This is an excellent article . Thanks a lot . I am grateful to you .

How can so many Americans be so Stupid and believe, support and follow this man?

How can they let their minds be persuaded, manipulated, conditioned to submitting to this man?

How can they be so naive and gullible to let their minds be tricked into believing this known proven liars words?

Is it weakness or desperation or is it the program and techniques that are used on them so strong they can not resist?

It is far past the time for someone to investigate the use of these programs and techniques, being used on the American people.

It is the right and the responsibility for someone in a position to do something about this problem of national security. For the good of the country and the people Of America.

Where is Big Brother when they are needed the most.

Where are the government Watch dogs and Protectors of this Nation?

There is a peaceful coup taking over the Government, Who is Responsible from letting it happen.

This Man Obama is the Single Most Threat to National Security this nation has ever came up upon us.

God Bless America

God Bless the People of America, keep them from harm.

The Time is now to protect America

How dumb can you get?? Answer you elected George Bush twice, the idiot from Crawford Texas, which is in the middle of no where Texas, so far from anything Laura told chimpy she wasn't going to stay there when they left office. At least one of the Bushes has some sence.

6 colleges in 5 years? Just to get a degree? This woman must be a dunce.

Remember when Obama said he got his best experience for foreign policy by living in Indonesia between the ages of 6 and 10, and then Joe Biden, tongue-in-cheek agreed with him that that was actually the best experience he could tout? Yep, America should feel safe and secure.

Gus, you simply do not want to go there with your 57 states !

If the American people think taxes will not be raised they are kidding themselves how do you think we are going to get out of the debt we are in and pay China back? I for one would rather a president and vp that are repectful of the people they are serving and know the constituation because they have studied it and taught it. No one has the exprience to be president unless you have served in that office, but you have to have the temperment be president. Watching the RNC was very disappointing there was no respect for the least of us.

Can the super-rich former governor of Massachusetts — the son of a Fortune 500 C.E.O. who made a vast fortune in the leveraged-buyout business — really keep a straight face while denouncing “Eastern elites”?

Can the former mayor of New York City, a man who, as USA Today put it, “marched in gay pride parades, dressed up in drag and lived temporarily with a gay couple and their Shih Tzu” — that was between his second and third marriages — really get away with saying that Barack Obama doesn’t think small towns are sufficiently “cosmopolitan”?

Can the vice-presidential candidate of a party that has controlled the White House, Congress or both for 26 of the past 28 years, a party that, Borg-like, assimilated much of the D.C. lobbying industry into itself — until Congress changed hands, high-paying lobbying jobs were reserved for loyal Republicans — really portray herself as running against the “Washington elite”?

Yes, they can.

On Tuesday, He Who Must Not Be Named — Mitt Romney mentioned him just once, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin not at all — gave a video address to the Republican National Convention. John McCain, promised President Bush, would stand up to the “angry left.” That’s no doubt true. But don’t be fooled either by Mr. McCain’s long-ago reputation as a maverick or by Ms. Palin’s appealing persona: the Republican Party, now more than ever, is firmly in the hands of the angry right, which has always been much bigger, much more influential and much angrier than its counterpart on the other side.

What’s the source of all that anger?

Some of it, of course, is driven by cultural and religious conflict: fundamentalist Christians are sincerely dismayed by Roe v. Wade and evolution in the curriculum. What struck me as I watched the convention speeches, however, is how much of the anger on the right is based not on the claim that Democrats have done bad things, but on the perception — generally based on no evidence whatsoever — that Democrats look down their noses at regular people.

Thus Mr. Giuliani asserted that Wasilla, Alaska, isn’t “flashy enough” for Mr. Obama, who never said any such thing. And Ms. Palin asserted that Democrats “look down” on small-town mayors — again, without any evidence.

What the G.O.P. is selling, in other words, is the pure politics of resentment; you’re supposed to vote Republican to stick it to an elite that thinks it’s better than you. Or to put it another way, the G.O.P. is still the party of Nixon.

One of the key insights in “Nixonland,” the new book by the historian Rick Perlstein, is that Nixon’s political strategy throughout his career was inspired by his college experience, in which he got himself elected student body president by exploiting his classmates’ resentment against the Franklins, the school’s elite social club. There’s a direct line from that student election to Spiro Agnew’s attacks on the “nattering nabobs of negativism” as “an effete corps of impudent snobs,” and from there to the peculiar cult of personality that not long ago surrounded George W. Bush — a cult that celebrated his anti-intellectualism and made much of the supposed fact that the “misunderestimated” C-average student had proved himself smarter than all the fancy-pants experts.

And when Mr. Bush turned out not to be that smart after all, and his presidency crashed and burned, the angry right — the raging rajas of resentment? — became, if anything, even angrier. Humiliation will do that.

Can Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin really ride Nixonian resentment into an upset election victory in what should be an overwhelmingly Democratic year? The answer is a definite maybe.

By selecting Barack Obama as their nominee, the Democrats may have given Republicans an opening: the very qualities that inspire many fervent Obama supporters — the candidate’s high-flown eloquence, his coolness factor — have also laid him open to a Nixonian backlash. Unlike many observers, I wasn’t surprised at the effectiveness of the McCain “celebrity” ad. It didn’t make much sense intellectually, but it skillfully exploited the resentment some voters feel toward Mr. Obama’s star quality.

That said, the experience of the years since 2000 — the memory of what happened to working Americans when faux-populist Republicans controlled the government — is still fairly fresh in voters’ minds. Furthermore, while Democrats’ supposed contempt for ordinary people is mainly a figment of Republican imagination, the G.O.P. really is the Gramm Old Party — it really does believe that the economy is just fine, and the fact that most Americans disagree just shows that we’re a nation of whiners.

But the Democrats can’t afford to be complacent. Resentment, no matter how contrived, is a powerful force, and it’s one that Republicans are very, very good at exploiting.

Hey Jim, you are 100% correct. Hacks like Kieth Olbermann have infested the media and as a result completely detroyed its credibility. Good riddance to it.

Can the super-rich former governor of Massachusetts — the son of a Fortune 500 C.E.O. who made a vast fortune in the leveraged-buyout business — really keep a straight face while denouncing “Eastern elites”?

Can the former mayor of New York City, a man who, as USA Today put it, “marched in gay pride parades, dressed up in drag and lived temporarily with a gay couple and their Shih Tzu” — that was between his second and third marriages — really get away with saying that Barack Obama doesn’t think small towns are sufficiently “cosmopolitan”?

Can the vice-presidential candidate of a party that has controlled the White House, Congress or both for 26 of the past 28 years, a party that, Borg-like, assimilated much of the D.C. lobbying industry into itself — until Congress changed hands, high-paying lobbying jobs were reserved for loyal Republicans — really portray herself as running against the “Washington elite”?

Yes, they can.

On Tuesday, He Who Must Not Be Named — Mitt Romney mentioned him just once, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin not at all — gave a video address to the Republican National Convention. John McCain, promised President Bush, would stand up to the “angry left.” That’s no doubt true. But don’t be fooled either by Mr. McCain’s long-ago reputation as a maverick or by Ms. Palin’s appealing persona: the Republican Party, now more than ever, is firmly in the hands of the angry right, which has always been much bigger, much more influential and much angrier than its counterpart on the other side.

What’s the source of all that anger?

Some of it, of course, is driven by cultural and religious conflict: fundamentalist Christians are sincerely dismayed by Roe v. Wade and evolution in the curriculum. What struck me as I watched the convention speeches, however, is how much of the anger on the right is based not on the claim that Democrats have done bad things, but on the perception — generally based on no evidence whatsoever — that Democrats look down their noses at regular people.

Thus Mr. Giuliani asserted that Wasilla, Alaska, isn’t “flashy enough” for Mr. Obama, who never said any such thing. And Ms. Palin asserted that Democrats “look down” on small-town mayors — again, without any evidence.

What the G.O.P. is selling, in other words, is the pure politics of resentment; you’re supposed to vote Republican to stick it to an elite that thinks it’s better than you. Or to put it another way, the G.O.P. is still the party of Nixon.

One of the key insights in “Nixonland,” the new book by the historian Rick Perlstein, is that Nixon’s political strategy throughout his career was inspired by his college experience, in which he got himself elected student body president by exploiting his classmates’ resentment against the Franklins, the school’s elite social club. There’s a direct line from that student election to Spiro Agnew’s attacks on the “nattering nabobs of negativism” as “an effete corps of impudent snobs,” and from there to the peculiar cult of personality that not long ago surrounded George W. Bush — a cult that celebrated his anti-intellectualism and made much of the supposed fact that the “misunderestimated” C-average student had proved himself smarter than all the fancy-pants experts.

And when Mr. Bush turned out not to be that smart after all, and his presidency crashed and burned, the angry right — the raging rajas of resentment? — became, if anything, even angrier. Humiliation will do that.

Can Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin really ride Nixonian resentment into an upset election victory in what should be an overwhelmingly Democratic year? The answer is a definite maybe.

By selecting Barack Obama as their nominee, the Democrats may have given Republicans an opening: the very qualities that inspire many fervent Obama supporters — the candidate’s high-flown eloquence, his coolness factor — have also laid him open to a Nixonian backlash. Unlike many observers, I wasn’t surprised at the effectiveness of the McCain “celebrity” ad. It didn’t make much sense intellectually, but it skillfully exploited the resentment some voters feel toward Mr. Obama’s star quality.

That said, the experience of the years since 2000 — the memory of what happened to working Americans when faux-populist Republicans controlled the government — is still fairly fresh in voters’ minds. Furthermore, while Democrats’ supposed contempt for ordinary people is mainly a figment of Republican imagination, the G.O.P. really is the Gramm Old Party — it really does believe that the economy is just fine, and the fact that most Americans disagree just shows that we’re a nation of whiners.

But the Democrats can’t afford to be complacent. Resentment, no matter how contrived, is a powerful force, and it’s one that Republicans are very, very good at exploiting.

How quickly minds forget, especially ones that hate Obama

Wasn't it Stephanopoulos who spent 45 minutes of a democratic debate ABC sponsored to hammer Obama?

You must remember that debate where Obama got peppered with questions about Reverend Wright, and Bill Ayers.

You can't have it both ways, unless your Faux News in which case you just make things up.

Turning to the issues for a minute, the federal government is spending HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS on prescription drugs.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that we use the purchasing power, just like when private companies like McDonald's order their potatoes, and negotiate the price with the big drug companies.

EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIAL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD SAVES THEIR TAX PAYERS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS BY NEGOTIATING ON THE PRICE OF PRESCRIPTIONS.

Why does John McCain favor wasting the American taxpayer money?

Racist!!! this is no Oprah's show, dude!

AND TO THOSE WHO WONDER WHY THE CANDIDATES DON'T TALK ABOUT ISSUES - THE PRESS NEVER ASKS OBAMA ABOUT THE ISSUES. THEY THROW HIM SOFTBALL QUESTIONS ABOUT BASKETBALL. MCCAIN & PALIN TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES ALL THE TIME, BUT THE MEDIA DOESN'T REPORT IT. THEY ARE OBSESSED WITH HER KIDS. AS FAR AS THEIR OBAMESSIAH, THEY KNOW HE CAN'T TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES BECAUSE HE HAS NO EXPERIENCE, AND THAT JOE "I'M FROM SCRANTON" BIDEN IS AN ISSUE ALL BY HIMSELF.

Jazboy it took her 5 Colleges to find a Professor who would trade grades for, well you know.

"AS IF SHE COULDN'T PLAY A REAL GAME OF BASKETBALL"

OBama is not insulting Palin. Obama is afriad to drive to the hoop. While Palin was called Barracuda for her aggressive play Obama stands outside shooting avioding contact lest someone sends his skinny girlish figure flying.

Voter in PA can the novel legnth posts, or we will ship you out to Iran.

geevil outside shooter do so because they have that ability and are talanted with hand eye cordination as opposed to one who stretches the rules when talent alone can't do the job.

Ordinary people can do extra-ordinary things. Cliche or not, history is about to repeat istself.

"Dude is awesome, and the freaking intelligence of the guy. This country is lucky to have this guy as the next President of the United States of America"

HOW SO? I KNOW SO MANY PEOPLE SMARTER THAN HIM DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN. HE HAS NO BIG ACCOMPLISHMENTS THAT I CAN THINK OF.

"Do you have health insurance provided by your employer? John McCain wants to start TAXING health insurance benefits."

HE IS ACTUALLY PROVIDING A $2500/$5000 TAX CREDIT ALSO. YOU NEED TO CONSIDER THE ENTIRE STORY (SOMETHING DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS DON'T USUALLY DO!)

"Do you, or your parents receive a Social Security check every month? John McCain wants divert money currently paying for retirement checks to PRIVATE ACCOUNTS."

THE PEOPLE RECEIVING SOCIAL SECURITY WILL STILL GET THEIR CHECKS. THIS IS ANOTHER DEMOCRAT SCARE TACTIC. AGAIN DEMOCRATS DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO MATH AND DON'T WANT TO LOOK THE BIG PICTURE. FACT IS THAT ALL OF THESE RETIRED PEOPLE ARE TAKING MANY TIMES THE MONEY THEY PUT IN THE SYSTEM OUT OF IT. OUR YOUNG GENERATIONS ARE GETTING SCREWED. WHATS WRONG WITH GIVING THEM PRIVATE ACCOUNTS LIKE 401KS?
IT MAY ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO SAVE MORE. LOOK AT THE NUMBERS AND DON'T BE STUPID. WHEN YOUR GRANDPARENTS ONLY MADE $20,000 / YEAR AND THE RECEIVE $20,000/YEAR IN BENEFITS. YOU'VE GOT TO
THINK TO YOURSELF THAT SOMETHING IS NOT FAIR.