GROSS: McCain Said the Economy's 'Fundamentals' Are 'Strong.' Was He Right?

re: GROSS: McCain Said the Economy's 'Fundamentals' Are 'Strong.' Was He Right?

Bacalove — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:13:15 GMT

After being exposed for Lying, McCain is now Engaging in Identity Theft -- as he is now sounding more like Barack every day -- Change we can believe in, Enough is Enough and now Regulation! Maybe he thinks he can lie, steal and cheat his way to the Presidency. After all its been done before!

Yesterday McCain said we needed a 911 Commission-like study to investigate our failing economy, however, yesterday in his speech in Colorado Barack hit back at McCain with "Instead of offering up concrete plans to solve these issues, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book -- you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem," . "But here's the thing - this isn't 9/11." Barack went on to elaborate -- we know how we have got here, and what we need is Leadership!" This shows a distinct contrast from a Party with no new ideas and failed policies to Barack, who does have ideas and who is ready to lead!

I quess there is a light at the end of the tunnel because Five Conservative writers have now come forward to speak out and tell the truth that Sarah Palin is not qualified and is not experienced to lead as Vice President or the Presidency. They are making it clear to the public that John McCain made a poor judgment call, a rash judgment and an unneeded risk when times are bad and in a crisis mode. As a gambler, McCain should know you never take an unneeded risk in a crisis when things are already shaky. Enough is Enough! The American people will not reward a dishonorale and immoral man to the top job in the land, someone they cannot have confidence in. A Wizard as in Oz, who blusters and pretends but has no real solutions. American people want someone they can trust and believe in. They want a renewed Government working and looking out for them again, not just corporations and Fat Cats -- Giving welfare bailouts and support to Corporations and none to everyday Americans.

So you got your guns, but you can't afford to pay your mortgage? We have to get rid of that mentallity and embrace unity and change for all. Look, there is a message in Ground Zero -- that afer 7 years, it is still a dark hole. This is is a symbol of the failed polices of Republicans, that after 7 years, Ground Zero is still a hole, left desolate and it speaks volumes that we are a country unable to find leadership, unable to unite and unable to rebuild and show ourselves and the world that we know how to overcome adversary, yet trillions of dollars go daily to Iraq, to allegedly rebuild a country which should never have been invaded in the first place. Talk about selling someone the Yellow Brick Road, I mean OIL! Because continued Drilling is not going to end our addiction, it is a band aid. We need 21st Century ideas and innovations, we need Intelligence instead of experience. We need the intellectual capacity of someone who can see the way forward when it is dark and to lead us out of the dark and into the light. We need a Rudolph whose nose was so bright, only he could lead the way from darkness to light and from the unreal to the real.

re: GROSS: McCain Said the Economy's 'Fundamentals' Are 'Strong.' Was He Right?

caraprado — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:51:28 GMT

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/cynicism-of-mccains-vp-choice.html ">http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/cynicism-of-mccains-vp-choice.html

Monday, September 15, 2008

The Cynicism of John McCain and his VP Choice

If you read Jeffrey Goldberg's excellent piece on McCain in the new Atlantic, one fact stands out clearly. McCain's stance on the war is inviolate--it involves what for him are principles of honor that stretch back immediately and directly to his own experiences in the Vietnam war, and to those of his father in World War II. Just one example of many in the first-rate article:

<blockquote>I told Swindle [a cellmate and friend of McCain's] that McCain had argued to me that he doesn’t think about Vietnam overly much when he thinks about the wars of today.

“Bullshit,” Swindle said. “He’ll say Vietnam didn’t affect him, that he doesn’t think about it, that he’s aloof from it. But I see it. It’s there.” </blockquote>

This is the issue on which McCain is inflexible, certain, fully invested, passionate.

It is equally clear that as a result, he views all other issues as malleable, political issues--stances that can be easily taken, and easily changed, tactically-- in order to win a campaign and thus deal with the issue that, to him, matters.

This is utterly clear in his choice of Palin, where his Vietnam-and-since cynicism about political necessities is manifest--one of feeding the bread and circuses desire of the electorate, giving them, so easily fooled, as they were so easily fooled by the media in Vietnam, what they need, in order to be able to deal with the important issue.

The choice of a remarkably unqualified Vice Presidential choice is simply a political necessity. The attitude towards the public, and the media, in this choice, as in many of the public representations and statements of his campaign, is one of an extraordinary, jaded, cynicism: Feed the beast with whatever fantasies and half-truths it takes. The fundamentals of the economy are sound. We'll take care of it later.

Goldberg:

<blockquote>In my conversations with McCain, however, he never appeared greatly troubled by his shifts and reversals. It’s not difficult to understand why: tax policy, or health care, or even off-shore oil drilling are for him all matters of mere politics, and politics calls for ideological plasticity. It is only in the realm of national defense, and of American honor—two notions that for McCain are thoroughly entwined—that he becomes truly unbending. </blockquote>

This is no doubt rooted in McCain's eternal certainties, drummed in by three generations of such certainty. And there is no doubt strength and decency--as well as these "family values"--that drive this commitment to an ideological core.

The question is this: Do we need another president with such a core of ideological inflexibility, rigidity and unwillingness for self-reflection, linked to a long past conflict--and who is willing to resort to half-truths, deceptions, and distortions in its service?

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/cynicism-of-mccains-vp-choice.html

re: GROSS: McCain Said the Economy's 'Fundamentals' Are 'Strong.' Was He Right?

caraprado — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:52:01 GMT

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/cynicism-of-mccains-vp-choice.html

Monday, September 15, 2008

The Cynicism of John McCain and his VP Choice

"I told Swindle [a cellmate and friend of McCain's] that McCain had argued to me that he doesn’t think about Vietnam overly much when he thinks about the wars of today.

“'Bulls--t,' Swindle said. 'He’ll say Vietnam didn’t affect him, that he doesn’t think about it, that he’s aloof from it. But I see it. It’s there.'”

This is the issue on which McCain is inflexible, certain, fully invested, passionate.

The choice of a remarkably unqualified Vice Presidential choice is simply a political necessity. The attitude towards the public, and the media, in this choice, as in many of the public representations and statements of his campaign, is one of an extraordinary, world-weary, cynicism: Feed the beast with whatever fantasies and half-truths it takes. The fundamentals of the economy are sound. We'll take care of it later.

Goldberg:

"In my conversations with McCain, however, he never appeared greatly troubled by his shifts and reversals. It’s not difficult to understand why: tax policy, or health care, or even off-shore oil drilling are for him all matters of mere politics, and politics calls for ideological plasticity. It is only in the realm of national defense, and of American honor—two notions that for McCain are thoroughly entwined—that he becomes truly unbending."

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/cynicism-of-mccains-vp-choice.html

re: GROSS: McCain Said the Economy's 'Fundamentals' Are 'Strong.' Was He Right?

willnotvoteobama — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:36:58 GMT

If there is anyone out there that doesn't know this; this is the best visual presentation I ever saw. just remember who did this when you vote....

Our Social Security

Franklin Roosevelt a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,

That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,

That the money the participants elected to put Into the Program would be deductible from Their income for tax purposes each year,

That the money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would Only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and

That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and if we get a Social Security check every month we are finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government and now to Dwight Eisenhower

34th. President, Republican,

in 1958 the first year that Congress voted to remove funds from Social Security and put it into the General Fund for Congress to spend.

If I recall correctly, it was a democratically Controlled Congress. And From what I understand, the Congress logic at that time was that there was so much money in Social Security Fund that it would never run out / be used up for the purpose it was intended / set aside for. Then comes Lyndon Johnson 36th.President,a Democrat

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson a Democrat, and the democratically Controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party. Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Albert Gore, Jr. (Al Gore) casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S. Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving Annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right! (Jimmy Carter) a Democrat, and the Democratic Party. Voted to give

Immigrants who moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! TheDemocratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

If enough people read this, maybe a seed of Awareness will be planted and maybe changes will