So basically, what you are saying is, that the PRESIDENT is a figure head....that all the advisors actually make all the decisions for the president because they are the intellegent ones that know what they are doing and have the experience???? That the REAL CHANGE is because Obama will have a BETTER set of Advisors!!

Now it all makes sense!! This is why the LIBERALS don't have a problem with OBAMA not having the first bit of experience!!

Leader = salesman was a bit oversimplistic so I researched it a bit.

For example, Reagan was a salesman ONLY. History teaches us he was an ineffective leader.

Obama IS inspiring the nation. A sign of a truly great salesman. We can only hope he'll actually become a truly great leader. Only time can tell us that.

McCain is NOT inpiring the nation. He IS inspiring fear and campaigns of fear are not fooling the people this time. Obama is transcending that fear (which ridiculously conjures up more fear...hence all the messiah references).

Just my opinion...I respect yours.


Here's the snippet I found about leadership vs. salesman (the underlying context of the article was speaking about Canadian politics so I cut the end out...the quoted material is the substance of my point):

You have got to be kidding.....MSNBC is the ONLY one to show biased..... :crosseyedcrazy:

CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc...along with most newspapers....what about them? THEY ALL lean so far to the LEFT I'm surprised that they can sit up sraight!!

They are ALL BIASED ....the MSM, including print. There's not one out there that isn't.

MOST Liberals, won't admit to BIASED in MSM so saying conservatives don't admit that Fox News is biased is like the pot calling the kettle black isn't it??

NO he isn't..... OBAMA is inspiring the LIBERALS. That's it. I am NOT INSPIRED by OBAMA. In fact, exactly the opposite.

It makes me sick that someone with NO EXPERIENCE, someone that wants to SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND (the Robinhood mentality), someone that supports ABORTION, someone with friends like AYERS and CO., someone that sat, for 20 years listening to a preacher say terrible things about this country and thought NOTHING OF IT, someone that has NO RESPECT for the US Military and what it stands for and the list goes on and on, is even in the running for this office.

To say that he's "Inspiring a NATION" is saying that we're all for him. That we're all, the entire nation is "FOR" Obama and that's FAR from the truth and how things are.

You go right ahead and BE INSPIRED.... I think I'll pass!!



The ramblings of a suicidal man...... yep....he's creditable :crosseyedcrazy:


David Foster Wallace, the novelist, essayist and humorist best known for his 1996 novel "Infinite Jest," was found dead Friday night at his home in Claremont, according to the Claremont Police Department. He was 46.

Jackie Morales, a records clerk at the department, said Wallace's wife called police at 9:30 p.m. Friday saying she had returned home to find that her husband had hanged himself.

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-wallace14-2008sep14,0,246155.story

Actually, the article originated with the Times of London. The UK is probably providing better election "news" than any US media outlet...Fox News included.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/

Instead of telling me why my candidate doesn't inspire you...

why not tell me why your candidate does??

If you can.

That's one of the reasons the typical Republican Rove smear campaign isn't working this year. Al Gore and John Kerry were kinda uninspiring. They would have been better for this country by a longshot but that's only in hindsight. Their presidential campaigns WERE uninspiring. Obama is not. He HAS inspired the nation and I predict a tsunami victory next tuesday (the only poll that matters and it will confirm the polls the republicans are trying to portray as partisan). It's impossible to convince people/voters that they shouldn't be inspired by a campaign/candidate when they already are.

To bad about David Wallace. I wasn't quoting him to be partisan. I just liked the words he used and I highlighted to analyze the saleman versus leader debate. His quote could certainly be applied by either party to either candidate and I'm surprised you would jump up and down on the guys grave instead of telling me how McCain IS the real leader Wallace is referring to. I'm not surprised. Doesn't seem many people are inspired by John McCain or maybe it just seems that way to you and every independent voter out there.

Mr. Wondering

I can see aspects of that.

However, I think Reagan was a pretty good leader as well. Not as hands on as others, as I think he was more into delegating, and to be honest, not always keeping a close enough reign on those working for him (Iran-Contra)

But he also had a vision where the Soviet Union could be gone from the scene of world power.

As a conservative, I think that's the one thing Obama has going for him, charisma.

I was thinking in my car last night that it might not be so bad if America once again takes pride in itself. I think that sense of national pride has diminished after both the first Gulf War and after 9/11.

So in some ways, I think it will be good to have a president that folks are not ashamed of, and are proud of.

My concern is that Obama will follow too closely with the "hate or blame America" crowd that believes that the badness in the world is because of America.

I've largely voted Republican and I have to wonder why McCain is the best the GOP could present to the public. I think he's the sacrificial lamb. Folks expected the Dems to win after the past 8 years, and wanted to silence McCain who has been a thorn in the side of the GOP for some time, so they let him run. Little downside for the GOP. They didn't expect to win, so why not set up McCain for a loss, and bring out a stronger candidate in 2012?

I think the GOP will pick up seats in the 2010 mid-term elections, especially if deficit spending doesn't drop, or if taxes go up over the next couple of years.

If Obama doesn't deliver on his tacitly promised hope, then he'll face a much more difficult 2nd half.

I think Obama will be elected, and I think the US will survive, and the political metronome will continue to swing left, right, left, right....

He'll have two years to get things moving in the right direction, yet he'll face enough opposition in the legislature that he cannot just go totally left.

Look at the 103rd congress:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/103rd_United_States_Congress

I think this scenario will likely be repeated, with a Democrat majority in the Legislature, as well as a Democratic Executive.

Yet we've survived.

If you go too far left, what happens.

Let's take a look at the 104th congress:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/104th_United_States_Congress

So if Obama tries to go too far left, I think he'll find himself in the same place Clinton found himself, with a wholesale change in the legislature.

Recall, Clinton was pushing for nationalized healthcare, and I think that drove a lot of the change in the legislature in the 1994 elections.

I don't agree with Obama on many issues, and won't vote for him because of that. But I don't see it as the end of the world if he's elected.

I thought it was the end of the world when Clinton was elected, yet we survived and even thrived.

Gridlock is good in DC.

If Obama tries to go too far to the left, he'll face gridlock again, and things can be much much better for all the US.

I think it's bad for both the legislature and the executive to be controlled by one party.

The GOP failed to balance the budget when they had 6 out of eith years with control of both the legislative and executive, and if Obama and the Dems in the legislature don't get things going on the right track in two years, it's likely they will face losing the gains in the legislature in 2010.

Put a sticky on this and see if I'm right two years from now

That's it for me. I'm not inspired by either one, so I'm voting for neither of them.

I'm not inspired by anyone, so I'm protest voting a 3rd party to send the message that BOTH major parties have mediocre candidates.

Frankly, Obama and to some extent McCain are playing on how evil banks and such are.

Yet the one who is in my pockets the deepest is Uncle Sam.

Neither of them are presenting a plan that will protect me from their reach into my pockets. I pay far more in taxes than I do on my mortgage or any other single bill.

So instead of protecting me from Wall Street, who will protect me from the Congress and the White House?

It's said we need more regulation. Bah! We don't get the best and the brightest typically in government service. Why? It doesn't pay. Wall Street pays, so they are going to attract the greatest talent.

So to put faith in the government's ability to protect me from them is false hope. So if Wall Street can fool the regulators, then we are all screwed.

But if the market is allowed to do it's job, I believe fewer will get screwed by Wall Street.

Why? Because instead of having to fool regulators to get something going, they will have to fool the entire market to get everybody.

Part of the problem is that we now expect the government to be our nanny, and when they are fooled, or are caught flatfooted, we blame those who fooled them, or thought of something they didn't think of.

Let's get real, about both parties. Folks who cannot even balance the federal budget want to now lecture Wall Street on how to manage money.

That is rich, beyond my wildest dreams.

I have no illusions about Wall Street being greedy. They are greedy. No argument from me.

But to think that the Federal Government is the outfit to protect me from that greed is laughable.

These are the same folks who bought a bunch of trailers for Katrina victims that are useless and rotting away.

These are the same folks who brought us the house banking scandal, and we want them to save us from Wall Street.

These are the same folks who borrow from Social Security to pay day to day government spending and want to tell us the budget is balanced?

And it's both parties doing this, not one, not the other, BOTH.

What's the difference between McCain and Obama? Very little. Both voted for the 700B bail out.

Obama keeps saying McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time.
What is his record? Did he only vote with Bush 10% of the time?

Obama and McCain Similar Voting Records

Not so different.

I'm not impressed with either of them.

I want the None of the Above choice on the ballot please.

Good posts EE.


totally agree with above - GOP may burn down in ashes this cycle because of the total power they had 2006.

Total power = greed. The Gop had lost its way - that doesnt mean the principles are bad - they lost their way when they had the power.

First of all.....you're asking me to do something that you haven't yourself done. You quote others and their opinions and thoughts but not your own.

I am for McCain/Palin because I like their polices, from taxes, to guns, to health care, to abortion.

I am for McCain/Palin because I believe in our Military men and women, just like they do and agree that cuts should NOT come at the Military's expense.

And while the entire LEFT want to compare McCain to Bush just because he's of the same party, McCain IS his own man. He did not vote with Bush all the time, unlike what the Left wants everyone to believe. Obama ALSO voted with Bush on issues...

Is that enough, or do you need MORE???




Keep telling yourself that.....HE HAS NOT inspired a NATION.....only the LIBERALS. YOU can speak for yourself and the rest of those on the LEFT but you cannot speak for the other 44+% of us that ARE NOT INSPIRED. That WILL NOT be voting for OBAMA.

Tsunami victory......unless OBAMA starts gaining in the polls instead of falling .......that's not going to happen. But that's OK, you can live in your happy place for a few more days :crosseyedcrazy:



I was NOT 'jumping up and down on Mr Wallaces grave and I do not appreciate you saying that, although it does not surprise me that you did. Typical!! I was simply saying that the man was suicidal, therefore it's hard to take anything he says as worth listening to or even wasting the time to contemplate it.

BTW ~ SALESMAN instead of a LEADER??? Come on.....I don't want a sleazy salesman (Obama), I'll take the experienced LEADER (McCAin) every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Thanks for the offer though, but I'll pass.



WHATEVER.....like I said....you have 4 more days to live in your happy place with your rose colored glasses on and bask in the pipe dream that Obama, the socialist/borderline Maxist is going to become president.

I agree, European networks tend to be less partisan than the hysterical local sources. Also, I was referring to your second link, not the first one. Is the second one also from Times?

As for the first, I see no problem with Obama doing expectations management. The country is in a mess, and there will be no free lunch or easy out. I don't think Obama ever promised either of those, but there is nothing wrong with repeating that point.

I'd prefer this kind of a reality check over McCain/Palin's "we'll balance the budget in our first term" drivel.

AGG

Actually, they lost their way when they were HIJACKED by christian conservatives.

Those same christians will be responsible for completely dividing the GOP into two factions...maybe even two parties entirely.

I'm right there with you Enlightened.

Though I tend a bit more liberal in my thinking about regulation. In some/many cases, I would like to think an elected representative is more accountable TO THE PUBLIC for his decisions than the "smarter" businessman that is constantly pressured by his duty to maximize profits for HIMSELF and the shareholders of corporate America.

I like this analogy (I just made it up). "A tacked horse is more utilitarian. Either way, it still runs".

Corporations have no soul. Elected representative do (I hope).

I know Obama is going to cost me more money (paying now is better than later). I know I'll be disappointed in many of his administrations decisions and actions. I know gridlock will continue. However, I HOPE that he'll bring in a new group of thinkers and leaders. Maybe some old Clinton men/women, at least for the first term, to mentor and bring along the fresh faces. After 8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Bush, the bureaucracy has gotten OLD, STALE and FAT. I am hopeful Obama and his new group can shake things up and move this country in a new direction. I am a realist. There will be disappointments.

But we've got to participate and make a decision about what's best between the only real two choices we have.

I live in a democracy but belong to a kingdom.

My kingdom commands me to respect those that are put in authority over me. To pray for them...regardless of party politics. Regardless of race, gender, etc.

I choose Obama as the candidate I most trust with authority over me. It may be misguided, but it is my choice.

I respect whatever decision you make but urge you to choose. IMO, a vote for a non-realistic third party candidate is merely a vote for no hope/apathy. You are clearly NOT apathetic.

Mr. Wondering

Then you're pretty well off, then? 'Cause I've heard "95%" more times than I can count.


More things will actually get done without a Congress and a White House at odds with each other.

I know some of those things will be new and *shiver* scary and *gasp!* different to many of the down-home "folksy" types who fear change of any kind, but eventually even they might step out of them there little bubbles and realize that there's more'n one way to skin a cat.

Actually Krazy -

I dont mind the christain influence. I do believe that "borrow and spend" is equally evil as "tax and spend".

I believe the government should be much smaller in size. Anyone who relies on the govt for their survival will always be sadly disappointed.

That Christian influence is destroying the GOP, slowly but surely. A christian conservative is not the same animal as a "regular" conservative who's closer to the center.

McCain picking Palin was a blatant attempt to pander to the far-right, due to the fact he's too close to center for the far right's liking. It's costing him now.

The left has a far left, but it's not a large portion of the party, like the far right is.

I know what I'm doing voting for a 3rd party. My state is already likely won by Obama (given that he represents my state, LOL, and Chicago will likely deliver the state, regardless of how we downstate may feel about him.)

So my vote is essentially meaningless, so I will cast it not for Obama, not for McCain, but for a 3rd party candidate.

It's seems the Democratic style of corruption, er I mean government in IL is not as effective as the Republican style of corruptions, er I mean government.

Seems we can convict Republican governors, but it will be interesting to see what happens to Blagojevic.

But since I can't in good conscience vote for Obama, and a vote for McCain is voting for more big government, I want to vote for something different.

I urge EVERYONE to NOT vote for anyone who voted FOR the bailout package, at any level, Senators, Congressmen, or presidential candidates. Anyone who voted to transfer 700B of taxpayer money to the folks who play a major role in the crisis is saying they are in favor of more of the same.

For as much as Obama talks of change, voting for the 700B tells me he is no different than any other elected member of the federal government.

Most polls I've read put citizens against the bailout at 67-80%, a solid majority, yet Congress passed it and of course the president signed.

Both McCain and Obama voted for this horrible package. So much for markets doing what they are supposed to.

If Wall Street cannot keep their street clean, folks will lose confidence in the markets and invest elsewhere.

That's where the incentive and the responsibility for cleaning up the mess needs to be, Wall Street and ONLY on Wall Street.

Sorry, I can't vote for either of these guys. MrW, I think we share the same faith, and I know that I'm to trust in God, not the government. So the less government we have, the more opportunity we all have to trust in one who really cares, who really has a soul.

The folks who are elected may have souls. But the question is, do they care about me, or are they just looking to buy my vote with my own money and then telling me what they "gave" me?

Fire the lot of them, and let's start over.

I love the way that you talk down about other people just because they dont agree with YOUR politics.....

But it doesn't surprise me in the least though!

Just because someone believes in GOD, believes that you have a right to carry a gun and is against Abortion, DOES NOT MAKE them "Down-home Folksy" types....

Conservatives DO NOT fear CHANGE, we welcome it....we just don't want Obama's idea of CHANGE.

Liberal SPIN....what a bunch of BS!!!

Exactly,

I don't fear change. I want change. Real change.

The problem is, I don't believe EITHER will give us real change.

I want REAL change, such as going back to what the framers of the Constitution envisioned, which is very little power over day to day life at the Federal level.

That would be real change. A federal government that would stick to it's constitutionally mandated role of National Defense, Foreign policy and a Federal Judiciary.

Turn things back over to the states and if a state doesn't do it well, they can change, or folks will simply leave that state.

That would be real change, leadership in Washington saying that they themselves are the problem and that they should get out of the way and let the states find innovative ways to resolve their issues and not assume that a few elected folks in DC know better how to solve problems than the rest of the nation, especially those closest to the problems.

Most of the time, the biggest problem is DC and our societies reliance upon them.

We have a nation of folks who think that their problems are best solved by 535 men and women, plus a president and vp who cannot even balance a budget. Real balance, not borrowing from Social Security to make it look balanced.

Folks think we should trust these clowns to solve major problems. Most of the time, they created the problems that need solving.

Must be nice to create your own job and to make things that guarantee there will never be a shortage of demand for your solutions.

Too bad most citizens fail to realize that the problem is as often in DC those DC says we need protection from. (How do I end this without the preposition from, LOL?)

Well, I voted today and voted for Bob Barr.

You see, I don't buy the line that the only REAL choices are Obama and McCain. Basically, that the same choice. So if you vote for either Obama or McCain, I think you are voting for more of the same.

More Federal Government, More Taxes, More Spending, More reliance of government mediocrity. (My apologies to any Federal workers reading here, I don't think the people are mediocre, but I do think the idea of large scale government solutions is what generates mediocrity, since to make it acceptable for everyone, any solution ends up being mediocre.)

So I'll wear my "I Voted" sticker today knowing I voted for real change. I have no illusions that Bob Barr will win. But when folks are complaining in two years that nothing has changed, go back to this post and read what I said.

I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is real change. I hope there is less federal interference, and DRASTICALLY reduced taxes, such as folks who currently pay taxes pay at least 25% less taxes across the board, and far less federal government, and of course, no federal deficit spending, unless there are 8 consecutive quarters of a shrinking economy, or during a war that truly threatens our soil.

But it's unlikely we'll see that as long as the citizens expect their government to be the nanny that takes care of their every whim and need that years ago, folks believed they should take care of themselves.

I'm sure there are folks who say health insurance is too expensive or too difficult to get, while watching their plasma TV, with DVR and 800 channels, while texting their friends.

I suspect many, if they would look at what they are spending, would find that they could buy health insurance with that money. But instead, they believe someone "OWES" them healthcare, that it's a right and the government is mandated to grant that right.

Well, it isn't that way.

Do I believe all who don't have healthcare are like that? Of course not. But my former wife worked in a pharmacy that was for practical purposes 100% medicare and medicaid patrons. They drove better cars than either of us had, and we were paying for their healthcare.

The problem is that people think that solutions come from DC. I think the that's the real problem, we as a society today expect DC to take care of things that we the people should be solving on our own, but have found that it's much nice to get Uncle Sam to pay, so we can run down to Best Buy and get the bigger plasma TV for our entertainment center, while moving the smaller one to our bedroom.

PS, my largest TV is a 27" CRT