Re: Obama's Closest Associates are Radicals

On Oct 7 2008 12:40 PM, Lute wrote:

If one can summarize the basic distinction between liberal and
conservative, it is this:

Liberal: Bigger government, higher taxes, more spending.

Conservative: Smaller government, lower taxes, less spending.

Conservative? You're calling McCain a conservative? Whose party to, which
he is unswervingly loyal when it counts, has given us bigger, more
wasteful government, massively higher debts that will have to be paid off
with taxes (later), and gargantuan amounts of wasteful spending?

Check in with Planet Earth once in a while.


Obama was unable, during his first debate, to name one major
government program that he would cut, perhaps apart from the military.

McCain is no conservative either, but he is not on the far, far left.

If you single out those votes that would lead to smaller government,
lower taxes, and less government spending, Obama is without question
to the left of Hillary Clinton.

=*=*=

On Oct 7, 1:41 pm, "JerseyRudy" <a44f...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 7 2008 1:32 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:

On Oct 7 2008 10:50 AM, Lute wrote:

Obama is the MOST LIBERAL senator in the senate, and his agenda is to
"tax the rich" and increase government spending.  In his debate with
McCain, when asked what he might CUT from spending, he listed off
those items that he would NOT cut.

Most liberal? Ha! Voted for the bailout. Voted to reauthorize the Patriot
Act. Voted for the FISA legislation. Didn't vote to de-fund the Iraq war.
Wants to dump more troops into Afghanistan, and wants to attack Pakistan.

Those are some solid liberal credentials!

It's amazing how often that "MOST LIBERAL" attack has been used against
Obama; I guarantee that the people using it have no idea what this is
based on. They are just throwing it out there because it sounds good. Here
is the most detailed explanation I could find explaining the basis for
this stupid attack:

"Breaking down exactly what McCain and Palin are talking about when they
cite the National Journal's 2007 Congressional vote rankings from which
they cull their reference to the "most liberal" U.S. Senator in their
attempts to make Obama look "too risky."

The National Journal looked at 99 Senate votes in 2007 and used those as
the basis of what the McCain-Palin team sees as a stinging indictment of
the Democratic ticket. Sadly for McCain, looking at many of those votes
indicates that Obama is very much in the American mainstream and provides
an excellent rationale for why more of us should vote for Obama and not
against him.

Of the votes used to give McCain his latest name-calling gambit, a good
number of them show Obama on what most voters would consider the right
side of issues such as the Iraq war, raising the minimum wage, energy
independence, stem cell research and increased domestic security.

Two of the votes that will cause McCain and Palin to shriek "liberal" at
Obama were in favor of raising the Federal Minimum wage for the first time
in a decade -- something Americans overwhelmingly supported -- and against
another piece of cruel Republican legislation to kill the minimum wage
entirely. And, yes, for all you folks out there making the lowest required
wage rate, Senator McCain did vote to abolish it and let your employers
decide based on state law or their own kindness how much you earn.

Obama also voted for a whole slew of other popular things including fully
funding special education in our schools -- you know, Governor Palin, for
kids with special needs -- allowing more children to get basic health care
and lowering prescription drug prices on our senior citizens. Here's to
hoping our elderly in Florida consider that last one and allow the
"liberal" cry from John McCain to send them to the voting booth for Obama..

Stem cell research? The vast majority of Americans support that science
and the promise it holds for new treatments and cures for some of the most
debilitating and deadly diseases. Barack Obama supported the "liberal"
position of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act and, as a matter of
fact, so did John McCain -- but that won't keep McCain and Palin from
using it like a bat to beat Obama with.

The same hypocrisy is true with legislation by that flaming liberal Joe
Lieberman that called for the creation of a Senate Office of Public
Integrity to, as Lieberman put it, "aggressively investigate allegations
of misconduct among [Senate] Members." Lieberman, McCain and other
Republicans voted for that -- but somehow Barack Obama also voting in
favor makes him an evil liberal American.

American energy independence is one of the hot topics this campaign season
and yet two votes cast by Obama to reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil
will be assailed by Team McCain -- even though John McCain couldn't even
be bothered to show up for either of those votes.

And on Iraq, caring for our troops fighting there and in Afghanistan and
securing America within our own borders, Obama has consistently voted for
what "Main Street" thinks is right and which again, in Bizarro Republican
World, would make voting in step with the American people a bad thing.

The majority of Americans no longer want us bogged down in the Iraq
quagmire and all of Obama's votes to set a timeline to get the hell out of
that mess makes for more GOP evidence of his "liberal" ideals. Obama also
voted to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations -- how did that
become a liberal stance? -- and to fund screening of cargo containers at
major U.S. shipping ports... McCain didn't show up for work to vote on
those issues that day either.

Finally, it's a very strange part of the election cycle when the
McCain-Palin team thinks it can turn votes Obama made on behalf of
America's troops and their families against him -- but they're going to do
exactly that when it comes to the Democratic nominee's efforts to limit
the duration of Iraq deployments and extend the period of downtime troops
receive with their families before they can be sent back.

"This is an amendment that is focused squarely on supporting our troops
who are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Senator Jim Webb (D-VA), a
combat Veteran, arguing for one of two bills he authored to give troops
more time between deployments. "It speaks directly to their welfare and to
the needs of their families by establishing minimum periods between
deployments for both our regular and reserve components."

Obama voted with the troops and their families on that issue, McCain voted
against them -- and this is a bad thing for Obama?

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel sponsored a bill to limit Iraq deployments
to 12 months saying that the extended tours favored by the Bush
administration is "...wearing down the troops and their families,
impacting the mental and physical health of our troops."

Again, wherever Sarah Palin speaks in the next month, she will try to
convince voters that Obama siding with Hagel and military families was a
nasty liberal plot while McCain voting with Bush and against the troops
was the right thing to do.

So we're in the homestretch. The Obama-Biden ticket is surging in the
polls and even making states like Indiana and North Carolina look like
they may vote Democratic this year -- so desperate times will call for
desperate and dirty Republican tricks and labeling.

But if they're going to resort to their tired old tactic of standing on
the street corner like crazy people yelling "liberal, liberal, liberal,"
let's at least let them know that, along with Obama and Joe Biden, they're
including the mainstream of America under that umbrella."


------ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

.

Quantcast