# Food for Thought



## seniorcats (Oct 24, 2008)

DH and I really admire Charles Krauthammer and try and catch him whenever he is on TV. Here is his column from today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/23/AR2008102302867_pf.html


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 25, 2008)

I don't know how I missed that he is a columnist....I really enjoy him on tv and had never read his column before.

I'm still waiting to see what the "October Surprise" will be....I've been reading about Sarah Palin's clothes....how much they pay her hairdresser....Joe Biden's remarks about Obama being tested if elected....Murtha's comments about Pennsylvania being "racist" and then "really redneck years ago"...and now about the case in Pennsylvania where Barack Obama was ordered to produce his birth certificate and the 30 day deadline passed without it being produced. (Story is here: http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/ob...2008/10/24/143882.html?s=al&promo_code=6E2D-1 )

Oh - and Joe the Plumber....

Oh yes - and how they think bin Laden may try to affect the election with an attack beforehand...

Any other October surprises folks have heard about?

I'm still sorta waiting for the big one to pop up....


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 25, 2008)

Here are some of Charles' columns. 'The Audacity of Vanity' is one of my favorites.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/author/charles_krauthammer/

October surprise - I expect we will get one. I've read the stories of more terrorist 'chatter' and traffic so we will have to see what Osama has up his robe.

The birth certificate/ birth place issueis huge!


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 25, 2008)

Hawaii had a problem with a fire where some records were kept. I wonder if Obama's were in that fire? A friend of mine had a heck of a time trying to get her birth certificate because of that.

Also, my understanding is that if you have one parent who is a U.S. citizen, you can be born on the moon and still be a U.S. citizen at birth.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 25, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> Hawaii had a problem with a fire where some records were kept. I wonder if Obama's were in that fire? A friend of mine had a heck of a time trying to get her birth certificate because of that.
> 
> Also, my understanding is that if you have one parent who is a U.S. citizen, you can be born on the moon and still be a U.S. citizen at birth.


I don't know - but according to his book - he had his birth certificate at one time (the article mentions it).

There is a website called "fight the smears" which has posted a copy of his birth certificate - it is here:

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

However, it doesn't have certain information which all birth certificates supposedly had:

Name of hospital
Weight of baby

possibly - name of doctor 

Also - it lists his father as "African" but in 1961 - his father would have been listed as "Negro" or "Colored" on official documents during that time frame - which is part of why his birth certificate is considered 'questionable'.

As I said - I suspect there is still more to be part of an "October surprise". It could be bin Laden....it could be a lot of things.

I'll just be glad when its over. I rarely watch tv and usually watch stuff on the internet - but the few times I watch tv - I'm getting sick of the ads.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 25, 2008)

Yep, I agree there's not a lot they might not do for political reasons or whatever.

Oh and I looked it up and in 1961, if one parent was a citizen and had lived in the US for 10 years prior (which she had) and 5 of those years were after age 14, they could be born in a residence outside of the USA and be a citizen.

Now, I have read that Stanley never left the States with Barack senior. That when he wanted to return to Kenya, she filed for divorce.

I say I've read it because who knows at this point? 

My personal feelings are that someone like ARNOLD who was Austrian and both parents were, should not have the right to be president.

I'd like to know for sure and I'd like the law to be better - it's changed over the years. If nothing else, we're getting educated huh? LOL! 

Here's a link to that - http://www.brooklaw.com/citizenship...eâs Citizenship When Born Outside of the US

Now, personally I think that if they had to knock off Obama from the candidacy for this, it would have had to be done before now. If they did do it, I wonder if they would put Biden there? or slap Hillary on or something? Isn't that an interesting idea to think about? I'm curious about stuff like that! If there is a rule in place or whatever.

IF Barack wasn't born here, and if his mom, Stanley wasn't here during the time, I suppose he shouldn't be running. However, I don't think that's the case.

On a side note:

I think this election is opening the eyes of many people. Several people had no clue that things were going on around them that they really care about.

I also think children are learning. My daughter says they talk about the candidates among themselves sometimes...... unfortunately there was a day when 2 of her friends got a bit too heated in their discussion and she had to get between them!!! KIDS! Seventh Graders! 

Whatever happens - I just pray that it's the best thing for our country - at least to get us back on track cause it's pretty scary right now for everyone (well, not the richies but.... )

If you guys hear anymore about that stuff, post it will ya?


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 25, 2008)

I don't even bother worrying about the whole birth place/certificate issue, there has been so much confusion over that by now I doubt we will ever really know what's the truth. And honestly, I don't think it makes any difference, there's no way he's getting yanked out of the race. He has too many important friends.

As for the whole October surprise thing--the rumor I heard was thatBiden was going to back out as VP candidate for "health reasons" and Hillary would be put in instead. Hasn't happened yet, though, thankfully. The only thing I find scarier than Obamaleading this country is Obama AND Hillary leading us.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 25, 2008)

*gentle giants wrote: *


> The only thing I find scarier than Obamaleading this country is Obama AND Hillary leading us.


Wait...you don't find it scary that we might have both a Democrat President/VP AND the Congress / House with the Democrats holding the majority?

Now to me - that is scary. Where are the checks and balances? Obama won't have to "reach across the aisle" - anything he wants will get through...for at least two years. I suspect though that the Democrats may only hold the majority for those two years once this happens. (I am not totally in favor of the same thing happening with the Republicans either - just so y'all know. I like the whole checks/balances when both parties have to work together). 

I keep reading about how the race is tightening - I think I need to stop reading political stuff till after Nov. 4th! I don't know how much more of this waiting I can take...


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 26, 2008)

*TinysMom wrote: *


> I keep reading about how the race is tightening - I think I need to stop reading political stuff till after Nov. 4th! I don't know how much more of this waiting I can take...


I am with you on that one... I have always payed attention to presidential races of course, and voted. But I don't think I have ever gotten this nervous and worried over one before. There are just so many rumors going around, so many nasty comments made on both sides. I have heard several people say they think that if Obama loses there willl be mass rioting, etc. I have also heard the opinion that if Obama wins he will be assasinated not long after election, but I think that one is unlikely myself. I just know that whatever way the election goes, it will be a relief that this wait and the campaigning is over.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 26, 2008)

It's so funny to me because each side seems to be very nervous about the other.

I WISH Hillary was running! Bill Clinton had our budget balanced and we were actually paying off some of the national debt! He would be right beside her as she was with him for office. I think they could help a lot.

Obama is not my first pick but I would take him over anything from the Republican party right now......... especially with Palin on the ticket.

Indiana is looking to swing Democratic this time. I'll be interested to see if it happens.

Early polls are packed here!


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 27, 2008)

More food for thought on McCain's health care plan. i chose the best of many articles saying the same thing

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122506862956370705.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 27, 2008)

Interesting article - my brain is too fuzzy right now though to really read it,

I've been following links and stuff about Obama being a member of the Socialist "New Party" (which is now no longer in existence if I understand right) - my head is still fuzzy from reading the various articles from newsletters and the picture of him that was in a "New Party" newsletter. 

I think this article will be much more thought-provoking though when I read through it in more detail tomorrow.

Health care is one of those things that doesn't really affect Art & I since he retired with the military and we get our health care through them.....


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 27, 2008)

I am planning on reading some of the books Obama has written, I heard from a friend yesterday that a direct quote from one of his books states that America will be a Muslim country. Like I said, that is hearsay still, but I am going to look it up asap. One of the things that gets me is the fact that every one is so angry at the Bush Admin. over the current economy crisis--all this damage was not done in the last four years, this has been coming fora long time. It is going to take a long time to fix, too, no matter who gets into office.

I got an email forwarded video I thoughtI would put up on here, just as more food for thought. It's a little bit long, but I find it interesting. http://oldbluewebdesigns.com/USSA.htm

Just as an aside, not trying to flame or start an argument here, but Bo, what is it you dislike about Palin? Just curious.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 27, 2008)

If Obama said that, I'd sure LOVE Toknow where!I've heard a bunch of people who are paranoid of stuff have said such things..... that's ludicrous


As far as Palin:

1. She has not got enough experience. She has some but it's not a strong amount, number of people, etc. I have experience with birthing lambs but I sure don't expect to become a midwife..... 

2. She's an airhead who can see Russia from her house, and thinks that (if it were even true) could give her foreign policy experience. 

3. She has done some really unethical things like the trooper-gate issue, the polar bear issue, and monies spent inappropriately.

4. She talks all down home and I think it makes her sound stupid. I also think she isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

5. She's a poor representative for the first (possibly) woman in the pres/vp seat. Hillary may be a witch but she's at least got the ability to look like she has a brain! (which she really does) Palin to me sounds like an idiot! 

6. I don't think that baby needs its mom to be even more busy! Children with those issues need intervention - not to be lugged around and passed around like a loaf of bread by the entire family while he sleeps...... which is all the time apparently. (I know that sounds sort of dumb but it's been really unnerving to me to see him done that way)... 

7. I think a VP with a teenage pregnant daughter is NOT something we need to see in office. It seems Palin needs to work on her family - not mine! 

8. Her views. I don't agree with some of her ideas and apparently, neither does McCain...... LOL! 

9. My fear is to see her in the VP seat and something happen to McCain.... I cannot imagine her as our president ....... I've told my family I feel I would have to pack up and move out of the country. Again, her fake, downhome, b/s about joe six-pack (which is basically calling someone a hick) and joe the plummer makes me want to puke!


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 27, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> If Obama said that, I'd sure LOVE Toknow where!I've heard a bunch of people who are paranoid of stuff have said such things..... that's ludicrous





> *That one I have to look up for myself, my Mom works in a library so I am going to ask her to see if she can get ahold of that book for me.*
> 
> As far as Palin:
> 
> 1. She has not got enough experience. She has some but it's not a strong amount, number of people, etc. I have experience with birthing lambs but I sure don't expect to become a midwife.....





> *Yes, but still more than Obama...*





> 2. She's an airhead who can see Russia from her house, and thinks that (if it were even true) could give her foreign policy experience.





> *Same as above, LOL. *
> 
> 3. She has done some really unethical things like the trooper-gate issue, the polar bear issue, and monies spent inappropriately.





> *I don't know--I have heard several different views on the Troopergate thing, and had not heard about the money issue.*
> 
> 4. She talks all down home and I think it makes her sound stupid. I also think she isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.





> *I think on that one she is just trying to hard too sound like "one of us" and it is coming out sounding overdone.*
> 
> 5. She's a poor representative for the first (possibly) woman in the pres/vp seat. Hillary may be a witch but she's at least got the ability to look like she has a brain! (which she really does) Palin to me sounds like an idiot!





> *I have a lot of the same issues with Hillary as I do with Obama. She is also very anti-gun, just like he is. And...Yes, she has a brain, but the way her brain works is a bigger issue, I think.*
> 
> 6. I don't think that baby needs its mom to be even more busy! Children with those issues need intervention - not to be lugged around and passed around like a loaf of bread by the entire family while he sleeps.





> *Well, at least the VP would have access to the best medical facilities, etc. I admit the whole busy mom thing kinda gets me too, though.*
> 
> 7. I think a VP with a teenage pregnant daughter is NOT something we need to see in office. It seems Palin needs to work on her family - not mine!
> 
> ...


----------



## LadyBug (Oct 27, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> As far as Palin:
> 
> 1. She has not got enough experience. She has some but it's not a strong amount, number of people, etc. I have experience with birthing lambs but I sure don't expect to become a midwife..... Obama doesn't have that much experience either. at least she's been a governor.....
> 
> ...


TinysMom* wrote: *


> ......and now about the case in Pennsylvania where Barack Obama was ordered to produce his birth certificate and the 30 day deadline passed without it being produced. (Story is here: http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_birth_certificate/2008/10/24/143882.html?s=al&promo_code=6E2D-1 )



him not fessing up his BC is very suspicious, if you ask me. if he wasn't born in the US he has no business running it. i think arnold swarchenegger would make a great prez, but he wasn't born here, and he's playing by the rules. if Obama wasn't born here, even this late in the race, he should be forced to pull out. rules are rules, there should be no exceptions! and the guy's middle name is 'Hussein' for pete sake! that kinda freaks me out.......

:soapbox

ok, i'm done......:whistling


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 27, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> If Obama said that, I'd sure LOVE Toknow where!I've heard a bunch of people who are paranoid of stuff have said such things..... that's ludicrous
> 
> 
> As far as Palin:
> ...


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 27, 2008)

I HAVE to share this - Art just sent it to me - and it is not only true -but funny...sorta.

[line]
Subject: Barstool Economics

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for
all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,
it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy
with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce
the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just
$80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our
taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for
free. 
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How
could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair
share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth
man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. 
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each
man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the
amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%
savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a
dollar, too. 
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's
true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got
only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't
get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the
nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay
the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough
money between all of them for even half of the bill! 
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college
professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest
taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much,
attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In
fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is
somewhat friendlier. 

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia [/code]


----------



## naturestee (Oct 27, 2008)

All I have to say is- the thought of Palin as a VP, representing our country, frightens me more than anything else. That was the final straw for me as I used to really like McCain. Between his policy changes and campaign style (he's NOT the man he was in 2000) and his choice of Palin as his VP my vote is going to Obama.

Keep in mind that I am a fairly liberal independant. But social policies are what really get me. Average right-to-life politicians I can deal with although I'm for keeping their laws off my body. But Palin is against abortions even for rape victims! Frankly I find that to be cruel and also encouraging to the rapist. Congrats, you get a baby! Even if he isn't allowed anything to do with the kid the choice should be 100% up to the mother. Edit- did anyonesee the interview (I think it wasCBS, bothMcCain and Palin at the same time) where Palin avoided answering whether she thought abortion clinic bombers were terrorists? After a bunch of waffling McCainhad to jump in andanswer the question (yes, duh). Does she think they're in the right just because she supports their basic belief? Sick. 

McCain's energy policy is short sighted and Palin's even more so. Our oil reserves are tiny compared to what the US uses and it will take 10+ years for new oil wells to actually start producing in quantity. Oh and BTW this was covered in my college geology classes by a pro-oil professor. Also foreign policy- it is way past time we as a country start looking more towards diplomacy as a first response, not war. When Obama said he'd be willing to meet leaders from countries like Iran and Cuba- that is exactly what is needed! Isolationism does nobody any good, and why are we taking away relations from countries as a punishment for them? It's backwards.

Also what is with the ridiculous anti-intellectual thing in this country? How dare someone be smart and well-read. I forget where I read this but I totally agree with the thought. When you look at who to choose for a president, don't choose the person you'd like to have a beer with or the person that reminds you of yourself. Presidents aren't supposed to be the "everyman," they should be the best people available and capable of handling emergencies and difficult concepts. It just makes me think of how I feel like Palin is talking to a bunch of elementary school kids in her speaches. Ugh.

Oh, and about Obama's birth certificate: My certificate doesn't have all the "expected" info on it either. I think they're more universal now but at Obama's time (and mine, born in '81) different states had different policies and requirements. Also, in order to challenge someone's citizenship it is up to the challenger to provide proof of the accusations before anything of the accused citizen is required.

Do you really think he'd get into the Senate, and then a majorpresidential candidate, without someone checking on the basics?

Ok, I'm done for now!


----------



## naturestee (Oct 27, 2008)

Ok, not done lol!

Anyone who thinks Obama's plans may be socialist need to read about what socialism actually is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

All Obama is doing is working with the progressive tax system. What's farmore socialist is the $700 billion Bush-backed bailout plan (buying into banks!?!) and how Palin charged money to the Alaska oil companies and gave that money in checks to Alaska residents. Alaska's actually the most socialist-appearing state in the US, believe it or not. And stop with the knee-jerk McCarthyism please.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote:*


> Alaska's actually the most socialist-appearing state in the US, believe it or not. And stop with the knee-jerk McCarthyism please.


The money that Alaska residents get every year in the dividend - does NOT come from other residents of Alaska. It comes from the money that the state makes off of the various leases, etc. - part of which goes back into the government and part of which goes back to Alaskans.

How is that socialism? It isn't as if the state is taking taxes from the business people in Anchorage and putting them into the pockets of the fisherman who live in the rest of the state. Everyone who is a resident and files for the dividend - gets it. I know - we lived there for four years and qualified.

Maybe I should put it this way - Alaska isn't "redistributing the wealth" by taking from one person and giving it to another. 

It is instead sharing the wealth among all of its citizens - but none of that money comes from taxes. (One reason we loved Alaska was there was no state income tax).


----------



## BethM (Oct 28, 2008)

Ranting here, sorry. Feel free to disregard or disagree.


naturestee, I agree with pretty much everything you said. 

I don't understand how, when most experts on oil agree that the total amount of oil is estimated at only a 7 month supply, at current world usage, is available in these untapped areas, everyone just blindly celebrates drilling as the answer to all our problems. Why are people so resistant to new energy technologies? Yes, it will cost money. Everything costs money. 

On the right to life issue, I have some extremely strong opposition to Sarah Palin's views. McCain originally said he had no interest in messing with Roe v. Wade but now, probably just to get some votes, has said pretty much the opposite. (Anyone see John Stewart's bit on the Circle Talk Express? Nice.) When John McCain's pregnancy test turns up positive, that is when he will have the right to force me to have a baby that I don't really have the means to take care of. People who find a way to raise a child in tough economic/emotional circumstances are angels. I do not have the mental strength or fortitude to do that. I was raped in college, and if I had become pregnant, I would not have been able to finish school (I worked my way through, and still have huge student loan debt), and probably wouldn't have been able to get a good paying job, (my hometown is a college town where more than half of the jobs are seasonal, low-wage jobs; my mom still lives there and makes less than $9 an hour after several years experience, but she has no college education) and now wouldn't be able to afford to go back to school. That would have seriously derailed my life, through no fault of my own, and I don't think *anyone* has the right to force that on me.

I agree that I want a president who is smarter than me and more able to handle the difficult situations this country is facing. (Sarah Palin is not that person, except that I have not yet found a way to get taxpayers to buy me a new wardrobe. Yes, technically legal. But ethical? I don't think so. Not when she's proclaiming herself to be an average person. I also have not figured out how to govern a state that embraces some socialist ideals- dividend payments just for being an Alaskan citizen- yet decry socialism at every turn. So maybe she is smarter than me, after all.)

Let me state that I don't believe that a pure socialist system is the answer. It just doesn't work. But there are many European countries that have added little bits of "socialism" into their society and are much better off for it. I believe free market really is the best solution for things like phone service or tvs or stuff like that. But I don't think it has any place in health care or social security. 
I particularly enjoyed the 60 Minutes piece some time ago about Denmark being the "happiest country on earth." From what I understand, they pay about half their income in taxes. The poorest person pays half, the riches person pays half, everyone in between pays half. Even Steven. Health care is paid for for everyone. Education, elementary through college, is paid for. And I think you can go back to school later in life. Each parent gets 6 months paid leave for the birth of a child. I believe retirement is paid for. What's missing? The greed we seem to have over here for stuff, stuff, stuff. A perfect system? I doubt it. But I would be happy to pay a little more in taxes and know I didn't have to worry about not being able to see a doctor when I'm sick. I'm pretty sure McCain's health plan would not cover enough to make health care affordable for me.

Oh, and I haven't researched the Danish system extensively, I just know what was reported on 60 Minutes, so if my impressions of it aren't correct, it's my own fault for not looking into it more thoroughly. 

(I do have employer paid health care, currently. However, it changes companies *every year* as they look to save money. Every year the plan gets worse. This year was the first when I had a deductible, and it was a real shock to get that $243 bill when I went in for a routine check-up on my sinuses that lasted less than 15 minutes. I am pretty sure that my severe allergies would count as a pre-existing condition, and I would not be able to purchase private insurance if I needed to. I take 3 allergy prescriptions every day and still suffer from regular sinus infections. (Just finished 2 weeks of antibiotics, and I still have the sinus infection.) I have had surgery twice to remove polyps in my sinus cavities. Plus I take birth control because my husband and I don't want to have kids, and can't afford to even if we did. No one would want to insure me at a rate I could afford. It is shameful that the "greatest nation on earth" would treat its citizens in this way.)

Again, sorry for the rant.


----------



## LadyBug (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote: *


> But social policies are what really get me. Average right-to-life politicians I can deal with although I'm for keeping their laws off my body. But Palin is against abortions even for rape victims! Frankly I find that to be cruel and also encouraging to the rapist. Congrats, you get a baby! Even if he isn't allowed anything to do with the kid the choice should be 100% up to the mother.



what about that day after stuff that makes you have a peroid?

my mom doesn't believe abortion is ok, period(and i feel the same way.). but when i asked her what if some one was raped, that's what she told me. the day after stuff. why are people over looking things like that that does it the day after before you know, it has a chance to do much...? it really shouldn't be up to us(not even possibly pregnant mothers)to decide who lives or dies. babies are human beings, they have a heart beat at five weeks!(from wiki article-The human embryonic heart begins beating around 21 days after conception, or five weeks after the last normal menstrual period (LMP), which is the date normally used to date pregnancy.)

:rant:

ok, done for now.......:wiggle


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 28, 2008)

*BethM wrote: *


> On the right to life issue, I have some extremely strong opposition to Sarah Palin's views. McCain originally said he had no interest in messing with Roe v. Wade but now, probably just to get some votes, has said pretty much the opposite. When John McCain's pregnancy test turns up positive, that is when he will have the right to force me to have a baby that I don't really have the means to take care of. People who find a way to raise a child in tough economic/emotional circumstances are angels. I do not have the mental strength or fortitude to do that. I was raped in college, and if I had become pregnant, I would not have been able to finish school (I worked my way through, and still have huge student loan debt), and probably wouldn't have been able to get a good paying job, (my hometown is a college town where more than half of the jobs are seasonal, low-wage jobs; my mom still lives there and makes less than $9 an hour after several years experience, but she has no college education) and now wouldn't be able to afford to go back to school. That would have seriously derailed my life, through no fault of my own, and I don't think *anyone* has the right to force that on me.



I do have every sympathy with you and other rape victims, I was molested by a friend's brother when I was twelve, and so have *some* idea what you have gone through. I still cannot agree with you on the abortion issue, however. LIke Ladybug said, that is what the morning after pillwas createdfor. For most people, there is also the option to adopt. 

I don't have any sympathy for people who get pregnant through consensual sex, though. Birth control is cheap and very easy to get ahold of now, and if you don't feel like using it, well then. And yes, I have been there too. My boyfriend and I got pregnant when I was 18, and I never even considered abortion. In my opinion, once a woman is pregnant, it's not an issue of just her anymore. There is another human being to think about now, besides yourself. I have learned a little bit about abortion that I really didn't want to know, also. I will not give details here where there are younger members, but did you know that sometimes a baby can survive the abortion process? What do you think happens then? 

I am gonna take a step back now, LOL, because this is a subject that really riles me up. 

:rant:


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote:*


> knee-jerk McCarthyism


:roflmao:


I went and looked up McCarthyism (just to make sure I remembered what it was). After the brief history lesson compliments of wikipedia - I spend some time thinking about what you were saying.

First of all - unlike McCarthyism - I'm not going around pointing fingers and a large number of people and whispering (or even proclaiming) that they are socialists. I'm not saying (pulling Democrat names out of a hat) that Barney Frank is a socialist or that Nancy Pelosi is a socialist. I'm not saying Joe Biden is a socialist - nor am I saying that people who vote for Obama are socialists. 

I'm not saying someone should be "blacklisted" nor am I saying, "We should have hearings because so and so is bad for the country". 

I'm not on a witchhunt.

I did talk to a friend about this and *I will take back part of what I said about Obama though.*

As my friend pointed out to me - I am a member of the American Rabbit Breeders Association. However - I am no longer breeding rabbits (well - except for one last breeding for a friend who lost her lines in a dog attack on her rabbitry). But it is not my practice any more to breed rabbits. So...to label me a "rabbit breeder" would be inaccurate. In addition - it is possible for a non rabbit breeder to be a member of this association - so not all members of ARBA are "rabbit breeders". 

It was a valid point. I can be a member of something without actually following their practices (in this case - rabbit breeding).

However - it could be stated (accurately) that since July of 2005, I have been a member of ARBA. 

Am I correct? (The date is correct - so yes - I have been a member since that time).

Now - there is proof out there (and I will include links and photos and stuff) that Obama _*was*_ a member of the "New Party" in Illinois in 1996. So let me share the information that I have recently come across on the internet (I came across a link on another site - wound up following it the other night - all of this was "new" to me and that was why I found it interesting).

First - the photo...







From what I've read - that picture is from the New Party's 1996 newsletter.

Now also from what I've read - this was on the New Party's website back in 1996 (and was in their archives)...






Let me share some more information....in 1996 - in Progressive Populist magazine this was shared:

New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. *New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.*

Reference: http://www.populist.com/11.96.Edit.html

[line]*So - I will take back what I said about him being a Socialist - since I can not prove that.*

But - I can state factually - that according to both New Party records and according to Progressive Populist magazine - in 1996, Barack Obama was listed as a New Party member. 

For those who don't know what the New Party is/was (I didn't until I was reading some of this stuff) - here is a link to it on Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_(United_States)

And since that article says: The party could best be described as social democratic in orientation....here is a link to the term social democratic: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democratic

[line]
Now some of you may wonder why am I pointing this out? Well - why not?

Let's say for a moment that John McCain was a member of a "right-to-life" group - wouldn't that be all over the media? Wouldn't we have a right to know that?

Don't forget that Todd Palin's membership in the Alaskan Independence Party became a big media thing earlier - and he's not even the candidate.

So why shouldn't the fact that Senator Barack Obama was a New Party member be something that is pointed out and considered?

Once again - I'm not saying everyone who votes for him is socialist. I'm not saying that all Democrats are socialists. 

I'm mainly pointing out that he is not the same type of Democrat as former President Bill Clinton was or Senator Kerry, etc. 

By the way - I don't have the page in his book to quote this exactly (I read it online) - but supposedly - according to his own books he says..
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully," the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, "Dreams From My Father." "The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."
​He also goes on to state:
Obama's interest in leftist politics continued after he transferred to Columbia University in New York. He lived on Manhattan's Upper East Side, venturing to the East Village *for what he called "the socialist conferences* I sometimes attended at Cooper Union."
​http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/28/obama-affinity-marxists-dates-college-days/


[line]
The title of this thread was "food for thought" - and I found this information thought-provoking. 

My sharing it really wasn't that much different than when folks talked about Todd Palin's links to the Alaska Independent Party - except for the fact I don't have media coverage.

But it was me - sharing my thoughts on something.

That's all.

(I do have another post about some other points I'd like to mention).


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote: *


> Oh, and about Obama's birth certificate: My certificate doesn't have all the "expected" info on it either. I think they're more universal now but at Obama's time (and mine, born in '81) different states had different policies and requirements. Also, in order to challenge someone's citizenship it is up to the challenger to provide proof of the accusations before anything of the accused citizen is required.


You have a really good point here. I went to wikipedia to look this up and found out that there are different types of birth certificates...the traditional longer form - a short form (which is what I saw a copy of on the "fight the smears" website) and also some states (I know Connecticut is one as I have one of these) have a wallet-size copy. 

Thanks for making your point cause you got me to thinking and looking things up.

I guess my one "duh" question is - if a judge felt there was enough evidence to request the birth certificate be shared as part of a lawsuit...why didn't the Obama lawyers produce it within the 30 days? From what I read - the judge had read the various information and decided that the birth certificate was needed by the court.

Anyway - back to the real point - various birth certificates will have different things on them - depending upon the type of birth certificate they are. 

Wow - around here I learn something new every day!


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*BethM wrote: *


> Ranting here, sorry. Feel free to disregard or disagree.
> 
> *I enjoy the rants because it gets me thinking and researching and doing more thinking! So please don't feel bad for ranting...at least not as far as I'm concerned.*
> 
> ...


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote: *


> Also what is with the ridiculous anti-intellectual thing in this country? How dare someone be smart and well-read. I forget where I read this but I totally agree with the thought. When you look at who to choose for a president, don't choose the person you'd like to have a beer with or the person that reminds you of yourself. Presidents aren't supposed to be the "everyman," they should be the best people available and capable of handling emergencies and difficult concepts.


I do agree with you here to a point. When I go to vote - I do consider a person's intellect - along with their experience - their judgment and other things. 

But I have nothing against someone who has many degrees - and on a couple of the news shows I watch - I love it when they bring in people who have all of these degrees and they explain things. 

I certainly would not vote against someone just based upon the fact they're an "intellectual". But I wouldn't base my vote for them on just that either.


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 28, 2008)

Peg, that's a lot of food for thought. I will have to read more than once and assimilate. Thank you for taking the time and the effort to post your thoughts.


----------



## naturestee (Oct 28, 2008)

Sorry Peg, I wasn't aiming at you with the "knee-jerk McCarthyism" comment. There just seem to be a lot of people, including some around me, that hear McCain and Palin call Obama a "socialist" and they have no idea what it actually means but that it is "bad." (Bad is in quotation marks because I do like some of the ideas from socialism. Did I mention that Obama's not liberal enough for me?) And there was someone who mentioned examining members of Congress to see if they were "pro-America" or not (remember Palin's slip about the "real America" and "pro-Americans?)... she's a Republican congresswoman in Minnesota. She apologized for the comment later when she realized the backlash that happened- she could very well loose her re-election campaign because of it- but it is the basic definition of McCarthyism but with "pro-/anti- America" instead of communism/capitalism.

For those that didn't read Tinysmom's article on social democracy, here are the modern tenets:

*In general, contemporary social democrats support:*


A mixed economy consisting mainly of private enterprise, but with government owned or subsidized programs of education, healthcare, child care and related services for all citizens. 
Government bodies that regulate private enterprise in the interests of workers, consumers and fair competition. 
Advocacy of fair trade over free trade. 
An extensive system of social security (although usually not to the extent advocated by democratic socialists or other socialist groups), with the stated goal of counteracting the effects of poverty and insuring the citizens against loss of income following illness, unemployment or retirement. 
Moderate to high levels of taxation (through a value-added and/or progressive taxation system) to fund government expenditure.
*Social democrats also tend to support*:


Environmental protection laws (although not always to the extent advocated by Greens), such as combating global warming and increasing alternative energy funding. 
Support for immigration and multiculturalism. 
A secular and progressive social policy, although this varies markedly in degree. 
A foreign policy supporting the promotion of democracy, the protection of human rights and where possible, effective multilateralism. 
As well as human rights, social democrats also support social rights, civil rights and civil liberties.
As you can see, this is far from actual socialism. It specifically supports free enterprise, just with government regulations for safety, consumers, etc. similar to our current system. Our laws prevent monopolies that big businesses would love, enforce safety laws at work, protect consumers from false advertising and dangerous products, etc. The only thing on this list I actually don't like is government-run health care although some European countries do great with that. All the other policies are ones I am 100% for.

Apparently I'm a social democrat. Who knew?

But it's not socialism. Your property is still your own. Your business is still your own. There is no communal ownership of anything. Edit: And in some of Palin's speaches she claims that Obama will take your businesses and property away, take what's yours away because he's a complete and dirty socialist.

As for the New Party, here's what it was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_(USA)

It wanted to change part of the electoral process back to one that was previously used in the US, where candidates could receive nominations from more than one political party. Actually, it would seriously encourage the growth of 3rd parties which I think we need. Also, it was big on grassroots/community organization, which explains Obama's interest in it if he was actually involved. He worked for community groups, it's how he got his start. It's also how he's getting so much money from small, individual contributions. The man knows his grassroots organizing. 

About the abortion issue, I understand where you guys are coming from. But the thing is it hinges on a personal or religiousbelief that life starts at conception. For people who truly believe that, such as Palin (and she's stated this clearly in an interview), the morning-after pill is just as bad as a full-out abortion. It prevents the fertilized embryo from attaching to the uterus. My personal belief is that life doesn't start until one is able to survive outside of the mother's body. Since this isan issuethat comes down to personal beliefs often the person's religion, I feel that the government should have no say in it. If you don't believe in abortion, don't do it and also teach your kids your thoughts. But don't impede on my right to make decisions about my body and life with the assistance of a docter. In my view it's about the separation of Church and State. And for crying out loud stop attacking Planned Parenthood, in many communities that's the only place offering low-cost ob/gyn exams, low cost birth control, birth control/prevention education, and STD testing. I know a number of people, including myself in college, who went to Planned Parenthood for pelvic exams, etc.,that we couldn't otherwise afford.:rant:

This has turned out to be a really interesting discussion, actually. Thanks for being reasonable, everybody!


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 28, 2008)

I know of people that using birthcontrol or even a condom is bad. Sadly some people I know are beyond stupid.


----------



## naturestee (Oct 28, 2008)

*JadeIcing wrote: *


> I know of people that using birthcontrol or even a condom is bad. Sadly some people I know are beyond stupid.



Ever watch Monty Python's The Meaning of Life?

:singing:Every sperm is sacred...


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*naturestee wrote:*


> Thanks for being reasonable, everybody!


:yeahthat:

I hope folks know that even though I posted a lot (and LONG messages) - I wasn't upset (other than thinking maybe I was being told I was acting like McCarthy)...and I've really been enjoying reading the discussions and thinking about this.

I want to bring up something about 401Ks...but I'm not sure I should. I am watching the topic to see what is happening with it....


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 28, 2008)

THat's how the Catholic church believes..... no birth control. HAHAHHAHA! God does not want me to be a nutjob in a looney bin when I have 2 children that need me. He doesn't care if I don't get pregnant intentionally...... we have procreated ourselves into overpopulation!

Now, I will answer the questions you have all posted for me later - today was a really rough day and I have a bad headache and earache from leaning back with a towel under my shoulders while the doc poked needles into my neck! YUCK! 

Anyhow........ my husband just told me that he wasn't voting for that terrorist...... :foreheadsmack:

He's usually the democrat in the house! LOL!


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> Anyhow........ my husband just told me that he wasn't voting for that terrorist...... :foreheadsmack:
> 
> He's usually the democrat in the house! LOL!


:roflmao:

Didn't you say before once that you two normally cancel each other's votes out anyway?

So he's just keeping things the way they normally were???

Sorry - I just sorta had to laugh!


----------



## Spring (Oct 28, 2008)

As a Canadian.. thought I would ask... when will the rest of us know who is the confirmed President? Is it the next day, or how does that work? Will be interesting to see what happens, either way..

Not much into the wheeling and dealing of politics, but man will I be GLAD even as a Canadian to finalize this election! At least the Canadian campaigns only last a month or so, seems like I've been hearing about this election for years!


----------



## LadyBug (Oct 28, 2008)

*TinysMom wrote: *


> *Bo B Bunny wrote: *
> 
> 
> > Anyhow........ my husband just told me that he wasn't voting for that terrorist...... :foreheadsmack:
> ...



this is _really_ good.......................:laugh::roflmao:

:whistling:wave2


----------



## naturestee (Oct 28, 2008)

LOL, Bo! Ask your hubby if that means he's voting for the one that's all for diplomacy first.

Striking first without being directly attacked by a country and without UN approval is, in my opinion, terrorism. My respect for Obama went up when I read his profile and found out he spoke at peace rallies against the start of the Iraq war. For those keeping note... I was one of those sign-carrying hippies too.

Also, tell him Colin Powell wouldn't be voting for a terrorist. Man I hate that stupid smear campaign.

Edit: Peg, I just read your last post and that's how James and I work. He almost always votes Republican, I generally vote Democrat. We've decided we either both have to vote or both have to not vote.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 28, 2008)

Yes, Peg, we do and it IS funny but it makes me so darned mad at the same time!

His UNION backs Obama! 

He's such a redneck in some ...... nawww..... MOST ways! 

Funny tho, it's like that all over from what I am seeing.... all the republicans are voting demo and all the demos are voting republican!


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 28, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> Now, I will answer the questions you have all posted for me later - today was a really rough day and I have a bad headache and earache from leaning back with a towel under my shoulders while the doc poked needles into my neck! YUCK!
> 
> Anyhow........ my husband just told me that he wasn't voting for that terrorist...... :foreheadsmack:
> 
> He's usually the democrat in the house! LOL!



We'llhave to talk about the needles... I thought I was sticking those pins in a voodoo doll! Was it you instead? I'll PM you about my neck needles experience:?

Please give your DH some nose pats from me and Frankenbunny for 'right' thinking, LOL! He can have some of crack Craisins too.


----------



## naturestee (Oct 28, 2008)

Whoa wait a minute! Bo, your hubby is UNION? And he's voting for McCain???

Something tells me he hasn't read up on the candidates' stances.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 28, 2008)

Yeah, he's been listening to RUSH LIMBAUGH! :?

I think he's actually thinking about voting for the Independant tho LOL!


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 28, 2008)

*Spring wrote: *


> As a Canadian.. thought I would ask... when will the rest of us know who is the confirmed President? Is it the next day, or how does that work? Will be interesting to see what happens, either way..
> 
> Not much into the wheeling and dealing of politics, but man will I be GLAD even as a Canadian to finalize this election! At least the Canadian campaigns only last a month or so, seems like I've been hearing about this election for years!


Back in the good old days, we knew the next day or in landslide cases, very late at night. These days it depends on how close the election is and how many people file law suits. Could be a couple of weeks, worst case scenario.


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 28, 2008)

Here is aneditorial piece from journalist Michael Malone that I find thought provoking. The media's Presidential bias and decline, slanted coverage and the reasons why.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=6099188&page=1


----------



## LadyBug (Oct 28, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> Yeah, he's been listening to RUSH LIMBAUGH! :?
> 
> I think he's actually thinking about voting for the Independent tho LOL!



umm....who _is_ the independent?:whistling

seniorcats* wrote: *


> Please give your DH some nose pats from me and Frankenbunny for 'right' thinking, LOL! He can have some of crack Craisins too.


oh yes, give him some from me and Jamie, too:biggrin2:. and if he's really good Jamie might even share some banana with oats with him:biggrin2:


----------



## naturestee (Oct 28, 2008)

*seniorcats wrote: *


> Here is aneditorial piece from journalist Michael Malone that I find thought provoking. The media's Presidential bias and decline, slanted coverage and the reasons why.
> 
> http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=6099188&page=1



That's a good read! I agree that the press has been far too nice to Obama and Biden.Although for all of CNN's supposed bias, when I have it on after work (10 pm-12 am) I usually see bad Obama story followed by bad McCain story followed by discussion by panels of people supporting both campaigns and independants of various sorts.

Of course what made me respect this particular author more than others who have written similar articles lately is that he's not whining about Palin's treatment by the press. I agree with his thought that if you're going into the big leagues you should be prepared for them, home life and history and all.

Oh Peg, my comment earlier about Palin giving money to the taxpayers was not about the normal annual check. She took extra money businesses (I think it was a windfall tax on oil companies?) and handed out the money to the citizens. Something like an extra $1000 or so per person? As much as I dislike big oil I think they should be treated just like other companies... meaning don't tax them extra but stop subsidizing them (which the feds currently do). Anyways, that is a more direct form of this "socialism"Palin is talking about- literally taking a sum of money directly from one group and giving it directly to another group.


----------



## BethM (Oct 28, 2008)

> *
> 
> *
> 
> ...


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*Bo B Bunny wrote: *


> Yeah, he's been listening to RUSH LIMBAUGH! :?


Ok - since someone (besides me) mentioned Rush's name -I want to bring something up.

First of all - I almost never listen to Rush on the radio - I can't stand him most of the time. My mom loves him - Art loves to laugh at him and says his arrogance is part of his "showmanship".

Me? I usually avoid him whenever I can.

But lately I've heard him being interviewed various times on Fox...and he's got a different attitude when he's on there. Less...egotistical?

Anyway - I say all that to say - I'm not a Rush groupie - before I share this.

Also - when he shared this - he was NOT saying that the Democrats are GOING to do this....but he said it was something he heard about or read about or something...and it concerned him. 

If I understand him right - the person I'm going to be quoting/writing about has been invited to testify before some subcommittee about this idea.

Ok...with that said - I'm gonna copy and paste some of what Rush said and give the link...

[line]Listen to this. Look at me. "A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. ... Under Ghilarducci's plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the US government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration." In other words, there is a plan that the Democrats are considering to convert your 401(k) to the Social Security Administration, your 401(k) then administered by the SSA, your private retirement plan becomes owned by the government. "The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation."

Now, the purpose of this plan is they think you'll go for this because you've seen these wild market gyrations, and you've seen your 401(k) plunge, so now they're thinking that you'll go along with the Social Security Administration running your private retirement plan at a guaranteed 3% a year. "The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated," so no longer would you get the deduction off the top of your income for whatever you contribute to your 401(k). The current system of tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated. Teresa Ghilarducci, "I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s. 401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break." So that's two people now that want to come along and take away the tax deductibility and subsidy of your 401(k). George Miller, who runs the committee, and some babe, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York.





"Ghilarducci outlined her plan last year in a paper for the left-liberal Economic Policy Institute, in which she acknowledges that her plan would amount to a tax increase on workers making more than $75,000--considerably less than the $250,000 Barack Obama has said would be his tax-hike cutoff. In addition, workers would be able to pass on only half of their account balances to their heirs," so that your 401(k) would be subject to the 50% death tax rate because the government's going to own it. The government's going to own your 401(k), and your 401(k) will guarantee you just 3% in government bonds administered by the government. Your private retirement account that the government set up and got you into, now they want to take over from you, just like Joe Biden wants to go out and make sure that these evil CEOs, their pensions go first. The concept that your money is your money will vanish when the Democrats take over Congress and Obama takes over the White House. All money will officially be government's. 

Now, this is getting pretty brutal, so they had this babe up to testify before this committee, Teresa Ghilarducci, and she offered a sweetener. "Short-term I propose ... that the Congress allow workers to swap out their 401(k) assets, perhaps at August levels, for a guaranteed retirement account--just a one-time swap. ... How would this work? You go back to your districts and meet up with a 55-year-old who had had $50,000 in his account last month and now has $40,000 in the account. He can swap out that $50,000, valued in August, for that guarantee of what would become, if he retires at 62, a $500 a month addition to Social Security." So her plan is to have your 401(k) plan taken over by the government, invested by the government, the Social Security plan at 3%, and then your retirement is paid back to you in a Social Security check. Whatever your Social Security benefits are when you retire will be added to by whatever is in your 401(k). The point is that in your mind, if you go along for this, the government is in total charge of your retirement. 

And the sweetener, the little hook here is for people to say, "Well, my 401(k) in August it was worth a lot of money, and now it's lost." Okay, we'll give you the August value. Your generous and benevolent government will give you the August value, and then they will take your plan and will put it in the Social Security Administration and will invest your plan in safe bonds at 3% a year, and then when you retire, that money in your 401(k) gets added to whatever your Social -- you get one check, your Social Security check. And in that check will be whatever your retirement account is, and you're essentially giving it up. You're essentially giving it up. By the way, gone also is any incentive to contribute to it, in terms of the subsidy you get off the top of your income for whatever you donate to your 401(k). Now, I don't want to totally alarm you here, it's by no means a certainty that Congress or Obama would embrace this proposal, but I'll tell you when you listen to them talk, this is the direction they're headed. You know they're going to come after pension plans. It's one of the largest sources of money out there, be it you California teachers, public employees, Teamsters Union, your pension plan, I guarantee you people like Obama and Democrats in the House are eyeing that as though it's theirs. Joe Biden, "Their pensions go first." 

Here is the link to the full article (which I don't care for due to Rush's sarcasm)...

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102408/content/01125109.guest.html

[line]
Now I went looking for this information because Rush shared it on a show - just a brief blurb about it - so I went to his website to find the information.

I also want to clarify...

I did not hear Rush say the democrats are planning on doing this.
I am not saying that the democrats are planning on doing this.
I am not saying it is going to happen.
But I felt this was an interesting scenario...

One point that bothered me about what he said is...

So her plan is to have your 401(k) plan taken over by the government, invested by the government, the Social Security plan at 3%, and then your retirement is paid back to you in a Social Security check. Whatever your Social Security benefits are when you retire will be added to by whatever is in your 401(k). The point is that in your mind, if you go along for this, the government is in total charge of your retirement. 
​[line]
So here comes the questions for y'all....especially those of you with 401Ks...


How do you feel about this? How do you feel about the fact that the money will be invested with a guaranteed 3% interest rate?
How do you feel about the fact you won't get the tax breaks on your contributions?
How do you feel about the government being in total charge of your retirement?
[line]Since this was a "food for thought" thread - I thought I'd throw this out there and see what everyone says!

:biggrin2:


----------



## BethM (Oct 28, 2008)

> > I do have every sympathy with you and other rape victims, I was molested by a friend's brother when I was twelve, and so have *some* idea what you have gone through. I still cannot agree with you on the abortion issue, however. LIke Ladybug said, that is what the morning after pill was created for. For most people, there is also the option to adopt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 28, 2008)

*BethM wrote:*


> > Again, it is unfair to force someone else to go through all of that, *especially* if the pregnancy is the product of rape/incest.


I see where you're coming from - but all I can say is that I'm glad my birthmom AND her family didn't consider abortion even an option to be discussed when she was abused for the last time - at the age of 13. 

When I found her as an adult and talked to her (and her family) and were reunited with them - it was a beautiful thing and she is just an awesome person.


----------



## BethM (Oct 29, 2008)

*

*


> TinysMom wrote: BethM wrote: Again, it is unfair to force someone else to go through all of that, *especially* if the pregnancy is the product of rape/incest. I see where you're coming from - but all I can say is that I'm glad my birthmom AND her family didn't consider abortion even an option to be discussed when she was abused for the last time - at the age of 13. When I found her as an adult and talked to her (and her family) and were reunited with them - it was a beautiful thing and she is just an awesome person.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BethM (Oct 29, 2008)

A little bit off-topic......Does anyone else find this Sen. Stevens thing to be ridiculous? I am completely baffled that there are no laws (according to the news reports I have heard) that would prevent Stevens, now a felon convicted on 7 counts, to continue service in the Senate (if he were re-elected), while in many states convicted felons can't even vote!?! How can this happen?

This sort of thing makes my head hurt.


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 29, 2008)

*BethM wrote: *


> > I do have every sympathy with you and other rape victims, I was molested by a friend's brother when I was twelve, and so have *some* idea what you have gone through. I still cannot agree with you on the abortion issue, however. LIke Ladybug said, that is what the morning after pill was created for. For most people, there is also the option to adopt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trust me I don't like those people either.

I have a question who believe abortion shouldn't be legal. 

Would you rather it be legal and people can have it done at a clinic or hospital or would you rather they have it done illegally at some back room in someone house an possibly die? 

I again want to mention that I know that no matter would have an abortion. I just believe it should be a persons choice and they should be able to do it in a controlled environment.


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 29, 2008)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp

From this one. Sorry made me giggle.


> Obama blended his sharp rhetoric with a more humorous approach as he sought to fend off McCain's charge that his tax policies amount to socialism.
> McCain, he said, will soon "be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_pr/mccain
Are they having issues with each other or not?



> Also in the interview, McCain:
> 
> _Acknowledged friction between some of his advisers and Palin's but called it "nonsense" and said his relationship with Palin was fine.
> 
> ...


I am alittle behind on this but when is the last time we have heard anything along these lines being a threat. We will ALWAYS be at risk from someone.


> Returning to the issue of national security, seen as McCain's strongest asset before the financial crisis overwhelmed the campaign, McCain stood with former military officers and national security advisers to ask rhetorically whether Obama had the wisdom and judgment to be commander in chief.
> 
> "The question is whether this is a man who has what it takes to protect America from Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida and the other great threats in the world," McCain said. "He has given no reason to answer in the affirmative."



Right about now I don't care about the world I care about HERE!


> McCain also warned of the danger to national security from a Democratic takeover of both the White House and Congress. He predicted deep cuts in defense spending and abandonment of America's role in the world if Democrats run the government.


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 30, 2008)

> > As far as adoption, I don't think that's always a solution. Pregnancy puts a huge strain on a woman, emotionally and physically. I know I would have absolutely no way of coming up with the money for all the health-related expenses of pregnancy; exams, vitamins, the delivery, maternity clothes, missed work, I don't even know what else. Again, it is unfair to force someone else to go through all of that, *especially* if the pregnancy is the product of rape/incest.



That is one of the great things about this country, though. For situations like that, where a woman can't afford the healthcare she needs for herself and her baby, we have things like WIC and the medical card. When my husband and I got pregnant with our twins, we would not have been able to get all the care needed for a high risk pregnancy without help. But that help is there available, basically allyou have to do to be eligible is be pregnant or have a child under three years old. 

Of course pregnancy (an unwanted one, at any rate) will take a toll on a woman emotionally. But do you think that an abortion wouldn't? That is something that any woman who has an abortion has to live with for the rest of her life, that she made the decision to end the life of her child, however that child's life came about. I wouldthink personally that would be far more scarring than having to spend nine months carrying it to term.


----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)

*gentle giants wrote: *


> > Of course pregnancy (an unwanted one, at any rate) will take a toll on a woman emotionally. But do you think that an abortion wouldn't? That is something that any woman who has an abortion has to live with for the rest of her life, that she made the decision to end the life of her child, however that child's life came about. I would think personally that would be far more scarring than having to spend nine months carrying it to term.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 30, 2008)

At the moment I can't think of any Supreme Court decision that has subsequently been overturned by a later Supreme Court. Even the current Chief Justice has acknowledged thatover turning Roe V. Wade, which camefrom an earlier court, would be nearly impossible. The President cannot write a law. It isn't a part of the executive branch powers. The Supreme Court cannot make law. It can only decide the merit of cases it decides to accept andif the law has been correctly applied.

Let's say state 'x' decided to pass a law making abortion illegal in any circumstance.Since 1973, every attempt by a state to limit or illegalize abortion has been struck down by the Supreme Court. Let's say Justice Stephens, who is ancient, drops dead and Justice Ginsberg, who has health issues, retires. Both are very liberal justices. The next President appoints 2 ultra conservatives.Even if an abortion case were brought to the Court and they decided to hear,Roe v. Wade cannot be overturnedsimply because the majority of Justices do not like abortion.

Even if the 'worst case scenario' happened and State 'x's abortion law was found legal and Roe V. Wade overturned, it would only effect that one state. Every other state in the nation would have to pass anti-abortion laws and no doubt go through years of appeals to get abortion made illegal.

Some states have already passed what are called 'trigger' laws - or 'just in case' laws as I call them. These trigger laws make abortion legal in that state even if R v W is overturned.

On the other hand, what will happen when there are few or no doctors willing to perform abortions? Do a little research and you will find many younger students in medical school and just coming out of school are refusing to learn or do the procedure. In some states, South Dakota for one, there are no doctors who do abortions. From my research I understand it's becoming an issue in other countries as well. Should doctors be forced to learn and perform abortions?

The good news is the abortion rate is declining and has been declining in the past couple of years. The bad news is, that's only among caucasian women. Among black women, the rate is increasing. My friend Suzette asked me to attend a lecture her minister husband and otherswere giving at his church. I went last week.The church is about 95% African -American and 5% white. The topic of the lecture was 'Abortion As Black Genocide'. I had never considered this before. I found the speakers and the audience very passionate on the subject. We were referred to the Black Genocide Project for more information http://www.blackgenocide.org/ The site does provide much food for thought which is why I am sharing it. It gave me, a mostly white partly Passamaquody Indian woman, much food for thought.


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 30, 2008)

And while I am wide awake and on a roll, the information posted by some on the 'morning after' pill is inaccurate according to Planned Parenthood. The pill is effective for up to 5 days after unprotected sex not 72 hours as has been posted several times.

The morning after pill is available WITHOUT a prescription according to Planned Parenthood and can be obtained at drug stores and PP offices. So no need to worry about having a pharmacist refuse to dispense it.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/emergency-contraception-morning-after-pill-4363.htm

They do make this statement: Plan B is safe, effective, and should be widely available. But, because of certain policies and personal bias, some women may have a hard time getting it. If you are having trouble getting emergency contraception from your local pharmacy or health care provider, contact your local Planned Parenthood health center. We can help you get the medicine you need.


I almost forgot - I live in podunk, the sticks, ya know.... I called the information line at our local hospital and asked if the hospital ER dispensed the morning after pill and was told most ER's do this now. It's offered and given if accepted. If it's avaiable in hicksville, it sould be available at just about any hospital.


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 30, 2008)

*BethM wrote: *


> I think we will be agreeing to disagree on this one.  Some people believe it's a child from the moment the egg is fertilized, and I respect their beliefs on that, and the choices they make based on their beliefs. But I don't believe it's a child until it can survive on it's own outside the womb, and I expect others to respect my beliefs and the choices I make based on that belief.




H-m-m-m-m-m, I have some friends whose 'children' are now in their 30's and they are still not surviving on their own outside the womb.


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Oct 30, 2008)

*:laugh:I know a LOT of people like that! *

*seniorcats wrote: *


> H-m-m-m-m-m, I have some friends whose 'children' are now in their 30's and they are still not surviving on their own outside the womb.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 30, 2008)

For those who watched Senator Obama last night - here is a "fact check" on his speech by the Associated Press....

AP FACT CHECK: Obama Ad Avoids Budget Realities The Associated Press takes a look at the details in Obama's prime-time ad

WASHINGTON -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.
Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are -- beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
A sampling of what voters heard in the ad, and what he didn't tell them:
*THE SPIN:* "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."
*THE FACTS:* His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
*THE SPIN:* "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."
*THE FACTS:* That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.
*THE SPIN: *"I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."
*THE FACTS:* Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years -- and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."
*THE SPIN: *"Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. *(Peg inserting a question here - I thought it was $250,000 - did it drop?) *Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. "
*THE FACTS: *His proposals -- the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more -- cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged -- although not in his commercial -- that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."
source: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/ap-fact-check-obama-ad-avoids-budget-realities/

By the way - one way to fact check BOTH candidates is www.factcheck.org and I'm sure there are other sites out there too.


----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)

I spent 20 minutes writing a response, but it didn't post.

I got the 72 hour number from an ob/gyn. So there is apparantly some mis-information in the medical community.

"Available without prescription" doesn't mean it's obtainable. Some pharmacies here don't even carry it, while others keep it behind the counter. If the pharmacist is unwilling to hand it to the customer, it's not available, even when it's right there behind the counter. Some will call over a collegue, others will flat out refuse and send you on your way. The stores allow this, but I think this is BS, if the people aren't willing to do the job, find somewhere else to work, I don't go the pharmacy for a sermon.

When I was raped, I did not go to the ER. It was 11pm, I didn't have a car, the nearest hospital was over 5 miles away. Even if I had been up to the walk, I didn't have insurance so I couldn't afford it anyway. Some communities make women pay for their rape kits, with no financial assistance available.


----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)




----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)

> > On the other hand, what will happen when there are few or no doctors willing to perform abortions? Do a little research and you will find many younger students in medical school and just coming out of school are refusing to learn or do the procedure. In some states, South Dakota for one, there are no doctors who do abortions. From my research I understand it's becoming an issue in other countries as well. Should doctors be forced to learn and perform abortions?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 30, 2008)

*gentle giants wrote: *


> That is one of the great things about this country, though. For situations like that, where a woman can't afford the healthcare she needs for herself and her baby, we have things like WIC and the medical card. When my husband and I got pregnant with our twins, we would not have been able to get all the care needed for a high risk pregnancy without help. *But that help is there available, basically allyou have to do to be eligible is be pregnant or have a child under three years old.
> *





> Really? WIC is so good? I would love someone to explain to a baby that he should drink less formula because he needs to make it last longer.My friends son is a BIG boy. At almost 2months he can drink of to 8oz my friend stops him but if left to it he would keep drinking. If she doesn't give him atleast 8oz he cries. The doctor is ok with this because honestly he is a large baby. My friend asked WIC if she could have more formula. Thats it nothing else and they told her not to feed the baby so much that she had to make it last.
> 
> 
> The help only goes so far.
> ...





> Of course pregnancy (an unwanted one, at any rate) will take a toll on a woman emotionally. But do you think that an abortion wouldn't? That is something that any woman who has an abortion has to live with for the rest of her life, that she made the decision to end the life of her child, however that child's life came about. I wouldthink personally that would be far more scarring than having to spend nine months carrying it to term.


That is something that most women know and if they are willing to face it than that is their choice.


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 30, 2008)

**hugs**

*BethM wrote: *


> I spent 20 minutes writing a response, but it didn't post.
> 
> I got the 72 hour number from an ob/gyn. So there is apparantly some mis-information in the medical community.
> 
> ...


----------



## JadeIcing (Oct 30, 2008)

In the end I think that no matter who goes into office our country is so messed up it would take more than four years to fix our problems. 

One thing I keep in mind is sometimes things have to get worse before they get better.


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 30, 2008)

*I am going to post this, and that will be the lastI say about the abortion issue, anyway.*

*BethM wrote: *


> > Yes, she sold the official plane, but it was at a *loss* of a half million dollars. If her kids were attending events they didn't need to, fine, but she should have paid for that out of her own pocket.) Personally, I think things like that show her character.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gentle giants (Oct 30, 2008)

*JadeIcing wrote: *


> In the end I think that no matter who goes into office our country is so messed up it would take more than four years to fix our problems.
> 
> One thing I keep in mind is sometimes things have to get worse before they get better.


You are absolutly right. I think we haven't really seen the worst yet.Just like this whole crisis didn't come about because of the Bush Administration, it's been in the making for a lot of years.


----------



## LadyBug (Oct 30, 2008)

*gentle giants wrote: *


> *BethM wrote: *
> 
> 
> > > My personal belief is that life doesn't start until one is able to survive outside of the mother's body.
> ...


totally agree with you here


----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)

> > > I haven't heard anything about her kids attending events, I think that's a little silly. Do you honestly think that every other politician in history hasn't done at least some of that sort of thing?
> >
> >
> >
> > ...


----------



## BethM (Oct 30, 2008)

> LadyBug wrote:
> gentle giants wrote: BethM wrote: My personal belief is that life doesn't start until one is able to survive outside of the mother's body. Yes, except that it is not uncommon for the fetus to survive the abortion. But don't impede on my right to make decisions about my body and life with the assistance of a docter. Well, as I have said before, the fact still remains that it's not YOUR life and body you are ending.
> totally agree with you here





The First Amendment of the the US Constitution provide for a separation of church and state. The debate over when life begins is a religious matter. Religion has no place in lawmaking.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 31, 2008)

I'm simply sharing this because I thought it was interesting....ok...so it is about Obama...but still yet. If McCain had done the same thing - I'd be sharing it here too...honestly.

Report: Journalists From Three Newspapers Booted From Obama's Plane Reporters from three newspapers that endorsed John McCain have reportedly been told that they can't travel aboard Barack Obama's plane in the final days leading before Election Day. Journalists from three major newspapers that endorsed John McCain have reportedly been booted from Barack Obama's campaign plane for the final leg of the presidential race.The Washington Times reported Friday that it was notified of the Obama campaign's decision Thursday evening -- even though the paper has covered Obama from the start.
Executive Editor John Solomon toldFOXNews.com that the Obama campaign said it didn't have enough seats on the plane, but "I don't think the explanation makes sense to us."
"We've been traveling since 2007 with him. ... We're a relevant newspaper -- every day we break news," Solomon said. "And to suddenly be kicked off the plane for people who haven't covered it as aggressively or thoroughly as we are ... it sort of feels unfair."
He said the newspaper protested but was turned down again by the campaign.
"I can only hope that the candidate who describes himself as wanting to unite the nation doesn't have some sort of litmus test for who he decides gets to cover the campaign," Solomon said, noting that the Obama campaign's decision came just two days after the paper endorsed McCain.
The New York Post and Dallas Morning News also have been kicked off Obama's plane, according to the Web site The Drudge Report.It said the three reporters were told to find alternative transportation by Sunday so that the plane could accommodate "network bigwigs" and reporters from two black magazines, Essence and Jet.
Representatives from the New York Post and Dallas Morning News could not be reached immediately for comment.
Click here to read the story on the Obama campaign's decision in The Washington Times. 

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/31/obama-plane-pitches-reporters-mccain-endorsing-papers/

[line]
I mention this because it reminds me of that tv station in Florida that had a tough interview with Joe Biden last week - and then the Obama campaign contacted them and canceled all upcoming interviews and stated that they would be "inaccessible" for the rest of the campaign - or something like that.


----------



## Bunnys_rule63 (Oct 31, 2008)

I just read through this whole thread (yes I'm supposed to revising, but this is more important in day to day life let's be honest) and found itvery interesting- although asa bit of a liberal I did get a bit whipped up by some opinions...but I'll just shake those off.When it comes to things such as politics, religion and great philosophical debates its best never to take things too much to heart or we'd all end up at each other's throats!:shock:

Although I'm (obviously) not American I'm still taking great interest in this election because America is arguably the most powerful country in the world and whoever becomes President not only affects you guys but the rest of us round the world. That being said, the idea of the republicans coming into power quite scares me to be honest....:?It makes me wish we had some say in the election, although at least I'm 18 in 2 months so able to vote here in the UK when it comes to our next general election!


----------



## NorthernAutumn (Oct 31, 2008)

:yeahthat: As a Canadian, the US is our largest trading partner, and US policy tends to influence policies around the world. 
It is very important to me that you guys elect someone who is focused on becoming a better global system.

No offense, but Dubya has ruined a lot of international treaties and relations between countries with his "US first" approach to everything from trade to the environment.
I think that whomever wins better focus on learning how to co-operate effectively with the rest of the world.


----------



## seniorcats (Oct 31, 2008)

*NorthernAutumn wrote: *


> No offense, but Dubya has ruined a lot of international treaties and relations between countries with his "US first" approach to everything from trade to the environment.


Could you list those please? I would like to research that information if you have it available.


----------



## TinysMom (Oct 31, 2008)

*TinysMom wrote: *


> I'm simply sharing this because I thought it was interesting....ok...so it is about Obama...but still yet. If McCain had done the same thing - I'd be sharing it here too...honestly.


To be true to my word....

Obama is not the only candidate to play hardball with the press. McCain's campaign has reportedly barred Time columnist Joe Klein and New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, who have been critical of the Republican candidate, from the Republicancandidate's plane.
​http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/31/obama-plane-pitches-reporters-mccain-endorsing-papers/


----------



## naturestee (Oct 31, 2008)

Meh. McCain booted the reporters a while back, and I remember other reporters commenting on how much space was in the plain.

In the Washington Times article, Obama's rep did say they ran out of seats due to the high number of reporters wanting in on the last few days of the election (I wouldn't be surprised) and offered seats on Sen. Biden's plane instead. I wouldn't be surprised if they chose based on who the journalists support and how many people read/watch their stuff. If you have to choose somehow, you may as well choose that way.

Either way, I'm was more concerned about how the McCain campaign kept preventing Palin from doing more interviews. People wanted to get to know her and her stances since she was pretty much unknown outside of Alaska, and after one bad interview they just pulled the plug for a while. I know I wanted to know more about her since I was undecided as to who to vote for at the time. It made me feel like they had something to hide, or that she was just so very unprepared for national-level politics.:?

Edit: Seniorcats- I'm sure moving on Iraq without UN approval was a blow to ourdealings with other governments.


----------



## NorthernAutumn (Nov 1, 2008)

Seniorcats;
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4959.html
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4956.html
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4937.html
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4933.html

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/19/america/NA-GEN-US-Carter-Bush.php
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/03/ir-theory.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_steel_tariff_2002
Steel tariffs

Kyoto
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-12/10/content_502294.htm

He locked horns with the UN over everything. Granted the UN isn't always the most effective governing body, but everyone is supposed to work together there. Put forth ideas, don't just complain.

Softwood lumber tariffs + Canada
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2005/2005-11-23-04.asp

Really great article on trade+ US policy
http://www.uiowa.edu/ifdebook/issues/globalization/perspectives/carlson.shtml
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/ffd/2003/0718exploits.htm


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 3, 2008)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCaOCWYpPk4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCaOCWYpPk4[/ame]


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 3, 2008)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_el_pr/palin_troopergate


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 3, 2008)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_el_pr/watching_the_returns


----------



## seniorcats (Nov 3, 2008)

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4A26GV20081104

I may not be a supporter but this is very sad news. Please say a prayer, send some healing thoughts or spare a moment of silence.


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 4, 2008)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/ap_on_el_pr/split_decision


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Nov 4, 2008)

Obama's Nevada campaign chairman died at the age of 44 last night. Heart attack.

What a sad time it's been for him this week.


----------



## TinysMom (Nov 4, 2008)

*JadeIcing wrote: *


> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/ap_on_el_pr/split_decision


I've been reading/hearing about the various things in this article since....Friday I think?

It really has looked like the race is tightening up and while it looks like Obama will win....if things work out in certain ways - McCain could pull off a victory. 

Did y'all hear about the military vote in Virginia now and how the ballots did not get sent out in time?

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/03/court-rejects-naacp-suit-mccain-files-one-too/

The suit filed by Mr. McCain's campaign against elections officials states Mr. McCain could lose votes from military members overseas who support the Vietnam War hero. 
"There are many military service members and overseas voters who support Senator John McCain for president in the upcoming election and whose right to vote will be denied without relief from this court," stated the complaint, also filed in U.S. District Court in Richmond. 
*The complaint states some Virginia localities did not send absentee ballots to overseas voters at least 45 days before the election, as recommended in 2004 by a congressionally created commission. *
It names such jurisdictions as Arlington, Chesterfield and Fauquier counties and the cities of Richmond and Virginia Beach as areas that did not even receive ballots from the printer until late September. 
The complaint cites the specific case of a Marine stationed in Iraq who did not receive his absentee ballot from Arlington County until Oct. 29. It asks that the court order absentee ballots for federal offices sent by Nov. 4 from qualified voters and received by Nov. 14 in the state to be counted. 
"The McCain-Palin campaign believes without exception that the servicemen and women on the front line protecting our freedoms deserve every opportunity to make sure their vote counts," McCain spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said. 
It was not clear last night when the suit would be heard in court. 
"Of course we want to make sure that all the absentee ballots that are coming in from overseas are counted," Miss Skinner said. "We'll comply with whatever order the judge gives on that." 



[line]


Since Virginia is one of the battleground states - it makes me wonder if there are enough votes out there (if the vote in that state is close enough) that we could have a longer wait to see who takes the state...


----------



## seniorcats (Nov 4, 2008)

Peg, I am really expecting it to takes weeks to know who is President. There are already proven voter fraud issues in Ohio as an ACORN worker confessed to registering himself 75 nonexistant Dem voters. He is one of several under indictment.

In this state, people who cast provisional ballots and certain mail ballots have a limtited number of days to present themselves to the BOE and verify identity and residence. The Plain Dealer has already broken a story on the numbers of dead people who are registered and who voted in the primary. The BOE says 'we'll look into it'... Jennifer Brunner has several law suits pending already.

With all that in mind, doubt I'll stay up late expecting to hear anythng definite.


----------



## gentle giants (Nov 4, 2008)

Oh, it won't be done today, that's for certain. This is just the day you cast your vote, and apparently, half the dead people in the country do too. :XMy DH was telling me this morning that he had seen on the news about this small town in (I think) Virginia, that only had 19 registered voters, and turned in 21 votes. 

It is going to be insane for a while, but I am really hoping that it doesn't take weeks, I am so ready for all of this crud to be done, one way or the other.


----------



## seniorcats (Nov 4, 2008)

I saw a similar news segment of several towns where more people are registered than live in the town.

also http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/03/investigator-evidence-palin-violated-ethics-law/


----------



## Wabbitdad12 (Nov 4, 2008)

I've listened to a lot of people (on the forum, at work, home etc) voice their opinions on the different canidates. 

I don't care who anyone voted for, if you voted great, rejoice or complain all you want when the votes are counted. If you didn't bother to take the time to vote keep quiet. If you didn't like the current political situation you should have voted, don't complain about it then when the opportunity comes to make a change then stay at home.

There rant over.


----------



## Wabbitdad12 (Nov 4, 2008)

*seniorcats wrote: *


> I saw a similar news segment of several towns where more people are registered than live in the town.
> 
> also http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/03/investigator-evidence-palin-violated-ethics-law/


Happens all the time in Chicago! Ask the Daley's!


----------



## Bo B Bunny (Nov 4, 2008)

That is EXACTLY how I feel! People who don't vote have no right to say anything one way or another.

Now, with that said, I heard that if Indiana goes Democratic, you can bet that Obama will win...... 

It's possibly true. indiana has been republican forever.


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 4, 2008)

Thats what I was telling everyone at work. I highly doubt we will know tonight or even tomorrow. I think I will be in shock if we do.


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 4, 2008)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_pl128


----------



## seniorcats (Nov 4, 2008)

To heck with all this. Elvis for President!

:elvis2:


----------



## JadeIcing (Nov 4, 2008)

*seniorcats wrote: *


> To heck with all this. Elvis for President!
> 
> :elvis2:









Elvis says yes!


----------

