General Music Chat

In all honesty, what has the woman done to deserve such attacks?

Because she is pro-life?

Because she has, until recently, kept John McCain in the race?


I happen to be pro-choice, but unlike some extremists, I am not so arrogant as to disregard how difficult and serious an issue this is.

I'm not God. Are you?

Who gave us the right to determine for another human being, when their life begins. When it is valid?

Have you ever thought, that if we are wrong, we are indirectly encouraging taking the lives of countless innocent children?

This is NOT a neat and clean issue.

Only a person FAR OUT OF TOUCH with their souls and their own humanity could think it is.

While I disagree with Palin on this issue, I certainly cannot judge strongly, let alone "hate" her, for erring on the side of life.

Craig, I think you are confusing the issues.

People aren't attacking Palin BECAUSE she is a woman, they are attacking her because she is (in their eyes) a sleazy politician. Abortion is a hot button issue during elections designed specifically to rile up people, like you.

You need to see past that and realize that abortion, immigration, and about 10 other hot-button issues won't change (dramatically) no matter which candidate is chosen.

Back to the point though -

I don't want Palin in office, almost as much as I don't want McCain in office. Why? Because, I've been saying "I told you so" for 8 years, and I really don't want to have to say it for another 4. It really will be more of the same. McCain is basically promising to ride into washington and change ... himself!? He's promising to fix all that he's helped break.

But in spite of all of that, the real kicker is all the sound bytes from republicans from last spring who, in defense of attacking hillary clinton, would state that if she couldn't stand the heat, then she's not qualified to be a politician, but when it happens to Palin, suddenly everyone THEN has a problem with politically attacking women?

Are you supporting mccain and palin because you are voting for your party's stance on abortion, or are you supporting them because you strongly believe in runaway government spending, deregulated corporatism, wars of aggression, continued wealth disparity, and fear based propaganda?

I totally respect you as a musician, but I don't agree with your political views, and your strawman argument that anyone who attacks palin is a woman hater. My wife can't stand her either.

I have to clarify my political position on Palin and on abortion. I'm not necessarily for Palin or against abortion. Abortion should be legal but there should be significant counseling to a woman who wants to abort. I am dead set against late-term abortion if the fetus can survive outside the womb. I am dead set against a minor getting an abortion without her parents' consent. I am 100% for creating a much easier process for qualfied adults to adopt a baby. Women who seek abortion should be given a one week period where they CANNOT abort and be counseled on alternatives. Abortion SHOULD be allowed where the physical health of the woman is at risk (notice I did NOT say mental health) or the health of the fetus is at risk. Abortion should NEVER be an alternative to contraception although it would virtually impossible to prove it. I am also VERY INTERESTED in making it up to each state if abortion is LEGAL in that state. This could be voted on in each state perhaps when governors are elected. I see nothing wrong with public referendums on issues, whether it be abortion or capital punishment or state speed limts, etc. On Palin I see someone who is just way too inexperienced to possibly become President very soon. McCain would be the oldest President were he to be elected. I believe McCain chose Palin mainly to get more publicity because of the huge publicity Obama is getting. In retrospect I'm not sure it was a good idea to pick her. I understand she has executive experience (more than McCain, Obama, or Biden combined) but it is in a very sparsely populated state and a very small town, not anywhere near a large nation. I think potentially the best thing about Palin is that she would really be a Washington outsider (unlike McCain) who would not be afraid to shake things up. The perception of McCain (and not necessarily the reality) is that he has been a part of the Washington scene for TOO MANY years. He DID vote with Bush over 90% of the time, so the perception is he really is NOT the maverick he claims to be. Unfortunately when you have a lame duck President with an approval rating that is very low, the chances of the candidate of the same party to win are practically nil. Maybe we'll see Palin in the future become a major player in national politics, or maybe she'll disappear from national politics, who knows. I wouldn't mind seeing Condoleeza Rice or Bobby Jindall become major players four or eight years from now. It's too bad Newt Gingrich wasn't such a pompous, baggage-laden politician. He's the smartest SOB out there and he'd make a great President I believe. Even my parents who are staunch democrats begrudgingly admit that Gingrich is a brilliant man, more so than any of the four main candidates for Pres and Vice Pres we have to choose from next Novemeber 4.

Bob,


Yeah, you are dead right about Gingrich. He took a bad PR turn for the "contract With America" which was so successful for the Republicans back then. He was the pitbull. So now he is hated by many. Plus, he is not "attractive" like Obama for example.

So his chances are probably nil.

Yet, as you said, he is brilliant. Very very intelligent, and the most knowledgeable politician on history and the constitution that there is. Period.

He is also forward thinking, and not afraid to try new ideas and generally re-think things.


Palin is inexperienced on world affairs.

World affairs can be mastered easily enough. Character? That may not be as easily learned, as it is not an "issue" but instead, central to who we are, part of our core being.

I trust Palin.

She has convictions and is willing to stand for them and defend them. She clearly loves her country. I also think she has shown amazing class and grace throughout the campaign. She has kept her composure, despite being the most attacked politician I have ever seen in my life. Name a candidate who has gone through such a thorough beating as her? Kerry? Not even close. Dukakis? No way. No campaigning politician has been so degradingly mocked, than her.

She has held her own.

I think that is laudable and she will probably parlay this into a powerful position among Republicans for the future.

I'd prefer more of a moderate myself.

What really surprises me most about the reaction to Palin is the harsh criticism by the feminists. They have been smearing her the most. Talk about hypocrisy. The feminazis have been fighting for decades to have a woman get to the position Palin is in and they lambaste her. Doesn't make any sense to me...

Doesn't suprise me at all. Palin isn't a woman from their little group.
Women hate women. They compete differently than men do.
Any men that seriously have a problem with Palin only need to stand back and shut their mouths. Her fellow women, or 'sisters' will tear her into bloody bits. Over nothing.

Are you supporting mccain and palin because you are voting for your party's stance on abortion, or are you supporting them because you strongly believe in runaway government spending, deregulated corporatism, wars of aggression, continued wealth disparity, and fear based propaganda?

I totally respect you as a musician, but I don't agree with your political views, and your strawman argument that anyone who attacks palin is a woman hater. My wife can't stand her either.

Clearly I would not support McCain over the abortion issue, since i believe in choice, but with reasonable restrictions.

Government spending?

Maybe you forgot that the Democrats are running congress?

But, remember how great Clinton was for the economy?

Oh wait... he had a Republican congress.


Republicans are almost always better for the economy. Democrats believe the government is a business. It isn't. It is a bureaucracy that sucks money away from those who really create wealth and jobs. The government does not "create" new wealth. How then does the economy grow under a bloated government and fewer incentives for the private sector? It won't happen.

Spreading the wealth seems like a good idea to poor people who refuse to work their way up on their own efforts. "I'm jealous of people who are more successful than I am, but I just don't want to do what is necessary to get there myself honestly."

So, let's take it from those who already have it.

Brilliant.

That is just as brilliant as Obama's buddies in ACORN who harass and threaten banks into giving loans to people who are not qualified for it. Why? Cause they are poor people. Poor things. If they just got a loan to own their own house, things would change.

Yeah, for the worse.

The housing market is what has gotten us into the most trouble.

People usually live the way they do for a reason. They choose to. Now, the housing market has crashed, helping devastate the economy, because Democrats who love programs like Freddie and Fannie, have helped coax banks into giving loans to people who don't know how to manage their finances.

Find me anywhere in the world that socialism or communism or any form of Marxism, has realized a better life for it's people than what is available here.

Here's a quote I found interesting...


US higher education often looks like a clear case of the inmates running the asylum. That is, the students who were radicalized in the 1960s have now risen to positions of influence within colleges and universities.
Exceptionally intelligent people who favor the market tend to find opportunities for professional and financial success outside the Academy (i.e., in the business or professional world). Those who are highly intelligent but ill-disposed toward the market are more likely to choose an academic career. For this reason, the universities come to be filled with those intellectuals who were favorably disposed toward socialism from the beginning.

This also leads to the phenomenon that academics don't know much about how markets work, since they have so little experience with them, living as they do in their subsidized ivory towers and protected by academic tenure. As Joseph Schumpeter explained in Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, it is "the absence of direct responsibility for practical affairs" that distinguishes the academic intellectual from others "who wield the power of the spoken and the written word." This absence of direct responsibility leads to a corresponding absence of first-hand knowledge of practical affairs.


As to attacking Palin.

No one said not to attack her views. It is the slimy personal assaults that are unacceptable. Using the "C" word is attacking her as a female, not on issues.

And I was incensed at how Hillary was treated by Obama's people.

It is willing political blindness, if someone cannot see how much more venemous and PERSONAL the assaults on Palin are, compared with any of the others.

Justify it all you want.

It is classless and slimy and completely politically based, and beneath a person of good values.

I am very concerned with someone as liberal as Obama is, particularly with his associations to radical America haters, but even still, I can separate that, when looking for his redeeming qualities.

I can despise Obama's socialist vision, without making personal assaults on him and especially, his family.

Som news agencies have actually asked for paternity testing on her child with down syndrome, because someone questioned whether it was possible the child was really her daughter's and that the governor was pretending it was hers, I guess, to save face or something.

How ridiculous is that? Someone just made something up out of thin air, with no evidence or testimony to support it, and some news groups have made it a cause, like asking for a candidate's health records.

No one really believes this nonsense. Just the accusation is enough though.

Is that respectable campaign fodder? Seriously.

I usually don't worry about America's election's,but after the the last 8 years,me and the rest of the world can't help but watch closely and hope for the right choice for the third time in less then a decade.I found these video's (and tons more)to be very instresting that might address your disagreements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrcy1MxhhVk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTXUmDz8 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FuLVfStT3E - Palin's REAL domestic terrorist connections,lol,oooh facts..how i love them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6YwPtzL ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdxugg9Q18o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0 <<< disgusting

Craig - I don't think you read my posts very well. Where did I condone the personal misplaced attack on Palin's gender? What have I to be ashamed about? Perhaps the misspelling of the word "censorship?"

I believe I said that it's no different than the equally viscious personal inaccurate attacks on Obama. I said that it's a shame that we have become so insensitive that we can accept these types of attacks in the name of freedom of speach. I said that these things would be better censored or ignored. (Would it be sexist if someone called Obama a "prick?" I doubt it. Talk about your double standards!)

"There is no excuse for such a t-shirt as the one described in the above article to be allowed on a campus, or any public setting. There is no excuse for much of what I see daily, like the plastic testicles hanging from the trailer hitches on trucks, or the innumerable foul messages on bumper stickers & buttons & t-shirts, or the foul language I hear every day in every setting. Still, we are willing to accept all of this, & then have the stupidity to act all surprized and offended when someone crosses the next line to be offensive."

Did you read any of that? You seem to place the blame for all the world's ills at the feet of liberals, & then place me in that group of ppl, without reading the words I type.

Dude, I'm not disagreeing with you or condoning this type of behavior, other than to say quit whining about it because it's to be expected in this society. These ppl should be dealt with as we would any uneducated immature group of loud-mouthed misinformed dissidents. I'm saying that there are serious issues that we as a society need to be addressing, but refuse to, all while clinging to our childish embrace of the concept of "freedom of speach" in spite of the hatred & misinformation it produces, not to mention how it diverts our attention away from the real & serious issues.

I honestly do not believe that the use of the "c" word by some stupid left-wing student is going to bring down our society or a woman's right to rule any more than the use of the "n" word or the "arab" or "terrorist" words that are being bandied about by the far right uneducated uninformed religious fanatics. It's the lack of respect that is condoned & encouraged by our society that is bringing down our society.

You want to gripe about it? Don't tell me that this sort of thing makes losers out of all women, because that's just taking it too damned far, & giving the idiot faction too much power. It merely shows the last gasp of intolerance in a society that has been forced to accept a more fair, more "liberal" view of women & blacks, & their collective roles in our country's future. As I said, this is an exciting time to be an American! One in which these views of women & blacks are being overcome in vast, far-reaching ways. In no way is this election returning us to our out-moded stance on women's or black's abilities or their roles in our society.

"Losers?!?!?!" Who loses here? We're all of us winning something, no matter who wins the election, if only in that we are taking it all so seriously for once. Just imagine - a woman or a person of color in the white house, ruling us by our own choice! WOW!

Whoever wins, I pray that they can lead us in a unified, positive direction as we take on the dire issues that face us in these times, & I'm not speaking of gay marriage or Roe v. Wade. There are MUCH more serious issues to attend to at this time.

Here I go again, stepping into a political discussion, which I abhor...

But I think a couple of comments might be in order.

I'm always trying to look at things from another angle, from around the corner so to speak. I think philby is right to an extent, especially with this statement.

It's the lack of respect that is condoned & encouraged by our society that is bringing down our society.

I made a comment in the thread about rap that runs right alongside this, I'm constantly hearing rap coming from cars driving by or sitting at red lights with "lyrics" that are very demaning, degrading, derogatory, violent and disrespectful - to say the least- toward women. That's in addition to vulgar, obscene and violent in general.

Art reflects on society.

While I don't consider rap to be art, what I hear is a very sad commentary on our society. When you have a younger generation that listens to recordings that consistently refer to women as "bitches" and "hos" as well as a generally degrading attitude toward them, you're seeing a society that is in serious trouble.

The attacks on Palin are exactly why I don't like seeing politicians running our government at all, they all seem to be more concerned with smearing the other guy's reputation than attending to the actual issues facing our country. I've been watching this in some of our local elections, some of the candidates have been airing TV ads smearing others, while I haven't seen one from them claiming to try and do anything about the problems facing our area.

I don't want either of them in office, I'm pretty sure it will be more of the same we've seen for the past 50 years or longer. Government by and for the rich...Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the opportunity for any person in this country to make lots of money, but I'm very strongly against the greed and corruption that always comes along with it. Corporation CEOs are making millions and paying almost no taxes at all, while the middle class is paying the taxes they should be paying. The corporation goes down the tubes and the people who sit behind the desks and do the work leave with a small box of personal belongings, while the CEO walks away with a bonus of up to 120 million. Multi billion $ corporations are "outsourcing" jobs to all over the world while unemployment here soars to record highs, and they turn a blind eye and send more jobs overseas. Go to wally world and try to find anything of decent quality or not made in China...

It's politicians who have allowed all of this, primarily because they own stocks in these corporations and/or are accepting "fringe benefits" from lobby groups, that have millions to spend to sway them for votes. All expense paid trips to all corners of the world, memberships in the most exclusive golf clubs, you name it, just vote for this bill. The American people are the losers. We're paying for all of this.

Gas prices...I'm sure each of you has had to fill the tank fairly recently and found it costing over $100, and I just saw an ad last night at a friend's house for a vehicle making a big deal of its 24 MPG rating. 24??? My '91 Jeep Cherokee gets 23 with well worn spark plugs...and a high performance engine...a car with a 100+ MPG carbeurator was driven from Florida to Washington 20 years ago, reported on national news, and I've never heard of it again. Why isn't that carb being used on every car in sight right now? Even then we were hearing about this "gas crisis" or shortage. Some oil corporation bought it for a paltry couple of million and it will never see the light of day again. Politicians allowed this. Many are where they are right now due to oil money. If that carb disappears, they keep making lots more money.

I don't know much about Palin, or the others since I don't follow politics and don't like politicians in general, and as I stated in another recent thread I think we desparately need a third party, the twp that have been running this country for the last 100 years have done a piss poor job of it. Prices have steadily gone up, wages have stayed as low as possible and our rights have been whittled away consistently while special interest groups have gained more and more influence over the politicians int he white house.

Whew...I don't remember where I started now...

But I do think I have to agree with the main point of this thread, women are losing in this deal. someone said it and is right, women are tougher on other women than men are, but the kind of attitude shown by this twerp withe a derogatory t-shirt is becoming more and more prevalent, domestic violence is not declining, and if the "music" I hear on the street is any indication, it's not getting any better.

An example...

We recently had a story on the local news, some fellow killed his ex wife and her mother, shot her father, then blew himself away. A week earlier she had tried to get a restraining order, she didn't get it. The police could have issued one but didn't. The man had a violent history, had made several threats, and this was not the first time she had sought legal assistance.

This kind of apathy is very common, police departments all over the country just tell people "ohj, settle down and stay away from each other, it will be OK". This happened to me when a woman I worked with screamed, cursed and threatened to kill me twice. The police refused to do a thing about it, and wouldn't issue a restraining order. When the female officer did a less than admiral job of investigating it, I talked to the acting chief of police, he acted lioke I was the one who had done something wrong, was rude and insulting but told me he wouold send her back to talk to some of the other employees...it never happened, all he wanted was to get me out of the office.

Women face the same thing when they are dealing with violent husbands or boyfriends, they certainly don't get a fair shake in the workplace, every time they stop at a red light they are treated to some rapper screaming derogatory nonsense, now they see Palin being everything but crucified just because she happens to be famale.

Say what you will folks, it's just plain wrong, whether I want her in office or not, these people should be focusing on the problems our country faces, not the candidate's hairdo, gender or parenting.

Just a point that I think everyone will agree on. This is a historic election. No matter who wins, we will either have a black president or a female vice president. That is amazing. I never thought in my lifetime that we would actually have either scenario happen! No matter what your views are, don't you think, if you really stop to think about it, what a totally amazing time this is?

But isn't it the peoples right to question a person's qualifications that happin to be running for the VP position.Alot of people call Bush and other male politicans a "dick" opposed to a "cunt",you won't hear anything about that,equality just so happins to be non existent in reality.From what i've seen most people are simply hating on her because of her hate speeches,verbal attacks,lies,and lack of honest communication,none of those playing the gender card at all.Also hows does rap music play into hate?that's just plain old stupid and bias,like country's in conflict and wars have nothing to do with violence.I'm sure sure The Phelps family,KKK,Hitler,Ted Bundy,and Ed Gein were huge 50 Cent fans,in fact they were mainly Christian or Catholics,and knowing REAL history,religion has always played a violent role more then any other influence.So save that bullshit.

one Guinness please...extra cold..

I cannot predict who will win the presidential campaign, but I already know who will lose big: all women.

I realized this when I saw a 20-something male student who attends a class in the community college where I teach, wearing a T-shirt that read, "Sarah Palin is a C-." He wore it in public, in broad daylight, and without shame or even consciousness of what he was doing.]

What a ridiculous assumption: that a misguided child wears an offensive t-shirt makes ALL women losers.


[/quote]This encounter shook me right down to my socks.[/quote]

I'm so sure it did. The real question is why you are so upset about the act of a single individual & apply it to all Americans.

[/quote]Most of my adult life has been spent working for civil rights for all Americans, as a lawyer defending constitutional rights and now as a college teacher and director of a nonprofit advocating for the rights of women.[/quote]

Zippidy-doo-dah & good for you. What about the rights of ALL of us? Sorry - but when you get someone with this single-mindedness about injustice for one group, while ignoring the rest, I don't take them seriously.

[/quote]It was the encounter with the young man that woke me up, but there were signs all along the campaign trail. First, with the candidacy of Sen. Hillary Clinton, who won 18 million popular votes from the people of the United States and was ridiculed, marginalized, and put in her place when she wasn't even offered the vice presidency slot.[/quote]

Um...lady, I wouldn't have offered her the VP slot, either, after she'd done her very best to divide the party, & refused to bow out when it was obvious that it would be best if she had. If she'd WANTED that VP post, surely she'd have handled things differently.

[/quote]But the really big attack on women occurred when John McCain selected only the second woman in history to be on a major-party ticket. He chose a governor of a state critical to our energy crisis. She is a very popular governor with an 80-percent approval rate. She was elected on her own merit without previous political ties. She is her own political creation, not the wife, daughter, sister or mistress of a politician.

I thought Americans would be proud of her nomination, whether we agreed or disagreed with her on the issues. Was I in for a shock.[/quote]

Well, we might have been proud, if it weren't for the fact that it was such an obvious grandstand attempt by McCain to counter the Dem's choices of minority candidates by pandering to the woman voter, since Mz Clinton wasn't going to be a viable VP partner for Obama.

[/quote]The sexism that I believed had been eradicated was lurking, like some creature from the black lagoon, just below the surface. Suddenly it erupted and in some unexpected places.[/quote]

Gimme a frikken break! There was no sexism encountered when Hillary was running. Why should it so suddenly raise its ugly head when Palin comes on the scene?

[/quote]Instead of engaging Palin on the issues, critics attacked attributes that are specifically female. It is Hillary's pantsuit drama to the power of 10. Palin's hair, her voice, her motherhood, and her personal hygiene were substituted for substance. That's when it was nice.[/quote]

Oh yeah, I stand corrected. Ppl made fun of Hillary's pantsuits. BFD! They also make fun of Obama's ears & mcCain's age. So what? Is that sexist too? You put yourself out there running for office, you're going to be rated in all sorts of ridiculous areas. Get over it already!

[/quote]The hatred escalated to performers advocating Palin be "gang raped," to suggestions that her husband had had sex with their young daughters, and reports that her Down syndrome child really was that of her teenage daughter. One columnist even called for her to submit to DNA testing to prove her virtue. Smells a little like Salem to me. I was present at an Obama rally at which the mention of Palin's name drew shouts of "stone her."

"Stone her"? How biblical.[/quote]

Like there aren't worse remarks coming from the opposing hate camp. It's part & parcel of the process, folks, esp after the last 8 years of our leaders doing all they can to divide us. I haven't heard any of the Obama camp yelling out "kill her!" "Stone her?" Eh, at least the Dems are trying their best to put off the crazies instead of giving them the mic & letting them spew their hatred during stump speaches like McCain does.

[/quote]All this is at a time when women are regularly being raped as they try to cross the border into the United States; bloody, broken women haunt the emergency rooms of hospitals; and abuse and disrespect for women and girls is rising faster than bank bailouts. That is the atmosphere in which people, including women, choose to attempt to destroy a woman who is a legitimate political leader.[/quote]

Yes, terrible things happen to women, & children, & MEN, TOO, in case you weren't aware of that. We do need to address ALL of these crimes, & give the ppl responsible for committing them the jail terms & worse that they truly deserve. Don't try to make everything a "woman's issue" with me, cuz there's far more going on than that.

[/quote]Agreement on issues is not required, but Palin merits respect.[/quote]

Respect is earned. She will have a tough time earning my respect by avoiding the issues, by inciting ppl to violent behavior, by using misdirection to hide her lack of knowledge in any of the issues we face as a nation, or by lying about her opponents.

[/quote]It is dismaying that misogyny and sexism are so excessively marbleized into our daily interactions that some of us cannot even recognize their existence when confronted with it or when staring at it directly in the mirror.[/quote]

Excuse me. Are you accusing me of something?

[/quote]It is my fervent hope that those who purport to be intellectuals begin to engage in argument and not resort to their baser selves or the easy exercise of personal and biology-based attacks.

Mockery and vilification of women such as Palin should become just as taboo as race-based slams. Until then, women are the real losers.[/quote][/quote]

It is my fervent hope that whoever wins this election can do so without using hate or fear to do so. Those who cannot deserve our pity & vilification.

As long as you're making all of this a "woman's issue" you are making all women "losers."

Clearly I would not support McCain over the abortion issue, since i believe in choice, but with reasonable restrictions.

Government spending?

Maybe you forgot that the Democrats are running congress?

I would say that right now, congress is effectively gridlocked when it comes to partisan politics, and on a runaway pillage and loot the american taxpayer train when it comes to the sleaze that has infested both sides.

What you completely failed to mention with your congress being run by democrats blanket statement, is that the democrats only have a narrow margin of majority, and that there are enough corrupt politicians on both sides of the asile to negate that margin; and completely missed that republicans had the majority in congress, white house, and the supreme court for the previous 6 years. There's no excuse for the outrageous spending, wars, corporate welfare, and deregulation that happened from 2000-2006.

But, remember how great Clinton was for the economy?

Oh wait... he had a Republican congress.

You mean the "do nothing" congress? I remember that they gridlocked clinton at every turn, and instead of doing their jobs, they spent 2+ years and $50Mil of taxpayer money to investigate a blowjob. Yet, we've trapped in two unnecessary wars right now because of outright lies and a campaign of misinformation that have cost of 4000 american soldier their lives and an erosion of civil rights that would have been unheard of 10 years ago.

Republicans are almost always better for the economy. Democrats believe the government is a business. It isn't. It is a bureaucracy that sucks money away from those who really create wealth and jobs. The government does not "create" new wealth. How then does the economy grow under a bloated government and fewer incentives for the private sector? It won't happen.

I believe you are referring to the party principles, democrats for centralized government, and republicans for diminished government. In case you haven't noticed, actions speak louder than words, and the republicans abondoned those principles long ago. Look at how much the government grew during Reagan, and now Bush2. Look at the S&L scandal of Bush1. The current administration has spent so much money and grown the war departments (CIA, NSA, Pentagon)... so much that the USA now spends more on the military than the entire sum of all other industrialized countries in the world.

Spreading the wealth seems like a good idea to poor people who refuse to work their way up on their own efforts. "I'm jealous of people who are more successful than I am, but I just don't want to do what is necessary to get there myself honestly."

Now that's just a fox news talking point. There are millions of hard working americans who are being kicked down at every possible point. I'm struggling, and have been for years. What happened to collective bargaining? CEO's can pay much better pay and benefits and enrich the middle class, and still live in mansions, but the bottom line at some point became an obsession instead of a goal.

Instead of running a company with well paid and happy employees, that provides a good quality service or goods, these CEO's have taken to paying crappy wages, sub-standard benefits, outsourcing jobs foreign countries, buying cheap parts and supplies from foreign countries, making huge personal gains, while Joe America is struggling to make his mortgage payment. If he don't like it, a foreigner or young kid out of college will gladly do his job for half.

You blame Joe. I blame his CEO.

So, let's take it from those who already have it.

Brilliant.

No, but let's stop the profiteering. We need regulations (that used to be in place, for damn good reasons), and we need collective bargaining.

That is just as brilliant as Obama's buddies in ACORN who harass and threaten banks into giving loans to people who are not qualified for it. Why? Cause they are poor people. Poor things. If they just got a loan to own their own house, things would change.

Yeah, for the worse.

ACORN has little to do with banks and loans, if anything. They operate on a commission basis for voting registrations. Their logic is flawed form the beginning and it's no mystery why they have "salespeople" who are now in hot water for breaking the rules, in order to make a few extra bucks. And they will have to deal with the ramifications of that. Roping Obama into it is a bit unfair and disingenuous, considering that for the few bad apples that they've had, they still have registered tens of thousands of people to vote legally.

The housing market is what has gotten us into the most trouble.

People usually live the way they do for a reason. They choose to. Now, the housing market has crashed, helping devastate the economy, because Democrats who love programs like Freddie and Fannie, have helped coax banks into giving loans to people who don't know how to manage their finances.

All that deregulation was done throughout the 90s and early 2000's, and who did you say ran congress that whole time? McCain even had a very heavy hand in that deregulation.

BTW. I lost my house in 2002. I worked my ass off and bought well below what they wanted to give me. And guess what- My mortgage was double what they said it would be (no ARM either, I went with fixed). Bottom line was that I was fired immediately after 9-11 and the tech industry imploded. No (decent) work to be found for years. I worked my ass off in 3 jobs at one point trying to save my house, and the mortgage company... "pay up or GTFO", not willing to work with me or refinance or anything, "talk to the hand"... It's no wonder their great business model failed.

And still today I don't make what I used to, and I honestly thought I was underpaid then...

But getting back to the point, these mortgage companies had a huge scam going, and they preyed on folks who were "financially illiterate". They could have never wrote up the amount of loans and traded them off to the banks if not for ignorant buyers.

Find me anywhere in the world that socialism or communism or any form of Marxism, has realized a better life for it's people than what is available here.

Socialism itself is a factor in almost every country in the world. Sweden, New Zealand, and Denmark are all heavily socialized, and also can lay claim to having the highest ranking of happiness among the people in the world.

Socialist policies are also in play here - Public schools, Public Libraries, Roads, etc.. Right now the big problem is that with our current form of deregulated capitalism, the risks are socialized (lookup bailouts), while the rewards are capitalized. So we, the taxpayers end up with all the bills, and a select few are hording all the profits.

You ever work for a corporation that had a central cafeteria? Where a full hot lunch is literally $2.25. That's even a form of socialism. I think that socialism and nationalism are equal necessities as much as capitalism and freedom.

As to attacking Palin.

No one said not to attack her views. It is the slimy personal assaults that are unacceptable. Using the "C" word is attacking her as a female, not on issues.

I've yet to see any broadcasters call her that.

And I was incensed at how Hillary was treated by Obama's people.

But not that the republicans dished out equal (if not worse) attacks on her?

It is willing political blindness, if someone cannot see how much more venemous and PERSONAL the assaults on Palin are, compared with any of the others.

Or just that because you support her, that your perspective is biased into being victimized, while not realizing that the same level of attacks have happened to Hillary, Michelle Obama, etc...

Justify it all you want.

It is classless and slimy and completely politically based, and beneath a person of good values.

Nobody has control of individuals on youtube, but I personally think the media has every right to question her ability to do the job, her record, her choices in life, and everything else that's fair game in politics, which, face it, after what the right wing did to (both) Clinton's and Kerry, doesn't
really leave much out.

I am very concerned with someone as liberal as Obama is, particularly with his associations to radical America haters, but even still, I can separate that, when looking for his redeeming qualities.

I can despise Obama's socialist vision, without making personal assaults on him and especially, his family.

And I can despise Palin's facist views and religious extremisms without attacking HER personally.

Som news agencies have actually asked for paternity testing on her child with down syndrome, because someone questioned whether it was possible the child was really her daughter's and that the governor was pretending it was hers, I guess, to save face or something.

Because there were pictures and a chain of events that suggested that was more likely the case. It's really not a provable circumstance, but does pose legitimate questions regarding her positions and ability to lead the country (assuming mccain will drop dead within 4 years), when she can't even manage her own household. And I think the fact that her daughter is currently pregnant kinda hit the same target. I haven't heard this accusation in the mainstream media since she was first nominated, so I have to wonder why you are repeating it now, as if it happened yesterday?

The bottom line for me is that I've had enough of cronyism, Bush's wars, McCain's partisan attacks (and yes, his campaign has been far more seething and venomous than Obama's), the current republican policies as a whole. I was a republican back in 2000, and bailed as an independent when I realized that the party no longer stood for anything it said it did.

I also realized that politicians are almost ALL greedy opportunists that no longer serve the people, but themselves and the special interests that obligate and support them.

I was never a fan of Obama's and didn't intend to vote for him. I've stated that in other posts, however, I personally think McCain is a far worse candidate on every level. I don't care about abortion, immigration, or guns. None of that is going to change. I care about fiscal responsibility, foreign policy, trade, and the environment. I see a total McCain fail on all four of those fronts. With Obama, at least were left with a "maybe" instead of certain failure. I'm not voting FOR obama, I'm vothing AGAINST McCain.

What the daughter is going thru has no bearing on Palin herself. At some point the daughter makes her own choices. You raise your children the best that you can and hope they make the best decision for themselves. THat has NO bearing on your child raising! I am not a supporter for the McCain/Palin ticket....but I think it is deplorable to bring her daughter into a discussion on politics! The fact that she is giving her support to her daughter is commendable in my eyes.

Some women (my mother included) would wash their hands of problem children (put my sister into a foster home). That is downright dispicable. No matter what, you love your child.

Leave the kids alone in this debate!