A Letter for McCain Supporters' Eyes Only

If you're voting for McCain and you've clicked to read this I promise this will be pain free and fast. First off, I respect you for voting tomorrow. Right away you've set yourself above the apathetic millions and clearly you care about this country.

Before you punch, click or fill in your ballot for John McCain I would like to have a small one sided non-argumentative conversation with you as a person who also cares whether this country continues to grow and flourish or not.

If you're not going to vote for Barack Obama because of the emails and rumors that he is a terrorist or hangs out with criminals or is a Muslim please do not let that be the reason.

This begs the first question: why in the hell should you listen to me? Well my answer would be, why not? I have no tax breaks or corporate interests to be supported by Barack Obama. In fact, as someone who makes over 250k a year I will pay more. So why would I lie or shill for him unless I truly believed he is the right choice?

And remember, there were a lot of us who said very early on that Bush was up to no good and that the Iraq war would be a mistake. If you voted for Bush in the past why not at least listen to another point of view? If you're one of the twenty something percent who still think Bush has done a good job then I'm guessing you aren't reading this anyway.

The bottom line is that I believe no one wants a bad leader on purpose so clearly you were given some bum information if you voted for Bush. That's okay. You were doing the best you could. But don't rely on that very same information all over again. Whether it be FOX news, emails or friends or family.

Which brings me back to the rumors and emails about Obama. They are false. Not only are they false, they're crazy false. They are. And it would be a tragedy for anyone to make a decision based on those kinds of dark ugly lies.

It's also possible you are voting for McCain because he is "pro-life." I ask you to please remember that there is not one person in this country who thinks abortion is a "good" thing. The only reason any of us think that it should be open as an option to women is because if it wasn't, then people would do it anyway and they be hurt and assaulted by creeps offering illegal abortions. That is literally the only reason. The way to stop abortion is to offer sex education and protection. For that reason there were fewer abortions during the Clinton administration then during the Bush tenure.

If by chance your religion is against protection or sex education then I ask you to question that stance and any group that resists educating kids about how easy it is to have a baby. After all, is there anything more precious than a baby? Nope.

I'm almost done. Stay with me (or stay against me but please keep reading).

If you are a person who is voting for McCain because you think Obama is a communist who wants to redistribute the wealth, I know you are smarter than that. Bush already gave obscene tax breaks to people like me and Warren Buffet and we are saying it's not fair. Why would we work against our own interests? The answer is simple: because fair taxation makes the whole country stronger and if the country isn't strong our money ends up disappearing anyway (see massive stock market crash currently in progress). Bush redistributed the wealth and McCain has been very clear that he will continue to give tax breaks to big corporations and the wealthy in the name of trickle down economics. He really truly has. It's a big fat fact.

I also know that from years of Corporatists and fundamentalists turning the word "liberal" into a code word for gays and hippies and commies you think that blue staters all want to corrupt our country and have people marrying dogs and smoking crack and burning Christmas trees. Here's the real truth we're pretty much just like you. We really, truly are.

And finally if you are not voting for Barack because of the color of his skin, then there may be nothing I can say to you. But I just ask that you really consider this decision. Can anything good come of a backward way of thinking like judging someone based on skin color? No way. And I think in your heart of hearts you know that is very true. The world is changing and if we think and act like it's the 1600s then America will slip hard.

That's it. Thank you for reading. Now let's send a message to the world and our children that the United States learns from it's mistakes and can change when necessary. Remember, you're alone in that voting booth. You don't have to tell your McCain loving friends who you voted for. And chances are one or two of them will secretly vote for Obama. And as a reward for reading this a 30% off coupon for Dave & Busters is being sent to your home.

On a separate train: anyone from California looking for help with how to vote on the Props, check this site out. It combines the stances of six different organizations.

Comments

[killpack]

I wouldn't consider myself a John McCain supporter so maybe this letter wasn't for me. But I did vote for him so maybe it was. Bottom line is this. I thought BOTH presidential candidates were downright lousy. BOTH voted for that dispicable piece of legislation called the financial bailout bill, Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, HR 1424, or whatever you want to call it (have we all forgotten about this craziness!) Ladies and gents, do not forget the government's (this includes the two presidential candidates) complete disregard of the people's will when they passed such unprecedented, ungodly spending. In essence they said "you don't know how best to invest or spend your own money." And this election was a total injustice since no one who voted for it was up for election, at least where I voted, excepting the two presedential candidates! It's like YOUR elected officials just voted for it thinking they were untouchable, that it will all blow over, and that everyone will just forget about it. Well my friends, please, DO NOT forget! Just because this election did basically nothing to fix the problem, keep letting your elected officials know! Don't let these clowns lead you to believe that you don't know what is best to do with your OWN money!

[GeorgeBeatty]

There is one question that I have not heard addressed by Barack Obama that would go along way to relieve my concerns about his Presidency. Where does he stand on the question of black reparations?
Maxine Waters, John Conyers, and Charlie Rangle are not candidates I would be able to support. I am looking for some separation between the positions of Barack Obama's and theirs'. I suppose I am a racist to care about such things, but I am concerned. If he has addressed this and I missed it. Please give me a reference.

[RallyGrrrl]

I thnk that's a valid question, especially since it was stated so respectfully. :)

My advice - go to wikipedia and read up on BO's schooling/writings, go to your local library and read BO's books, and if all else fails go to Google and search for prominent reparation leaders and see if any of them have crossed paths with BO.

[GeorgeBeatty]

Thank you both for your responses. I checked out the link and was indeed comforted. Although I did not vote for Barack Obama I will salute him and pray for him. He is my President and this is still my country. We are all going to need to work together solve the problems we face. We haven't come this far to fail now.

[research]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-02-candidate_N.htm

Obama is Opposed to reparations.

Just another last minute GOP lie.

[kayinmd]

This is a good article, but one thing is missing. For most people 'against' Sen Obama, it is because of his lack of experience. Sen Obama is a very good man, and I hope he will be a good President, but his lack of leadership experience does concern me.

[osalover]

Tsk, tsk, tsk.... and how much experience did any of our former presidents have in being president?

Obama has a leader's mind and far-reaching vision; along with good old-fashioned common sense.

America has been blessed; believe it and stop turning your back on it and turning your nose up at it.

[kayinmd]

I didn't say presidential experience, I said leadership experience. Of course no one has 'presidential' experience until they are running for their second term. By any objective measure, Sen Obama has very little leadership experience where he was the #1 person running a large government body or organization. Executive leadership experience such as being a governor can be very helpful (see Clinton) or not (see Bush). Sen Obama does have good ideas, and good common sense as you have said, but running the country as President of the United States is probably the most difficult executive position in the world. I'm not turning my nose up or turning my back on anything. I think I'm looking it straight in the eyes.

[GriffJr]

Kayinmd, Your concern regarding Obama's lack of experience is quite common but I think that the importance of experience is much overated. No first time President has any experience in the office. I don't think experience as a senator or governor is very good preparation for the job. I believe that good judgement and a sharp mind are more important. It is also important for our President to surround himself with talented advisors. I think Obama has a clear advantage in all of these critical facets.

[BettyG]

Right -- Obama has intelligence, compassion, good judgement, even temperment, ability to chose good advisors and VP, sense of humor, grace, charm, vision and great oratorical skills to communicate his vision to America. He has the experience we need right now. Two years in an obscure statehouse or 26 years as a right-wing senator mean nothing now.

[PattyElle]

McCain/Rove Will Try To Steal the Election with Voting Machine Fraud in Swing States -Republican I/T voter machine computer guru Michael Connell testified yesterday! Rove tried to stop the subpoena, but the judge had the grit to forge ahead. Finally somebody is standing up to these Republicans CROOKS! It's not just the Presidential election we should be concerned about them rigging. It's the Senate & House races in every state as well!!!!

http://www.truthout.org/110308R

Watch this important piece of information:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/11/3/on_eve_of_election_day_is

[petalpusher]

I like this post, except it operates on the false assumption that most McCain voters listen to reason.

[Rhetticent]

I've been attempting to dialogue with liberals since 2000. What saddens me the most are these kinds of "you're a big doody-head" comments that do nothing to advance the discussion, but are instead simply broadside attacks against those with whom you disagree. Perhaps you are just being wry, or ironic, or going for a cheap laugh, but I don't believe that you really think this.

There is a divide in this country that is wider and deeper than anything I have ever seen. Wider than the divide over VietNam, or Nixon's impeachment. The largest issue for me is the size, extent, invasiveness and power of the government, and that was the most significant reason for my vote. Not Rev. Wright, not the goofy emails, not the color of skin. If Sen. Obama was a conservative, I would have been walking door to door to get him elected. The most infuriating thing about the media, and many liberal writers, is that they cannot believe that their opponents may have legitimate philosophical disagreement with them on these issues, and turn instead to ad hominem attacks like ". . . the false assumption that most McCain voters listen to reason."

Let's make a deal. Whomever is elected tonight will be our President and deserves our respect and support. We can disagree on issues, but let's avoid the personal attacks. Let's quit calling our leaders morons and crooks, and keep our eye on what's really important: finding common ground.

[beeftip]

Why does the religion of any candidate matter?

If any of us where in a job interview and told that we couldn't have the job because the employer suspected we were muslim, we'd sue.

Aren't we technically the employers of government officials? Why do we have the right to either endorse or decry a candidate based on religion and religious values?

Religion has absolutely no place in government. It is by no means an indicator of one's moral values. I know Christians who have commited felonies, who have had extra-marital affairs, and who have conducted their lives in anything but a Christian manner.

[PattyElle]

I agree. I am a staunch supporter of the separation of Church & State. I am amazed at how religion is becoming a top issue for politicians. Bush pushed it and Palin sealed it.

McCain/Rove Will Try To Steal the Election with Voting Machine Fraud in Swing States -Republican I/T voter machine computer guru Michael Connell testified yesterday! Rove tried to stop the subpoena, but the judge had the grit to forge ahead. Finally somebody is standing up to these Republicans CROOKS! It's not just the Presidential election we should be concerned about them rigging. It's the Senate & House races in every state as well!!!!

http://www.truthout.org/110308R

Watch this important piece of information:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/11/3/on_eve_of_election_day_is

[deepfreezevideo]

I'm a lifelong moderate conservative. Until recently I had been a registered Republican, for damn near my entire life.
I offer this to the Obama voters and to Barack Obama.
I hope he will listen, and reach out to us.
I've already reached out to Barack Obama by voting for him on Friday with my wife.

http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/1491

[lilacmess]

You're in good company, deepfreeze. My husband is a registered Republican as well and he voted for Obama week before last.

[pfa]

I'm curious - and I hope you don't take offense to this - as a non US citizen, coming from a country where there is no such thing as registered type voting....

What - if any - policies of the Republican party do you agree on?

I'm also curious as to whether there was any specific issue, or was it a range, that makes you now vote for the Democratic party.

It seems to me that many voters (on both sides) vote for the same party no matter what. The 20 odd percent that still say Bush is doing a good job - I think - are proof of that.

Seeing these two posts gives me some hope this country can be great again (still a long way to go though).

[MissElaineous]

You guys rock. It is possible to vote across party lines. I've done so myself for one of the local candidates because the Democrat did nothing for her constituency when she held a smaller office. Thinking is fun and I encourage everyone to do so as often as possible.

[killpack]

I voted for a Democrat this election. Not that I consider myself a Republican by any stretch, but I tend to usually vote for Republican candidates. I did vote for a Democrat, however, this time around. I voted for Jim Matheson for the U.S. House. Why? Because he voted down the obscenely, almost backbreaking bailout of the financial system. I vowed to vote against anyone who supported it. Unfortunately the Republicans who voted for it weren't up for reelection.

[petalpusher]

Yes, you guys do rock. I have also voted across party lines when I felt the Republican was the better candidate and would do a better job.

[killpack]

I'll be frank, I voted for John McCain, but I think that is irrelevant now. The important thing is what you said: "I hope he (Obama) will listen, and reach out to us." We tend to focus so much on who we elect that when the euphoria (or however you look at it) of election day passes, we forgot to hold our officials accountable to our will. Don't forget, when Congress (including John McCain and Barack Obama) passed the bailout of the financial system, they completely ignored the will of the people. They in essence said, "we know better than you how to spend/invest YOUR OWN hard-earned money." That is unacceptable. I don't really care who is in office, but they better answer to you and I and the voice of the people. That is a CHANGE we need. For too long men and women have gone off to Washington with good intentions only to succumb to feelings of entitlement. No more! My friends, don't forget the bailout you opposed! Don't let Congress and the White House take your hard earned money because they "know" what is best to do with it!

[Schaef]

"Which brings me back to the rumors... They are false...And it would be a tragedy for anyone to make a decision based on those kinds of dark ugly lies."

There are also dark, ugly truths. Even shedding old associations, they can't have had zero net effect, especially from the pulpit. McCain accused Obama of using tax policy to redistribute wealth; Obama's simple response: "they can afford it." Obama and Biden assured their voters they will squeeze the coal industry into oblivion. There's plenty on record that raises red flags without wasting time determining citizenship status.

"The only reason any of us think it should be open to women... literally the only reason."

Either you're lying, or more likely, your party's lying to all of us. The argument's been that women have a fundamental right to choose (to kill). That this life form, with distinct human DNA code, isn't a human life, but a blob, a cancerous growth. That conservatives are misogynists. I vote to protect innocent human life; no citizen has the right to end such life at their whim.

"we're pretty much just like you. We really, truly are."

If I'm to believe that, it would have to start here, where my arguments are routinely dismissed and ridiculed without consideration, or even moderated out of existence days after the fact. I spent a month here after being told my impressions were wrong, and received in-kind respectful treatment exactly once.

[RallyGrrrl]

1. I agree that *if you must raise taxes* then best do it on the uppermost first, because the slightest increase for those making $1,000,000/yr ($500/hr) will result in dramatically more tax revenue than a moderate increase for those making $75,000/yr ($37.50/hr).

2. Of course not all conservatives are misogynists - as all liberals are not hippies. I would argue that I vote to protect innocent human life also - my own. I'd ask the baby growing in my belly for her/his opinion if I could, but since I can't I have to fly solo and make the decision myself. By the way - "whim" is a great term to use if you want to incite a feminist riot.

3. This is a pretty liberal site, as far as overgeneralizations go. I've been mocked at when visiting conservative sites, and I think that's part of what happens when you challenge other people's ideas. It's a good thing - it means you made someone stop and think long enough to respond. And if you make incindiary, disrespectful statements (like equating the right to choose to the right to kill - which is a mischaracterization of the importance of choice - just ask the mothers in China who were not *allowed* to give birth to more than one child) then you will likely be run over by the liberal footsoldiers that keep this site running.

So please keep coming back, but take off your shoes so you don't track mud in.

[Schaef]

"1.*if you must raise taxes*... the slightest increase...will result in dramatically more tax revenue."

Kennedy cut taxes in 1960, Reagan in 1980, Bush from 2001-2003ish. In each case, revenues dramatically increased. There's no *direct* correlation between rates and revenues, such that you can raise revenue just by raising rates. Besides, at $3t, I'd prefer to see less spending as a solution.

"I would argue that I vote to protect innocent human life also - my own."

I agree. So let's get rid of the 99.5% of abortions that have *nothing to do with saving anyone's life*, then we can sit and talk about how to handle the medical emergencies.

"'whim' is a great term to use if you want to incite a feminist riot."

It may be a dramatic term for a major life choice, but I'm weighing human life versus using the practice as a form of post-facto birth control. Moreover, when you frame it as an inalienable right, reason becomes irrelevant, and "whim" is just as good as life-threatening emergency.

"if you make incindiary, disrespectful statements...which is a mischaracterization of the importance of choice"

It's not, because I observe the importance of human life. The importance of choice does not protect my "choice" to kill you. So the only two possibilities are: people are choosing to take human life, or it's NOT a human life and I'm correct to say preventing back-alleys isn't the ONLY reason given.

[Schaef]

For perspective, my wife has miscarried twice in the first trimester. We've seen ultrasound pictures of both babies, and the evidence to us both is incontrovertible. I just wanted to make it clear that this is not some single "dude" shooting from the hip about women having babies, but someone who's been in the offices, been at all the appointments, had to struggle with the potential dangers of high-risk pregnancies, whether the baby would be as frail as my wife, whether we should get the AT or what we would do with the results. I do not draw my conclusions in a vacuum.

[lilacmess]

Let me get this straight. You are actually asserting that the pro-choice argument refers to a pregnancy as a blob and a cancerous growth? And you want to be taken seriously here? You want to be treated with respect? Start by showing a little respect yourself.

Pro-choice people are not in favor of abortion. We don't like abortion. We want more than anything to reduce the number of abortions just as you do. We just don't agree that making abortion illegal will accomplish that common goal. Take a look at history. Prohibition of anything of any kind has never worked. We need practical solutions to our problems and a rational discussion to come up with those solutions. Based on your comments above, I'd say you won't be participating in that rational discussion.

[Schaef]

"You are actually asserting that the pro-choice argument refers to a pregnancy as a blob and a cancerous growth?"

That's exactly what I'm saying. Do you mean to suggest that no one has ever supposed the unborn child was not a living human, or that it was a "cluster of cells"? There was a ruling out of the Connecticut Supreme Court a few years back ruling that a fetus was "part of a woman's body", much like your skin or your teeth.

So I really don't know what exactly I'm saying that you find disrespectful. I was saying that was not the ONLY REASON I have been told abortion should be upheld, and guess what, it's NOT the ONLY reason I've been told!

"We want more than anything to reduce the number of abortions just as you do."

If there's no good reason to outlaw the practice, and I'm supposed to believe it's not a living human, what would be my reason for wanting to reduce them?

"Prohibition of anything of any kind has never worked."

Would you then recommend legalizing murder, theft, bank fraud, and so forth, and instead launch government programs to educate people about making better choices?

"Based on your comments above, I'd say you won't be participating in that rational discussion."

Can you explain to me what's irrational about wanting to protect innocent life? Or merely relaying what others have said to me?

[PJBroughton]

I have never before heard anyone refer to a pregnancy as a malignancy.

That said. I am curious as to your feelings on sex education and making proper guidance and protection available to young people.

[Schaef]

I think that parents need to take responsibility for their children and help them make informed decisions about their lives. The first, best hope we have for their future is to get involved early and stay that way until they become their own adults.

[cam]

The point Obama was making is that wealthy people's disposable income is far greater than poor people's. If is scandalous that 40% of the tax revenue derives from less than six percent of the country - it should be derived from 20% of the country at least. To get that right we need to lift the median income substantially. It is not a question of beggaring the rich to support the poor - it is a matter of expanding the tax base - something that is not going to happen as long as some of us are earning 400 times as much as the people we employ. One doesn't begrudge someone who built a successful company from enjoying the fruits of his equity, but a SALARY of 40 million is a little steep.

Regarding abortion. Your opinions are your own - they differ from mine but I do respect your right to them. What I do not respect is your right to impose them on me. Perhaps you would argue that abortion is the ultimate imposition of someone else's opinion -- in many ways you would be right. In this case the balance between right and wrong lies with the individual, with the choice she herself makes. All we can hope to do as a society is help her make the right choice. We can also prevent abortion from becoming a form of birth control - mandatory sterilization after two elective abortions?

[twwv8]

1. Your argument reguarding taxes is just the opposite of BO. He wants 90% of the tax burden paid by 6% of the population.

2. Re: abortion, we pass laws to protect innocent victims, be it theft, assault or murder, so are those just an imposition of "your opinions" on those people.

[Schaef]

"If is scandalous that 40% of the tax revenue derives from less than six percent of the country - it should be derived from 20% of the country at least."

This notion is incompatible with Obama's plan, which concentrates MORE taxation in a SMALLER percentage of the populace.

"What I do not respect is your right to impose them on me."

The federal government is well within its rights to protect innocent human life. I am not imposing upon you my opinion that you should not smoke, or that you should not drive your car backwards on Thursdays. I am saying that citizens do not have the right to kill other people. Either I'm right to say so, or I'm right in saying that the safety of the mother is NOT the sole reason given for the protection of this practice.

[MissElaineous]

I don't think of pregnancy as a cancerous growth, but rather, um, an inconvenient truth...

[BlueZoo]

You're a little late to the party, Adam! I'd have felt better about your column had you written it a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't have a prayer of changing any votes at this late date.

[Chbronze]

That may be be the most patronizing blog I have ever read, I am certainly glad someone so much smarter than I can teach me about politics. You vote your way, I'll vote mine.

[biglover]

Good post Adam, but what makes you think anyone voting for McCain is reading it or will be swayed. I think that train left the station a long time ago.

Joe (aka Sam) the Plumber (not even licensed) is a case in point. You are not dealing with rational high information voters.

[martinchill]

my friend in georgia is voting for mccain, ostensibly because his tax plan is better.

facts and reason held no audience with this guy, and he did repeat the socialism mantra over and over again.

nice post, adam.

[libsRchildren]

And I imagine your friend in Georgia is saying the same about you.

[martinchill]

nah - i didn't fall for the socialism mantra.

[PJBroughton]

I distinctly remember McCain's promising the country that his campaign would not stoop to smear tactics. That was a lie. Since then I have watched his campaign lower itself to a bar I didn't believe possible of a man I once respected. He and Palin couldn't even get themselves on the same page. He has not run a congealed, consistent, honest campaign on the issues. There is nothing of the dignity expected of the POTUS. This country needs to get that back. Unfortunately McCain has devolved into a mere shadow of who he once was, and it's a shame.

I have heard the words "Maverick" and "reform" tossed around like cargo on a sinking ship.
I have listened to both McCain and Palin speak ad nauseum of these and how Obama would single handedly destroy this country with his racist socialist beliefs and terrorist connections. Yet I have heard little to nothing of McCain/Palin's alleged "plans" for reform other than that they exist somewhere in the nether world of this mis-run convoluted campaign.

[ForMySons]

I support John Mcain , for very selfish reasons. As a small business owner for the latter half of my adult life I see the $250,000 thresh hold and wonder where Mr Obama got his figures from . For a small business, particualrly a service oriented business( mine was Towing and Recovery) thats nothing. it works out to less han $700.00 per day. Add to that a few employees making as low as $25,000/ yr or $12 per hour, and its easy to see that is a very low thresh hold. Add to it mandatory health care programing, and a raise in capital gains on any retirement funds I have, its a no brainer. I am but 1, and my Industry has over 2 million just like me, big and small. transposed over to a host of other small businesses, it spells a path to downsizing, employee lay off, loss of private health care and diminished retirements.

That coupled with a simple lack of experience. There is an old saying that you can 10 years experience or 1 years experience 10 times over. Mr Mcain's experience has been earned, as progressivley higher offices have been attained. He has the respect of both sides of the aisle because of that experience. SO his experience is not just what he has learned, but, but what other American Politicians and world leaders have learned about him
Its simple from where I sit, no great decisions need to be made
Simple economics
Simple credentials

[JD2774]

The calculation of the threshold is done after you deduct the salaries of employees and other expenses. If on your S Corp tax forms you carry over 250,000 through to your personal taxes then everything over that threshold will be taxed at the rate (+3%) from Bill Clinton's years. Everything below 250,000 will remain at the current rate. Does that help???

[jolietjohann]

Dude,

It's not gross earnings that are taxed, it's net. If you still earn more than 250K after paying all of that overhead that you are complaining about, then no one is going to feel bad for you.

[OhMyGoodness]

The $250,000 is your personal income not the gross amount your business makes per year.

[WVGALE]

It' amazing how uninformed some people are about taxes. Its the $250,000 of PROFITS not total income that are taxed and even then someone making say $275,000 would only pay an add'l $3000 or so in taxes (maybe even quite a bit less than that). Anyone making that kind of money should be happy to contribute a little extra to the country that made it all possible.

[valkyrie607]

So you're honest: you're voting McCain because you're selfish. You want tax cuts.

It's strange. I heard Republicans champion small-town values. I grew up in a small town in upstate New York. Last time I checked, selfishness was not a small town value.

One of the reasons I voted for Obama is that he's the only politician I've heard during my lifetime introduce the idea of sacrifice and service into the national conversation. As an environmental scientist, I can see that there is a great deal of work needs to be done to get our economy on a track that is sustainable, just, and not poisonous to humans and other living things. I don't think McCain remotely understands the challenges we must meet if we are going to deal with global climate disruption, mass extinctions, the loss of fisheries and coral reefs, etc.

Obama has shown, at least, that he's thinking about these things. His green jobs proposal is the one thing that gives me hope that we might be able to take care of our country for the coming generations. It seems to me that Obama understands that the time when America could succeed simply by encouraging everyone to be as selfish as possible (i.e. "Go shopping" when our nation is under attack) is over. We don't need to consume more stuff, we need to build a new, green economy. We need to care about each other and work together to achieve this; we need sacrifice.

[dirtfreak]

One of the most famous presidential quotes of all time is John F. Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!". So many people quote it, but how many actually read the words and understand it? This is Obama's campaign in a nutshell, but in the me-first greed-is-good world of the rich and selfish (yes, $250,000 is a good MINIMUM income), no one can imagine giving a few extra bucks to help 'put country first' and pay off the debts that W and his cohorts got us into! Sure, let's keep borrowing from China and India. They have the money, because they're not giving any to their own people.
I just don't get it.

[Fzetmptres1]

Well stated~Good stuff~couldn't have said better~Just voted for Obama/Biden in Pittsburgh, PA

FIRED UP & READY TO GO!!!

Peace & Love~Stop the WAR and invest in US(A)

[dphilip]

Well I am getting ready to go vote for McCain/Palin. You know, the team that puts all of the experience and knowledge on the top of the ticket, no the bottom.
Did you hear Arnold say that 'McCain spent more years as a POW than Obama has spent in the Senate?" You can't make this stuff up.
But don't worry, from what Iunderstand they limit Republicans to one vote per person.

[dirtfreak]

So I guess McCain learned everything about running the government in the POW camp?
Look, we can argue forever about who has more 'experience', but it's time to LISTEN to the candidates. Who is more intelligent? After the last 8 years, I think it's time for someone who can speak the English language and is able to reason intelligently. Who's plans have more of a realistic possibility of helping get our country back on its' feet, and restore us to where we belong as the leader of the free world? McSame? Palin???!!! Please...