Political Punch

I´m ashtonished to read so much bull... about a Presidential Candidate from the most powerful country in the world. What is important is that during his visit to Israel, he went as any good human being to the Wall to pray. The Wall is a place of reverence, is a wall from the Lord´s Temple, a Lord´s Wall! It should be a place of respect and honour because it is a Holy Place. People have forgotten the real meaning of this place, it would be better to remember what it really is about, the Lord and stop with the greedy stuff!

Nothing the pretender-to-the-throne does is intended to be anything but a photo-op. The entire universe exists for him to put on a display. I'm glad that someone there protested his presence.

The man yelling that Jerusalem is our home could have belonged to any of the three Abrahamic faiths, the Christian, Judaic or Muslim. If the three placed more importance on their origins and commonalities and less on the territorial differences, then perhaps the phrase, Shalom, would cease to be such an empty greeting in Jerusalem.

"Wearing a white yarmulke" huh? What's next, a blue turben?

Also, I know many liberals or socialists actually do mean well, so please don't take offense to my last statement, but the fact is that, although it looks good on paper and it sounds good in a speech, socialism just doesn't work. For example, the past couple of years when the media was acting like our economy was hurting, our unemployment rate was between 4-5% and at the same time western Europe's unemployment rate, those liberals strive to be, was between 12-15%. These are the same people in the streets screaming thier support for Obama in Germany. Does anyone remember the riots in France? Those were due mainly because there were no jobs and people were lashing out. Do you want that here? Seriously, all you hear is how horrible the economy is here, but our unemployment rate right now is between 5-5.5%.

I like where you're goin with this Joey. I know most people on here can't understand the correlation, but just think, for example, Universal Healthcare, raising taxes on the rich, and taking away the cap on FICA payroll taxes, and of course doubling the capital gains tax. Together it means a socialist anti-economic growth economy, which will bring more people to rely on the government more and more, thus giving the government ultimate power and taking away individual freedom, aka Cuba. How many boats full of Americans are heading to Cuba?

Or maybe this instead?
Communism--
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
Communism
A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariattead?

Hey Mike,
Socialism refers to any of various economic and political concepts of state or collective (i.e. public) ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, some of which have been developed into more or less highly articulated theories and/or praxis. [1] In a Marxist or labor-movement definition of the term, socialism is a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done with the goal of creating a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community. [2] This control may be exercised on behalf of the state, through a market, or through popular collectives such as workers' councils and cooperatives. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state, cooperative, or worker ownership of the means of production, goals which have been attributed to, and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments.

The modern socialist movement largely originated in the late–19th century working class movement. During this period, the term "socialism" was first used by European social critics, who spoke against capitalism and private property. Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, wrote that socialism would be achieved through class struggle and a proletarian revolution.[3] Marxism has had a lasting influence on most branches of socialism.

Since the 19th century, socialists have not agreed on a common doctrine or program. Various adherents of socialist movements are split into differing and sometimes opposing branches, particularly between reformists and revolutionaries and Marxists and non-Marxists. Some socialists have championed the complete nationalization of the means of production, while social democrats have proposed selective nationalization of key industries within the framework of mixed economies, while libertarian socialists advocate cooperative worker ownership of the means of production. Some Marxists, including those inspired by the Soviet model of economic development, have advocated the creation of centrally planned economies directed by a state that controls all the means of production. Others, including Communists in Yugoslavia and Hungary in the 1970s and 1980s, Chinese Communists since the reform era, and some Western economists, have proposed various forms of market socialism, attempting to reconcile the presumed advantages of cooperative or state ownership of the means of production with letting market forces, rather than central planners, guide production and exchange.[4] Anarcho-syndicalists, Luxemburgists (such as those in the Socialist Party USA) and some elements of the United States New Left favor decentralized collective ownership in the form of cooperatives or workers' councils. Hmmm Sounds a lot like Barrack Obamas ideas to me, wouldn't you say?

In all honesty, I actually feel sorry for Obama. He gave a good speech a the DNC in 2004 afer winning a senate seat essentially unopposed after leaving the state senate after being a community organizer. Someone convinced him he would be qualified to be president with no executive or military or leadership experience. Calling for potholes to be filled in is not executive experience. Now the poor guy is probably going to be president. The person most wanting Obama to be president is Jimmy Carter, he knows this is his one chance for there to be a president actually worse than him and he is counting on it. I mean seriously, he's an 80 something man that still goes by Jimmy, what does that tell you?

The obvious purpose of Sen. Obama's visit to the western wall was not to pray, but to be photographed appearing to pray. If no cameras were there, Obama would not be there. No senior advisor in the Obama campaign has made any secret about the fact that this entire trip was planned for US consumption. Aside from being presumptious, there is nothing wrong with that by itself. But it is more than a little hypocritical for Sen. Obama for example to have the gall to criticize the Bush administration for not paying enough attention to Afghanistan because it was focused on what it thought to be the more immediate threat in Iraq. Since January 2007 Sen. Obama has been Chairman Of The Subcommittee On European Affairs of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. That subcommittee has jurisdition over the NATO mission in Afghanistan because all NATO matters come under that committee. As chairman, Obama could hold hearings on the mission of NATO in Afghanistan any time he wants to. He keeps changing his answer on why he never held hearings. He was a little candid with the late Tim Russert of NBC in March when he admitted he was too busy campaigning for president to do his Senate duties even though they are directly related to his and Sen. Biden's fake complaints about a lack of piority on Afghanistan. Then Obama just this week told Katie Couric of CBS that he did not hold hearings on Afghanistan because that topic was dealt with by the full committee. But he has done zip on the full committe either to deal directly with this topic of his subcommittee. Obama cannot bring himself to admit the surge worked. He says other things played a part in the downturn of violence in Iraq and he is not wrong on that but why not admit the surge also worked? Because, like President Bush, Sen. Obama is not one who likes to admit he was wrong. Now the "Sen. Let's Bring the Troops Home at Once" of 2007 is willing to leave as many as 80,000 US troops in Iraq until 2010. I understand why conservatives don't trust Sen. Obama for all his flip flops but I cannot understand why liberals still do trust him when most of his flips have been at their expense.

Yes, aaaa Obama is a aaa a very well aaaa aa spoken aaa man. Aaaa similar to aa aaaa to John aa aaa a Kennedy aa. It is fun aa aaaaa a to watch him a aaaa answer aaa question when aaa aa he aaa aa doesn't aa aaaa aaa have a aaa tele aaa a prompter aa aa to read a aaa aaa from aaa.

This story is lame. Obama went there and showed he had the chops.

Most of you people are very uniformed and spread a lot of propaganda.

I see claims that Obama is a "socialist," and of course, there's no evidence. I see people saying that Obama is an idiot, when he finished at the top of his class at Harvard, while John Mccain only got through the academy because his father was a very well respected military man. He finished bottom 4 or 5 out of a class of nearly 900. That's pretty sad, reminds me a lot of George Bush Jr.

The most astonishing "blemish" according to you incredibly illogical, ignorant people is that since people in Europe love Obama, it must be a bad thing. So now it's bad to have our US representatives loved over seas? Explain that one to me please, without calling me a liberal or a socialist please.

Also, please continue crying about media coverage. McCain had no problem with the media bias in his favor during the 2000 primary nominations, but now he does?

McCain is the king of changing stances about issues at the last moment. Explain to me why McCain said he would be fine with gay marriage, and then a day later said he was against gay marriage? Explain to me why John McCain said Falwell was an "agent of intolerance" and now embraces him? Tell me why John McCain is claiming the surge started before our troops got there, when in fact a "surge" means an increase in troop levels. Does it not bother you that McCain is taking credit for things he had NOTHING to do with? Explain to me why you want someone to be president that has a economic adviser that personally has his stamp on the bills that deregulated the energy and mortage industries, two industries that have since had major scandals and collapsed. The same adviser that things we're a bunch of whiners because we don't like gas being at $4+ a gallon.

If you follow McCain you are nothing but a sheep. Everything the republicans preach and claim to be they are the opposite. It's funny how Republicans are now Neocons. If you know the actual definition of a Neocon you would know that they are closer to socialism than a true democrat could ever dream to be.

Jeremiah Wright would be proud of the way Obama turned such a holy site into a tacky political campaign event.

I believe the United States should apologize to Israel. Obama should apologize to Judaism.

Wow, there are so many insane postings here. It seems like the left and right want open violent conflict. I hope when they are done, no one is left.

Is it true that Obama wants the economy to be a lot like it was a couple of years ago? No one in the media, let alone Barack Hussein Obama, is praising President Bush for one of the most robust economic conditions a couple of years ago.

Obama will not lower the price of oil. He and his liberal wingnut friends want the price high. In fact, he will likely raise taxes! Those environmentalists will not be happy until the government allows only one small car per family with a ration on its use (like, only 100 miles a week).

Obama is a socialist and the most liberal, inexperienced and unqualified ever to run for the office of Commander-in-Chief! But why does the media (including ABC News) continue to offer his months of free advertisements and rear end kissing?

If there was ever any evidence that the media is liberal, this is it!

I find most of the comments posted here laughable. Leaves me with the impression there are alot of nervous Republicans out there............wonder why??? Guess we'll find out in November!

I wasn't sure about Obama before this trip. Now I am certain.

Obama is the WRONG choice for this nation. Let him move to Europe since he likes tickling ears and getting his ears tickled there.

!Si McCain puede!
Johnny Mc in 2008!!!

John McCain/Kay Bailey Hutchinson in 2008!
- or -
McCain/Condi in 2008!

At least the people of Israel aren't buying the media's "chosen one." Obama is not a "Messiah." Obama is an idiot -- handpicked by his hyper-liberal followers and their disciples in the media.

While the media follows Obama like a dog in heat -- acting as though Obama's election is a done-deal -- Obama holds only a slim margin in most credible national polls. This is ironic since most Democratic Presidential candidates hold a 10-15 point lead at this time in the summer. As the election draws near, many Americans think twice about the "change" promised by liberal candidates. In other words, Obama has a lot to worry about!

Why does the media act like Obama followers constitute a massive majority in the United States? He doesn't even hold a majority in most polls! He holds a slight plurality of only 1-5 points.

My biggest fear is regarding what could happen if and when Obama loses in November. Since the media is acting as if it were already a foregone conclusion, I am afraid that the reaction in the inner cities might turn violent. If less-intelligent liberals still accuse the Bush Administration of having "stolen" the election of 2000 (and even 2004) -- then what will happen when Obama loses in November?!?

I just wish that the news media would cover the candidates without bias. Instead, the media disciples of Obama are already crowning him their King.

This guy O'bama is the most dangerous candidate for Pres. of The United States in history. His followers have no idea what he stands for, as he doesn't know himself. But America has always had ignorant politicl voters who have no idea what they vote for. If this guy were to somehow get elected, then after the swear in,on 20th Jan 2009 you will have any bills to pay, and you will be able to pocket every dollar you earn. No grocery bills, no medical bills, no fuel bills, no insurance bills, no car payments, no mortage payments, no water bills, free clothing, free food, free clothing, free college. Changes that we can beleive in!!!!!
I personally beleive Sen. McCain's supporters will beat the crap out of the most liberal democrat in Washington