Rant ahead/

There is political crap all over the internet, all over TV, all over the radio. I am so sick of the game playing, mud-slinging, alarm-sounding, fire starting, the sky-is-falling noise of this election. I'm a Republican, but at this point, I don't know what to think. I just want the truth... from somebody... so I can make an informed decision. I think BOTH sides are guilty and they should BOTH be ashamed. I bet our enemies are laughing their asses off at America's stupid politics.

What worries me is there are extremely gullible people out there who will believe anything! There are also extremely intelligent people purposely stirring up things or who wouldn't know the truth if it smacked them on the behind.

Sheesh.

Let's get this election over with and STOP with the games.

WHOEVER (or whomever) is elected is going to have a very hard road to hoe and I just hope that America can rally together after all this crap and support our new president and vice-president. Otherwise, I think we're in serious trouble as a nation.

/Rant Over

The country will be divided more than ever now and it's merely going to spiral to self destruction.

The freeloaders want to punish the successful, the successful are sick and tired of the freeloaders.

Either way, we are all going to lose.

But Texas will always be there. Chin up PM - only one more week of this.

Yup. After all, the Texas constitution does say:

“Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States...”

(note that it does not state “...subject to the President of the United States...” or “...subject to the Congress of the United States...” or “...subject to the rest of the United States...”)*

*Texas Secession Facts

P.S. Just kidding folks in case anyone thinks I've gone off the deep end.

Ughhhhhhhhh

You really need to change your name to "The Grim Reaper".

It's human nature to want a free ride. Those who seek it do not get a free ride and lose their freedom as well.

I feel very sad. The economic meltdown is nothing compared with the loss of our freedom. I feel sad for our children who may not have the same opportunities I had.

There is a taste of things to come in how the press who are not on board with Obama are now being treated. The rich are to Obama as the Jews were to Hitler. "Do not ask for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for you...."

The barbarians are not at the gate. They are inside. We'll see what happens to Charles Krauthammer...

Cherished

____________________________

McCain for President
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, October 24, 2008

Contrarian that I am, I'm voting for John McCain. I'm not talking about bucking the polls or the media consensus that it's over before it's over. I'm talking about bucking the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama before they're left out in the cold without a single state dinner for the next four years.

I stand athwart the rush of conservative ship-jumpers of every stripe -- neo (Ken Adelman), moderate (Colin Powell), genetic/ironic (Christopher Buckley) and socialist/atheist (Christopher Hitchens) -- yelling "Stop!" I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I'd rather lose an election than lose my bearings.

First, I'll have no truck with the phony case ginned up to rationalize voting for the most liberal and inexperienced presidential nominee in living memory. The "erratic" temperament issue, for example. As if McCain's risky and unsuccessful but in no way irrational attempt to tactically maneuver his way through the economic tsunami that came crashing down a month ago renders unfit for office a man who demonstrated the most admirable equanimity and courage in the face of unimaginable pressures as a prisoner of war, and who later steadily navigated innumerable challenges and setbacks, not the least of which was the collapse of his campaign just a year ago.


McCain the "erratic" is a cheap Obama talking point. The 40-year record testifies to McCain the stalwart.

Nor will I countenance the "dirty campaign" pretense. The double standard here is stunning. Obama ran a scurrilous Spanish-language ad falsely associating McCain with anti-Hispanic slurs. Another ad falsely claimed that McCain supports "cutting Social Security benefits in half." And for months Democrats insisted that McCain sought 100 years of war in Iraq.

McCain's critics are offended that he raised the issue of William Ayers. What's astonishing is that Obama was himself not offended by William Ayers.

Moreover, the most remarkable of all tactical choices of this election season is the attack that never was. Out of extreme (and unnecessary) conscientiousness, McCain refused to raise the legitimate issue of Obama's most egregious association -- with the race-baiting Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Dirty campaigning, indeed.

The case for McCain is straightforward. The financial crisis has made us forget, or just blindly deny, how dangerous the world out there is. We have a generations-long struggle with Islamic jihadism. An apocalyptic soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. A nuclear-armed Pakistan in danger of fragmentation. A rising Russia pushing the limits of revanchism. Plus the sure-to-come Falklands-like surprise popping out of nowhere.

Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.? A man who's been cramming on these issues for the past year, who's never had to make an executive decision affecting so much as a city, let alone the world? A foreign policy novice instinctively inclined to the flabbiest, most vaporous multilateralism (e.g., the Berlin Wall came down because of "a world that stands as one"), and who refers to the most deliberate act of war since Pearl Harbor as "the tragedy of 9/11," a term more appropriate for a bus accident?

Or do you want a man who is the most prepared, most knowledgeable, most serious foreign policy thinker in the United States Senate? A man who not only has the best instincts but has the honor and the courage to, yes, put country first, as when he carried the lonely fight for the surge that turned Iraq from catastrophic defeat into achievable strategic victory?

There's just no comparison. Obama's own running mate warned this week that Obama's youth and inexperience will invite a crisis -- indeed a crisis "generated" precisely to test him. Can you be serious about national security and vote on Nov. 4 to invite that test?

And how will he pass it? Well, how has he fared on the only two significant foreign policy tests he has faced since he's been in the Senate? The first was the surge. Obama failed spectacularly. He not only opposed it. He tried to denigrate it, stop it and, finally, deny its success.

The second test was Georgia, to which Obama responded instinctively with evenhanded moral equivalence, urging restraint on both sides. McCain did not have to consult his advisers to instantly identify the aggressor.

Today's economic crisis, like every other in our history, will in time pass. But the barbarians will still be at the gates. Whom do you want on the parapet? I'm for the guy who can tell the lion from the lamb.

My dilemma is this - - I have voted in several presidential elections.....but I can't remember ever voting for a winner. I can't believe I have ended up needing to choose between two major party candidates whom I have renamed "Unh-uh" and "No Way". I can't believe the voters of the United States gave me these two slates from which to choose. This is ridiculous. I can't really support either one of them.

So, going on the premise that my choice is NOT going to win, what do I do? I have figured out which candidate is the least unacceptable. Do I vote for him knowing I have never voted for a winner?

""""""The barbarians are not at the gate. They are inside.""""""

how ironic,

way back when there used to be an exhibit at disneyland called Mr Lincoln. where there was an animated Abe who gave a speech on the benefits and fears of this country. in that speech he said something to the effect that.....

""""""""no foriegn power will ever set foot on this continent and bring it down. but rather the down fall will come from within.""""""""

i remember that part of the exhibit from being a kid in the 60's. and here we are watching it happen some 40 + years down the road

mud slinging has been the way of political success for the last 20 years or more. no one is interested in telling us WHAT they WILL do while in office. instead they are more concerned about making their opponent look greasy.

Pm

Interesting - I noticed and was told that the Texas flag has equal stature as the US flag. Sometimes you will see the Texas flag fly by itself and have never seen the state flag here flag under the US flag. It usually will have its own pole at equal height. One of those quirky things. My daughter pointed it out to me while back that she had learned of this tradition.

Republicans have actually manipulated poor and middle class people into fighting for the wealthy.

It's amazing to watch.

"If we tax them, they'll cut jobs, or pay lower wages!"

Fear, fear, fear.

You're actually frightened into insisting that we make sure the rich stay as rich as possible, even at your own expense.

I know for a fact that if they raise taxes even one cent, we are going to have a massive lay-off.

And I have already taken notice of the bumper stickers in the parking lot of who goes first.

Huh?

You're joking, right?

No, I'm not joking.

The company must survive, and sacrifices must be made and if we are going to be taxed into bankruptsy, then we will stave it off by cutting personnel that can be replaced by machinery.

The ones who decided that it was more fun to fail in school than to get their education can be replaced a dozen at a time for less expense by a machine.

Just as my XW lost her job. She never finished college because she was a party girl and never thought about the future. She thought she could just get by on her looks until her shelf life was up and she became too expensive for the company she worked for.

They ain't gonna pay no uneducated secretary no 40 grand a year in south Georgia when they can get an fresh out of college student for 25 grand a year and just rotate them as either they move up or move on.

Fact of life. No education = low wages.

PM, excellent post. I would like to join in your rant, if I may.

I have gotten so many hare-brained emails from individuals on both sides of this campaign. Each side spends its time pointing the finger at the other, continuing the mudslinging, maintaining that the country is in trouble simply because of the opposing political party. Exactly how naive do they think I am?

It's almost enough to make me not want to exercise my right to vote....almost, but not quite. I always vote, even if I have to hold my nose while I do it. (And Cinderella, I have had the same thought. All of the candidates I have voted for have lost. So...what to do?)

I also agree that the future President is going to have a very tough road ahead of him. Campaign promises will give way to reality on all fronts. Post-election, I would like to see the country come together for its own good, and leave this partisan BS behind.

I would say they are both lying throught their teeth. What does a president acutally do? Mostly a figure head in times of crisis. They sign bills into laws, not write them. The way I see it, the founding fathers had 3 branches of the legislative branch for a reason. House, Senate, President. That way it is harder for the child to rob the candy jar. When 1 party controls all 3, they rob the candy jar.

Pariah

You are correct. A corporation is never really taxed. When a corp is tax, the shareholders, the customers and the employees will pay the tax. A corp is not a living breathing being.

I have heard that there are (was) 100 million shareholders in this country. If taxes hit the bottom line and dividends are reduced the net result is lower 401K earnings for the middle class. Shareholders will pressure the corp to layoff employees to bring in higher dividends.

In some industries - the tax just flows to the consumer with higher prices.

If there is less profits after tax - R&D is reduced (my personal concern) and production may be affected which will produce more layoffs.

Taxing corporations is similar when a city raises hotel and car rental taxes. Sounds great because the local govt is passing the burden to non local citizens. Local citizens arent concern with high local hotel or rental fees unless you are in those industries of course.

Good question. According to MSN Encarta here's what they give as the president's job description. Sounds like it's a lot more than just a "figure head in times of crisis."

Just for "fun" replace the words "the president" in the text below with either Obama or McCain. I {{{shudder}}} on some of these.

The Constitution requires the president to discharge the duties of the office and preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. The president is also responsible for the execution of the laws of the United States. In domestic affairs, this means anything from implementing economic, social, and regulatory measures passed by Congress to acting as commander in chief to quell disorder or suppress insurrection. Presidents shape the country’s judicial affairs by appointing federal judges. They influence the country’s domestic, economic, political, and social life by proposing legislation, calling Congress into special session, and vetoing laws passed by Congress that they consider destructive to the national well-being. As commander in chief of the military, the president is also empowered to repel foreign invasion and to fight wars overseas. In times of overwhelming public danger, the president can declare martial law, when the courts are not open or cannot function freely. The Constitution also gives the president the power to grant pardons and reprieves in criminal cases. This power does not require congressional approval, but it cannot be used in cases of impeachment.

In addition to these formal duties, the president is the country’s chief educator who sets standards of taste and culture, using the White House, in Theodore Roosevelt’s words, as a “bully pulpit” to assert moral authority. Presidents are also the leaders of their political party, and they try to advance its agenda.

A Legislative and Judicial Responsibilities

The president proposes much of the legislation that Congress approves. The president’s power to veto (reject) legislation also serves as a strong influence on the legislative process. Because it takes a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate to override a presidential veto, Congress often modifies pending legislation to suit the president’s preferences. Aside from the role in proposing and vetoing laws, the president exercises important legislative authority by issuing executive orders that have the force of law. The president also supervises the implementation of laws by directing administrative agencies, such as the Department of Justice and the Department of Agriculture.

The president appoints federal judges, subject to the approval of the Senate. In addition, the president assumes important judicial and law enforcement powers through executive agencies.

B Economic Authority

The president exerts substantial influence on the economic life of the nation through budgetary and taxing proposals. The president’s decisions to increase and reduce budgets and to cut or raise taxes in conjunction with Congress affect the entire country, from the largest corporations to the individual taxpayer. Presidential decisions early in the country’s history to contribute federal funds to road and canal projects helped boost the nation’s economic development, and federal spending continues to drive growth in many areas. The president’s ability to shape tariffs on imports affects the thousands of businesses that buy and sell goods to other countries. A president’s power to regulate industries through the enforcement of safety requirements and environmental regulations affects nearly every workplace in America.

C Foreign Policy

The president is the chief diplomat of the United States. The Constitution gives the president the power to negotiate treaties and appoint diplomatic representatives with the advice and consent of the Senate. The president also has the power to negotiate executive agreements with foreign countries that have the force and effect of law but do not require congressional approval. The president has the discretion to give official recognition to foreign governments.

D Military Leadership

As commander in chief of the armed forces, the president has the power to formulate and direct military strategy and actions in times of war and peace. As the country’s principal military commander, the president is responsible for the nation’s security and the safety of its citizens. Although the Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war, historically the president has had nearly total freedom to send troops into combat. In the second half of the 19th century, many presidents sent U.S. forces into Latin American countries to defend American business interests. Harry Truman made a much more substantial commitment of American soldiers in 1950 when he decided to fight the Korean War (1950-1953). A series of presidents—Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon—waged war in Vietnam without a formal declaration of war from Congress (see Vietnam War). Since the establishment of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1947, nearly every president has used executive power to order the agency to conduct covert military operations abroad.

E Appointive Powers

Subject to confirmation by a majority of the Senate, the president appoints the members of the Cabinet, the heads of independent federal agencies, and a large number of the administrative personnel of the federal executive departments and agencies. The president also appoints federal judges, including the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States; many federal employees; and the diplomatic representatives of the United States. The president also commissions, subject to congressional confirmation, all officers of the armed forces.

The appointive powers of presidents include the freedom to spend substantial sums of money to facilitate their administration of the government and the exercise of their constitutional powers. Franklin Roosevelt, for example, authorized the Manhattan Project—a massive federal project to build an atomic bomb during World War II. Since the end of World War II, presidents have used their budgetary authority to support the CIA’s secret projects.

Then your company really sucks, to be honest.

No, it doesn't suck.

It pays me really well because I am a skilled worker that can oversee and operate the automation. They had an ample chance to get training to advance, but CHOSE, there's that word again, their path.

No free handouts when you are required to produce, reward comes with productivity. If a new machine comes along that can do your job better, you better learn how to either operate it or repair it.