Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 5:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stuart Hartman:

I don't know about why others don't like Obama, but my reasons are as follows:

1) No track record of having accomplished anything.

2) Voted "present" on most issues put in front of him.

3) Poor judgement in associating with Ayers, Wright, etc.

4) His voting record (when he didn't vote "present") makes me worry about his commitment to national security.

5) His statement (since nuanced) that he would meet with dictators and despots without preconditions.

Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 5:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Musings by Bill Ayers, Obama's "organizer" friend: (From the Pittsburgh-Review)

Ayers, describing the Weather Underground as "an American Red Army," motivated by "hope," succinctly summed up the organization's mission: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments."

"I don't regret setting bombs," Ayers told The New York Times in September 2001. "I feel we didn't do enough."

Posted by thefishheadsoup on October 6, 2008 at 5:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer - great reasons. sounds like you have your man in mccain. let's keep rolling with record deficit spending, real fiscal conservatism, a bitter, erratic old man, and his "you betcha" wink wink idiot sidekick for joe six pack.

praise jesus.

Posted by connie on October 6, 2008 at 6:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer - there is absolutely nothing wrong with talking - even to despots and dictators. Talk can lead to actual peace - without talk there can be no peace. If you don't like what they have to say you can always nuke them later.... sheesh.

As for not having accomplished anything and voting present - perhaps you should check your boy McCain's record recently. And you may just want to do a little research on your own because the dittohead talking points are wrong - Obama has accomplished a lot. Just surviving in Illinois politics is more of an accomplishment than most candidates have under their belts.

More of the same with a dreadful VP or a possibility of something good for a change... the choice seems obvious to me.

GOBAMA!

Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 6:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Connie:

Please tell me precisely what Obama has accomplished, other than "a lot." Oh... a LOT, not alot. I get it. His Rezko connection.

I never said there is anything wrong with talking. But - as Obama now says - there has to be much diplomacy, preconditions, etc. etc., before the legitimacy of the US Presidency is lended to the likes of the Castros, Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinejad, etc.

FishHead: At least in McCain I can be certain that he has the best interests of the US in mind. I do have many reservations about McCain, but at least we can trust him.

Posted by blacksho89 on October 6, 2008 at 7:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stuart: John Kerry graduated from the same university as Bush, belonged to the same fraternity, and had a GPA of .02 higher. They were the same candidate.

Nixon was one of the most highly educated presidents; Washington one of the worst. Educational background does not predict Presidential ability. Character and values allow a man (or woman, sorry, Hil)to surround himself with the people necessary to guide this country in the direction we need to go. John McCain is the better candidate this year. We know that Obama has consistently surrounded himself with racists, with '60s radicals, with real estate criminals, and with "community groups" dedicated to income redistribution.

Vote McCain 2008.

Posted by trappist99 on October 6, 2008 at 7:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Landlords beyond the eye of Council:

Over the past few years I've heard of many cases in which landlords keep deposits, either by simpley not returning them or vastly inflating the cleaning costs.

I see this as a crime as it violates the spirit, if not the letter of the law.

I have no connection with CU, but given this rising crime wave, the university should have some sort of ombudsman to protect its students, rather than passively encouraging this fraud.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 7:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Now, those same people attack Barack Obama as an "Elitist" because he graduated from Columbia and Harvard Law"

Oh, I don't think he's an elitist, I've heard him speak without prepared words written by someone else or a teleprompter. Even Letterman spoofs Obama with the "uh" counter (easy to find on you tube, along with dozens of blundering, babbling nonsense when he's put on the spot).

Let me get this straight: Obama attended the foremost legal school in the world and couldn't learn to remove the "uh"'s from his speech? I learned that in 8th grade speech class. His town hall meetings where he is forced to improvise are equally laughable, he can't form coherent thoughts, let alone sentences (look up Obama blunders on you tube..you can see them all..if you have the time).

Will it make Obama supporters change their minds? Of course not, but it is ironic the people who created an industry out of Bush blunders support a candidate who's body of work in terms of bumbling already surpassed the President.

Posted by shbldr1 on October 6, 2008 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To blacksho89
However, Kerry went on to Law School, while Bush barely made it through Grad school. But you are missing the point. There is a new "anti-intellectualism" that is pervasive in the conservative movement. Anything that smacks of "book learning" is looked down upon by the right. They put more confidence in those with the least education. They make fun of anyone in academia, as an "elitist in an ivory tower". There is disdain of intellectual curiosity, science, and rational thought. Every policy must adhere to the political dogma; i.e., free markets, lower taxes, small government, God in one's life, etc.I don't want the people governing this country to be "just like me", I want them to be much smarter, and wiser!!

Posted by shbldr1 on October 6, 2008 at 7:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To IXLR82
JFK ( Harvard Graduate) famously used "ah" routinely in even his delivered speeches. That is not the measure of an intellect. Earning the Editorship of The Harvard Law Review is a much better guage of ones intellectual prowess.I would put Obama, and his speech patterns up against George Bush's any day. Obama is such a powerful speaker, that most who listen to him are dynamically impacted (see Germany speech, 2008). He has been a Law School Professor, as well. I don't think his ability to speak and think on his feet are in question. I really believe those of you on the right are in a perpetual state of denial. Obama may become the modern day equivalent to FDR.

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As usual each election cycle, the GOP is left with smearing the opponent.

It should be poignant for McCain, since the weasels did it to him when he ran for the nomination against Bush. They did it to disabled vet Max Cleland.

Remember?

I wonder if McCain does, now that he's Captain of the USS Swift Boat?

Posted by rockin_betty on October 6, 2008 at 8:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Landlords: I moved last year from a house owned by a wealthy Republican politician. When we moved in, there were mice living in the stove top, among other disgusting discoveries. The toilets never flushed correctly, no matter how many times we plunged. We requested a plumber, whom I suspect told the landlord it was a tree root problem. Upon moving out, the landlord charged ME for the bill for the plumber, saying the plumber said we had flushed a baby wipe. Considering we had no babies, but the people before us (who abandoned the house in a shambles) did, I expressed my disagreement. $100.00 was pittance to this a-hole, but it was a fortune to us. Talk about out of touch! He also charged us $800.00 for carpet cleaning. We had done nothing wrong to the carpet. When I was a landlord, I considered it my responsibility to clean carpets between renters and to keep the property in working order. This man was truly hateful. Too bad landlords are so often greedy. There is money to be made without skrewing people.

Posted by bobcat77 on October 6, 2008 at 8:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by billy_goat_gruff:

"As usual each election cycle, the GOP is left with smearing the opponent."
---

Very funny.....

Unlike the left that has taken the high road?

Posted by stvrainkid on October 6, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The right keeps making a big deal about "preconditions." Exactly what preconditions would you want if meeting with the Iranian president?

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Obama is such a powerful speaker, that most who listen to him are dynamically impacted (see Germany speech, 2008)."

LOL. Here, see how dynamically this impacts you:

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

If you are 'dynamically moved' by someones ability to recite memorized text written by someone else, that speaks more to your critical thinking ability than anything.

Posted by malohovno on October 6, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

mark boys

we collect taxes differently for schools. we are in the middle of taxation for schools.

don't believe the 2nd from the bottom statements.

Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

See how dynamically McPain impacts you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2y8dY...

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Unlike the left that has taken the high road?"

Any number of fact-checking sites can inform the lazy citizen. Both sides have distorted and misrepresented facts, but the smears and character assassination have come from McCampaign.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

See how dynamically McPain impacts you:"

Sorry Jak, show me again where I, or anyone else, say that McCain's speeches "dynamically impact" them. It is the exclusive territory of the blind Obama supporters to speak of him, like the Chris Matthews at CNN, who said when Obama talks he gets a "furrowing feeling up his leg". Here is that one:

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m9Gbb...

If this kind of nonsense were happening with a Republican candidate, the liberals would rightfully be having a heyday about the naive, blind, zealous followers....but it's Obama, so it's okay to sound like fools in love....

Posted by marlboroman on October 6, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer,

Something your post brought to mind:

Ig"no*rance\, n. [F., fr. L. ignorantia.]

1. The condition of being ignorant; the want of knowledge in general, or in relation to a particular subject; the state of being uneducated or uninformed.

Ignorance is the curse of God, Knowledge the wing wherewith we fly to heaven. --Shak.

2. (Theol.) A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge which one may acquire and it is his duty to have. --Book of Common Prayer.

Invincible ignorance (Theol.), ignorance beyond the individual's control and for which, therefore, he is not responsible before God.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Your right, your candidate is unlikely to dynamically impact anyone...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwK16V...

According to him he is a 'proud conservative liberal' that will run a 'dispirited, dispirited campaign'

Guess he got that one right.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 9:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

At least he doesn't want to give a kid with asthma a breathalizer...

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

Or say he's visited all 57 states, with two to go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02...

Or comments on his Muslim faith

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGMQ5D...

Or just a whole bunch of funny ones

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5R6kV...

Or that we need a civilian security force that is just as well funded as our military...

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

Sends a tickle up your leg, doesn't it?

Posted by JG on October 6, 2008 at 9:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stuart, you better be careful, you might just get what you are wishing for.

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer at 5:45 am:
"I don't know about why others don't like Obama, but my reasons are as follows:

1) No track record of having accomplished anything.

2) Voted "present" on most issues put in front of him.

3) Poor judgement in associating with Ayers, Wright, etc.

4) His voting record (when he didn't vote "present") makes me worry about his commitment to national security.

5) His statement (since nuanced) that he would meet with dictators and despots without preconditions."

Response:
1.) Go to Wikipedia to look up Barack Obama. You'll find several pages of accomplishments. most more extraordinary than anything McCain has done, even if you say POW over and over again. You should also compare Biden to Palin. She's a joke.

2 & 4.) Google the voting records for Obama and McCain. Note especially how each of their voting records support the troops. Obama has, but McCain has not. In fact, McCain has received failing grades from all veterans groups because of his voting record regarding veterans issues.

3.) Obama was 8 years old when Ayers was associated with the Weathermen. OOOOO! Bad boy. Later, Obama lived down the street from Ayers. When my wife and I lived in Denver, our neighbors were Neil Bush and his wife. We met them several times. I guess I could never run for office because of my association with a man who was involved in a scandal and run out of town.

Rev. Wright was only one of the pastors at the church Obama and his family had attended for many years. When I was growing up, we had a pastor for a few years that nobody much liked. But we all stayed at that church because it was OUR church, not the pastor's church. Just because we didn't change churches did not mean that we agreed with everything that pastor said. A few years later, we got a new pastor.

5.) I would not want a president who was afraid to meet with anybody. Bush and McCain don't want to meet with adversaries because they have no confidence in their diplomatic skills and are afraid they'd look stupid and may inadvertently give away the store. (Just think, if Bush could have arranged a meeting with bin Laden, they could have nabbed him there - either killed him or arrested him. We'd all feel a whole lot safer now.)

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The majority of any tax increase for schools doesn't go to teachers. Get rid of half the overhead, double teacher salaries, and I'll listen to a tax increase.

Posted by phoenix_rises on October 6, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Republican Mantra:

"We have meet the truth and we did not like it.
Truth be d$mned, full speed ahead."

Captain, USS Swiftboat

Posted by DianeMad on October 6, 2008 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Palin is Bush in a skirt. We have had a moron for a president. We don't need a clone (albeit with a vagina) being a heartbeat away from being president. Palin is an embarrassment to women. She should bow out. And then again, with what is happening in the country (the whole mess it is in), maybe it would serve the Republicans right if they won. They they would have to clean up the mess they have created. Only thing is I don't think our country can survive another
Republican administration. And perhaps it won't even be able to survive the past eight years with that bozo and Darth Vader.

Posted by pittnurse70 on October 6, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My daughter, too, got fleeced out of some of her deposit. She was charged for cleaning the carpets, which she was never told was expected of her (they were just cleaned when she moved in, and not in need of anything more than vaccuuming, which she did). Part of the problem is that CU throws these kids to the mercy of the Boulder housing market as 19 yr old sophomores! They need more housing like the Bear Creek Apartments, where my daughter is living this year.

Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

mcbuffs: Great leftist spin, but either misleading or incomplete.

Posted by CityZen on October 6, 2008 at 10:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hmmm, if the railing hadn't been cleaned in 10 years when they were moving OUT, what kind of house did they keep while they were there?

Seriously, I've never lost any of my deposit in Boulder...and back in the day they paid 5% interest on it, which I also got. I always did a walk through with the landlord on move in and again move out, and got the check on the spot.

When your kids move in, have them make a detailed inventory of the condition of the place, give a copy to the landlord and keep a copy. Also keep the receipts for any repairs. It helps the move out process considerably.

I will say that I detest the local practice of the tennant paying for carpet cleaning on move out, but at least the carpets get cleaned...

Posted by vkberlinn on October 6, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

...Palin is an embarrassment to women....

Diane, are you a WOP member?
Are you a womens libber?

....She should bow out..
Real women curtsy

..Palin is Bush in a skirt...

Interesting perspective

Would she also be bush in pants?

Jeepers Diane you are Mad.

Posted by walongloop on October 6, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does Obama still support drivers licenses for illegal aliens?

That should say something about the value of electing a (so-called) "intellectual".

Posted by connie on October 6, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I cannot possibly list all of Obama's accomplishments in 3000 characters or less, so here's a tiny url so you can go read about it yourself:

http://tinyurl.com/4wne4c

And that's just what he's done in the US Senate.

McCain is an old man whose mind is fading - I do not want him anywhere near negotiations with anyone. And if pride is what you are concerned about - get over it. I think it is about time we had a president who was not too proud to negotiate with people like Castro and Kim - talk doesn't hurt anyone. And, in case you haven't noticed, the legitimacy of the US Presidency is in the toilet thanx to the current occupant of the White House. Talking to anyone for any reason can only make things better.

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If you think a landlord has fleeced you, take them to court. The judge may very well be sympathetic. But don't cast all landlords as evil incarnate.

As CityZen points out, read the lease. Do a walk through before moving in and when you move out. It's easier than ever to protect yourself -- take digital photos of everything before and after.

Make sure you are using something like the Boulder Model Lease. By law, you get interest on your security deposit and you get it back in 30 days. You are required to return the premises to the same condition as when you moved in, except for normal war and tear, which you do not have to pay for. (Face it, though, if there are major stains to the carpet from a pet, cigarette burns, etc., that is not normal wear and tear.)

The landlord is required to give you a detailed breakdown of anything they are withholding and why, along with the difference in the security deposit, or they forfeit their right to withhold anything.

Keep good records and notes, make sure the landlord knows you are doing do, and you should be fine. Show them the before and after pictures. And be honest with yourself about real damage you may have caused.

But if you are not prepared to take the minimal steps to protect yourself when you sign a contract, then your only recourse is to whine to the newspaper about evil landlords. And you may get sympathy, but that's all you're getting.

Posted by boulder_native on October 6, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Landlord's are NOT responsible for cleaning the carpet when a tenant moves out. They were not the one living there, the tenant was. I get my own house's carpet cleaned professionally about every 1 to 2 years, the average time of a lease in Boulder. So If I do it for myself, I expect a tenant to do the same, not for me, but as a courtesy to the NEXT tenant. I kept my rental property in tip-top shape and never had a problem finding qualified tenants that wanted to rent the property.

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Colorado state law defines normal wear and tear as: "that deterioration which occurs, based upon the use for which the rental unit is intended, without negligence, carelessness, accident, or abuse of the premises or equipment or chattels by the tenant or members of his household, or their invitees or guests."

I suppose in theory I agree with bn about carpet cleaning. But, as an evil landlord, I would rather pay to have the carpets cleaned every two or three years instead of have the tenant go out and rent a carpet cleaner and do a poor job, just because they don't know what they are doing.

Posted by lafayetteeast on October 6, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OMG, BN !! .... I agree with you. Any lease says that the tenant will leave the place the way he found it, except normal wear and tear, which always means painting and/or normal carpet wear. If it was clean, it needs to be clean; if the carpets were cleaned before the tenant moved in, the carpets should be cleaned when the tenant moves out. It isn't a matter of courtesy, it's a matter of contract.

Posted by barney on October 6, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

McCain and his redneck MooseMAMA Palin are getting nastier and more desparate as the hours tick by. With nothing other then a record of complete and abject failure, lies and corruption to run on they continue to mount more and more smears and lies. Helping to further the convictions of some of the Daily Camera's intellectual elite (IXLR,VK, CS, et al). Just break out the blackface and the pointy little white hats boys, you're diaper wearing angry old man still has a month to smear his way into office.

Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Connie, your link, like your argument, does not work. Or maybe there are no accomplishments...

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 11:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer whined at 10:13 am:
"Great leftist spin, but either misleading or incomplete."

Excuse me? Wikipedia gives facts - no spins, not misleading and very complete. The same with voting records. What are you talking about? CS must stand for "Completely Stupid".

Posted by jonutah on October 6, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

McCain hangs out with dumb people. Have domestic terrorists or dumb people (aka Bush/Palin) killed more people world wide over the past 8 years? A dumb person is way more dangerous.

- Jon

Posted by talven on October 6, 2008 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I hope Obama is as smart as you all think he is. It's going to take a truly exceptional intellect to raise taxes on just the top 5% of wage earners and implement $1 trillion in new spending while raising corporate taxes and bringing jobs back to this country simultaneously. All of this will occur while the country is weaned off of fossil fuels and onto wind and solar power in a mere 10 years. He'll also pay off that bad mortgage you stupidly took on, and care for and educate your children from birth (if you unwisely decide to actually have children) thru college. But wait! He's not done yet! He will also negotiate a lasting peace with the militant Islamists of the world, pacify Russia and China and eliminate global warming.

On the seventh day, presumably, he will rest.

Posted by vkberlinn on October 6, 2008 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

plagiarists are the worst killers along with Muslims of the 57 states.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Just break out the blackface and the pointy little white hats boys, you're diaper wearing angry old man still has a month to smear his way into office."

Where did that come from? Closet racist on the left? Even the most reprehensible of us knuckle-dragger's (me) have never, once, commented on Obama's race, even when he plays the race card himself.

I agree McCain looks desperate, and I (gulp), feel like the election is slipping away from him. I just hope Obama, if elected, rethinks some of his tax increases, especially those on small businesses. Raising taxes on business means two things: higher prices and layoffs. Higher prices mean inflation, which can quickly eat up the supposed tax cuts he offers, because wages alway lag.

Posted by jonutah on October 6, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If William Ayres is a terrorist, why isn't he in jail? What's scary is that if this guy IS a terrorist, he's just allowed to teach at our universitites. So, we having politicians saying this guy Ayres IS a terrorist, but he's just walking around the streets? Hmmm. See anything strange about that?

I don't think either candidate is going to solve world hunger. But, I think its down right pathetic how much the right is reaching (again) becuase they are loosing.

- Jon

Posted by walongloop on October 6, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

> Raising taxes on business means two things:
> higher prices and layoffs. Higher prices
> mean inflation, which can quickly eat up
> the supposed tax cuts he offers, because
> wages alway lag.

Hey now! No fair using logic!

Posted by connie on October 6, 2008 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oops - I don't know why that didn't work, here's one that does...

http://tinyurl.com/3bvc6g

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 11:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

loopy: "Hey now! No fair using logic!"

FactCheck.org: "McCain falsely claimed Obama's plan would increase taxes on 23 million small-business owners, when the vast majority of them would get a cut."

Based on a deliberate falsehood, the rest of IXL's comment is meaningless.

But doggone it! No fair using logic!

Posted by walongloop on October 6, 2008 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

> If William Ayres is a terrorist, why isn't he in jail?

He was acquitted on a technicality. He admits to the bombings, and said that he has no regrets and wished that they had done more.

> What's scary is that if this guy IS a
> terrorist, he's just allowed to teach at
> our universitites.

Yes, that is VERY scary. But there he is, and free as a bird...

What is even more scary is to see Obama trying to downplay his relationship with Ayers. Obama's campaign has openly threatened TV stations to dissuade them from running ads linking him with Ayers. Is that not scary?

IF Obama's work with Ayers was on the up-and-up, why is he trying so hard to hide the truth from voters?

Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Taxcutters never talk about our crushing national debt or what spending programs should be eliminted.

8 years of taxcuts has not resulted in economic windfall...quite the contrary.

Besides, taxes are lower right now then they have been since taxes were created. Should the country just go bankrupt ?

We cant 'grow' our way out of this one at an average of 3-4% per year.

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"I just hope Obama, if elected, rethinks some of his tax increases, especially those on small businesses. Raising taxes on business means two things: higher prices and layoffs. Higher prices mean inflation, which can quickly eat up the supposed tax cuts he offers, because wages alway lag."

I'm glad to let you know that you can stop worrying now, IXLR82. Obama will not raise taxes on small businesses. In fact, Democratic congressmen and presidents have been supporting small business for years. According to the American Small Business League (asbl.com), Democrats have supported pro small business legislation while Republicans have been voting against small business since the 1970's. Obama will continue this trend, so you can rest easy with this knowledge.

Quote from Obama in February 2008:
"Helping American small business is part of our movement for change and the end of politics as usual."

Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

walongoop: "What is even more scary is to see Obama trying to downplay his relationship with Ayers.."

Yes, VERY SCARY. But not quite as scary as all the people focusing on stuff that has nothing to do with the real issues facing this country. Have you heard of the economic problems? Try to get out more.

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at noon (Suggest removal)

"If William Ayres is a terrorist, why isn't he in jail?"

This is not a fair question. There are a lot of criminals who are not in jail. One of them is the Republican presidential candidate.

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

McCain and Palin had better be careful playing the Ayers and Wright cards. After all, they both have plenty of associations in their own closets that are at least as bad.

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If your small business is set up such that you are paying taxes on your personal tax return, and you are making more than $250,000 from your business, then you had better see your accountant soon. Other than that, there is no reason for small business to fear Obama's tax plan.

Posted by CSminer on October 6, 2008 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Connie, I can find the same page all over the internet, but no listing of the bills. This seems to be an urban legend of some kind. After all, Obama's been in the US Senate for about 143 days, and he's "Written a total of 890 Bills and Co-sponsored Another 1096 since he started serving in the U.S. Senate"???

I have also found that he "sponsored" the bills.
And I found this:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-met...

Posted by jonutah on October 6, 2008 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Come on now, if William Ayres is a threat to our nation why isn't the Bush administration having him locked up with the other terrorists?

Why? I will tell you why. Its a non-issue to get us off topics and to smear Obama. Heck both parties have had DIRECT dealings with terrorists - sold arms to them, etc. So, its a joke of a topic.

- Jon

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"...DIRECT dealings with terrorists - sold arms to them, etc. So, its a joke of a topic."

Guess who helped fund those madrassas along the Afghan-Pakistan border when the Soviets were in Afghanistan?

It seemed like such a good idea at the time.

Posted by Billprez on October 6, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Connie -

You and your ilk say "without talk there can be no peace'.

I bet with your great leader talking to various nut cases, you will find "peace in our time."

Look it up.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Have you heard of the economic problems?"

Hope you're not blaming the Republicans for this. From the liberals best friend, the NY Times in 1999:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage...

My favorite quote:
"In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's."

They were right.

Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IXLR82: "...blaming the Republicans..." for economic problems.
No, there is little point to blaming anyone at this point. One man's greed is another's profit motive. Many people engaged in transactions that they thought, with good faith, would turn out just fine. The lack of regulation is at the core of the problem. Some may have backed this in the interests of getting more people into homes and others in the interests of business growth. It just makes it that much more important to vote for the candidate with the better understanding of the economy.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Wikipedia gives facts - no spins, not misleading and very complete."

Now that's funny.

Its kind of a running joke to use Wikipedia as a source..they even made fun of it on "the Office". From the site itself:

"writers do not need specialized qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover existing knowledge; this means that people of all ages and cultural and social backgrounds can write Wikipedia articles"

You can learn a lot on Wiki, but

Posted by walongloop on October 6, 2008 at 1:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

> Hope you're not blaming the Republicans for this.

Along with Wright and Ayers, this just underscores Obama's inherent tendency toward dishonesty. He tries to pin the economic issues on Bush (and implicate McCain by party association), but the above shows that the roots of the crisis are in the Clinton Administration.

Just a few more facts that Obama doesn't want voters to know.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"It just makes it that much more important to vote for the candidate with the better understanding of the economy."

Exactly. Here is what McCain said in 2005:

“If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

Obama said nothing, because he was only 12 in 2005... ;-)

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CSminer posted at 12:29 pm:
"Obama's been in the US Senate for about 143 days..."

Once again, CS displays his total ignorance and nonconcern for the facts. Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004, so has been in the US Senate for a little, tiny bit more than "143 days". CS, can you multiply 365 times 4? Take off a few months for the transition, and we're talking about 1300 days that Obama has been in the Senate instead of your "143".

CS = Completely Stupid.
(Although, to be kind, maybe he is just another right wing liar.)

Posted by MayorMfumbo on October 6, 2008 at 1:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jonutah 12:48 p.m.
"Come on now, if William Ayres is a threat to our nation why isn't the Bush administration having him locked up with the other terrorists?"

Simple answer: Ayres' phone was/is tapped just like yours. The FBI tapped my phone too and caused me problems when I was only doing what I needed to do in order to make a few extra dollars.

I say let's get rid of the FBI and let what happens happen.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The FBI tapped my phone too and caused me problems when I was only doing what I needed to do in order to make a few extra dollars."

That could be most intriguing line I've read up here in months.

Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 1:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IXLR82, it is simplistic to blame either party for the current economic mess.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-20...

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 1:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by IXLR82 at 1:18 p.m
"Its kind of a running joke to use Wikipedia as a source."

This is not true if confirmed by other sources, which people who want to know the truth do and which I have done. Wikipedia is just the best compilation of all the data relating to Obama's background and most of his accomplishments. IX, give me one thing in Wikipedia's background of Obama which is untrue. If you can't, then just keep your pie hole shut.

In another source, I found the following list of some of his accomplishments in just his first 3 years in Senate:

Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.

Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.

Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.

His record is in fact quite impressive for a junior Senator from Illinois.

Most of his legislative effort has been in the areas of:

* Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills)
* Health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills)
* Consumer protection/labor (14 bills)
* The needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills)
* Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills)
* Foreign Policy (10 bills)
* Voting and Elections (9 bills)
* Education (7 bills)
* Hurricane Katrina Relief (6)
* The Environment (5 bills)
* Homeland Security (4 bills)
* Discrimination (4 bills)

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"IXLR82, it is simplistic to blame either party for the current economic mess."

Facts are a liberal conspiracy.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Wikipedia is just the best compilation of all the data relating to Obama's background"

What about your Etch-A-Sketch?

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 1:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

mcbuffs: Don't waste your time.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 2:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 1:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IXLR82, it is simplistic to blame either party for the current economic mess."

That is an interesting article, but only talks about symptoms and results in the past few years. It does not in any way dispute the dire prediction of the NY Times article I posted.

If Clinton had not tried to manipulate the free market by putting pressure on Fannie and Freddie to give loans to bad candidates, we would not be in this predicament.

Repubs are not innocent either, both sides turned their heads when the economy was flying high. But for Obama to try to blame McCain and Republicans is every bit as disingenuous as all the anger about McCain's 'attack' ads.

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The "Chicago Ties" and "Sex Education" ads are straight-ahead lies and character assassination.

Look those up, while you're at it.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Facts are a liberal conspiracy."

Clinton pushed for lower credit guidelines, that is a fact. Please explain to us all how we would still be in this mess if he had left them alone. Please, I can't wait for the spin.

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Among McCain's accomplishments is that he is good at telling tasteless jokes:
McCain, reveling in adoration at a June 1998 Republican fund-raiser and sure his joke would go no further, said: "Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."

Yep, that's the kind of leader we need to represent America, at least that part of America which is misogynistic and/or ignorant. He's sure to get the ignorant misogynist vote, like IX and CS.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 1:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

mcbuffs: Don't waste your time."

Oh come on Goat, the Etch-A-sketch line was a good one. Didn't know you also relied on Wiki for your source. That explains a lot. You're still one of my favorites though....

Posted by connie on October 6, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CSMiner - the first link at the bottom of that article points to the bills. I can't do all of your research for you. I'm beginning to think you're as senile as McCain....

Posted by mcbuffs on October 6, 2008 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by IXLR82 at 2:04 pm:
"Clinton pushed for lower credit guidelines, that is a fact."

Doggone it, there ya go agin, IX. Lookin' to the past. Clinton's not runnin' for nothin', IX. Dagnabbit! You betcha!!

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."

Now that's funny.

Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IXLR82: I too find that utterly tasteless joke quite funny. But that is a joke McCain told back in 1998 when he was a real maverick. Now he backs Bush on torture and can't tell offensive jokes either.

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 2:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Now that's funny."

Only for cases of arrested development. All together now: nyuk, nyuk.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Speaking of jokes, I've got one:

Mcbuffs, Goat, and connie are walking through the woods and come across a set of tracks.

"Those are Bear tracks!" says Goat excitedly.

"No, those are Deer tracks!", corrects connie.

Seconds later, McBuffs gets hit by the train.

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 2:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Seconds later, McBuffs gets hit by the train."

That's stupid: if you can see the tracks, it's already gone by...

Posted by Greatgarloo on October 6, 2008 at 2:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fine. Obama is simply TOO intelligent for a job as simplistic as president of the USSA(United Socialist States of America). Liberals are just too darn smart, and cool for themselves.

Fortunately, their self-righteous arrogance always makes up for it.

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 3:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Considering McCain is someone who doesn't need to rent a Halloween costume, the anecdote captures the Repug mentality quite accurately.

Posted by connie on October 6, 2008 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

BillPrez - Remember, I also said that if you didn't like what they said you could always nuke them later. The "peace in our time" that you speak of was Chamberlain, and that was not just talking, he actually gave concessions... did I ever say anything about concessions? No, just that there can be no peace without talk...

Please do not put words into my mouth. Typical GOP tactic - when you cannot argue intelligently, make something up.

Posted by taoistblockhead on October 6, 2008 at 3:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) Says Congress Threatened with Martial Law If Bailout Bill Is (was) Not Passed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_...

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/nod...

Posted by blacksho89 on October 6, 2008 at 4 p.m. (Suggest removal)

shbldr1 : No, you are missing the point. Nixon ALSO went on to law school. Educational level is no predictor of ability.

Posted by phoenix_rises on October 6, 2008 at 4:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Exactly. Here is what McCain said in 2005:

“If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

So with Republican control of the house for 2 more years, control of the senate for 4 more years, and control of the White House, why didn't McCain do more than just talk?

Oh, perhaps it had something to do with this:

The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list — using figures from the Federal Election Commission — shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.

McSAME

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 4:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree, shbldr1 is missing the point. Education is irrelevant. Intelligence is irrelevant. Experience is irrelevant (unless that experience has to do with "being real" whatever that means, or being a "maverick" and then renouncing all of your maverick views but not the label, or being a POW). Nothing is relevant, except ... what? I haven't figured it out yet.

Oh, wait. All those things do count. But they count FOR you if you are one of the "good" guys and AGAINST you if you are one of the "bad" guys.

Now I get it.

Posted by pack on October 6, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MikeEllis: "all those things count..." Yes, all these character and education factors seem rather confusing. Another reason to just focus on the issues.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"That's stupid: if you can see the tracks, it's already gone by..."

Good one Flav. You continue to be one of the few on your side of the fence with a sense of humor...

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

From 2:04 PM: "Clinton pushed for lower credit guidelines, that is a fact. Please explain to us all how we would still be in this mess if he had left them alone."

**Crickets Chirping**

Posted by SoBoPop on October 6, 2008 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blockhead: Whom do you think Rep Sherman was referring to as threatening martial law?

The most likely fearmonger to threaten democratic reps would have been his boss Ms. Pelosi or one of her minions like the house majority party whip.

Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 5:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

" Clinton pushed for lower credit guidelines, that is a fact. Please explain to us all how we would still be in this mess if he had left them alone."

Considering the markets around the world are crashing, we probably would. One administration nearly 10 years ago responsible for the escalating prices and subsequent crash in all of Europe, Dubai and Russia...?

If it was such a bad move, why didnt the Bush administration, with the luxury of a compliant house and senate fix this long ago...?

Live and learn. Change the rules back and lets get back on track. Nobodys hands are clean - including yours.

Posted by JakPott on October 6, 2008 at 5:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

FYI - " In 2000, due to a re-assessment of the housing market by HUD, anti-predatory lending rules were put into place that disallowed risky, high-cost loans from being credited toward affordable housing goals. In 2004, these rules were dropped and high-risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals. "

The whole thing was a complicated mess. Messing with the rules was the problem.

We need regulations that are stable to encourage stable markets.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"If it was such a bad move, why didn't the Bush administration, with the luxury of a compliant house and senate fix this long ago...?"

Who was going to listen? The economy was flying high, homeownership was at an all-time high, and peoples homes were worth 3, 4, or 5 times what they paid. Anyone urging caution was basically laughed out of the room by both parties.

Reducing credit guidelines was well intended. Clinton wasn't a bad guy for doing it. He meant well, and for a decade it looked like a great plan. But when the chickens came back to roost, it appears to have been an abject failure, and another example of why human nature trumps social engineering.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 6, 2008 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"We need regulations that are stable to encourage stable markets."

Either that or let banks decide who to loan money to. Got bad credit? Fine. Pay 20% down and a higher interest rate. That way you have skin in the game and won't walk as easily, and the bank can cover its exposure if you default. It's simple and has worked for literally thousands of years. If a bank is being biased based on race or other issues for people with identical credit scores, punish the bank...even close them down.

Posted by MikeEllis on October 6, 2008 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IX, you're basically saying we can't blame anybody. That's no fun.

Posted by billy_goat_gruff on October 6, 2008 at 6:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Free.Markets.Don't.Work.

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 7:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blame IXL, that's always fun...<G>

Posted by Billprez on October 6, 2008 at 7:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Connie -

Wow - thanks for setting me straight. Now I realize that if I don't agree with you and swallow your Kool-aid I am making things up and of course "cannot argue intelligently".

On a more positive note, I noticed the other day that your campaign has enlisted some children in California to sing praises of your great leader. Perhaps you would like to see the ultimate result of their work. Please go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH-2Fw...

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"...I noticed the other day that your campaign has enlisted some children in California to sing praises of your great leader..."

So? Is that more appalling (...er...a palin'...) than speaking in tongues?

Posted by bobcat77 on October 6, 2008 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by billy_goat_gruff :

Free.Markets.Don't.Work.
---

Since when?

They have worked fine, around the world for over 2000 years.

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 8:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"They have worked fine, around the world for over 2000 years."

Depends on your vantage point.

Posted by Billprez on October 6, 2008 at 9:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Flatven -

"So? Is that more appalling (...er...a palin'...) than speaking in tongues?"

You once again make absolutely no sense. Please elucidate.

Posted by flaven on October 6, 2008 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm confident you can figure it out.

Posted by redneck on October 6, 2008 at 10:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The obama youth core is getting indoctrinated in our public schools:

http://tinyurl.com/3nj7jz

Posted by taoistblockhead on October 6, 2008 at 10:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CNN (October 7, 2008) Washington, DC - The American People have staged a coup and forced the current Bush Administration to abandon the White House, along with Democratic Congressional leaders Pelosi and Reid. The Bush team has apparently fled, with unspecified amounts of Nazi gold, to recently purchased property in Paraguay. Former Vice President Cheney is rumored to be holed up in a bunker in an un-disclosed location. Pelosi and Reid are currently being held under house arrest inside the upper levels of the Washington Monument. The American People have installed Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich as first-ever bipartisan co-leaders of the nation; among their first acts will be to bring US troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as begin closing the 800+ worldwide US military bases with the goal of returning America to a Republic, rather than an Empire. The coup was met with international support and seen as a return to sanity from the last 28 years of Fascist takeover of the US federal government. David Addington was not available for comment at press time.

Posted by IXLR82 on October 7, 2008 at 7:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Posted by redneck on October 6, 2008 at 10:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Obama youth core is getting indoctrinated in our public schools:"

My friends 9 year old came home the other day and said "I'm voting for Obama because Plain will kill all the Polar Bears". Nice.

But on the bright side, its a better reason than I get out of most adult Obama voters.

Posted by connie on October 7, 2008 at 8:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

BillPrez - you never address issues, you make things up (I never said word one about concessions - just that we should never be afraid to talk) and you appear to be so completely under the control of the forces of evil that you are beyond redemption. I hope you don't spontaneously combust when the light finally dawns on November 4th.

Posted by redneck on October 7, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

maoistblockhead: "The Bush team has apparently fled, with unspecified amounts of Nazi gold, to recently ...."

I have made an effort reading your rants but absolutely can't figure out what you're trying to convey. Is this just feable attempts at irony or satire or are you just nuts?