Obamacrat for McCain | Oct 13, 2008 1:34:18 PM

There is a terrific photo of McCain at an ACORN event posted at Politico.

Gee Evil,

When are you going to stop eating the sour grapes?

At this rate I am sure you have already found the rope and tree from where you will dangle after McNasty loses.

I have found it to be true! While most conservitive republicans vote based on facts. The Dem's do things based on feelings. I think I'll stick to the facts. Look out Obama! Cause the MCCAIN TRAIN just smoked thru your block!! That's what happens when you back a great fighter into the corner!

Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin, what if things were switched around?

…..think about it.

Would the country’s collective point of view be different? Could racism be the culprit?

Ponder the following:

What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, including a three month old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?

What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review?

What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?

What if McCain had only married once and Obama was a divorcee?

What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife after a severe disfiguring car accident, when she no longer measured up to his standards?

What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married?

What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?

What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five? (The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s.)

What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

What if Obama couldn’t read from a teleprompter?

What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included discipline problems and a record of crashing seven planes?

What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly, on many occasions, a serious anger management problem?

What if Michelle Obama’s family had made their money from first bootlegging, the legit beer distribution?

What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?

You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?

This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.

Educational Background:

Barack Obama: Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations. Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

Joseph Biden: University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

Vs

John McCain: United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899

McCain hammered Obama as an untested and untenable choice for president, frequently voicing the refrain: “Who is Barack Obama
********************************************
John McCain and Sarah Palin have both been tested and have both FAILED!
Who is this John McCain, the President wanna be of 2008?
According to quite a few of his colleagues, he is a VERY different person that they knew in 2000 and they are now asking that question themselves.\
Who is John McCain?

Who is Sarah palin?
We have gotten quite a glimpse and what we have seen so far ain't pretty.

Good Stuff!!!!!!

During the Democratic primaries, Roland Martin wrote a column for CNN.com about how easy it is for any candidate to tar and feather another about their associations with less-than-acceptable figures.

Sen. Hillary Clinton tried to blast Sen. Barack Obama for unsolicited comments made by Nation of Islam leader Minister Louis Farrakhan, and folks like Fox News' Sean Hannity were happy to run with it, saying it was evidence that the junior senator from Illinois was unfit to be president.

But critics like Hannity never bothered to raise the issue of former Republican vice-presidential candidate Jack Kemp praising Farrakhan for his focus on self-help. Not only that, nearly everyone in the media was afraid to bring up the fact that Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell had high praise for Farrakhan when Rendell was mayor of Philadelphia, even as the Muslim leader sat just 20 feet away!

Again, blasting one person's associations can come back to bite you.

We now see Gov. Sarah Palin and the McCain campaign trying to stir the pot by invoking William Ayers, a 1960s radical who was a major figure in the Weather Underground, a group that bombed the Pentagon and committed other unspeakable acts of terrorism against their own country.

Palin has been hammering home the point on the campaign trail that Obama and Ayers were friends, "palling around" the Windy City, even though the Weather Underground committed these crimes when Obama was just a child. And never mind the fact that Ayers and Obama were involved in a multimillion-dollar education grant that was funded by a right-wing Republican, media magnate Walter Annenberg. Do you hear any of them castigating this late Republican pillar?

The McCain camp, along with their right-wing media comrades, want to convince you that Obama should not have decided to serve with Ayers, who was named the Citizen of the Year in Chicago in 1987 for his education work, and who is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Now, if someone was seen as an acceptable figure by business, political and education figures, many of whom support both Democrats and Republicans, should Obama be faulted for sitting on a board with the guy?

So, let's use that same logic and apply it to McCain.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Chicago who serves as one of the national co-chairs for Obama, told me on The Tom Joyner Morning Show that if we are to use the association tag as evidence of a candidate being unfit for president, what about McCain serving and working alongside people with virulent bigoted pasts like Sens. Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd?

Do we have evidence that these individuals committed specific acts against African-Americans during Jim Crow? No. But we do know that their hateful words, and willingness to uphold laws that were absolutely anti-American, did not represent the best of this nation.

Thurmond ran for president as a Dixiecrat in 1948 with a platform of maintaining segregation. Based on Helms' policies, he didn't see blacks as full Americans.

Bombing the Pentagon is horrible and indefensible. But declaring yourself a patriot while you speak such hateful and venomous words against your own countrymen, who just happen to be black, and then trying to oppress them, is just as indefensible.

So, did McCain work with them? Did he not speak with them? Should McCain have declared that he would not work alongside these men because of their past? Should the self-described maverick who believes in integrity and character have taken the honorable stance of resigning from the Senate to protest these hateful characters serving in the U.S. Senate?

No. And this is why this association argument is so weak and impotent.

For goodness' sakes, Byrd was once a member of the Ku Klux Klan, a domestic terrorist organization!

Now, if Ayers was involved in these despicable acts today -- or Byrd and his late Senate colleagues -- then it is fair game.

But no candidate should have to be held responsible for the actions of someone else that took place years ago.

He fundamentally believes that this is nothing but a smokescreen and effort to ignore the real issues we face. Nobody should care about any of this when they are losing their jobs and having their homes foreclosed and finding themselves unable to afford to send their kids to college and to get access to health care.

What he found to be more deplorable is to hear McCain advisers say they want to turn the page to anything but the issue number one -- the economy.

If that kind of talk is coming from the camp of a guy who wants to be president, then that is something to be afraid of -- not a candidate's association with Ayers, or Thurmond, Helms or Byrd.

Obama's 95% illusion!!

One of Barack Obama's most potent campaign claims is that he'll cut taxes for no less than 95% of "working families." He's even promising to cut taxes enough that the government's tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% -- which is lower than it is today.

APIt's a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he's also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of "tax cut."
For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase "tax credit." Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals:
- A $500 tax credit ($1,000 a couple) to "make work pay" that phases out at income of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 per couple.
- A $4,000 tax credit for college tuition.
- A 10% mortgage interest tax credit (on top of the existing mortgage interest deduction and other housing subsidies).
- A "savings" tax credit of 50% up to $1,000.
- An expansion of the earned-income tax credit that would allow single workers to receive as much as $555 a year, up from $175 now, and give these workers up to $1,110 if they are paying child support.
- A child care credit of 50% up to $6,000 of expenses a year.
- A "clean car" tax credit of up to $7,000 on the purchase of certain vehicles.
Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut.
The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.
The total annual expenditures on refundable "tax credits" would rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to $1.054 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center. This means that the tax-credit welfare state would soon cost four times actual cash welfare. By redefining such income payments as "tax credits," the Obama campaign also redefines them away as a tax share of GDP. Presto, the federal tax burden looks much smaller than it really is.
The political left defends "refundability" on grounds that these payments help to offset the payroll tax. And that was at least plausible when the only major refundable credit was the earned-income tax credit. Taken together, however, these tax credit payments would exceed payroll levies for most low-income workers.
It is also true that John McCain proposes a refundable tax credit -- his $5,000 to help individuals buy health insurance. We've written before that we prefer a tax deduction for individual health care, rather than a credit. But the big difference with Mr. Obama is that Mr. McCain's proposal replaces the tax subsidy for employer-sponsored health insurance that individuals don't now receive if they buy on their own. It merely changes the nature of the tax subsidy; it doesn't create a new one.
There's another catch: Because Mr. Obama's tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. The marginal tax rate refers to the rate on the next dollar of income earned. As the nearby chart illustrates, the marginal rate for millions of low- and middle-income workers would spike as they earn more income.
Some families with an income of $40,000 could lose up to 40 cents in vanishing credits for every additional dollar earned from working overtime or taking a new job. As public policy, this is contradictory. The tax credits are sold in the name of "making work pay," but in practice they can be a disincentive to working harder, especially if you're a lower-income couple getting raises of $1,000 or $2,000 a year. One mystery -- among many -- of the McCain campaign is why it has allowed Mr. Obama's 95% illusion to go unanswered

billy smith, you said,

"He knows how to fix the economy
He knows how to win an election"

You were close, but it should be,
-He knows how to fix an election.-

I do agree with McCain, I will stand and fight. But it's to make sure Obama wins. We don't need any more ethics violators in the White House.

McCain really speaks to the heart of every racist! See how they throw in the Africa thing, with their praise of McCain in comments on this blog. They show up at campaign rallies(more like KKK rallies) with monkey dolls with sticker of Obama on them, they yell kill him, go back to africa, hang him, racist names, they spread rumors and false emails because they fear what is different from them. If you think they are only racist towards Obama, think again, they are scared of anyone who speaks against this hatred they spread to try to keep their place (as they see it) in history, Republicans will go down in history as racist thanks to the tactics of the Mccain campaign. McCain campaign has lit the fire of all the racists hiding under the rocks and behind the cross of religion. The campaign has destroy McCain's honor and Palin has turned him in to a poster for racism. They have invited these type of people and now those people are more representing the party then conservative views! The time has come to change our country from petty, ignorant, selfish views and get the country on the road to greatness and they only way to get there is to speak out against the now Republican view and take up with the Democratic view. Vote out every republican running for re-election or election, make a stance and let them know the time has come to move forward for all, either get on board or get the hell out of the way!

the NEW Republican party has a NEW platform----ANGER.

That is all they can talk about ---ANGER, FEAR, HATE AND MORE ANGER.

THIS IS SICK, AMERICA. REJECT THIS EXTREMIST RADICAL NEW GOP.

ANGRY HATE-SPITTING MOBS---is that REALLY what mccain thinks this country wants and needs? more ANGER??????????

Obama on T.V. right now asking his supporters to "Organize" with him.

Great choice of words there.

I don’t get this “White Supremeness” label that obolony followers are trying to pin on the hero John McCain. When you have a black person running with 99.9% of blacks worshiping at his feet, then yes, of course, color is going to be missing from the hero John McCain’s rally’s, duh! When the winds shift against obolony he will be a muslim, again? As always. When obolony loses, poor little michelle won’t be proud of American again..so sad. Obolony coined the phrase “typical white person” that is the racist, supremeness remark that gets ignored.

Barack Hussein Obama II
By Judah Benjamin, Guest Author

It has been asserted by a number of sources, including Andy Martin, that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya and not in Hawaii. Philip Berg’s Latest Motion to the Court is more explicit since it gives an exact Place of Birth. I must assume that Berg did not simply pluck the Location out of thin air, Mombasa has more than one Hospital, though Coast Provincial General was the best in 1961.

British Birth Certificates have a Standard Format which has been more or less the same since 1837 and they can only be challenged in a British Court. Kenyan Law is explicit and can only be challenged in a Kenyan Court.

Indonesian Law is explicit and can only be challenged in an Indonesian Court. Be clear, if Obama was born in Kenya this is not simply a matter for the US Courts, or US Law.

If he was born in Kenya, and his parents were Legally Married [which on the Preponderance of Evidence they were, his father's first "Marriage" being a Tribal, or Village, Marriage, which was not Legally Recognized] due to the age of his mother he would NOT have been a US Citizen. The Immigration and Nationality Act 1952, 8 U.S.C. 1401. Sec. 301 (g) [Effective November 14, 1986] does not apply, nor does Title III, Immigration and Nationality Act Section 309. [8 U.S.C. 1409].

Unless he has taken the Oath of Allegiance as a Naturalized Citizen since he was 18 years old, and if he was born in Mombasa, Kenya, Barack Hussein Obama II would not be a US Citizen, period. The issue of whether or not he was Natural Born under Article II of the Constitution of the United States would cease to matter and he would need to be Deported as an Illegal Alien.

Impeachment as a Senator would seem not to be necessary since he would never Legally have been one, but Diane Feinstein and the members of the Senate Ethics and Rules Committee would be liable to Impeachment. So would their opposite numbers in the Illinois Senate and the appropriate officials of the Illinois State Supreme Court and Bar, so far as I can see.

If Senator Barack Hussein Obama II was born in The Coast Provincial General Hospital at Mombasa in Kenya at 7.24 PM on August 4th 1961, or at any other time, he is not a Natural Born Citizen of these United States and he never was. Philip J Berg, Esq, is correct, under the Nationality Act of 1940, as Revised June 1952 and in accord with United States of America vs Cervantes-Nava 281 F 3d 501 (2002) and Drozd vs INS, 155 F 3d 81, 85-88 (2d Circuit 1998) Senator Barack Hussein Obama II would not ever have been a Legal US Citizen at all, unless he was Naturalized.

If he was born in The Coast Provincial General Hospital at Mombasa in Kenya any Certificate, or Certification of Live Birth, issued for him by the State of Hawaii is a Fraudulent and Illegal Document. At Birth he would have been a UK and Colonies Citizen and in accord with the Kenyan Constitution he would have become a Kenyan Citizen in December 1963. He would not have been a US Citizen.

Alternatively, his UK and Colonies Birth Certificate issued in Mombasa in August 1961 could be a Fraudulent and Illegal Document. The two BCs would need to be compared. By this I mean the Original Vault Copy of the Hawaiian Birth Certificate and not the Amended, Post Adoption, Copy, Legally available to the Senator, assuming he was, as indicated by the Preponderance of Evidence, Adopted by Lolo Soetoro. This case might also need to go through the UK and Kenyan Courts and becomes a Matter of International Law and Controversy.

If Barack Hussein Obama II was born at The Coast Provincial General Hospital at Mombasa in Kenya at 7:24 PM on August 4th 1961, or at any other time, it is certain that he is not Eligible to hold the Offices of POTUS or VPOTUS and highly probable that he is not Legally entitled to hold the Office of Senator either and that he was not Eligible to be an Illinois State Senator.

In that event the Senate Ethics and Rules Committee, Chair Diane Feinstein, have a problem because they are responsible for the Certification of a Candidate’s Compliance with Constitutional Requirements, a job they would have conspicuously failed to do. Should he be Elected the poisoned Chalice would pass to Nancy Pelosi because as Speaker of the House she, and the House, have the Responsibility to ensure that the President Elect can Effectively be Sworn In and Legally Assume the Office and Duties of the President.

Be very clear here, if Barack Hussein Obama II was born at The Coast Provincial General Hospital at Mombasa in Kenya at 7:24 PM on August 4th 1961, or at any other time, Diane Feinstein’s Committee have already failed in their Duty, as has every Secretary of State in the Union.

Let me repeat myself, if Barack Hussein Obama II was born in The Coast Provincial General Hospital at Mombasa in Kenya at 7:24 PM on August 4th 1961, or at any other time, he is not a Natural Born Citizen of these United States and he never was, he is not even a Citizen by Birth. I had assumed ab initio that Obama was born in Hawaii and that his Hawaiian Paperwork was basically “on the up and up”, I could not conceive that a lie of this magnitude was possible, I thought that the INS would have caught on long since. If he is a US Citizen under these circumstances his Oath of Allegiance must be on Record somewhere. If it isn’t he is not a US Citizen.

Hawaii may Legally be able to Issue a Birth Certificate under these circumstances, according to their own Code, but it would breach of International and Federal Law if they have. It would breach Hawaiian Law if the Place of Birth is spurious.

“[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.”

So by that section he could get a certificate claiming Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born outside the US but the Place of Birth would need to be correctly recorded.

Understand, the Hawaiian Authorities may be able to Issue a Hawaiian Birth Certificate under these circumstances but they cannot make you a US Citizen. A child born in Kenya to and underage US Female and a UK and Colonies Citizen in 1961 was not born a US Citizen under any US Federal Law, under British Law, or International Law. The only way such an Individual could be a US Citizen in terms of the XIVth Amendment, or any Statute, or Code of US Federal Law is by Naturalization.

Under Common Law no Person can Testify as to their own Place of Birth, this is established Law upheld by stare decisis. Therefore it would be possible, even given the he was born in Kenya, for Obama to claim that he believed a Hawaiian Birth Certificate made him a US Citizen under the XIVth Amendment and that therefore he was acting in Good Faith running for an Office which he was Constitutionally Incapable of Holding. Unfortunately for him, his actions in regard to the Admission of his UK & Colonies and Kenyan Citizenships and his Indonesian Citizenship by Adoption, his frequent apparent Breaches of the Logan Act, his probable breaches of the Hobbs Act, the Hatch Act, USC Title 18 Part One Chapter 63 § 1346 and the RICO Statute make this Defense wholly Untenable, especially when one considers the fact that he holds a JD from Harvard Law. One may throw in the Misprision Statute for good measure. It is difficult to find any action or statement of Obama’s since 1992 that could be used to suggest Good Faith could be used as a Defense in this Case. I am not saying that Obama is Guilty of any of these Felonies or High Misdemeanors, only that his actions and pronouncements are such as to lead to a reasonable suspicion that he may be.

Under INA §349 “2. taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof after having attained the age of eighteen years.” This is an “Expatriating Clause”, if you hold Dual Citizenship and do this you void your US Citizenship. Well Obama campaigned actively for Odinga in Kenya and apparently also took some kind of Luo Tribal Loyalty Oath. He may also have joined Odinga’s party. Of course his Dual Nationality lapsed in 1982 but INA §349 could, perhaps, still apply here, if he was born in Mombasa. It might even be concluded that Obama was providing grounds to restore his Kenyan Citizenship by Prime Ministerial Decree, which is Legal under the Kenyan Constitution. That would certainly look Expatriating to me, but I do not know how a Court would react.

There is indirect reason to believe that this may be true. “2d Session S. RES. 511: Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.: In the Senate of the United States.” was Sponsored by Senator McCaskill and co-sponsored by Senators Leahy, Obama, Coburn, Clinton and Webb. Why? Why were Democratic Senators trying to pass a Resolution making Senator McCain undoubtedly Legally Eligible when this issue had already been cleared up in 2000 and again in 2004? And why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause?

“Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President;”

This Clause has no particular relevance to McCain and the following Clause, which it is reported McCaskill and Obama attempted to REMOVE shows that:

“; and Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:”

It seems clear that McCaskill and Obama were attempting to create a blanket Resolution covering ALL Foreign Born candidates. Why do that if not to benefit a Foreign Born Democratic Candidate, who did not have a US Military background?

McCain did not need this resolution, Richardson did not need this Resolution, so far as I can see nobody needed this Resolution unless somebody in the race was born outside the USA and was “Covering his/her Ass” and the only individual in the race that that could apply to was Senator Obama! This in turn would show that the Senator is a liar who has been peddling untruths about his birth for at least 16 years!

Likewise it would explain why Michelle Obama tried trawling the “very single mother” canard. Were he illegitimate there is precedent and Statute that says if his parents were unmarried at the time of his birth he would have become a Citizen of the USA at Birth under Title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act Section 309. [8 U.S.C. 1409]. However, as Miller v Albright, 523 US 420 (1998) demonstrates there is, and was, a split in the Supreme Court as to whether this Law is in fact Constitutional under the XIVth Amendment. A new case might change the precedent. For now it stands.

I do not insist that any of this is true and to me it makes little difference if it is, I hold him Ineligible anyway and have seen no solid Legal Rebuttal of my view from any source, but if he was born in Kenya he has, and can have, no defense of any description and any Document he has from Hawaii is Fraudulent on several levels. To hold the Office of POTUS one must be a Natural Born United States Citizen, if he was born in Mombasa Obama probably isn’t even a United States Citizen much less Natural Born. He would be guilty of Fraud and a list of other offenses and any and all persons who had aided him would be guilty of Misprision, in all probability.

Source: http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/obama-born-in-kenya-new-information/

Maybe they should go to chicago and burn a cross in Obama's yard, seems like that's what Mclames supporters want him to do anyway.

The Unshrub,

Your an goofball! Your friends at Acorn are the ones trying to fix an election! And they are supposed to be a non-partisan group yet they have people on the ground in Ohio trying to recruit voters and telling them who they are supporting. Please get your facts straight.

ok McDracula you must know you would by

now make GW. Bush Look Good for

another 8 Years.... You have given the

Late Night Shows enough to joke about

for Years .. But My Friend in about

20 days Time for your BS is UP.

and it will not be funny... But I am

Going to see if I can not get you

appointed US. Ambassador to Iraq

with your Experience you my friend

are the Man I want to see in

Iraq for 50 make it 100 Years.......

Even Karl Rove is saying Obam is going to win the election and electoral vote. GO OBAMA!

http://www.congratstothewinners.com/2008/10/karl-rove-obama-has-electoral.html

HEY CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHO SAID THIS ON THE SENATE FLOOR?????
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

mccain and palin are the ultimate bullies....

HATE ANGER HATE ANGER HATE ANGER

Their constant message and theme is

HATE ANGER AND MORE HATE ANGER....

THIS IS FRIGHTENING AND

it will most certainly motivate Obama supporters....the GOP has gone MAD... and dangerous... with ANGER

This is an admirable effort to cleanse the palate of voters still concerned with McCain’s initial denials of an economic crisis, but where are the optimistic plans to implement “change” and turn things around?

Just stating that America is “strong” and will somehow get over it is not good enough for voters bombarded with proposals from Obama that are getting more specific every day.

http://www.political-buzz.com/