Not Sarah Palin, but Gwen Ifill. She was indeed fair and very even handed, I have to give credit where credit is due.

I figure it's the least I can do considering Zin was gracious (and honest) enough to admit that Palin didn't tank the debate.

Ok, that's enough honesty for one night, lets find something to argue about. lol

I decided to vote for the candidate who looked as if he could after the election, and he had lost, reach across the aisle and heal the nation... you know, offer an olive branch and agree to work with the new president to heal the country - work to solve our problems - and set aside the need to have the biggest dick in town...  

Sadly I decided that there is something in each of the Presidential candidates that dicates that they cannot perform that task...  they just do not have it within them to be a gracious looser... to heal - but most of all - more forward for the good of the country....

Then - I decided that with the financial crisis... and the fact that Freddie mac and Fannie Mae... both are under Federal over sight... that's right... and both have presidential board appointed seats... by their charter....so I want someone who is in no way beholden to these folk... ya know, NO POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.... McCain, Biden and Obama ALL claim that they are innocent - and can act in the best interest in the public interests....

As I posted below - after looking into the $4.8M that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac DUMPED into MOCs and the MOCs Invested $1.5 M in these two entities...

So tell me that they (MOCs) are innocent - when the appoint 5 board members to each of these organizations... this is just totally irresponsible conflicts of interest....  maybe legal, but certainly questionable...

the top 4 guys... got over 500K from FM2

Name                        Grand Total
Chris Dodd, D             $165,400
Barack Obama, D             $126,349
John Kerry, D             $111,000
Bob Bennett, R             $107,999

But least you think that there was an untainted MOC, They ALL took some money, every last damn one of them  Members of Congress.... more like members of shit.

As for Mccain - he in the top half also....

John McCain, R               $21,550  

the guy in this big dick contest I like the least - joe biden -took the least... by that gage he appears to be downright honest...

Joe Biden, D                 $3,300  

This is all too much.... just too damn much.

and our fearless leader out of this mess?  Barney frank...

Barney Frank, D                 $42,350

I decided that because NONE of them are untainted with the stench of bribes, and influence peddling... I can vote for no incumbant...

On election day, I intend to get a list of all incumbants... and no matter who runs against them, that is who I am voting for.... and guess that - that means third party for this dude...

imagine if we ALL did that!  would that finally send the message....

old ronald regan had the right idea when he fired ALL the air traffic controllers.... it sent a message... loud and clear... and sometimes that is what is needed.... all incumbants in DC MUST GO.

emissions, gay marriage,same sex benefits and other liberal issues. Ifll did ask questions on energy and I did like that.

Biden had the same answer the Leesbo Rachel Madddow had being critical of Palin .
You have to know the problem before the solution .
But can we prove 100% global warming is man made and if  we cannot will we do nothing  to help the enviromental problem


-- Modified on 10/2/2008 10:14:28 PM

First Biden says that human caused emissions (carbon) is the problem, and then says clean coal is the answer? Helloooo!!! Pray tell how does cleaning the coal of impurities reduce carbon emissions???

He also claims that drilling will not produce one drop of oil for 10 years. So, how much energy will research into alternative sources of fuel produce in 10 years? How about using the money from selling leases (immediate $'s) to pay for the research? At least in 10 years we will have oil if research produces nothing.

a solution. Look I am not arguing that man does not have an effect per carbon emissions on the environment. Arguing how much effect man has the to Global Warming can be argued ad nauseum with no result.

By engaging on an energy policy and through smart land use planning we can achieve the goals of:

(1) National Security. Everyday we depend on foreign oil the more we become vulnerable to losing our way of life.

(2) Economic. Every $1.00 dollar in increase in a barrell of oil, costs our economy $7 billion dollars a year.

(3) Posterity. The resources we use today means the less our children will have.

(3) Environment. Through energy conservation by mass transit etc. we will achieve saving our environment.

By focusing on carbon emissions we lose focus on other causes of Global Warming such as for example, the way our cities are planned. Portland Oregon is excellent example of smart planning. I like to see jobs and where people live, closer together. I like to see less parking lots and more trees and more land for water runoff. The floods and fires we are having is direct result of poor land use planning not carbon emissions.

-- Modified on 10/2/2008 11:01:43 PM

I agree but still say she should have let it be known .

money to Obama but you never tell the rest of the story.

Those contributions were from people who were considered employees of FNMA or Freddie, they were not donations from those who held positions of power within FNMA or Freddie. Look where those people gave their money and you'll find that it went to the republicans 5 to 1.

I'm an ex-teacher and still a member of the professional organization (I WISH we had an actual union!). If I give $1000 to Obama (Fat chance! That's a few hours of lovely entertainment that I'd have to give up) does that mean he's somehow in the pocket of the teacher's 'union'? how about if 1000 teachers give $1000? Whose pocket is he in?

To decry money's role in modern politics is just hogwash. Money is and will be for the foreseeable future the lifeblood of American politics. Nothing in America makes any sense at all without money as the intermediary.

has worked its ass off for the last 30 years to enact policies completely counter to those you seem to want is beyond me.

The republican party has been at the forefront of the whole Me-First thrust of the last 30 years. "No one can tell me whether I should drive a Hummer or live in a McMansion or not". Then, when the larger society actually lives according to those tenets, it doesn't work so well, eh?

I  have been a member of one... and yes they do provide funds to political candidates... both D's and R's - as to your assertion about over half.... DUDE! in the partial list I provided of the top 4 folk who received money from FM2... 3 were Dems... and one was an R.... and I clearly stated that, get over your anger and look at the facts....

By the way, if indeed you did read the post, then you will know that of the TOP FOUR people who received money from FM2 - (over $500K in one year alone) 3 were Dems... and only 1 (the fourth) was an R.  So please spare me the innocence of anyone... and I also pointed out in a subsequent post that Biden is indeed at the bottom of the list in terms of quantity of influence peddling accepted... I was quite balanced in my review of this information - McCain is in the top half of recipients....

As to how PACs work, they, through their dues and contributions maintain a lobbying staff - and they also provide contributions to those "Friendly to their cause"  They also send out news letters to their membership - with lists of congressional members "fiendly to their cause" suggesting that you may wish to make a contribution in the name of the PAC.... that is how individual contributions are tagged to specific constituent individual desires...

As to a teacher's union - heck - AFT - the american Federation of Teachers... or the National Education Association - me?  I was a member of national AAUP.... no unions... PHULLLLLLeeeese gimme a frickin break... AND ALL THE AFORE MENTIONED - provide lobbying groups and funds to political campaigns....  

And yes, it DOES mean that larger sums of money given - in the aggregate DOES buy influence...

I have a way that I think would change this - and for the better - but it is NOT derived from my experience as a faculty member... but rather from how successful businesses are run.... and all still get a say.

but let me ask you a question since you have a problem with my concern.... would you rather your congressman go to WDC Knowing you, your concerns and your desires, with minimal obligations to either PACs or companies... or the other way around?  that is the question that I would try to resolve...  That is that your MOCs spend more time with their constituents than with any lobbiest group or groups.