What I find funny is that the Dems were most probably behind all of this info about McCain being an adulterer. Weren't they all the ones who said that Clinton's sex life (while in the White House and lying to the Grand Jury) was none of our business?

You asked me to point out any of your DJ's.

Well, here you go, this post is certainly a DJ. You can disagree with someone, but do you have to do it with a DJ?

I'm not saying others are not as well.

But you asked me to specifically tell you when you DJ, so here is an example.

I think a person's personal conduct is a reflection of their character and should be considered when voting for them. Not the only consideration. Not the most important consideration. But an important consideration.

John McCain did leave his wife who had been crippled in a car accident. Yes, he changed as a result of being a POW, and she changed as a result of her car accident. Lots of people deal with spouses who change due to life experiences or physical changes.

John Edwards had a son die and had to deal with a wife with cancer. Did that change him? Yes. But it doesn't excuse his behavior.

I considered voting for Obama, but I just couldn't. It's not his race. It's not that he's inexperienced. It's that he's off the charts liberal.

Cherished

I found the column here How Do We Handle the Misinformation?
identified as an anonymous email from a "Senator Bob".

For some authentic Thomas Sowell (linked from his website):
Race and Politics 03/18/08

Obama and McCain 06/05/08

grrr, thanks for the heads up, LG! I had received that column in the email. I am going to delete it now. Sorry, folks! I looked and looked for the article on his archive this morning and ran out of time.

Please point out the lies. I want to be sure I get the facts strait. How about three? That should be easy. Take the challenge, identify and provide facts that dispel just three lies so I can understand what Obama stands for. Feelings, hate, or character attacks don't count nor do references to ghost conspirators or reverences to Rove.

OK, Mimi, let me take a minute to respond to you. No, I am not going to read Obama's other books that he's written about himself and his life, and it has nothing to do with whether or not I am open-minded. I think it has more to do with not being interested enough to voluntarily, at age 60 and running out of time, delve into the writings of someone I know that I will never, EVER vote for. I deny that this is a race-based decision, nor is it Republican. I'm not, as I stated earlier, voting for John McCain either, although we do share skin tone. I am neither charmed by his race, nor repelled by it; personally, I wouldn't care if Obama were chartreuse. I have profound, irrevocable disagreements with Obama's openly-stated policies and beliefs, clearly on record--aside from ANY book--and available to anyone who wants to review them. I could not in good conscience give him either my support or my vote.

But you expressed surprise that I might read only one side. I've already read extensively about both sides and have made my decision based on that. How about you, though? Would you consider yourself to be not open-minded for not reading Corsi's book? Or am I incorrect in assuming that you have no intention whatsoever of checking out the other side for yourself? I'm truly not asking this to be confrontational, or even to pressure you into a public answer. But since you wanted that standard to be applied to me, I at least want you to consider what it would mean if it were also applied to you.

I will be glad when this election cycle is over.

I'm a conservative too, but won't be reading Corsi's book.

IMO, he's a nut.

See here----> LINK

I think a better critique of Obama is this book---> LINK

Oh and it looks like the Obama team wasn't exactly truthful about the criticisms of Corsi's book either----> LINK

T&L:




I didn't make any references about RACE in my post to YOU... ..Why did you think I thought it mattered to you?


I agree with Marsh on this...

I read ALL KINDS of BOOKS about ALL KINDS of things...I'm an AVID READER...I LOVE reading MEMOIRS and for THAT REASON ALONE loved reading OBAMA's first book. His LIFE EXPERIENCES have been DIFFERENT and INTERESTING..IMO...and in MANY WAYS like mine so I relate to a lot of what he is speaking about...

That's why I asked that question to you..

'Cause I really do TRY to take a look at ALL SIDES...mostly for LEARNING and GROWING..

ETA: And as I've said before, I'm not much INTO POLITICS..I am INTO READING...

Not necessarily from anything you have said on this thread, but I thought I remember that you have engaged in some rather spirited discussions on race on other threads in the past. That's probably why. I completely sympathize with your obsessive reading. I read at stoplights waiting for the light to change. I ALWAYS have a book available to stave off unexpected boredom. Read on...

Well, I won't be voting for either one, either.

John McCain abandoned his wife. She was in a car accident and badly injured. But she didn't want him to know, while he was a POW.

By the way, I have the highest regard for him as a hero.

However, I will never vote for an unrepentent adulterer. His story is still that they had grown apart.

I LIKE Obama - he is young, wants change, good looking, faithful, and raring to go. But I will never vote for anyone who is pro- choice.

I do feel like our candidates have a lot lacking. An adulterer, married to his affair partner, or a man who has a good life but would deny that life to the unborn.

ME, TOO!! We do have this in common...

I love it when these people write books with lots of footnotes, then when interviewed use the number of footnotes as some sort of measure of the validity of their work. "My book has 1000 footnotes! So you know it's good!"

It's adorable, don't you think?

I also love it when cable news interviewers take this Corsi person seriously. It's so cute. I see it and go, "Aaaaaaaaw." I just want to tousle their hair and pinch their cheeks. His, too. I say, "Look how they play at being grownups!"

I try not to think of the consequences.

Methinks the Obamaites "doth protest too much."

Isn't that just adorable?

ad hominem attacks? Seems to be plentyful.

Dispute the facts? Sure, just like John Kerry did. "On balance" how many of those "footnotes," proof statements and references, are demonstably "wrong" and how many are "right on?"

For a man who runs his entire campaign on some nebulous mesmerizing mantra of "Change," he is remarkably lacking in any specifics and scarily lacking in any experience other than tromping on anyone who stands in his way of getting what he wants, beginning with his race for a seat in the Illinios legislature. Now, with his "vast" experience and some 143 days in the US Senate where he managed to secure "the most liberal Senator" factual label for himself, he wants us to believe that the "Change" he wants for America is good?

For example, there is a longtime member of MB whose husband wants "Change" for their marriage. His "past associations and history" show clearly WHAT sort of "change" HE wants for the marriage. His "compromise (since his wife wants nothing to do with his "idea" of "change") is to get her to agree to having an "open marriage." That's HIS "vision" for change and for what marriage (at least HIS marriage) should be. That's Barak and his "vision" for change for America. Destroy all that is good and sacred about this great nation because he "has a better idea for changes" that what has worked for centuries.

Some will believe him. Some will vote for "charisma" over substance. Some will vote simply because he's black. Some will vote because THEY want government to control everything and turn our nation into a socialist state.

But few will consider what the ROLE of the President is, and few will "lay the blame for the state of the nation" where it really belongs, with the elected representatives of the people, the Congress, when they decide who will be the best Commander in Chief among the TWO choices we are being presented with to protect and defend the Constitution of the UNITED STATES and not some other country, and who will be the Chief Executive to carry out the Laws enacted by the Congress.

Experience COUNTS. And Obama has NONE. What he HAS done with his "getting his feet wet" in politics is SCARY.

If anyone wants to make John McCain's divorce and remarriage a "litmus test" for voting, that is their right.

If anyone wants to make Barak Obama's clear distain for ANY protections for unborn (or even some born) children a "litmus test," that is their right.

People can vote for whomever they want and do NOT have to "justify" their vote to anyone.

Sadly, most WILL vote emotionally simply because "if it feels good, do it." Few will look at what's right or wrong in a candidate AS QUALIFICATIONS for the office or as to their commitment to the Constitution OF the United States, rather than the changes to that Constitution that THEY want to impose upon the entire nation.

Barak Obama, in MY opinion, is the Wrong Person at the Wrong Time, period. That leaves only one other choice, because that's the way our political system works.




"Look how they play at being grownups!"

Funny, I say the very same thing about MoveOn.org, the New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc., etc., etc.

They have been playing at being grownups and a whole lot of people "on the left" have been taking them seriously. Agenda? Yes, very clearly there, en masse, just like the 40 page "tome" protesting the book to again try to "hide" truth about who IS this person Barak Obama?



Sadly, that is the opinion of a lot of voters too.

I do think about the consequences because a CHOICE must be made.

To those who "Will not Vote" for either candidate, I would simply say that I understand their evaluation of what "they would like if they were to pick the candidate," but regardless of "likes and dislikes," ONE of THESE TWO candidates WILL be the next President. "Conflict Avoidance" seldom helps, let alone solves, problems.


But if one cannot bring themselves to vote for one of these two, PLEASE consider carefully and vote for members of Congress who WILL have the power to write the laws, set the taxes, secure our energy independence, protect the rights of all citizens (born and unborn, not illegal), maintain freedom of choice in healthcare, and defend the hard-fought liberties FROM "big government" that our Founding Fathers desperately wanted for our nation that they were willing to "put it all on the line" to secure for us who would come LONG after they were "footnotes" in history.

Obama scares me. He has the mesmerizing qualities of Hitler. With a Democratic Congress, what would he do? That's why I'm voting for McCain, unrepentent adulterer and all. At least the country will remain free.
Cherished

I have 4 adult children. One of them, goodness knows how, has grown up to be a pompous liberal dweeb. Bear in mind that I love this young man intensely and without conditions. I'm very proud of him for his scholastic achievements and for being such an exceptional student at the college where he got his B.S. that when he obtained his Masters, they hired him to come back and teach biology for them without even bringing him in for an interview. They just got the required signatures on his hiring sheet on the basis of his undergraduate performance. I think he's a phenomenal young man.

But it is impossible to have a debate of certain ideas with him, for much the same reason that it's impossible to have a debate of ideas with many of the professed liberals on this site. My discussions with my son, back before I gave them up as counterproductive and a waste of the limited time we could spend together, were somewhat different because I'm his mother and we do love each other...but those restraints do NOT apply on this site. Still the same general idea, though. In most cases, try facts, get sarcasm. Try more facts, get heated emotions. Present reasoned objections, and the response is mockery, ad hominem attacks, insults (often juvenile), excuses that nobody except a child could seriously expect to be accepted as valid, rationalizations, irrelevancies, and so on.

Re-read these discussions--and there are several threads here that do this--with that template in mind, and I think you will find that the conservative posts are more often about ideas, while the liberal posts are about feelings, often expressed with sarcastic disdain for their political opposites. Which isn't to say that conservatives can't be sarcastic. If it weren't for the mods, my own posts would've been WAY snarkier than they were. But I'm talking about the discussion as a whole, and the difference in approach I feel is displayed by the two sides. And the liberals appear to have the same self-image that my son displays via the bumper sticker on his car. It's a definition of a liberal, which includes the word "tolerant". To which revelation his sister and I responded with a good (if surreptitious) laugh, while I whispered, "HA!" since he's extremely INTOLERANT and dismissive of opposing viewpoints about his own pet beliefs, while considering others who disagree with him to be "intolerant".

So there's my opinion. This is America. I can have one if I want. And not only does it not have to agree with yours in order to make me a good person, disagreeing with you doesn't make me bad either.

Well, reading your post brought to mind a bumper sticker of someone who attends our church. It read Hillary Voldemort as the ticket, as if Hillary had selected Voldemort as her running mate. Anyone who has read Harry Potter knows that the bumper sticker was from someone who is NOT a Hillary supporter! Apparently, some people had thought she was a Hillary supporter, but she isn't.

The Republican Party has at the top of its ticket someone who is in an affair marriage. That one fact reveals a lot about the man. I'm still voting for him because his opponent is very liberal. We have two choices, and I'd prefer him.

My children are still young -- the oldest is 14 -- and I'm working on teaching them the value of work, the value of marriage, and the value of human life. I've talked to the oldest about what happened when the entire family went in to see my level 2 ultrasound of the baby, since I was 42 when our last one was born and the doctor wanted the ultrasound. After 20 minutes of the nurse looking at the baby, including one hand raised so you could clearly see all five digits of that hand, the nurse left and the doctor came in and said there was still a 1% chance of genetic deformity because of my age so did I want an abortion. The child was 19 weeks gestation, my husband and other three chidren were there, and I was struck by the callousness of her question. There's a lot of emotion for me in the vote for president, but I'm with the people who are selling John McCain noseplugs. I'm holding my nose to vote for him.

Cherished

Probably just me, but I will never vote for an unrepentent adulterer. And I won't vote for a pro-abortionist.

So I guess I won't vote for president. Won't be the first time.

I don't know anything about the libertarian candidate.

Frankly, I think I'm more libertarian that republican anymore.

Or maybe the republican party isn't what it used to be.

Maybe I'll change my name to "None ofthe Above" and run for President. Seek to have my name last on the ballot, and see how I do.

You'd win by a landslide!