Political Punch

Madonna is another celebrity who may be successful in the fantasy world of show business and flaunting herself, but when it comes to politics, she is an airhead. Furthermore ... John McCain has not only proved himself with over 40 years of service to America, but when he was a prisoner in Hanoi, and he was given the chance of early release, and he chose to stay ... out of honor and love of America, even though it meant years of additional captivity and torture, it showed remarkable integrity and character ... something Madonna doesn't even recognize ... let alone acknowledge. Madonna's comparison of John McCain to Adolph Hitler is a travesty ... and another example of how these spoiled celebrities who support Obama, enjoy the benefits and sacrifices made by others, while these ingrates trash American heros like McCain who suffered to insure their freedoms and opportunities.

The reason why 200,000 people turned up in Berlin to see Obama was because they felt something good about America in his visit. I don't think Bush or Mccain could raise 10% of that number on a foreign visit. Wake up all you Bush/Mccain lovers, even the rest of the world sees what America needs, why can't we?

To James Danley: I paint a bleak picture because it is bleak. We are not better off than we were 8 years ago because of the terrible policies of the Bush administration. I think most people, now, will agree...and you are in the minority. There was indisputable proof, and now well known by everyone that is not blinded by their continued obstinance (usually those who listen to Fox News), that election cheating by Republicans took place which put Bush into the White House. Your man, Bush, will eventually, hopefully, be brought up on charges of war crimes. In my book, all of you continued supporters of the war criminal right wing should be hauled up before a criminal court. Then I'll "get over it"!

Palindromedary, you paint a very dark picture only because the Liberal Left has been feeding you garbage for too long. Yes we are in a down turn economically. But things are nowhere near as bleak as you and the Liberal Left portray it. In fact, in 2006 the Democrats ran on how "terrible" our economy was. At that time our unemployment was 4.7%. At that time, we were in the middle of a record 54 consecutive months of job growth. AND at that time we actually had two quarters where we took in more revenue than we spent. YET to listen to the Democrats and Liberals back then, you would have thought we were in a recession. BUT now--even though we are not technically in a recession--to listen to you and the other Democrats and Liberals, you would think we were back in 1929. Give me a break.

Finally, the Republican's did NOT cheat to win the elections in 2000 or 2004. No matter how long and how loud you and the Liberal Left shout it...it is still NOT true. Get over it already...we won back then; and looking at the current polls have about a 45% shot at winning the White House again this November.

The Republicans and their useful idiots, the little Republicans (those who make less than $200,000 a year and who supports the Republicans), and the really pathetic useful idiots (those that are having a hard time making ends meet and who supports the Republicans) call Democrats thin skinned when they dare object to ridiculous comparison/association of an honorable man to someone of a questionable moral character. But mention something that is very true and relevant about their candidate and they blow a gasket and scream bloody murder (man...talk about whiners and ball-babies). If the Republicans cheat again this time around, and they get their man elected, I think we will have to worry about more turmoil in this country than what could ever be worried about from some external threats. Four more years of another Bush-like creature in the White House will put most of all of us in the Poor House....Naomi Kline's book "The Shock Doctrine" shows how the the US manipulated other countries, like Chile, to force Friedmanism,neo-liberalism, and neo-conservatism on their economic structures. That failed miserably on their economies making a few people extremely rich in a very short time, bankrupting the rest of the country. That is what is happening here in the US. You want civil unrest? Without the hope that someone like Obama will turn us around, this country may see violence coming from it's own citizens. And Obama had better turn us around! McCain will only keep us on the same track of economic misery and continued new, needless war crimes against the rest of the world. You want Nazi-like privatized corporations, like Blackwater, jack-booting through the streets of the US? Vote McCain and see what happens!!!

I thought the ad was good. But I thought the Moses ad was a scream. These ads are not negative at all. THe Obama campaign can't even take a joke. And, the tire gauge with "Obama's Energy Plan" was even more hilarious. I like the ribbing. Keep it up McCain. Lighten up Obama people, you all are so thin skinned.

worried about safety - Flash news we have already been attacked on on American soil, remember 911. If we get attacked again, which we will, it will be because the Bush administration has laid the ground work for an attack.

This crap about Obama being a just a celeb is interesting given the fact that the Republicans voted for Ronald Reagan, twice and Arnold S. who are both famous actors. Please come up with an original thought. Anyone who does not see the hypocrisy in this is an idiot.

AnotherLaura, I am not an expert in Congressional precedures or protocol. However, I do not believe that Congress can cherry pick which parts of a law can be allowed to expire and then extend other portions. I believe that a completely new law must be written.

The Washington Post Fact Checker (June 2008) states the following: "According to Obama's new economics adviser, Jason Furman, the revenues raised from letting the tax cuts expire will be returned to middle and low-income tax payers in the form of tax credits to pay for health insurance, so the overall effect will be revenue neutral."

I understand that to mean that the actual tax liability for a couple making $50,000 and filing jointly WILL have a tax liability of $8,100--as I previously stated--when the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire (at the end of 2010). Then according to Sen. Obama's plan (as explained by Jason Furman), apparently, this couple will at some point receive the difference between THAT amount and the LESSER amount that they would have had to pay had the Bush tax cuts been still in effect in the form of a tax credit for health insurance. It certainly would be a lot easier to just let the Bush tax cut remain, and let the couple choose what they want to do with the difference--like paying for gas.

Grace - I watched Obamas' town hall meeting today. An African American man asked - How do you propose to pay for the $1000 stimulus? Obama proceeded to attack Bush for everything under the sun but never gave this man an answer to his question. I've observed this to be the case more times than not. I've also watched McCain in his town hall meetings and the same does NOT apply. He may not always give the answer we want to hear but gives an answer just the same.

This is to Kathy Hilton. I don't think the ad was attacking your daughter or Brittany. It was simply portraying Obama as a celebrity as is Paris and Brittany. Did not even in the least occur to me to be detrimental just that Obama is suppose to be running for President of the United States of America not for any other reason. I'm sorry you took it that way.

James Danley-
The problem with your scenario is Obama is not talking about letting the Bush tax cuts expire for incomes less than $250,000
Fact checking shows that a taxpayer making $50,000 will fair better (less tax) under
Obama's plan than McCain's

Ghost, actually I do blame the Democrats for the high energy prices. Thirty years of blocking drilling; thirty years of blocking the building of new refineries; thirty years of blocking the building of nuclear plants; thirty years of not allowing us to increase our supply of domestic oil.

Sorry but you are completely wrong about the U. S. Senate. There are 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 2 Independants who vote with the Democrats. So the Democrats ARE in control. They control the agenda...they control the committees...and they control what can come up for a vote. So yes, the Democrats are in control.

James Danley wrote :"The Democrats took office on January 3, 2007, and now look where we are just 19 months later!!"

Come on, man.. Don't bu.. s..
Reps are still in control in senate and so far dems didn't get anything done except G.I. bill. So it is all about Bush and oil prices. You can't blame it on dems.. You are so Rove... ;)))

HiltonsUnderstandEconomics-
Quite conveniently, you forgot to mention that the Dems don't have a filibuster proff majority either nor do not they typically have enough votes to override presidential vetoes. So many bills to address the problems we face are not passed because the Rep minority has sufficient numbers to filibuster or prevent an override of an executive veto.

Lydia, you wrote: "And that he (Sen. Obama) will give the middle-class and poor a break on their taxes by canceling the Bush tax breaks for the rich."

Only problem is those facts aren't accurate. A couple making $50,000 and filing jointly will currently have a 2008 federal income tax liability of $6,698. That same couple--after the 2001 & 2003 Bush tax cuts expire--will have to pay $8,100. So just allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will amount to a $1,402 tax increase for that couple.

Now as for Sen. Obama's plan for retirees making less than $50,000 to no longer pay federal income tax, that is just one of the many free handouts that he plans of which, cumulatively, will bankrupt the U. S. Treasury. Sen. Obama is full of populous rhetoric and will say anything to get votes. And should he succeed and win the general election, in four years there will be some very unhappy voters. You think the anti-war, pro-impeachment crowd are upset with Congress now, that won't come close to the anger that the mainstream electorate will have when they realize the consequences of their voting for Sen. Obama.

Lydia, you wrote: "We all need to look realistically at how bad things are now..."

Let's see, GDP has grown the past two quarters in spite of all the hits that our economy has taken. Unemployment is 5.7% (during the 7 year period of 1980-1986 we averaged 8% unemployment). And...oh yeah...no further attacks on the homeland.

It's interesting that when our unemployment rate was at 4.7%, and we were actually taking in more revenue then spending for a couple of quarters in 2006, and we were on the way to a record 54 months of job increases, the Democrats kept talking about how bad things were in order to get re-elected. The Democrats took office on January 3, 2007, and now look where we are just 19 months later!!

Lydia, you wrote: "And that he (Sen. Obama) will give the middle-class and poor a break on their taxes by canceling the Bush tax breaks for the rich."

Only problem is those facts aren't accurate. A couple making $50,000 and filing jointly will currently have a 2008 federal income tax liability of $6,698. That same couple--after the 2001 & 2003 Bush tax cuts expire--will have to pay $8,100. So just allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will amount to a $1,402 tax increase for that couple.

Now as for Sen. Obama's plan for retirees making less than $50,000 to no longer pay federal income tax, that is just one of the many free handouts that he plans of which, cumulatively, will bankrupt the U. S. Treasury. Sen. Obama is full of populous rhetoric and will say anything to get votes. And should he succeed and win the general election, in four years there will be some very unhappy voters. You think the anti-war, pro-impeachment crowd are upset with Congress now, that won't come close to the anger that the mainstream electorate will have when they realize the consequences of their voting for Sen. Obama.

Why is Obama so upset With the McCain's ad? He said it himself.

"Andy Warhol said we all get our 15 minutes of fame," says Barack Obama. "I've already had an hour and a half. I mean, I'm so overexposed, I'm making Paris Hilton look like a recluse."

jamesp, while we do live in the information age, unfortunately many seniors do not use the internet. Thus the polls show seniors favoring McCain. So to Obama voters out there, make sure you inform the seniors in your family and that you are friends with, what a positive difference Obama will make. I have personally changed more than a few seniors' minds in casual conversation when I tell them that Obama wants retirees who make less than $50,000 a year to no longer pay income tax. That Obama believes people should be able to retire with dignity. And that he will give the middle-class and poor a break on their taxes by canceling the Bush tax breaks for the rich. These facts really get their attention, as seniors are as worried about themselves and their kids making ends meet as the rest of us. Seniors just need accurate information about Obama.