October 1-2, 2008
Oct 01 09:08 Fundraiser Blogging Oct 01 13:35 Today's Must Reading (Especially for Conservatives) Oct 01 17:42 An Important Victory, A Call To Arms Oct 02 00:45 Altmire Playing Fast & Loose With the Truth? Oct 02 01:23 Ohio's Corruption Factory Oct 02 09:12 Obama's Loopholes? Oct 02 10:34 Aaron Landry: Elitist, Idiot Oct 02 20:00 Liveblogging the VP Debate
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Fundraiser Blogging
Last night, I attended a great fundraiser for Josh Behling, the man I hope will represent me next year in the Minnesota Legislature. Actually, I hope he represents me there for next year and many years to come.
State Representatives Steve Gottwalt and Dan Severson attended, as did former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Jim Knoblach and former Lt. Gov. Joanne Benson.
A portion of Josh's speech is dedicated to having the activists tell people that Larry Haws isn't a moderate. He illustrated this by asking if the activists thought Speaker Kelliher was a liberal. The predictable answer was yes. One person was heard saying "I know she is." (No, it wasn't me, though I wish I'd been that quick on my feet.) The next question Josh asked was whether we thought Tony Sertich was liberal. The resounding answer was yes.
That's when Josh delivered the knockout punch, saying that the Taxpayers League gave Speaker Kelliher and Leader Sertich higher conservative ratings than Rep. Haws. Longtime readers of this blog know that I've maintained that Grandpa Larry's image doesn't match reality.
Josh talked about how much he enjoyed the debates he's had with Larry. I've been to 2 debates thus far. Josh pretty much beat Larry like a drum in both. Those debates were Chamber of Commerce-sponsored events, the first being on business, the second being on health care. (I blogged about the business debate here . I liveblogged about the health care debate here .)
I mentioned in the first debate that Larry unknowingly touted the fact that he hasn't worked in the private sector in nearly half a century. Frankly, it's time we elected someone who'll pay attention to what small businesses need instead of paying attention to what Big Government needs. We've seen Larry Haws's commitment to expanding government. Josh owned a small business. He's currently employed by Capitol Granite.
One of Josh's responsibilities at Capitol Granite is to help put the benefit package together. This year, Josh successfully got HSA's included in their benefit package. This is a great example of how business is helping bring about intelligent health care reform without government's help. Josh is quick to point out that HSA's aren't THE SILVER BULLET. He'll just tell you that they're a great option for a number of people because it makes people "health care shoppers."
House Minority Leader Marty Seifert spoke right after Josh. He said that we need to elect guys like Josh because we need more people that will let the market work. The best example Marty gave of markets working was that the Star Tribune getting cut down to size. That was easily the best line of the night.
Marty said that 3M and Control Data were the biggest employers in the state when he was growing up. He then quickly highlighted the fact that the 3 biggest employers now are the State of Minnesota, the U of M and the federal government. Marty said that that information was proof that we need to change the business atmosphere in Minnesota. He quickly stated that that transformation won't happen with Margaret Kelliher as Speaker or Larry Haws in the legislature. That point isn't arguable.
Finally, Marty said he was excited to announce that CD-6 had purchased a billboard on Highway 10 just south of St. Cloud for Josh.
It's time that people in HD-15B helped Josh finish strong. If that happens, we can topple a living legend. It's vitally important that that happen. We need people in the legislature who care about Minnesota's business climate. Larry's shown his true colors. He won't get it done.
It's time we elected Josh so that that important project gets started ASAP.
Posted Wednesday, October 1, 2008 9:08 AM
No comments.
Today's Must Reading (Especially for Conservatives)
I've had several opportunities to discuss the credit crisis and bailout with my friend King Banaian. Much of what we've talked about is found in this article . If conservatives don't read any other article, they'd better read this. Here's one of the important points that King makes:
Free markets have always had booms and busts. This is the nature of Schumpeter's "creative destruction," of which some think this crisis is just another example. Some think this would be good for our economy.It's vitally important that we don't let the economy tank, which will happen if this credit crunch continues. That's inarguable. The longer this crisis continues, the longer the ensuing recession will be. That's in no one's interests.
They are wrong. Those who see in the current crisis only creative destruction underestimate the dose of simple destruction, as in a bomb going off, we are facing, and the magnitude of that destruction.
In creative destruction the boom that follows the bust needs to have credit to stoke its engines. The genius of capitalism is the movement of capital from the investor who seeks returns to the entrepreneur whose new innovation will help drive the next boom.
The current crisis threatens the engine of capitalism, finance, and hence we cannot sit idly by as the crisis deepens.
Here's another important point King makes:
Free markets do not mean always private markets. Free markets mean markets with an absence of coercion. It is possible for government to step forward for a missing market and not be coercive. A bailout that did not consume taxpayer dollars would be one example. Forcing banks to alter their lending standards would be coercive and unfree.John McCain did America a great favor by insisting that House conservatives be included in the negotiations this past weekend. Their involvement resulted in several important accountability provisions being adopted. Their involvement also potentially kept the costs down. Those are things that shouldn't be taken lightly.
Unfortunately, it's now time for a dose of reality. We're in the minority. Though we've played our hand exceptionally well, we aren't going to get everything we want. It's time we asked whether it's more important to fight for a great bill and lose or whether it's more important to win significant reforms and prevent a deep recession.
It's decision time because we won't get both.
Here's Captain Ed's thoughts on King's article too:
The net effect will be that investment capital will have to work harder to create more opportunities, even as we desperately need it to create a boom from the creative destruction of the markets.Here's what Ed thinks happens as a result:
The problems will not occur overnight, but will stretch out over a long period of decline in investment. Jobs will evaporate, and without credit, investor capital will escape into non-productive savings.
Existing businesses will take less risk, retreat from expansions and projects, and consumer spending will contract. Proper management on the margins can keep this from becoming a depression, but without rational pricing on credit, we're in for a long and hard recession .I heartily concur with Ed's opinion. That's why it's important for us to make the right decisions.
In this instance, it's vitally important that we don't choose stubbornness over prosperity.
Posted Wednesday, October 1, 2008 1:35 PM
No comments.
An Important Victory, A Call To Arms
The federal bans on drilling on the OCS and in the Green River Formation shale oil deposits ended when the clock struck midnight last night. House GOP Leader John Boehner issued this statement that should serve as both a reminder of our hard-fought victory and as a call to arms:
Today is a seminal moment in the fight for more American energy production, and the fight House Republicans waged and won is a big victory for Americans struggling with record gasoline prices. Lifting the outdated bans on offshore drilling and oil shale exploration is an important step toward the comprehensive energy strategy America needs to bring down prices at the pump. And for that reason, I'm very troubled by House Democratic leaders' recent assertion that restoring the bans 'will be a top priority for discussion next year.'It's imperative that we finish this fight. That means putting Republicans back in the majority in the House and keeping the White House in Republican control. At minimum, we need to elect Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin. That gives the good guys veto power, which means Pelosi and Reid can stomp their feet and hold their breath but they still won't get the moratoria re-instated.
For months on end, the American people demanded that Congress get serious about increasing energy production to lower gas prices, and for months, the Democrats in charge refused to listen. House Republicans did, and when Democrats went home for a five-week break over the summer, we joined American citizens on the floor of the House in an unprecedented revolt against the Democratic Majority's refusal to act. That protest, along with the increasing calls nationwide for real energy reform, proved to be an unstoppable force, and today's expiration of the bans are tangible proof of the victory shared by Republicans and the American people.
This victory for the American people must not be short-lived. Rather, it should be a first step toward an 'all of the above' plan to reduce fuel costs. That plan calls for increased energy production nationwide, including on Alaska's remote North Slope, more conservation and efficiency, and better use of renewable and alternative fuels, but the Democrats who run Congress have refused to give it a vote. Instead, they've decided to leave town for the rest of October, and signaled that one of their priorities for the next Congress will be restoring the bans that expired last night."
It also guarantees that an Obama administration won't be in position to issue the executive order re-instating the moratoria.
If you needed the motivation for the final 34 days, this should do it.
Posted Wednesday, October 1, 2008 5:42 PM
No comments.
Altmire Playing Fast & Loose With the Truth?
This Hill Magazine article shows that it's never too early for Democrats to play the Social Security scare card. Here's what the Hill is reporting:
National Democrats continue to bet heavily on Social Security privatization as a trump card in the 2008 elections, launching attack ads in three more districts Tuesday that accuse GOP candidates of supporting risky private accounts.Alicia Collins, the campaign manager for Melissa Hart , took issue with the Altmire campaign for running ads that were intended to scare people. Here's what Ms. Collins said in response to the DCCC's ads:
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is now up with at least eight ads on the topic, while Senate Democrats are using the issue in ads in Louisiana and Oregon.
Tuesday's additions go after a pair of Pennsylvania candidates, Rep. Phil English and top challenger Lou Barletta, as well as former Rep. Mike Sodrel (R-IN). And in another Pennsylvania race, Rep. Jason Altmire (D) is also up with a new ad linking former Rep. Melissa Hart (R) to President Bush's privatization plan.
"It seems that Jason Altmire is once again getting his direction from the Obama/Pelosi playbook, scare the public about any idea put forward, but offer no ideas of your own," said Campaign Manger, Alicia Collins.I'm personally calling Jason Altmire out on this. It's a gutless thing to let an ad like that run. It's intellectually bankrupt. It's indefensible. Most importantly, it tells me that he doesn't have a positive agenda to run on.
Collins added, "Instead of airing untrue and extremely misleading advertisements to scare people about their financial future, Congressman Altmire should get back to work in Washington and address the current financial crisis."
He's a freshman. That means he doesn't have any accomplishments to speak of. How could he when the 110th Congress didn't accomplish anything meaningful except at gunpoint? The only accomplishments they have was FISA reform, which they wouldn't vote on until the extension had almost expired, and passing an increase in the minimum wage. What's noteworthy is that the minimum wage didn't pass until Democrats included tax cuts that Republicans wanted in the bill. It should also be noted that the minimum wage increase didn't pass as a standalone bill; it was included in the Iraq Supplemental.
Here's proof that the DCCC's ad isn't accurate:
All of those claims have already been discredited by FactCheck.org on September 20, 2008 in "Obama's Social Security Whopper":In other words, Democratsare playing the same despicable games that they play every election cycle. Jason Altmire isn't the first Democrat to play this game. He won't be the last. He's just the latest morally bankrupt Democrat to play the card."The plan, 2005 would not have allowed anyone born before 1950 to invest any part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts. All current retirees would be covered by the same benefits they are now.
The private accounts would have been voluntary.
Obama's reference to "casino culture," disappearing "nest eggs" and gambling with "your life savings" are also misleading exaggerations. Only a little under one-third of any workers' total Social Security taxes could have been invested (a maximum of 4 percent of taxable wages, out of the total 12.4 percent now paid, split equally between worker and employer.)
Speculation in individual stocks would not have been permitted. Workers would have had a choice of a few, broadly diversified stock or bond funds."
Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 1:25 AM
No comments.
Ohio's Corruption Factory
Soren Dayton has posted a video of the voter fraud scheme that Ohio's Democratic Secretary of State and the Ohio legislature have put together. Here's that video:
Here's what The NextRight is reporting :
Early voting is taking place in Ohio. Through the end of the week, people can register and vote on the same day. The Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner argues that they are merely "casting their ballot" rather than "voting" so the fact that Ohio statute requires 30 days between registering and voting would not interfere.Here's what one person voting is quoted as saying:
So here is what is happening today. People are showing up to register and vote. There is no affirmative evidence that these people have not registered or voted somewhere else. There is no control. Normally in an election, partisan election monitors are allowed into polling places so that they can police each other. But not in two counties, Franklin and Montgomery, in Ohio. Brunner also issued an advisory opinion to counties saying that they are not required to allow election monitors .
It's a perfect opportunity for them to come in, register at a temporary address like a homeless shelter or a YMCA or something like that. They can register at that address because they don't know where they're going to be tomorrow or next week."Think of what this idiot said. Heres' my translation of what he said:
It's the perfect voter fraud opportunity. You don't have to prove you live where you say you live because it's a homeless shelter or a YMCA. As soon as I'm done here, there's nothing preventing me from registering and voting somewhere else. All I have to do is provide them with another fictional address.Let's remember that Ohio's partisan Secretary of State isn't allowing election monitors to watch the voting. That eliminates all challenges to questionable voters. It's the perfect voter fraud system.
There are some issues that I'll fight for but that I'm not willing to fight and die for. This is an issue that I'll fight tooth and nail on. This is something I'll fight to the death on. Voting is both a right and a privilege. Voting systems should be made as corruption-proof as is humanly possible. This is the opposite of being corruption-proof.
Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 1:24 AM
No comments.
Obama's Loopholes?
Robert Novak has posted something at Townhall.com about Sen. Obama mocking Sen. Obama's definition of a tax loophole. Here's what Mr. Novak posted:
How would Barack Obama pay for the $800 billion that John McCain claimed in the first presidential debate Sept. 26 in Oxford, Miss., that his Democratic opponent would spend if he were elected president? Obama replied, by "closing tax loopholes."The Anointed is playing word games. He knows that accurately describing his tax policies means that he'd have to call them tax increases. (In fact, an $800 billion tax increase would be one of the biggest in U.S. history.) The Anointed knows that using the term closing loopholes gets a pass from voters. He knows that if he tells people directly that he plans on proposing job-killing tax increases on small businesses, he'd get defeated. That's why he's using the euphemism closing tax loopholes.
Obama was no more specific in the debate, and tax experts doubt that structural changes without increasing taxes can raise anything close to that amount of money.
My office asked the Obama campaign for the details, and it responded with a 19-page single-spaced paper on the candidate's "tax plans."
In fact, there was precious little about tax policy in the paper, which amounted to a repeat of Democratic campaign oratory that can be heard in 30-second speeches before both houses of Congress daily on C-SPAN.
Obama has made clear that he would try to roll back President Bush's tax cuts, but that does not come under the definition of a "loophole." A loophole consists of a conniving tax attorney discovering a weakness in the Internal Revenue Code or such a weakness intentionally legislated by Congress under the instigation of crafty lobbyists. The only specific tax legislation contained in Obama's paper would raise the capital gains rate for most shareholders, restore taxation on dividend income to pre-Bush standards and restore the full estate tax.
The truth is that Sen. Obama's policies are either failed or radical. Sen. Obama's tax policies fall into the failed category. Sen. Obama's supporters will say that his policies aren't unlike Bill Clinton's. While it's true that Bill Clinton raised taxes, the conditions were completely different. He raised taxes while the economy was strengthening. Sen. Obama's tax increases would happen while the economy is teetering.
That's plain stupid.
If Sen. Obama wants to create 'Soupline America', he's on the right track. If the American people want prosperity within the next 4 years, then he's the last person we should want steering the United States. I'll simply close with this:
The Obama paper paints a picture of lobbyists running wild on Capitol Hill but neglects to assess the impact on the economy during the current financial crisis of taking a serious strike against the stockholding public.It's fashionable to paint Washington run amok with evil lobbyists, mostly because there are alot of Washington lobbyists running amok. Sen. Obama knows that because his staff is littered with lobbyists and special interest yes men.
Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 9:16 AM
No comments.
Aaron Landry: Elitist, Idiot
It isn't a secret that Aaron Landry isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. This post is additional proof that Mr. Landry is a partisan hack who isn't interested in thinking things through. Here's what I'm basing this opinion on:
Okay SD 16 GOP: I know you guys are a little bit upset that your endorsed candidate was overruled by the elitists in the party but please: get over it. Alison Krueger, if she defeats the DFL challenger, will be a fantastically obedient servant to the state party leadership and your senate district should be proud.It's obvious that Landry hasn't met Alison Krueger. If he had, he wouldn't say that she'll be "a fantastically obedient servant to the state party leadership." I've gotten to know Ms. Krueger. Calling her a yes person is wildly inaccurate. Let me rephrase that. It's pure BS.
Then again, Landry isn't noted for caring about important details. As far as I can tell, he's only interested in bombthrowing. If his claims are accurate, which isn't a frequent happening, that's fine with him. If his claims aren't legitimate or accurate, something that happens on a frequent basis, he couldn't care less. In Mr. Landry's world, it's important to throw bombs. Being accurate isn't even a blip on Mr. Landry's radar.
Saying that 1,700+ people's votes are the voice of elitism is downright obnoxious. It shows that Mr. Landry is the elitist in this equation. Here's another fact-free Landry diatribe:
What that means is that your state party really, truly cares that another rubber stamp for the GOP elite exists to make places like Mille Lacs and Sherburne counties proud to have a bought-out, corrupt minion that will vote their way for the betterment of the party and not the people they represent.I will again point out that she won the primary because We The People voted for her in sufficient numbers. That isn't a form of elitism. That's the definition of grassroots activism.
As for Mr. Landry's charge that Ms. Krueger is "a bought-out, corrupt minion", perhaps Mr. Landry will offer something other than empty allegations as proof of his accusation.
That's what real journalists routinely do, which means I won't hold my breath waiting for his proof.
That isn't something that Mr. Landry is interested in. He's accepted a mission to launch as many baseless accusations in as short of a period of time as is physically possible. I'm certain that he didn't promise to source his information. That'd require him to maintain a certain level of integrity. That'd get in the way of his mission.
As for Ms. Krueger, she's played a vital role in her family's 3 small businesses while homeschooling her children. In other words, she's been a picture of integrity. She'd also bring a wealth of knowledge to the State Senate, something that institution is missing badly. Ms. Krueger understands the negative effect that Minnesota's taxes and regulations have on small businesses. She understands that health care is overburdened with state mandates, which dramatically drives up health-related costs.
What's hilarious is the fact that Olson apologist Chris Kumpula compliments Landry's fact-free hit piece in the comments. Here's the part of Chris Kumpula's comment that I found most laughable:
The delegates were the furthest thing from elitists- suggesting that they were is really quite absurd.I know one of the delegates. Elitist fits this delegate to a T. I'd further ask Mr. Kumpula this question: How it is that Mr. Olson secured 60+ percent of the delegates in short order, then got his ass handed to him in the primary by an opponent who didn't campaign? The delegates got it badly wrong. They didn't speak the will of the people. That's the definition of elitism.
Alison Krueger wins the GOP primary while Aaron Landry and Chris Kumpula are again exposed as hatemongering elitists. What a fitting conclusion.
Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 10:35 AM
Comment 1 by Aaron Landry at 02-Oct-08 11:24 AM
Awesome. Thanks for your commentary on this.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 02-Oct-08 11:52 AM
Anytime. I'll gladly tear you apart with your own words.
Comment 3 by Ed Kohler at 02-Oct-08 12:50 PM
Can someone be both elitist and an idiot?
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 02-Oct-08 12:52 PM
Definitely.
Liveblogging the VP Debate
7:55 -- Listening to FNC's Strategy Room, they're saying that Palin has much more latitude in going on offense than Biden. I'll be watching for that. That would be a good thing.
7:56 -- Qwen Ifill is patiently sitting almost motionless at her desk.
7:59 -- Neither candidate has entered the room. It won't be long now.
8:01 -- Ifill is explaining the format.
8:02 -- They've just entered the stage. Gov. Palin looks comfortable.
8:03 -- First question to Biden on the bailout. He's starting off with a whopper, talking about the deregulation & wild happenings going on on Wall Street. "We're gonna focus on the middle class, not just on the wealthy."
8:04 -- Damn livestream dropped.
8:08 -- Palin talking about Obama not having proof of practicing new politics.
8:10 -- Palin talking about predatory lending practices, then talking about not getting ourselves into debt.
8:11 -- Biden is back talking about overwhelming deregulation. John this, John that. He's piling it on thick.
8:13 -- Palin responding to Biden. Obama had 94 opportunities to lower taxes. 94 times he voted not to lower taxes.
8:15 -- I'm gonna talk directly to the American people. As mayor, I've cut taxes.
8:17 -- John wants to add $300 billion to the wealthiest. Typical class warfare.
8:18 -- Palin: You're forgetting about all the small businesses that'll get dumped into Obama's tax increases. It's the backwards way to the economy. She's now defending McCain's health care plan. She's just nailed it talking about how inept government is at running anything.
8:20 -- Biden: Where I come from, it isn't called redistribution of wealth, it's called basic fairness.
8:23 -- Palin: The nice thing about running with John McCain is that he doesn't say one thing to one group & another thing to another group. As governor of Alaska, I had to take on the oil companies. John McCain voted against the tax cuts for oil companies, Obama voted for them.
8:25 -- Biden: Why is John McCain adding another $4 billion to Exxon?
8:26 -- Palin: Weak moment talking about greed on Wall Street, then finishing strong by reminding people that John McCain gave the first warning on Freddie/Fannie.
8:29 -- Palin: back on energy policy. Some from the East Coast aren't letting us tapping into our energy supplies. It isn't just about taxes.
8:31 -- Palin: We have to clean up this planet. I'm not about to blame every temperature change on man's activities. I'm willing to talk about the cyclical nature of warming/cooling.
8:33 -- Biden: We know what causes global warming. It's manmade. Now he's talking about clean coal technology. We should be exporting CCT. "I guess John just believes is Drill! Drill! Drill!
8:35 -- Palin: Sen. Biden, You once said that drilling on the OCS as raping the environment.
8:39 -- Palin: Barack Obama voted against the surge. "Sen., I respected you when you called Sen. Obama out", saying that it was all politics.
8:41 -- Biden: John McCain voted against funding the troops because the bill had a timeline in it. He's trying to saying that McCain didn't support the troops because he didn't sanction defeat? Get serious.
8:43 -- Biden: On every major foreign policy issue, John McCain has been wrong. That's strong language for someone who wanted to divide sovereign Iraq into 3 countries.
8:47 -- Palin: Gen. Petraeus called Iraq the central front in the war on terror. Ahmadinejad calls Israel a "stinking corpse" poses a greater threat than Pakistan. Now she's nailing Obama about meeting with Ahmadinejad without preconditions & preparations.
8:50 -- Palin. It's beyond bad judgment to meet with Ahmadinejad.
8:51 -- Biden: Sen. Obama did not say that he'd meet with Ahmadinejad. Wrong. This is demonstrably false. Expect Team McCain to have a video out 5 minutes after the debate ends.
8:52 -- Palin: Israel is our strongest & best ally in the Middle East. A McCain-Palin administration would tell Israel that we won't permit another Holocaust.
8:54 -- Biden: There's no better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. Barack Obama shares my passion for Israel.
8:55 -- Palin: Biden is wrong in saying the Bush adminstration's Israel policy was an "abject failure." "Sen. Biden keeps talking about change but they keep talking about the Bush administration."
8:57 -- Palin: The surge principles in Iraq need to be applied to Afghanistan. Sen. Obama said that we're bombing citizens. We aren't doing that.
8:58 -- Biden: Our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge strategy in Iraq won't work in Afghanistan.
9:00 -- Palin: First of all, Gen. McClellan didn't say specifically that the surge principles wouldn't work in Afghanistan.
9:01 -- Biden is arguing that Palin is wrong about Gen. McClellan.
9:03 -- Biden: I've got the stomach for winning wars. Proof please?
9:04 -- Palin: It's obvious that I'm not from inside the Beltway. Sen. You voted for a war resolution. TAGGED HARD.
9:05 -- Biden: I've never agreed with John McCain's Iraq policy.
9:07 -- Palin: John McCain knows how to win wars.
9:09 -- Biden: God forbid anything happens but I'd follow every Obama policy.
9:10 -- Palin: I think America needs some Wasilla common sense that says "If you're gonna dump more taxes on me, I'd rather you got out of the way."
9:11 -- Biden: I know about the middle class.
9:12 -- Palin: God bless you, Joe, but you prefaced your statement with the Bush administration again. Gets a good chuckle from everyone. Now she's talking about education & her family's education background.
9:13 -- Palin: The VP is President of the Senate. My role in the McCain administration will be about energy.
9:15 -- Biden: Barack picked me to help govern.
9:16 -- Palin: My executive experience will be put to good use in a McCain administration.
9:18 -- Biden: It's bizarre to think that the VP isn't part of the Executive Branch. (How does he explain the Senate paying the VP's salary?)
9:19 -- Palin: The McCain-Palin ticket believes in American exceptionalism.
9:22 -- Palin: John McCain is the ultimate maverick. I've taken on my own party in Alaska, too. Look at all the different people supporting John McCain: Lieberman, Giuliani, Lingle, Romney.
9:24 -- Biden: John McCain isn't a maverick. ??? This guy is downright bizarre.
9:26 -- Palin: "There've been times when I've wanted to zero-base budget but I didn't have the votes."
9:28-- Palin: You do what I've done. You appoint people who'll do the best job for the people. You walk the walk. You don't just talk the talk. You support a ticket that cuts spending. You support building infrastructure.
Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 9:38 PM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 02-Oct-08 11:10 PM
You know you missed a few things:
* Obama will only increase the taxes on the rich. I don't make $50,000 a year, but my taxes will be increased because the lowest rate will be increased from 10% to 15%!
* John Mccain didn't want to reform. Um wasn't there that bill in 2005 that Mccain sponsored where he predicted what happened this year.
* Didn't he say there is no difference between a gay marriage and a hetrosexual marriage. Boy that will wake up the Christian conservatives. Yet I heard that Biden made no gaffs!
* Oh Bush is wrong in Iraq! Bush is wrong in Afghanistan! Bush is wrong in Pakistan! Bush is wrong in Israel! Biden criticized Palin for supporting Bush policies. Um doesn't he realize they have no policies and make things worse.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by jt at 03-Oct-08 12:07 AM
seriously? Tell you what, if you're not willing to enlist, don't vote for McCain.
