Groan. You’d think Obama coined the terms “fired up” and “change.” Any democrat can market his/herself as an agent of change because each, if elected, would steer a radical change of course. Also, Clinton’s health care and work/life proposals are more bold than those of Obama. If you measure “change” by one’s standing on the progressive-meter, you might have to give it to Clinton. (gasp)
people ,especially in the usa , are stupid (mostly) and really dont have the intellect or objectivity to identify and critically dissect/assess the myriad pressing pertinent issues that affect the american voter today and tomorrow.
the american voter is just too plain old dumb to make the correct intelligent choice ever, for anything , end of story. blissfully ignorant = the american voter
change change change… what an ignorant drumbeat, and it suits the american voter and their simplistic political notions perfectly to a tee.
WE WANT CHANGE BUT WE DONT KNOW OR CANT AGREE EXACTLY WHAT CHANGES WE WANT OR HOW TO DO THEM, OR IF SAID CHANGES ARE REALLY THE BEST IDEA OR ARE EVEN A GOOD IDEA…BUT WE KNOW ONE THING….WE WANT CHANGE!!!
typical of the herd mentality, crowd around something that catches your eye/interest and moo loudly…
one thing tho,better make sure you know what change really means, before you sing the chorus so loudly.
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm
and when i hear the republican money grubbers talking about how much they admire obama and hate clinton , how they feel obama is someone they can work with vs hillary who they will never support under any circumstance…
well that in itself, by itself should tell ANY AND EVERY intelligent person reams about obama , his political agenda and who his real “friends” are…but as i said previously in my last posting ,the american voter is too stupid and ignorant to be able to “read between the lines”, or, even sadder, to know what the phrase means/implies…
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
If the American people really wanted true change they would support Congressional term limits. There are 27 Senators and 55 Representatives who have 20 or more years of service. Three Senators and two Representatives have more than 40 years of service.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
JUST LIKE YOU SAY THE AMERICAN VOTER
IS IGNORANT OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.
ALL THIS TALK IS BULL THE PRESIDENT
IS NOT A KING OR QUEEN THEY DO NOT
MAKE THE POLICY FOR WHAT GOES ON IN THE
COUNTRY. CONGRESS DOES IT ALL BY THEM
SELF THEY WASTE AND DO NOT FIX ANYTHING
THEY GET THERE PAY AND THERE BENEFITS AND PENSION. ALL THE TALK MAKES ME SICK
FROM THESE SO CALLED CANIDATES THEY ARE
NOT ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT CONGRESS. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC MUST DO
SOMETHING ABOUT CONGRESS,BUT THEY
WILL NOT ALLOW THE CHILDREN TO GET AN
EDUCATION TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. THE
TRUTH IS LOSED IN GOVERNMENT.
thats somewhat true James Danley ,but what is really needed to right the american political process is CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM….that would get the big business money out of the electoral process and allow the best and most qualifed people for the job to be able to run for office, but since when has ANY candidate actually made any significant proposals or advancements for that kind of agenda????? they all know which side their bread is buttered on , most definitely…
the real intrinsic problems in this country , politically, economically and socially are mysterious and unidentifiable in general to the avg american voter, they are just too dumb, albeit passionately ( courtesy of overfunded public education programs that waste the taxpayer dollars to build mega $$ schools that continue to turn out cookie cutter morons by the millions yearly) to figure out whats really needed and how to accomplish it.
honestly, the best choice is to not vote at all if you dont truly understand the issues, you are likely doing more harm than good , eg; anyone who voted for ron reagan and the bushes….
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
yup ,theres ava, another american voter who has no clue… keep pushing for obama to win the democratic nomination, that way the republicans will have a definite lock on the oval office one way or the other, even if the republican candidate doesnt win and obama makes it into the white house, he is at best a moderate democrat and at worst, a closet republican and he is in no way a true liberal . he will bow down to corporate interests once in office .
good job promoting “change” ava…
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
Bah, while I disagree with many of your assessments, I do agree there should be real campaign finance reform. Here are some things I would recommend:
1) Only an INDIVIDUAL who is 18 years or older and an American citizen can contribute to campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or initatives, political parties or Political Action Committees.
2) Corporations, organizations and unions are prohibited from contributing to campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or iniatives, political parties or PACs.
3) Contributions can ONLY be made to campaigns in which the individual is allowed to vote — no contributions to Senate campaigns, Congressional campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or initiatives outside the individual’s voting jurisdiction; and no contributions to PACs that are not advocating a candidate or cause outside of the individual’s voting jurisdiction.
4) Maximum limits for contributions would be $10,000 per candidate, proposition or initiative, per election (primary and general elections are separate elections).
5) Maximum limits for contributions would be $10,000 to any political party or Political Action Committee, annually.
6) 527 PACs must fully disclose all contributions.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
Correction: #3 should have been: “…and no contributions to PACs that are not advocating a candidate or cause WITHIN the individual’s voting jurisdiction.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
It is the Economy, Folks. We must get rid of oll who support the ‘new’ 21st century free market corporate supremacists in the Republican and democrat. We must demand that the privatization of the federal government be immediately un-done. Get rid of the corporate contractors running the intelligence in the CIA. You can only bring back our republic by going back to regulated capitalism that makes ‘we the people’ more powerful than corporations. It is not government that is bad -it is the free market corporatist politicians who are overthrowing our republic by privatizing government.Save our republic – Keep govt. public.
Posted by: Bill Roberts | January 6, 2008, 9:49 am 9:49 am
Face it folks. Hillary is LOSE CHANGE! Vote Huckabee!
Posted by: ez | January 6, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Face it folks. Hillary is LOSE CHANGE! Vote Huckabee!
Posted by: ez | January 6, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
James D – Your are right on the term limits.
The issue with donations though is limiting them would only allow multi-millionaires and up to run like Kerry, Bloomberg and so on. The other points are right unions should not be allowed to donate and neither from outside the country.
Bah – you complain about the education system which is a puppet of the Dems/Libs but then point to Reagan? You make no sense. The answer is School Choice, but the libs and their NEA sponsored groups stop the choice. (Funny from a Group thats says their Pro-Choice)
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:17 am 11:17 am
ez – your right about Hilary , but Vote Thompson!!!
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:18 am 11:18 am
Also Please Note, Change is a two sided sword!! The Libs say Change, but what change they never say!!
Do they want higher taxes? Do they want to destroy our Military? What!
Last Pol 80% of Americans are happy where they are in Life!!
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
Email
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Groan. You’d think Obama coined the terms “fired up” and “change.” Any democrat can market his/herself as an agent of change because each, if elected, would steer a radical change of course. Also, Clinton’s health care and work/life proposals are more bold than those of Obama. If you measure “change” by one’s standing on the progressive-meter, you might have to give it to Clinton. (gasp)
Posted by: cordelia525 | January 5, 2008, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
people ,especially in the usa , are stupid (mostly) and really dont have the intellect or objectivity to identify and critically dissect/assess the myriad pressing pertinent issues that affect the american voter today and tomorrow.
the american voter is just too plain old dumb to make the correct intelligent choice ever, for anything , end of story. blissfully ignorant = the american voter
change change change… what an ignorant drumbeat, and it suits the american voter and their simplistic political notions perfectly to a tee.
WE WANT CHANGE BUT WE DONT KNOW OR CANT AGREE EXACTLY WHAT CHANGES WE WANT OR HOW TO DO THEM, OR IF SAID CHANGES ARE REALLY THE BEST IDEA OR ARE EVEN A GOOD IDEA…BUT WE KNOW ONE THING….WE WANT CHANGE!!!
typical of the herd mentality, crowd around something that catches your eye/interest and moo loudly…
one thing tho,better make sure you know what change really means, before you sing the chorus so loudly.
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm
and when i hear the republican money grubbers talking about how much they admire obama and hate clinton , how they feel obama is someone they can work with vs hillary who they will never support under any circumstance…
well that in itself, by itself should tell ANY AND EVERY intelligent person reams about obama , his political agenda and who his real “friends” are…but as i said previously in my last posting ,the american voter is too stupid and ignorant to be able to “read between the lines”, or, even sadder, to know what the phrase means/implies…
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
If the American people really wanted true change they would support Congressional term limits. There are 27 Senators and 55 Representatives who have 20 or more years of service. Three Senators and two Representatives have more than 40 years of service.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
JUST LIKE YOU SAY THE AMERICAN VOTER
IS IGNORANT OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.
ALL THIS TALK IS BULL THE PRESIDENT
IS NOT A KING OR QUEEN THEY DO NOT
MAKE THE POLICY FOR WHAT GOES ON IN THE
COUNTRY. CONGRESS DOES IT ALL BY THEM
SELF THEY WASTE AND DO NOT FIX ANYTHING
THEY GET THERE PAY AND THERE BENEFITS AND PENSION. ALL THE TALK MAKES ME SICK
FROM THESE SO CALLED CANIDATES THEY ARE
NOT ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT CONGRESS. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC MUST DO
SOMETHING ABOUT CONGRESS,BUT THEY
WILL NOT ALLOW THE CHILDREN TO GET AN
EDUCATION TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. THE
TRUTH IS LOSED IN GOVERNMENT.
Posted by: RICHIE | January 5, 2008, 3:25 pm 3:25 pm
thats somewhat true James Danley ,but what is really needed to right the american political process is CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM….that would get the big business money out of the electoral process and allow the best and most qualifed people for the job to be able to run for office, but since when has ANY candidate actually made any significant proposals or advancements for that kind of agenda????? they all know which side their bread is buttered on , most definitely…
the real intrinsic problems in this country , politically, economically and socially are mysterious and unidentifiable in general to the avg american voter, they are just too dumb, albeit passionately ( courtesy of overfunded public education programs that waste the taxpayer dollars to build mega $$ schools that continue to turn out cookie cutter morons by the millions yearly) to figure out whats really needed and how to accomplish it.
honestly, the best choice is to not vote at all if you dont truly understand the issues, you are likely doing more harm than good , eg; anyone who voted for ron reagan and the bushes….
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
yup ,theres ava, another american voter who has no clue… keep pushing for obama to win the democratic nomination, that way the republicans will have a definite lock on the oval office one way or the other, even if the republican candidate doesnt win and obama makes it into the white house, he is at best a moderate democrat and at worst, a closet republican and he is in no way a true liberal . he will bow down to corporate interests once in office .
good job promoting “change” ava…
Posted by: bah | January 5, 2008, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
Bah, while I disagree with many of your assessments, I do agree there should be real campaign finance reform. Here are some things I would recommend:
1) Only an INDIVIDUAL who is 18 years or older and an American citizen can contribute to campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or initatives, political parties or Political Action Committees.
2) Corporations, organizations and unions are prohibited from contributing to campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or iniatives, political parties or PACs.
3) Contributions can ONLY be made to campaigns in which the individual is allowed to vote — no contributions to Senate campaigns, Congressional campaigns, organizations supporting or opposing propositions or initiatives outside the individual’s voting jurisdiction; and no contributions to PACs that are not advocating a candidate or cause outside of the individual’s voting jurisdiction.
4) Maximum limits for contributions would be $10,000 per candidate, proposition or initiative, per election (primary and general elections are separate elections).
5) Maximum limits for contributions would be $10,000 to any political party or Political Action Committee, annually.
6) 527 PACs must fully disclose all contributions.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
Correction: #3 should have been: “…and no contributions to PACs that are not advocating a candidate or cause WITHIN the individual’s voting jurisdiction.
Posted by: James Danley | January 5, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
It is the Economy, Folks. We must get rid of oll who support the ‘new’ 21st century free market corporate supremacists in the Republican and democrat. We must demand that the privatization of the federal government be immediately un-done. Get rid of the corporate contractors running the intelligence in the CIA. You can only bring back our republic by going back to regulated capitalism that makes ‘we the people’ more powerful than corporations. It is not government that is bad -it is the free market corporatist politicians who are overthrowing our republic by privatizing government.Save our republic – Keep govt. public.
Posted by: Teddy Ohio | January 5, 2008, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
Well spoken Denise. Thank you.
Posted by: Bill Roberts | January 6, 2008, 9:49 am 9:49 am
Face it folks. Hillary is LOSE CHANGE! Vote Huckabee!
Posted by: ez | January 6, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Face it folks. Hillary is LOSE CHANGE! Vote Huckabee!
Posted by: ez | January 6, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
James D – Your are right on the term limits.
The issue with donations though is limiting them would only allow multi-millionaires and up to run like Kerry, Bloomberg and so on. The other points are right unions should not be allowed to donate and neither from outside the country.
Bah – you complain about the education system which is a puppet of the Dems/Libs but then point to Reagan? You make no sense. The answer is School Choice, but the libs and their NEA sponsored groups stop the choice. (Funny from a Group thats says their Pro-Choice)
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:17 am 11:17 am
ez – your right about Hilary , but Vote Thompson!!!
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:18 am 11:18 am
Also Please Note, Change is a two sided sword!! The Libs say Change, but what change they never say!!
Do they want higher taxes? Do they want to destroy our Military? What!
Last Pol 80% of Americans are happy where they are in Life!!
Posted by: spock | January 7, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am