I'm gettin' worried..........

[Liberty]

Its amazing this isn't getting more press....

You really shouldn't be! Obama and his Democrats can do wrong in the eyes of the American press. This has been going on for years and every knows about it, but the MSM doesn't want to talk about it and hurt Obama's chances.

[John]

Just remember that McCain has problems using a teleprompter, so he uses a note pad, while Bambam has a team backstage typing his notes into one so he can go HUD all the way.

10-4 to that. Obama uses a teleprompter and staff reminiscent of a shyster healer using an ear bud and listening to cues from his shills in the audience.

[Pocket9]

Why is everyone ignoring the other choices in this election? Ron Paul recently endorsed Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle (http://www.baldwin08.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) and I will definitely be voting for them. Check out their position on the issues and I'll bet their views represent at least 95% of the people on this forum. They are write in candidates in Texas, but are on many ballots across the nation.

If people would just vote for the candidate that best represents their views instead of "the lesser of two evils", this country would be a much better place today.

[longhorn_92]

I'm worried too, very worried!

If Obama does win, we had better see NRA membership jump to 7 or 8 million quickly, because we're in for battles that make pre-1994 Clinton days look like a practice run. The Brady Campaign, Humane Society of the U.S., and lesser known but well-financed, powerful anti-gun organizations are elated at the prospects of having Obama and Biden in office. Have a look at the Brady Campaign website at http://www.BradyCampaign.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; For the first time in years, we are seeing Brady/Million Mom operatives in Texas actually happy to see the Texas Legislative Session just around the corner.

Remember, Obama will likely have the opportunity to name a successor to at least one Supreme Court Justice. The names most frequently mentioned are Justices Stevens and Ginsburg. If they are replaced by equally or more liberal, anti-gun justices, then the vote count remains the same, but they will be on the court for decades. Remember that Justice Scalia who wrote the majority opinion in Heller is 72 years old and Justice Kennedy, the swing/winning vote in Heller is also 72 years old. While 72 isn't old, it also isn't young and these justices won't be on the Supreme Court for decades more. It is quite possible that either of these men could leave the court by age 76, within Obama's term in office.

Heller was won by only one vote and the loss of either Scalia or Kennedy during an Obama Presidency could have disastrous consequences for the Second Amendment. If an anti-gun justice was confirmed to the Court, I believe the least we could expect to see is the Court refusing to apply the Second Amendment to the states (i.e. no "incorporation"). I also believe the Court would not hesitate ignore stare decisis and reverse Heller simply claiming it was wrongly decided. If we lose Heller, the Second Amendment would not provide an individual right and the way would be paved for draconian state and federal gun control laws. Further, we would once again face the specter of a UN "small arms" treaty that could prohibit the private possession of firearms by American Citizens, even if we are successful in blocking anti-gun legislation. Remember, only the Senate must ratify UN treaties signed by the President and the Democrats are expected to increase their margins in both the House and Senate. (A Supreme Court ruling of an individual right is crucial to preventing this treaty application to citizens.)

This isn't a scare tactic folks, this threat is very very real. For years we've seen Brady and the other anti-gunners shift the battle to the states, because they couldn't get anything passed at the federal level. The "chatter," as our intelligence people like to say, clearly indicates that Washington is once again going to be the battleground. We had better bolster the NRA with more members and more money -- the barbarians truly are at the gate.

You bet I'm worried; I'm very worried.

Chas.

I agree....and it is looking more and more like a Nobama victory...(Get out and vote!)

[Jesse1911]

Too bad McCain is also against Vets. Who do I vote for


McCain's attack on vets
His respectful rhetoric isn't matched by his votes.
By Edward Humes
May 30, 2008
MORE THAN A FEW people have been puzzled by Sen. John McCain's dogged opposition to the updated GI Bill of Rights now before Congress. The dissonance between McCain's military-man image and his actions on this issue have introduced a jarring note to his presidential aspirations -- and have highlighted the shoddy treatment many Iraq war veterans have received.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR THE RECORD:

GI Bill: A May 30 Op-Ed article about the GI Bill said the 1944 bill offered full benefits to any veteran who served 90 days. The bill paid for 12 months of college or vocational school if a veteran served 90 days, with additional benefits, up to 48 months of school, for each month of military service. —

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why would a Vietnam War veteran and former prisoner of war, a man who is personally acquainted with the difficulties vets can face in returning to civilian life, join President Bush in opposing a popular bipartisan bill to support the troops? Isn't fixing the education benefit in the bill -- one that has shortchanged far too many veterans for years -- a political no-brainer in an election year? The 75 senators who recently voted for it certainly thought so. Over the Memorial Day weekend, Sen. Barack Obama expressed some well-timed astonishment at McCain’s opposition, and the two have been feuding about it ever since. The media and pundits seem perplexed, collectively suggesting: That's not the John McCain we know.

[dwhitley]

Yea you should worry.... Both Suck... the entire GOV Sucks... Hello... its bull like this that keeps us where we are.. both sides are screwed up... and as long as Americans keep putting up with it... well its the same story... Now let me say this.. Bush has screwed this country to hell and we aint even on the road back yet... Obama.. well I am not sure he has much to add... McCaine he is to old.. he is tired and you can see it.. He picked the woman running mate to get the female vote... enough said... we are in trouble no matter who wins... Americans need to stand up and fight to get this crap back on track... I have said it before.. GAS is the issue here.. Middle East they cannot beat us in war... but they are kicking our butts with Oil... look at then our gas went up... the start of the war... Hello wake up and see the picture what all does the price of gas touch in your life? D

[bryang]

That being said, I agree that McCain lost the debate. I don't think he lost on substance. I think he lost on charisma. Charisma shouldn't matter in an executive because a charismatic executive can convince a lot of people to head down a wrong path. Obama, love him or hate him, is very charismatic. The biggest danger in him is not just that his dead wrong on just about every issue, but that he is so charismatic that he can convince people that he knows what he's talking about. I am convinced that people don't really understand what he's saying because they are often intellectually lazy. but that his voice and mannerism projects such conceeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrn and syyyyyyyyyyympathy and clear-eyed hooooooooooooooonesty that his listeners are seduced into believing that he knows what he's talking about. And they don't have to understand it. They only have to believe that HE understands it all, so they will trust him to do their thinking for them.

He's like the Anti-Christ.

"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up , and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." (Luke 21:28 KJV)

-geo

[nitrogen]

He's like the Anti-Christ.

John McCain himself says Obama is a decent man.

"I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared (of) as president of the United States."

"He's not. [an Arab.] He's a decent, family man citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that's what this campaign is all about."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf6YKOkfFsE[/youtube]
Do you see yet why I'm not voting for either of them? John McCain sticks his finger into the wind more than Barak Obama does. He obviously says this now, after getting bad press for his followers threatening his life at earlier town hall meetings.

I really wish McCain would attack Obama on the issues; but the fact that he only wants to talk about William Ayers and Jeramiah Wright (neither of which anyone in their right mind should care about) makes me ill. For the longest time, I was waiting with baited breath for Mr. McCain to give me something, ANYTHING in which I could support him for president. He has utterly failed to do this.

While on many issues I might be called liberal, I usually look to republicans to lead on is economic conservatism; less taxes, less spending. Republicans have even managed to ditch that these days, giving 800 billion of my tax dollars away to people that helped flush the economy into the toilet. He has lately said he wants to use my tax dollars to buy up bad mortgages now. What the heck kind of conservatism is this? I'd expect Obama and the Democrats to want to do this. This is a HUGE deal killer for me.

Not to mention that Obama's record on gun issues is completely unacceptable. I like part of his plans for energy, but his plans will help us many years in the future, and won't do a lick of good NOW. That's also unacceptable. He supports wasting money on ethanol as a replacement for gasoline. Also unacceptable. That's just a start. These are deal killers too.

So just what the heck am I supposed to do?

I'm incensed that this is the best we can do. The democrats were retarded to nominate Obama. They should have nominated Richardson.

The republicans should have nominated, well, ANYBODY besides McCain. Even though I severely disagree with some of his views in regards to seperation of Church and State, I truly wish I could vote for Huccabee for president.

Ok, I think I'm done ranting for now.

EDIT: Adding youtube link

[John]

Here is another example of an excused checkerd past. Obama fundraiser, convicted of fraud, spills beans http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081011/D93O5M100.html

But questions concerning Obama's relationship with Rezko linger, particularly over Rezko's role in the purchase of the Obamas' home.

The two have known each other for years, starting when Rezko offered Obama a job after he graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991. Obama didn't take it, but a friendship developed.

The men talked politics frequently and occasionally dined together with their wives.

In 2005, the Obamas paid $1.65 million for their home near the University of Chicago. The sellers wanted a parcel they owned next door to sell on the same day, and Rezko's wife, Rita, was the buyer. At the request of the Obamas, Mrs. Rezko later sold them a 10-foot strip of land to enlarge their lot. They paid $104,500.

The deal took place while Rezko was under investigation and when details of the cozy relationship surfaced, Obama said it was a "bonehead" error to have asked for the additional land because it looked like he was getting a favor.

"I regret it," Obama said at the time. "I'm going to make sure that from this point on I don't even come close to the line."

Thank goodness he's not going to come close to the line any more.