon after her candidate is elected.
McCain said it best... If Obama wanted to run against George Bush, he should have done it four years ago.
The other ironic thing that people seem to continually miss about McCain and his so-called voting record is that he is the most absent member of the Senate when it comes to voting.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/
The author of The Post-American World is Fareed Zakariah, Newsweek's overseas bureau chief and a CNN host and commentator. Why shouldn't Obama read it? Zakariah is brilliant. In fact, why not read it for yourself, rather than taking you opinion of it off some anti-Obama blog.
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
Obama has used the money to over- advertise himself on many TV networks , it's not a political campaign in true sense, it shows that Obama agressively uses the money to buy his way to the White House , it's very frightening , it's not a fair game with McCain , Obama is a corrupted dishonest person.
Pennsylvania is supposedly McCain's last stand. Not that I'm worried or anything, but if it could be shown that this was more than just the actions of a seriously misguided young woman and that some coordination existed with at least the state campaign, that would just be a real gift.
For heaven's sake, even Michelle Malkin was calling this out as hoax and asking for restraint. Michelle Malkin. I thought my brain was gonna espload!! I cannot believe I am saying this - and I am absolutely certain that I will never say it again - but I hope that our side is able to show the same kind of restraint in our response to the emerging details of the hoax story that Malkin did to the initially hyped "assault."
Let's all let law enforcement do its job here. Our job right now is to turn out votes for Obama!
Obama's dealing with something very important right now. Besides, the less he says about this, the less his name is associated to McCain's latest ***-up!
Me thinks this was supposed to be some kind of October Surprise to turn voters off towards Obama and it completely blew up in their face.
Utterly disgusting. If there is any respectable person left on the McCain campaign, I do not understand how they can make it through the next 11 days. Charles Fried of Harvard Law School apparently couldn't stand anymore, resigned from the campaign's advisory panels and voted for Obama absentee.
Yeah, because if Bush, McCain, Romney, Thompson, Giuliani or Palin were able to raise that type of cash they'd turn it away. Please...
When you pay your makeup artist DOUBLE what you pay your foreign policy advisor, it is time to start examining your PRIORITIES.
You look just fine without makeup, John. And Sarah is young enough not to need any. So cut the crap, and start paying some good ECONOMIC ADVISORS so you can have a fiscal plan to present to America. We're in the middle of a huge global financial meltdown, and you are worried about hair and makeup? PLEASE start worrying about the middle class, John. Please.
Yeah, $20,000 in two weeks! OMG, that's half of my student loans!
More to the point, and I think this is CRITICAL, how can you trust people like this to use our public funds? They are using campaign money which righteously belongs to them, this is THEIR dear campaign money they are throwing out the window, now, should they be in charge how can one trust them not to do the same with OUR money?
This ain't frugal, this ain't conservative values, this is exactly what's been wrong with Wall Street, K Street, Bush economic policy and the Republican congress 2000-2006: Uncontrolled spending. What a fiasco! If I had given money to the McCain campaign I'd be royally indignant.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Discuss