Friday, October 31, 2008

The Democratic Party is supposed to be the party of the "common" man", right?

And the Republican party is supposed to be for all those old, rich, white guys. Or so the legend goes. But if all that is true, then I have a question...John McCain has quite a few "every day people" standing up for him. I mean, there's Tito the Builder:

There's Joe the Plumber:

There's Joe the Veteran:

And let's not forget the most visible of us "common people", Sarah Palin:

So where are Obama's common "folks" (as he so charmingly calls us)? Where are they at? I see lots of politicians endorsing this "Agent of Change". Kind of makes me wonder what kind of "change" Obama is selling them on because surely they're not all volunteering to get the heck out of DC so that real change can happen if only we'll elect The One, are they? I see a lot of Hollywood "folks" endorsing Obama. Barbra Streisand, Matt Damon (Lord how I weep for your attitude about Palin, Matt!), Jessica Alba, Tom Hanks, Ron Howard and oh yeah, Oprah Winfrey among many, many others. Not sure if I see the benefit of having people who lie for a living endorse you, but politicians do seem to like that, don't they? I see lots of Obama campaign workers who support him. And they're all trained like good little robots. Doesn't matter what question is asked of them, they come back with the same tired old lines, "We don't want 4 more years of failed Bush policies" or "Senator Obama has been very clear that he is going to cut taxes for 95% of Americans". They never seem to mention that McCain isn't Bush and, in fact, McCain has differed from Bush in several very meaningful and public ways. Sure, he voted for lots of stuff that Bush wanted. Maybe that's because Bush was actually right about some things. I know the Left likes to paint Bush as being damn near as inept a president as Jimmy Carter was, but let's be serious...Carter set such a high bar in the field of ineptitude that it's pretty much impossible for anyone to even come close. They also fail to mention that of those 95% that Obama is going to cut taxes for, at least 40% of them don't even pay taxes to begin with. Hard to "cut" their taxes when they don't pay any, eh? But pointing that out is seen as quibbling and therefore, too far beneath response, so the Obama-bots just keep repeating their lines over and over and over without so much as acknowledging the issues.
I also see a lot of ACORN workers endorsing Obama. Only problem with that, of course, is that ACORN is supposed to be non-partisan and by claiming to be non-partisan, have managed to obtain beau coup bucks from our Federal Government in the form of our tax dollars. Not cool. So again...normal, every day, common Americans like Tito and Joe and Joe and Sarah put their butts on the line in order to endorse John McCain for president and Obama's big endorsements come from fellow politicians, pretenders, paid campaign workers and ACORN.
So tell me is it that the Democratic party is geared towards "the common man" and the Republicans are only good for rich, old, white guys?

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Make Election Day a National Holiday? I don't think so....

I did a post yesterday about Obama telling his supporters to ask for Tuesday off in order to make calls on his behalf, knock on doors on his behalf, as well as vote for him. I received some interesting comments on that post, but I feel the need to respond publicly to one person in particular. Well, actually two, since Brenda agreed with Brian, the commenter I'm referring to. Before I go any further, I should point out that I actually know Brian in real life. I know him and I thoroughly like and respect him. I want to make that perfectly clear. His family and my family are friends and, in fact, one of my kids even babysits his kids every know and then. Brian is also a dedicated Star Wars fan which, as some of you know, wins BIG points with me. The point I'm trying to make here is that Brian is my friend and while we have much common ground (hey! Star Wars counts for a lot!), we also have areas of disagreements. Brian's opinion about election day in this country is one such area. Here's some of what Brian had to say (by the way, those of you who didn't pay attention in civics class back in the day or if "back in the day" is too far back to remember {ha!}, Brian explains the reason why election day is held on the day it is. It's good info!):
"It goes both ways. You could take the day off and push for McCain as well. There are some people that want to see the voting day moved to a more practical time. The 1st Tuesday in November was chosen by President Taylor in 1845. At that time, it was a good day after the harvest when predominantly agrarian men would have plenty of time to go to the polls. It was also when the weather was still mild enough and dry enough as to not hinder travel. After observing Sunday as a day of rest, farmers used Monday to travel to often far-away voting sites for the Tuesday vote.
We should examine making election day a bigger deal in this country. The US lags behind many other nations in voter turnout (this year may be an exception). A friend from Russia, spoke of the parties and celebrations they had on election day. It was a national holiday so nobody had to work. Many things were available in the markets (he mentions bananas) that couldn't be had any other time of the year. All of these things were incentives to get people to get out of their home and vote.There has been some push to move election day to a more practical day. Scheduling elections on a day when so many Americans must also go to work or school flies in the face of our nation's mission to open democracy for all, makes it difficult or impossible for most parents to take their children to the polls (instilling the importances of voting), and makes chaos at polling centers inevitable.*"

(*Brian's comments as posted here are a compilation of two comments he actually left due to a confusion over my blog moderator procedure.)

Brian, dude, I love 'ya, you know I do. But I not only disagree with this, I have to say I vehemently disagree with it. First I'll address the view of moving election day to a more practical day: It no longer matters what specific day the election is held on. According to The National Conference of State Legislatures, early voting is available in every state in the union. Voters are no longer restricted to having to be at their particular polling place on a particular date during a particular time. For the most part, you can now avoid long lines, you can vote in a more convenient location, you can even mail in your ballot, if need be. Heck, in our area alone, there's been 9 locations available for early voting (which started 17 days prior to the official election date). With the early voting available all across this country, I think it certainly gives a wide enough time frame for people to get in and cast their vote if they want to.
Now, my big area of disagreement...the notion of making election day a "bigger deal" in this country. I'm not sure what you mean by that. A bigger deal? Heck, it is a huge deal to me. Why? Because I pay attention. Because I seek out information and views. Because I make it my business to learn what I can and try to discuss with others so that I can learn even more. So how could election day be a bigger deal? I assume everybody who cares about the direction our country is going in is making election day a big deal. Who isn't? The person who doesn't care? The person who only gets involved when he's offered a cigarette or a buck for his efforts? The person who expects his government to take care of his every need? I gotta tell ' is a privilege. Yeah, a privilege. Not just a right. This is a prime example of (to paraphrase President John F. Kennedy) what we can do for our country, not what our country can do for us. It shouldn't be made into a national holiday. It shouldn't be "celebrated" with incentives and enticements to get people out to vote. People should get out to vote because they feel driven to say their part, cast their ballot, have their voice heard. You make election day a national holiday and voter turnout will plummet to all time lows. "Election Day Sales" down at your local Lowe's, Home Depot and car dealerships nationwide might skyrocket, but I can guarantee you that voter turnout will not increase in any way, shape or form. For heaven's sake, look at our current national holidays: Martin Luther King, Jr's birthday. What do you do on that day? Me? Not much. Hang out with my husband, since he's off work that day. I'm not out there talking up the best points of what was most assuredly a great man. Not many Americans are. Presidents Day/Washington's birthday. What do you do on that day? Me? Same as MLK day. Hang with my husband. I'm not thinking of ways of honoring Washington or Lincoln. Sorry. I think very highly of both of them, but hey, that day isn't truly dedicated to thoughts of them. I'd venture to say most Americans feel the same way. Independence Day. What do you do on that day? Me? Well, we might go check out some fireworks. Or we might drive up to my dad's. Go to a BBQ maybe. Usually, we just hang out, though. I do think of the blessing of being an American. I do take some time to marvel at what a great country we live in. But I'm not out there trying to improve America in any other way on that day, other than telling my kids how blessed we all are to live here. Veteran's Day. What do you do on that day? Me? Well, we might go to a local parade. We might take a moment to think about our family's and friends' service to our nation. But by and large, we don't make a big effort to congregate with other people in an effort to "celebrate" the day. Not many people do, really. It's a good day to honor our fallen, but that doesn't take any truly physical effort on our part. We only have to use our prayers and our hearts to do it.
The bottom line is, you give Americans a holiday, and you'll get a bunch of laid back Americans. Sorry, but that's the way of it. We all love a holiday, but we don't necessarily honor that holiday with its intended purpose. But even if that wasn't the case, even if it was made into a holiday and Americans made a big effort and decided to go out and vote before they hit the couch, I would still disagree with making it an actual holiday. Because again, voting is something we should be doing for our country. Getting the entire day off of work in order to cast our vote is not something our country (or employers for that matter) should be doing for us. We all have ample time and opportunity to get our votes in. It's a matter of what, if any, effort we want to put out. It doesn't actually take a lot of effort now. Making it a holiday won't make it any easier. It'll just make it easier to turn election day into another free day off from work. Period. The problem with voter turnout isn't "getting to the polls". It's a mindset of some Americans who feel like it's too much of a "hassle", or it's too "inconvenient" or it just "doesn't matter". Giving Americans the day off won't change that thinking. It's a personification of that old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". Exact same thing.
As far as instilling the importance of voting in our children, I think I've done that with my kids. I talk to them about the candidates, about the issues, about the vote. I love discussing politics with them even though politics has become a dirty subject to many of my fellow citizens for some reason. I show my kids how excited I am to vote. I show them my passion for finding out the truth and for investigating issues and stands. I don't need for my kids to see me "touch the screen" or "punch the chad" or "fill in the little circle" in order to instill the importance of voting in them. They understand that by the importance we give election discussions that go on in our household.
And finally...Brian, I have to say, when we start taking voting cues from the likes of Russia, we're in bigger trouble in this country than I could have ever imagined. Prime Minister Putin and his puppet president can keep their damn bananas. I'll take my reward in the form of knowing I did my part. I cast my ballot. I let my voice be heard. Considering all that America has done for me, I figure voting is the least I can do for her.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Let's Get Together

For those of you who think the sides of this election are too divided, here's a tribute to our all our ridiculous glory.

Little gems of truth are in this thing. Including the fact that most conservatives don't like John McCain because they think he's too moderate. Me? I think he's the perfect person to work with both sides of the aisle. Obama's smear campaign against him, trying to convince the American public that John McCain is just an extension of Bush, has succeeded in diverting the American people from John McCain's record of reaching out to both sides of the aisle and his willingness to do what's best for our country. If you examine the records and not just the sound bites, you will see that John McCain is someone who has devoted himself to ending the divisiveness and has shown a willingness and ability to just get on with the business of what's right for America. This truly is a man who has put country above party and duty above self, time and time again.

Take Tuesday Off!

Barack Obama wants America to "take the day off" on November 4th (Election Day, for those of you not following along) so that we can "make calls" and "knock on doors" and "get the vote out". That's right, America. Ask your boss (or your professor for those of you who are installed in one of many institutions of higher learning across this country) if you can take the day off to serve Barack Obama your country.

He's talking to YOU Betty the Beautician, Cody the Construction worker, Arnie the ACORN employee, Stanley the Student, Tony the Tiger and Buffy the Vampire Slayer: TAKE THE DAY OFF! Nevermind our faltering economy, nevermind your good work ethic and nevermind that big paper you were due to turn in on Tuesday...your candidate country needs you to pressure and harass everyone within your grasp to get out and vote for Barack Obama your candidate of choice for the office of President of the United States of America. (By the way, this message does not apply to Sarah the Governor, Kari the Republican or You the Common Sense Advocate. Nor does it apply to hard working successful business owners, upper middle management of any and all companies or corporations in this country or anyone who makes over $250,000, $200,000 $150,000 per year. You guys need to keep your asses at work 'cause somebody has to pay some taxes in this country. And let's face it, it's about time somebody took you kind of people down a peg or two anyway. After all, your mantra of "personal responsibility" is becoming downright annoying to listen to so nose to the grindstone you crazy Republicans! Work, work, work so that others can vote, vote, vote!)

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Shouldn't the Man Who Would be President Have at Least Some Measure of Pride in Our Country?

Neither Barack Obama or Michelle Obama gives any indication that they are proud of our country which, for me, begs the question: When did some people become convinced that Americans should be ashamed of America? When and why did that become okay? I'm not ashamed. I'm extremely proud of our country. I'm proud of the way my fellow countrymen come together in times of crisis. I'm proud of our military for protecting our freedom and defending freedom for others all over the world. I'm happier than I could ever possibly express at being blessed enough to call the United States of America home. Furthermore, I take great offense at those Americans who express shame of and for our country. Americans like these two:

Ashamed of our country, but this is who they spent 20 plus years cavorting with? This is the person who performed their marriage ceremony, the person who baptized their children, the person who, before it became to too politically expensive, Barack Obama declared was "like family" to him?

Barack Obama is not a person who should hold the highest office in our land. The person who holds that office should go into it with a deep and abiding love of our country. The person who holds that office most assuredly should not be a person steeped in sermons of hate and division. Shame on those of you who refuse to believe your own eyes and ears. Your ability to "transcend" the issues of this election doesn't make you enlightened. It makes you frighteningly and willfully blind.

Monday, October 27, 2008

Yeah, Bill Ayers is as bad as they say...

And Obama finds something to like about this guy...despite the fact that Ayers is proud of his past and has never apologized for it. Obama wasn't 8 years old when he wrote this review of Ayers' book....

And he wasn't 8 years old when they served together on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Board and he wasn't 8 years old when they collaborated on the Woods Fund together and he wasn't 8 years old when he kicked off his political career in Ayers' living room.
If you won't question Obama's judgment in whose company he has kept and does keep, at least ask yourself what do these people like about Obama? What does Ayers see in him? What does Louis Farrakhan see in him? What does Jeremiah Wright see in him? What does that corrupt organization ACORN see in him? To attract radicals, racists and nut cases to your side, you must surely be espousing something they find attractive, no? Ask yourself what is it that they like about Obama....and then ask yourself if it's something you find attractive, too. And if it is, ask yourself why.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Memo From the Obama Camp to All Media Outlets: Vee vill tell you vhat questions you may ask. Zees is non-negotiable!

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Barack Obama's campaign killed all interviews with a Florida TV station after Sen. Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, faced tough and critical questions Thursday from reporter Barbara West of WFTV.

"This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election," wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign, according to the Sentinel.

Watch the video and you decide whether these questions were out of line:

So what'd you think? Bad questions? Harsh questions? Or questions that many Americans have been wanting to hear answers to? I very much wanted to know more about Obama's plan to "spread the wealth". I very much wanted to know what Biden meant about Obama being "tested" within 6 months of being president. (And despite Joe the Biden's word dance, he did specifically say that Obama would be tested...not just "the next president", as he now claims he meant. Oh and by the way Joe, it's not Obama and/or McCain who would be tested, seeing as how they can't both be president). I also would have liked to have heard more about Obama's ties to ACORN. Joe said here that Obama was a community organizer for them. No secret there, except that last week, Obama changed the wording on his website to say he was never hired by ACORN. Semantics, really. Whether or not he was hired and paid back in the day doesn't negate the fact that he did indeed collaborate with them and knowing that he's working so hard to minimize the appearance of their relationship now concerns me. It's a form of dishonesty and I don't know why America tolerates it.
Finally, at long last, someone from the media has actually asked Joe Biden to explain a few of his very own comments, as well as those of his would-be boss, and the Obama campaign shuts that media outlet down. No more interviews. This concerns me mightily because these were questions I wanted answers to. I do believe Obama wants to take our country to socialism - he's given every single indication of it and, no matter how harshly and frequently the left may mock that viewpoint, it doesn't change the facts...Obama wants to "nationalize" health care, he wants to "spread the wealth", he wants to nominate Supreme Court judges who have "empathy" for the downtrodden, rather than ones who are concerned with the letter of the law (which is kind of their actual role in our government, by the way), he wants to put government in charge of our retirement accounts ('cause the government has done so well with Social Security's funds) many more clues do we need before we see the light? I'm constantly amazed at people's willingness to accept lame explanations for these blatant signs. It stuns me. It truly does. I don't want the government taking so much control over my life. Why do you? Is that the kind of "change" America wants? To abdicate responsibility and authority of their own lives and give it to the government? Say it ain't so, Joe! Oh, wait a minute, that's right. Joe doesn't talk about those issues. He (and apparently the whole Obama camp) doesn't like those kind of questions....