I feel like some writers have been reading my blog. Ha! Today it is Cal Thomas writing about the election. His article begins with thoughts about undecided voters--that being undecided at this point should be nearly impossible if you've been paying attention at all and that if you haven't you shouldn't vote. I won't include the whole article, since I just did that. But I will quote 4 paragraphs for you:
[on the last debate]
"Why didn't McCain challenge Obama's promise to cut taxes for the middle class? As Jack Kemp and Peter Ferrara wrote in Wednesday's Wall Stret Journal, 20 percent of the middle class pay only 4.4 percent of all federal income taxes, while the bottom 40 percent of earners pay no taxes at all.
To say that only "the rich" should pay more and that those who pay little or no taxes should get a check to make things "fair" is George McGovern redistributionism, even socialism. That economic model was soundly rejected in 1972 and in subsequent elections.
McCain should propose ways to allow more people to become rich. We should reject Obama's plan to penalize those who have worked hard to become well-off. That's real fairness.
Individual initiative, risk-taking, an entrepreneurial spirit and optimism are what built and sustained America through many challenges over the last 232 years. Government can't produce those qualities in any of us. We must produce and renew them in ourselves."
Mr. Thomas also questions why Tom Brokaw didn't ask tougher questions during the debate, including questions about Senator Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers. I've read some debate that Senator Obama's association with Bill Ayers is not close enough anymore to really be concerned about. Excuse me, but just having someone who is anti-America with a terrorist background (Ayers) think a candidate (Obama) is a good choice for our next president is red-flag enough for me.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
"Just the Facts. . ."
This article was in the Knoxville News Sentinel the morning after my last blog. As I read it, I thought, "Everyone needs to read this article." I'm not a huge fan of this paper, but this article gets my seal of approval.
Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time"
Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on election day, just a few weeks from now.
Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.
The current financial crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain--which is astonishing in view of which man and which party had the most to do with bringing on the crisis.
It raises the question: "Do facts matter? Or is Obama's rhetoric and the media's spin enough to make facts irrelevant?"
Fact Number One: It was liberal Democrats, led by Sen. Christopher Dodd and US Rep Barney Frank, who for years--including the present year--denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.
It was Dodd, Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
It was liberal Democrats, again led by Dodd and Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today's financial crisis.
Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the president. So did Bush's secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.
Yet, today, what are we hearing? That is was the Bush administration's "right-wing ideology" of "deregulation" that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?
We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then-Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn't.
Is that the free market? Or do facts matter?
Then there is the question of being against the greed of CEOs and for "the people." Franklin Raines made $90 million while he was head of Fannie Mae and mismanaging that institution into crisis.
Who in Congress defended Raines? Liberal Democrats, including Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus, at least one of who referred to the "lynching" of Raines, as if it was racist to hold him to the same standard as white CEOs.
Even after he was deposed as head of Fannie Mae, Raines was consulted this year by the Obama campaign for his advice on housing.
The tie between Obama and Raines is not all one-way. Obama has been the second-largest recepient of Fannie Mae's financial contributions, right after Dodd.
But ties between Obama and Raines? Not if you read the mainstream media.
Facts don't matter much politically if they are not reported.
The media are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don't seem to know what to counterattack. They deserve to lose.
But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America."
If you're thinking this article is just racism, let me point out that the author himself is black. If you would like to know more about the terrorist association or the pastor/mentor who causes great concern, research Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. If you are wondering why you've never heard anything about the dangerous side of Senator Obama, I encourage you to get away from the mainstream media. On CNN tune into Glenn Beck and on FoxNews tune into Hannity & Colmes and the O'Reilly Factor. You may amazed at what you haven't heard.
"Do facts matter in presidential race?" By Thomas Sowell
Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time"
Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on election day, just a few weeks from now.
Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.
The current financial crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain--which is astonishing in view of which man and which party had the most to do with bringing on the crisis.
It raises the question: "Do facts matter? Or is Obama's rhetoric and the media's spin enough to make facts irrelevant?"
Fact Number One: It was liberal Democrats, led by Sen. Christopher Dodd and US Rep Barney Frank, who for years--including the present year--denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.
It was Dodd, Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
It was liberal Democrats, again led by Dodd and Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today's financial crisis.
Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the president. So did Bush's secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.
Yet, today, what are we hearing? That is was the Bush administration's "right-wing ideology" of "deregulation" that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?
We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then-Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn't.
Is that the free market? Or do facts matter?
Then there is the question of being against the greed of CEOs and for "the people." Franklin Raines made $90 million while he was head of Fannie Mae and mismanaging that institution into crisis.
Who in Congress defended Raines? Liberal Democrats, including Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus, at least one of who referred to the "lynching" of Raines, as if it was racist to hold him to the same standard as white CEOs.
Even after he was deposed as head of Fannie Mae, Raines was consulted this year by the Obama campaign for his advice on housing.
The tie between Obama and Raines is not all one-way. Obama has been the second-largest recepient of Fannie Mae's financial contributions, right after Dodd.
But ties between Obama and Raines? Not if you read the mainstream media.
Facts don't matter much politically if they are not reported.
The media are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don't seem to know what to counterattack. They deserve to lose.
But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America."
If you're thinking this article is just racism, let me point out that the author himself is black. If you would like to know more about the terrorist association or the pastor/mentor who causes great concern, research Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. If you are wondering why you've never heard anything about the dangerous side of Senator Obama, I encourage you to get away from the mainstream media. On CNN tune into Glenn Beck and on FoxNews tune into Hannity & Colmes and the O'Reilly Factor. You may amazed at what you haven't heard.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
More Election Thoughts
I keep hearing these arguments to vote for Senator Obama: 1) "McCain's one heart attack away from death." 2) "Palin's one heartbeat away from the presidency." Both arguments imply we don't know how long Senator McCain will live, so we shouldn't elect him. Did I miss something?? Is Senator Obama immortal? Is he immune to all cancer, all disease? Does he never get sick? Do accidents not harm him? If so, he should be in a comic book, not the White House.
This election gives me a feeling that isn't really anxiety or fear. It's a call to pray for this country like never before. Obviously Americans want change; but do we realize that responsibility belongs to us as well as the leadership? I look at signs promoting "Obama for Change" and wonder if people realize just how much change there would be? A change from the ideas of the American dream (I'll work hard for that) to borderline socialism (the government will provide it for me)--a move away from being responsible for yourself. I'm so tired of watching people put their hope in a man as if he's more than a man. You could say he's a man successfully climbing the political career ladder and shaking things up on the way. . . or you could see him as a man who hasn't stayed in one place long enough to have the accomplishments to back his words, a man trying to fix everything, including what isn't broken. I didn't set out to write an anti-Obama blog. I just challenge us all to make a decision not based on age, charisma or flashy words.
My prayers are not "please let McCain win," though I do pray for him, Governor Palin and President Bush. My prayer is for people to make a decision that is for the good of America and that no matter what happens on November 4th, American people will support America, not tear it down--that Christians will be bold in their lives and live the difference we need.
I guess the election just baffles me. The things we apparently cling to are surprising. 'McCain's too old and Palin's too young'--people seem to cling to that. 'Obama has relationships with known domestic terrorists, has advisors in his campaign that were part of the economic fall, has sat in the congregation of a man who is anti-American and not afraid to curse it (I mean, shout it) from the pulpit, has no military experience, has spent most of his national political career campaigning and not working. . . '--people just seem to think that those aren't fair arguments. Call me crazy, but it concerns me.
'Undecided voters'. . . a term I don't understand. With the gazillion of news channels (rough estimate :), talk radio, and the internet, there is no reason to not be informed. And to vote uninformed is just irresponsible. You may be reading this and thinking that I take this all too seriously. To you I would say, "This is serious, this is real, this is history in the making. Don't take it lightly."
This election gives me a feeling that isn't really anxiety or fear. It's a call to pray for this country like never before. Obviously Americans want change; but do we realize that responsibility belongs to us as well as the leadership? I look at signs promoting "Obama for Change" and wonder if people realize just how much change there would be? A change from the ideas of the American dream (I'll work hard for that) to borderline socialism (the government will provide it for me)--a move away from being responsible for yourself. I'm so tired of watching people put their hope in a man as if he's more than a man. You could say he's a man successfully climbing the political career ladder and shaking things up on the way. . . or you could see him as a man who hasn't stayed in one place long enough to have the accomplishments to back his words, a man trying to fix everything, including what isn't broken. I didn't set out to write an anti-Obama blog. I just challenge us all to make a decision not based on age, charisma or flashy words.
My prayers are not "please let McCain win," though I do pray for him, Governor Palin and President Bush. My prayer is for people to make a decision that is for the good of America and that no matter what happens on November 4th, American people will support America, not tear it down--that Christians will be bold in their lives and live the difference we need.
I guess the election just baffles me. The things we apparently cling to are surprising. 'McCain's too old and Palin's too young'--people seem to cling to that. 'Obama has relationships with known domestic terrorists, has advisors in his campaign that were part of the economic fall, has sat in the congregation of a man who is anti-American and not afraid to curse it (I mean, shout it) from the pulpit, has no military experience, has spent most of his national political career campaigning and not working. . . '--people just seem to think that those aren't fair arguments. Call me crazy, but it concerns me.
'Undecided voters'. . . a term I don't understand. With the gazillion of news channels (rough estimate :), talk radio, and the internet, there is no reason to not be informed. And to vote uninformed is just irresponsible. You may be reading this and thinking that I take this all too seriously. To you I would say, "This is serious, this is real, this is history in the making. Don't take it lightly."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)