2008 Presidential Elections

[Aplomb]

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...112.guest.html

Will Obama Dump Biden Off the Ticket?

excerpt:

RUSH: That's an interesting perspective you've got out there, Chris. I have to applaud you for that. Had he chosen Hillary, yeah, we'd have gotten Lieberman or somebody. You know what I think is funny? All these people talk about how long is it going to be before McCain has to dump her. You know, they're thinking about at the Obama campaign, "We gotta get Hillary on here somehow. We gotta." Believe me, when CNN starts asking people about it, a lot of other people are thinking about it besides CNN.

[Aplomb]

It was a good night at the RNC. McCain did a good job, even though giving speeches is not his thing. I do think he appealed to middle America and didn't look like a copy of President Bush, due to so much focus on his military involvement and heroic service. One of his roar of applause came when he said we are going to drill. He said a lot about $-- Obama would tax but he would not; and he mentioned people by name and their struggles from those states that the team needs to pick up. And then, of course, Governor Sarah Palin was there to be pointed out by every speaker, and we all just absolutely love her for all of the reasons we've stated already. I think his speech served it's purpose in showing us who he is and that he understands our struggles and that he will fight and win against Washington. Cindy is a wonderful person and I will be proud to have her as our First Lady. She has selflessly done so much for others and that was really very touching. An unsung hero. We LOOK soooo good! Anybody who is not totally committed to Obama will have a difficult time not seriously considering McCain-Palin 2008. That's my 2 cents.

[Aplomb]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ce_speech.html

September 04, 2008 John McCain's Acceptance Speech

John McCain
St. Paul, Minnesota


Thank you all very much. Tonight, I have a privilege given few Americans -- the privilege of accepting our party's nomination for President of the United States. And I accept it with gratitude, humility and confidence.


In my life, no success has come without a good fight, and this nomination wasn't any different. That's a tribute to the candidates who opposed me and their supporters.



They're leaders of great ability, who love our country, and wished to lead it to better days. Their support is an honor I won't forget.



I'm grateful to the President for leading us in those dark days following the worst attack on American soil in our history, and keeping us safe from another attack many thought was inevitable; and to the First Lady, Laura Bush, a model of grace and kindness in public and in private. And I'm grateful to the 41st President and his bride of 63 years, and for their outstanding example of honorable service to our country.


As always, I'm indebted to my wife, Cindy, and my seven children. The pleasures of family life can seem like a brief holiday from the crowded calendar of our nation's business. But I have treasured them all the more, and can't imagine a life without the happiness you give me. Cindy said a lot of nice things about me tonight. But, in truth, she's more my inspiration than I am hers. Her concern for those less blessed than we are -- victims of land mines, children born in poverty and with birth defects -- shows the measure of her humanity. I know she will make a great First Lady.


When I was growing up, my father was often at sea, and the job of raising my brother, sister and me would fall to my mother alone. Roberta McCain gave us her love of life, her deep interest in the world, her strength, and her belief we are all meant to use our opportunities to make ourselves useful to our country. I wouldn't be here tonight but for the strength of her character.


My heartfelt thanks to all of you, who helped me win this nomination, and stood by me when the odds were long. I won't let you down. To Americans who have yet to decide who to vote for, thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to win your trust. I intend to earn it.


Finally, a word to Senator Obama and his supporters. We'll go at it over the next two months. That's the nature of these contests, and there are big differences between us. But you have my respect and admiration. Despite our differences, much more unites us than divides us. We are fellow Americans, an association that means more to me than any other. We're dedicated to the proposition that all people are created equal and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights. No country ever had a greater cause than that. And I wouldn't be an American worthy of the name if I didn't honor Senator Obama and his supporters for their achievement.


But let there be no doubt, my friends, we're going to win this election. And after we've won, we're going to reach out our hand to any willing patriot, make this government start working for you again, and get this country back on the road to prosperity and peace.


These are tough times for many of you. You're worried about keeping your job or finding a new one, and are struggling to put food on the table and stay in your home.



All you ever asked of government is to stand on your side, not in your way. And that's just what I intend to do: stand on your side and fight for your future.


And I've found just the right partner to help me shake up Washington, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. She has executive experience and a real record of accomplishment.



She's tackled tough problems like energy independence and corruption. She's balanced a budget, cut taxes, and taken on the special interests. She's reached across the aisle and asked Republicans, Democrats and Independents to serve in her administration.



She's the mother of five children. She's helped run a small business, worked with her hands and knows what it's like to worry about mortgage payments and health care and the cost of gasoline and groceries.


She knows where she comes from and she knows who she works for. She stands up for what's right, and she doesn't let anyone tell her to sit down. I'm very proud to have introduced our next Vice President to the country. But I can't wait until I introduce her to Washington. And let me offer an advance warning to the old, big spending, do nothing, me first, country second Washington crowd: change is coming.


I'm not in the habit of breaking promises to my country and neither is Governor Palin. And when we tell you we're going to change Washington, and stop leaving our country's problems for some unluckier generation to fix, you can count on it. We've got a record of doing just that, and the strength, experience, judgment and backbone to keep our word to you.


You know, I've been called a maverick; someone who marches to the beat of his own drum. Sometimes it's meant as a compliment and sometimes it's not. What it really means is I understand who I work for. I don't work for a party. I don't work for a special interest. I don't work for myself. I work for you.


I've fought corruption, and it didn't matter if the culprits were Democrats or Republicans. They violated their public trust, and had to be held accountable. I've fought big spenders in both parties, who waste your money on things you neither need nor want, while you struggle to buy groceries, fill your gas tank and make your mortgage payment. I've fought to get million dollar checks out of our elections. I've fought lobbyists who stole from Indian tribes. I fought crooked deals in the Pentagon. I fought tobacco companies and trial lawyers, drug companies and union bosses.


I fought for the right strategy and more troops in Iraq, when it wasn't a popular thing to do. And when the pundits said my campaign was finished, I said I'd rather lose an election than see my country lose a war.


Thanks to the leadership of a brilliant general, David Petreaus, and the brave men and women he has the honor to command, that strategy succeeded and rescued us from a defeat that would have demoralized our military, risked a wider war and threatened the security of all Americans.


I don't mind a good fight. For reasons known only to God, I've had quite a few tough ones in my life. But I learned an important lesson along the way. In the end, it matters less that you can fight. What you fight for is the real test.


I fight for Americans. I fight for you. I fight for Bill and Sue Nebe from Farmington Hills, Michigan, who lost their real estate investments in the bad housing market. Bill got a temporary job after he was out of work for seven months. Sue works three jobs to help pay the bills.


I fight for Jake and Toni Wimmer of Franklin County, Pennsylvania. Jake works on a loading dock; coaches Little League, and raises money for the mentally and physically disabled. Toni is a schoolteacher, working toward her Master's Degree. They have two sons, the youngest, Luke, has been diagnosed with autism. Their lives should matter to the people they elect to office. They matter to me.


I fight for the family of Matthew Stanley of Wolfboro, New Hampshire, who died serving our country in Iraq. I wear his bracelet and think of him every day. I intend to honor their sacrifice by making sure the country their son loved so well and never returned to, remains safe from its enemies.


I fight to restore the pride and principles of our party. We were elected to change Washington, and we let Washington change us. We lost the trust of the American people when some Republicans gave in to the temptations of corruption. We lost their trust when rather than reform government, both parties made it bigger. We lost their trust when instead of freeing ourselves from a dangerous dependence on foreign oil, both parties and Senator Obama passed another corporate welfare bill for oil companies. We lost their trust, when we valued our power over our principles.


We're going to change that. We're going to recover the people's trust by standing up again for the values Americans admire. The party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan is going to get back to basics.


We believe everyone has something to contribute and deserves the opportunity to reach their God-given potential from the boy whose descendents arrived on the Mayflower to the Latina daughter of migrant workers. We're all God's children and we're all Americans.


We believe in low taxes; spending discipline, and open markets. We believe in rewarding hard work and risk takers and letting people keep the fruits of their labor.


We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don't legislate from the bench. We believe in the values of families, neighborhoods and communities.


We believe in a government that unleashes the creativity and initiative of Americans.



Government that doesn't make your choices for you, but works to make sure you have more choices to make for yourself.


I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it.


My tax cuts will create jobs. His tax increases will eliminate them. My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor.


Keeping taxes low helps small businesses grow and create new jobs. Cutting the second highest business tax rate in the world will help American companies compete and keep jobs from moving overseas. Doubling the child tax exemption from $3500 to $7000 will improve the lives of millions of American families. Reducing government spending and getting rid of failed programs will let you keep more of your own money to save, spend and invest as you see fit. Opening new markets and preparing workers to compete in the world economy is essential to our future prosperity.


I know some of you have been left behind in the changing economy and it often seems your government hasn't even noticed. Government assistance for unemployed workers was designed for the economy of the 1950s. That's going to change on my watch. My opponent promises to bring back old jobs by wishing away the global economy. We're going to help workers who've lost a job that won't come back, find a new one that won't go away.


We will prepare them for the jobs of today. We will use our community colleges to help train people for new opportunities in their communities. For workers in industries that have been hard hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one while they receive retraining that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage.


Education is the civil rights issue of this century. Equal access to public education has been gained. But what is the value of access to a failing school? We need to shake up failed school bureaucracies with competition, empower parents with choice, remove barriers to qualified instructors, attract and reward good teachers, and help bad teachers find another line of work.


When a public school fails to meet its obligations to students, parents deserve a choice in the education of their children. And I intend to give it to them. Some may choose a better public school. Some may choose a private one. Many will choose a charter school. But they will have that choice and their children will have that opportunity.


Senator Obama wants our schools to answer to unions and entrenched bureaucracies. I want schools to answer to parents and students. And when I'm President, they will.


My fellow Americans, when I'm President, we're going to embark on the most ambitious national project in decades. We are going to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much. We will attack the problem on every front. We will produce more energy at home. We will drill new wells offshore, and we'll drill them now. We will build more nuclear power plants. We will develop clean coal technology.



We will increase the use of wind, tide, solar and natural gas. We will encourage the development and use of flex fuel, hybrid and electric automobiles.


Senator Obama thinks we can achieve energy independence without more drilling and without more nuclear power. But Americans know better than that. We must use all resources and develop all technologies necessary to rescue our economy from the damage caused by rising oil prices and to restore the health of our planet. It's an ambitious plan, but Americans are ambitious by nature, and we have faced greater challenges. It's time for us to show the world again how Americans lead.


This great national cause will create millions of new jobs, many in industries that will be the engine of our future prosperity; jobs that will be there when your children enter the workforce.


Today, the prospect of a better world remains within our reach. But we must see the threats to peace and liberty in our time clearly and face them, as Americans before us did, with confidence, wisdom and resolve.


We have dealt a serious blow to al Qaeda in recent years. But they are not defeated, and they'll strike us again if they can. Iran remains the chief state sponsor of terrorism and on the path to acquiring nuclear weapons. Russia's leaders, rich with oil wealth and corrupt with power, have rejected democratic ideals and the obligations of a responsible power. They invaded a small, democratic neighbor to gain more control over the world's oil supply, intimidate other neighbors, and further their ambitions of reassembling the Russian empire. And the brave people of Georgia need our solidarity and prayers. As President I will work to establish good relations with Russia so we need not fear a return of the Cold War. But we can't turn a blind eye to aggression and international lawlessness that threatens the peace and stability of the world and the security of the American people.


We face many threats in this dangerous world, but I'm not afraid of them. I'm prepared for them. I know how the military works, what it can do, what it can do better, and what it should not do. I know how the world works. I know the good and the evil in it.



I know how to work with leaders who share our dreams of a freer, safer and more prosperous world, and how to stand up to those who don't. I know how to secure the peace.


When I was five years old, a car pulled up in front of our house. A Navy officer rolled down the window, and shouted at my father that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor. I rarely saw my father again for four years. My grandfather came home from that same war exhausted from the burdens he had borne, and died the next day. In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home with me. I hate war. It is terrible beyond imagination.


I'm running for President to keep the country I love safe, and prevent other families from risking their loved ones in war as my family has. I will draw on all my experience with the world and its leaders, and all the tools at our disposal -- diplomatic, economic, military and the power of our ideals -- to build the foundations for a stable and enduring peace.


In America, we change things that need to be changed. Each generation makes its contribution to our greatness. The work that is ours to do is plainly before us. We don't need to search for it.


We need to change the way government does almost everything: from the way we protect our security to the way we compete in the world economy; from the way we respond to disasters to the way we fuel our transportation network; from the way we train our workers to the way we educate our children. All these functions of government were designed before the rise of the global economy, the information technology revolution and the end of the Cold War. We have to catch up to history, and we have to change the way we do business in Washington.


The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn't a cause, it's a symptom. It's what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you.


Again and again, I've worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That's how I will govern as President. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. I have that record and the scars to prove it.



Senator Obama does not.


Instead of rejecting good ideas because we didn't think of them first, let's use the best ideas from both sides. Instead of fighting over who gets the credit, let's try sharing it.



This amazing country can do anything we put our minds to. I will ask Democrats and Independents to serve with me. And my administration will set a new standard for transparency and accountability.


We're going to finally start getting things done for the people who are counting on us, and I won't care who gets the credit.


I've been an imperfect servant of my country for many years. But I have been her servant first, last and always. And I've never lived a day, in good times or bad, that I didn't thank God for the privilege.


Long ago, something unusual happened to me that taught me the most valuable lesson of my life. I was blessed by misfortune. I mean that sincerely. I was blessed because I served in the company of heroes, and I witnessed a thousand acts of courage, compassion and love.


On an October morning, in the Gulf of Tonkin, I prepared for my 23rd mission over North Vietnam. I hadn't any worry I wouldn't come back safe and sound. I thought I was tougher than anyone. I was pretty independent then, too. I liked to bend a few rules, and pick a few fights for the fun of it. But I did it for my own pleasure; my own pride. I didn't think there was a cause more important than me.


Then I found myself falling toward the middle of a small lake in the city of Hanoi, with two broken arms, a broken leg, and an angry crowd waiting to greet me. I was dumped in a dark cell, and left to die. I didn't feel so tough anymore. When they discovered my father was an admiral, they took me to a hospital. They couldn't set my bones properly, so they just slapped a cast on me. When I didn't get better, and was down to about a hundred pounds, they put me in a cell with two other Americans. I couldn't do anything. I couldn't even feed myself. They did it for me. I was beginning to learn the limits of my selfish independence. Those men saved my life.


I was in solitary confinement when my captors offered to release me. I knew why. If I went home, they would use it as propaganda to demoralize my fellow prisoners. Our Code said we could only go home in the order of our capture, and there were men who had been shot down before me. I thought about it, though. I wasn't in great shape, and I missed everything about America. But I turned it down.


A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I'd been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I'd been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.


When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn't know how I could face my fellow prisoners. The good man in the cell next door, my friend, Bob Craner, saved me. Through taps on a wall he told me I had fought as hard as I could. No man can always stand alone. And then he told me to get back up and fight again for our country and for the men I had the honor to serve with. Because every day they fought for me.


I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else's. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn't my own man anymore. I was my country's.


I'm not running for president because I think I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God.


If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you're disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.


I'm going to fight for my cause every day as your President. I'm going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank Him: that I'm an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me.



Fight with me.


Fight for what's right for our country.


Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.


Fight for our children's future.


Fight for justice and opportunity for all.


Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.


Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America.


Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We're Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.


Thank you, and God Bless you.

John McCain, a U.S. Senator from Arizona, is the Republican presidential nominee.

[samizdat]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09...an-convention/

another good speech (knockout)

Doubling the child tax exemption from $3,500 to $7,000 will improve the lives of millions of American families

btw- thank wallis for your analysis. I also agree with your gripe or suggestion that candidates should plan propose and line up a cabinet.

Many- way too many voters choose for the cute candidate, oprah's choice or the unions. I symathize more with the candidates this year. They know they are sacrificing to serve a dumbed down gramcshiized US- a fifth of American adults use drugs- higher percentages been to jail-done time- top layers- commie-socialist intelligentsia- favorite national sport- fornication/adultery lust- milliones involved heavily in satanic sect- wierd- "christian" sects that claim dominion over govt. Militant muslim camps (spetsnaz-puppies) and the shameful abortion war- as if overturning roe-doe is a factor- they have pills- they have have souls that get thrills
drilling holes in babies heads?? pluralism is a difficult concept. there is no unity or e pluribus unum when the pluribus is blind- children of darkness.

If- and that's a big if- an election and a victory occurs- the candidates must- enter tain and educate the us public.

Meanwhile, putin will likely reveal credible intell that Israel and the us war-mongers were planning a surprise attack on iran using georgian airfields.

[Toad]

Obama had the most viewers ever w/ 38 million...NOT!

Sarah Palin did with more than 40 million.

http://www.thrfeed.com/2008/09/palin-ratings-s.html

...

Also, PBS just chimed in to say 3.2 million watched on their network, which brings Palin's total viewership on ad-supported and public airwaves to more than 40 million.

Read all of THR's convention coverage

But then to be fair to compare apples to apples, you'd have to add in Obama's PBS viewership, 3.5 mil, flipping it yet again.

http://tvdecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2...obamas-speech/

PBS estimated that it averaged 3.5 million viewers between 8 and 11 p.m.

Which really doesn't matter. What we're seeing is simply a US audience FINALLY engaged and energized by the upcoming election. This is good for the Nation as a whole.

I still think the Palin choice was an excellent political chess move by McCain. It's completely thrown the Dem's off balance and captured the attention of the middle grounders who can make or break either side.

[Aplomb]

Yes, Toad, but then again, as far as viewing goes, Obama was on 10 networks while Palin was only on 6. And she topped Biden's night.

I don't ever remember so many people being so intent on watching the election coverage, either. This is very good for our nation. Yes indeed.

[Brykovian]

(In reply to Aplombs comment #420 ...)

Only problem with that, Aplomb is that (using the same site) McCain hasn't voted on anything since April ... so, I'm guessing that will be a bad point for the McCain campaign to continue raising.

Of course, the "present" votes were while Obama was in the IL State Senate ... and he was actually there for the votes, but didn't want to pick a side.

btw, Aplomb -- thanks for the link to that site ... it's a very cool tool to check up on elected reps.

-Bryk

[Aplomb]

Bryk- thanks for pointing that out. I don't know why Giuliani would be making an issue of that present vote record then, other than contrasting the record for what Obama has voted for and against. I'm looking into it for the significance because Giuliani is a no-nonsense guy. He's served in the United States Attorney's Office and prosecuted a number of very high profile cases, not to mention his rep in New York as the Mayor. Feel free to add any insights.

[Aplomb]

Yes, it actually means that we look at what one has voted for and against because that reveals what is important to that Senator and his voting record has verified his leftist views. This is from last year:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ent_obama.html

February 13, 2007 The Ever-'Present' Obama

By Nathan Gonzales

Finally and officially, Barack Obama is running for president. His symbolic announcement, in the Land of Lincoln, called for a new era in politics. Obama downplayed his thin federal experience while championing his record on the state and local level, and he talked about the need to change Washington, set priorities, and "make hard choices."

"What's stopped us is the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics - the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions," Obama said in his announcement speech. But a closer look at the presidential candidate's record in the Illinois Legislature reveals something seemingly contradictory: a number of occasions when Obama avoided making hard choices.


While some conservatives and Republicans surely will harp on what they call his "liberal record," highlighting applicable votes to support their case, it's Obama's history of voting "present" in Springfield - even on some of the most controversial and politically explosive issues of the day - that raises questions that he will need to answer. Voting "present" is one of three options in the Illinois Legislature (along with "yes" and "no"), but it's almost never an option for the occupant of the Oval Office.


We aren't talking about a "present" vote on whether to name a state office building after a deceased state official, but rather about votes that reflect an officeholder's core values.


For example, in 1997, Obama voted "present" on two bills (HB 382 and SB 230) that would have prohibited a procedure often referred to as partial birth abortion. He also voted "present" on SB 71, which lowered the first offense of carrying a concealed weapon from a felony to a misdemeanor and raised the penalty of subsequent offenses.


In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill.


In 2001, Obama voted "present" on two parental notification abortion bills (HB 1900 and SB 562), and he voted "present" on a series of bills (SB 1093, 1094, 1095) that sought to protect a child if it survived a failed abortion. In his book, the Audacity of Hope, on page 132, Obama explained his problems with the "born alive" bills, specifically arguing that they would overturn Roe v. Wade. But he failed to mention that he only felt strongly enough to vote "present" on the bills instead of "no."


And finally in 2001, Obama voted "present" on SB 609, a bill prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares.


If Obama had taken a position for or against these bills, he would have pleased some constituents and alienated others. Instead, the Illinois legislator-turned-U.S. senator and, now, Democratic presidential hopeful essentially took a pass.


Some of these bills may have been "bad. They may have included poison pills or been poorly written, making it impossible for Obama to support them. They may have even been unconstitutional. When I asked the Obama campaign about those votes, they explained that in some cases, the Senator was uncomfortable with only certain parts of the bill, while in other cases, the bills were attempts by Republicans simply to score points.


But even if that were the case, it doesn't explain his votes. The state legislator had an easy solution if the bills were unacceptable to him: he could have voted against them and explained his reasoning.


Because it takes affirmative votes to pass legislation in the Illinois Senate, a "present" vote is tantamount to a "no" vote. A "present" vote is generally used to provide political cover for legislators who don't want to be on the record against a bill that they oppose. Of course, Obama isn't the first or only Illinois state senator to vote "present," but he is the only one running for President of the United States.


While these votes occurred while Obama and the Democrats were in the minority in the Illinois Senate, in the Audacity of Hope (page 130), Obama explained that even as a legislator in the minority, "You must vote yes or no on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just."


Obama's "present" record could hurt him in two very different ways in his bid to win the Democratic presidential nomination and, ultimately, the White House. On one hand, those votes could anger some Democrats, even liberals, because he did not take a strong enough stand on their issues. On the other hand, his votes could simply be portrayed by adversaries as a failure of leadership for not being willing to make a tough decision and stick by it.


Obama is one of the most dynamic and captivating figures in American politics at this time, and he has put together an excellent campaign team. He clearly is a factor in the race for the Democratic nomination in 2008.


But as Democrats - and Americans - are searching for their next leader, the Illinois senator's record, and not just his rhetoric, will be examined under a microscope. As president, Obama will be faced with countless difficult decisions on numerous gray issues, and voting "present" will not be an option. He will need to explain those "present" votes as a member of the Illinois Legislature if he hopes to become America's commander-in-chief.

Nathan L. Gonzales is political editor of The Rothenberg Political Report.

[Toad]

I did like Guiliani's "present" portion of the speech and he was dead on right. As President, you don't have the luxury of just being present. You have to make command decisions, often in tight timeframes. To defer off a decision for a "present" kind of tactic is a disservice to the public you are supposed to be serving and working for.

Having said that, to finger point at Obama for the "present" tactic in the Ill legislature is a little disingenuous, it's a tactic fully embraced by both sides of the aisle. Rather than single him out, he should have just pointed out he's nothing special, doing nothing different than anyone else. Is that really change? No it's not.

[Aplomb]

Check this out:

[Brykovian]

I think Toad nails it ... and it's why Rudi used Obama's IL State record instead of trying to compare US Senate records. Plus, there seemed to be a direct effort to pit the Republican VP nominee against the Democratic Pres nominee ... so, imo, it was more in response to show Obama's dismissing Palin's executive experience as being out of touch with what it means to have to make a call and go with it.

And, just to be clear about things, as a slightly-right-of-center moderate, I am clearly to the left of most people on this site (with the exception of Wallis, perhaps). I would like to see some changes in how government operates -- more bi/non-partisan, more keeping with the interests of the people being represented, etc. -- but I am trying to determine who can actually bring those types of changes while still keeping the important things (national security, economic freedom, etc.) out front.

McCain has been called a RINO because he doesn't always hold to the core Republican ideals. However, what I see in his crossing the isle (even in the case of horrible mis-negotiated results) is an attempt to get *something* rolling that will address issues that need addressing and that will be acceptable to a passing majority. I know that generally ends up in being unacceptable to the consistent conservatives. Still, he does truly seem to be the most "small government" minded of everyone involved (and that includes his running mate).

Obama just simply doesn't have enough legislative background to base any conclusions on. He seems to have become more centrist over the past 6 months -- but I'm sure that's driven by his realization that he has a legitimate shot at becoming President. And some of the bills he *did* work on in the IL State Senate had bi-partisan support. However, the people he associates with truly scare me. His "social justice" and "community organizer" background doesn't move me much either way -- I've known a lot of folks who feel strongly along those lines as a way to help those needing help ... and there are both good and bad people working in those areas. Especially after adding Biden to the ticket, I don't see an Obama Presidency as dragging the country immediately into socialism ... but I see a whole lot of nothing much getting done. And that's not what I want either.

The running mates won't play much in my choosing who to vote for. Both shored up some concerns I had. Nice to see McCain's campaign gain some energy and be able to promote the "maverick" pitch. I'm leaning McCain at this point simply due to the sense that he's proven himself capable of both leading and working with a wide range of folks.

-Bryk

[Aplomb]

Bryk- Thanks for being here and sharing your thoughts. I mean that. Every day is history, but it has never quite seemed like it before as it does at this point in time for me. I've been digging around over this present issue and what appears to be the problem in the look at the votes is that, duh, this is campaign time. So my bad on that posting July 2008. The records better reflect the normal voting practices of the Senators prior to Super Tuesday. That makes more sense because it would make absolutely no sense for Guiliani to make this a proof of Obama's inability to make decisions if one could turn around and use it against McCain; and in fact, the press would be all over McCain right now if it could be done.

[American Patriot]

Obama is wrong for this country on many levels, but the MAIN level is "Socialism". Period.

He should drop out now. America is NOT a socialist country and never will be as long as I'm alive. I'll fight that, and violently if necessary. That said, I don't like "centrist" values in general.

Why not? Because "Centrists" can't make DECISIONS.

You can not, I repeat NOT be a President if you're a "Centrist". You are an AMERICAN FIRST before anything else. This country has a long, long history to which we must live UP TO. A President can NOT abide evil in the world around us, surrounding us and taking away our energy (not oil, but rather this nonsense political correctness CRAP).

We can't fall in the "MIDDLE" when it comes to the Middle East, Israel, Iran obtaining and thus eventually USING nuclear weapons. We can't SIT on the fence when it comes to illegal immigration and MILLIONS of INVADERS taking away from true born citizens and those who naturalized LEGALLY. Those invaders take our money, cost our GOVERNMENT and by default, cost each of us our tax monies.

People that IGNORE the illegal immigration solution - like BOTH McCain and Obama HURT this country.

McCain's speech was .. ."ok". Palin's speech was AWESOME. Obama did a fine speaking job, but his senses are wrong for this country and wrong for me.

I understand American politics better than many of you - and I know from HISTORY that we are a two-party system - which brings me to this point... those who fall "in the middle" on almost all issues are simply as WRONG as the LEFT is wrong 98% of the time.

Wrong thinking has lead this country to where it is lately. Wrong thinking isn't going to get us OUT of this economic problem. It's NOT going to lower oil prices, it won't fix the energy issue, it won't "fix global warming" since that doesn't EXIST, and it sure as HELL ain't gonna give people out of work a JOB when you raise the taxes on businesses.

Wrong thinking is simply WRONG.

The LEFT is WRONG.

Liberalism is a DISEASE.

Liberals are closet Socialists.

Socialists are closet Communists.

If you folks want a real, honest country then you need to pick a fence SIDE to sit on, and get off the post.

You're going to get splinters in your ass otherwise.

[Brykovian]

the press would be all over McCain right now if it could be done.

That's exactly it. The main press has a strong left slant. The main blogs that I read to keep up on this stuff (here, Rantburg, Powerline, etc.) have a strong right slant ... so I'm trying to get info and filter out the slants (or, in some cases, take it into account as part of the context).

For example, with Governor Palin ... I'd love to have a comprehensive and detailed timeline of her political career, accomplishments, etc., instead of just the soap opera stuff that the main media gets caught up in.

-Bryk

[American Patriot]

Only problem with that, Aplomb is that (using the same site) McCain hasn't voted on anything since April ... so, I'm guessing that will be a bad point for the McCain campaign to continue raising.

I don't think Obama has either, but even so... that's NOT relevant.

Look at their records during times they were BOTH there. Not just "recently".

I wouldn't expect either man to have sat long enough to make many votes on anything in the past few months.

However, I WOULD expect them to be there doing their jobs PRIOR to that and making apple-to-apple comparisons rather than cherry-picking things specifically to attack the other candidate.

If Obama (and he did) voted ONLY PRESENT instead of Yes or No, then it's a problem. McCain took a stand. Obama didn't.

He's gonna get splinters, too.

[Aplomb]

(Originally posted by -Byrk)

The main blogs that I read to keep up on this stuff (here, Rantburg, Powerline, etc.) have a strong right slant ...

I didn't realize we were moving up the ranks. lol

On Governor Sarah Palin I'd say search for government written records and Alaskan press. All the same, if the media could have attacked her politically, they wouldn't have had to throw all that soap/tabloid bs around.

Rick:

[Aplomb]

I've gotta go but first there's one last thing I want to say about this vote of "present". If a senator disagrees, he or she will normally vote "no" and offer an explanation of the vote stating that it isn't clear or arguing for a change in wording. It isn't too difficult to conclude that Obama couldn't vote until he talked things over with others.

[Brykovian]

Aplomb ... That's what I'm currently doing. I knew of her (and knew she was a VP consideration) before McCain announced her ... but only had the generic, glossed-over view of things (reformer, taking on GOP establishment, 80% approval, etc.). So, time to dig and get the details.

Rick ... I get what you're saying, for the most part. However, I completely disagree that centrist = indecisive. And disagree that being a centrist means that you're unable to take a stand on anything. And I *certainly* disagree with your implication that centrist = leftist enabler = evil person out to destroy the country.

Maybe we're getting mixed up on terms. I consider myself a pragmatic moderate ... in fact, I've used the term "extreme moderate" because my moderation is a summation of take stands on one side or the other, depending on the topic, level of government, etc. I'm generally *very* conservative on macro issues -- national security, military, world projection, US economy, taxes, etc. And as thing move toward lower levels of government, I move more to the left. I'm all for local government having more impact in an individual's life than higher levels of government. If you don't like the town you live in, you can move to somewhere that fits you better (or get involved in your local government to change things for the better).

I'm definitely not an alarmist, but I do understand that there are significant dangers in the world that can have an immediate and direct impact on things ... and they need to have an eye (and, in some cases, a hand or something even more effective) kept on them.

With any major decision that has real choices to it, you usually get a period of time to gather info and use it to inform your decision. However, when the time to decide comes, I've rarely had a problem picking a direction and running with it. I don't consider that an "enlightened" or "progressive" approach ... merely, a practical one.

-Bryk

[Brykovian]

I've gotta go but first there's one last thing I want to say about this vote of "present". If a senator disagrees, he or she will normally vote "no" and offer an explanation of the vote stating that it isn't clear or arguing for a change in wording. It isn't too difficult to conclude that Obama couldn't vote until he talked things over with others.

Sounds like we're on the same page ... and this is why Rudy used that part of Obama's record to go after him. I have yet to see Obama defend this approach. Some of those votes were nearly unanimous across both parties ... how much "figuring out time" do you need for that sort of thing?

I've yet to moved away from the viewpoint that he's a poser "with ideas" ... but don't see much for evidence that he's been able to lead a movement on something he feels strongly about.

-Bryk