How are your friends Rev. Hagee, David Duke, McCain (hero - but willing to fight for 100 years?). You certainly are not a wolf in sheeps clothing - we can identify you right away!!!

Please, tell me when I ever stated that Hagee, David Duke, McCain were my friends. By sticking David Duke in there, are you trying to imply that I am a racist?

Shameful, David's mom. Shame on you.

-----------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

Don't you know this man HAS NO FRIENDS???!!! He is even "terrible" at restaurants.

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

That puff of smoke you saw yesterday over PTC was Hack's head exploding.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

"We can identify you right away!!!"

"David Duke" -- Getting desperate, are you? Touchy after O-BOMBa bombed in PA?

“If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names.”
Elbert Hubbard

The name-calling technique links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique that appeals to our emotions rather than to our reason hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence.

In other words, you're unable to present a cogent argument.

You actually cut and pasted your "name calling" line RIGHT below "O-BOMBa." Are you okay today?

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

You consider that a "vile name"? Actually, it's a caricature, like a political cartoon that emphasizes Obama's big ears. It draws attention to his associations, his political roots, for which I provided ample facts (evidence) so that you could stop relying on your emotions and reject Obama for president.

If you consider that the equivalent of David's mom saying the David Duke is Beaver's friend (totally unfounded), then you need to study logic, a solution suggested by David's mom. Richard Hobbs could teach you.

1) Denise opinion #1:

"The name-calling technique links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique that appeals to our emotions rather than to our reason hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence.

In other words, you're unable to present a cogent argument."

2) Denise opinion #2:

"? Actually, it's a caricature, like a political cartoon that emphasizes Obama's big ears. It draws attention to his associations, his political roots, for which I provided ample facts (evidence) so that you could stop relying on your emotions and reject Obama for president."

Denise, we might need a third you to judge the two yous on display currently.

Oh, and for Richard Hobbs to legally teach me, he may need to obtain a degree from an institution that is actually accredited. I would suggest one of our fine military academies, but that would require actual military service afterwards.

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Richard could teach you that also.

You do find it hard to stay on topic, don't you?

Is your saying that Richard doesn't have "a degree from an institution that is actually accredited" libel?

And what does his military service or lack thereof have to do with Obama, Ayers, or logic?

Distractions, again!

Re-read your cut & paste -- the part about my providing you with "ample facts (evidence) so that you could stop relying on your emotions and reject Obama for president."

to argue against YOU.

I'll take Denise argument #1 as listed above.

As you often forget what you type, Richard because you want the man obsessed with Jimmy Carter to "teach me." So, Denise, how does the school Richard attended rate in the world of peer review? How do other schools of law view Richard's alma mater? If you feel I'm guilty of libel, I know where you can find a lawyer.

military service has as much to do about Ayers and Barack Obama as Barack has to do with bomb-making. Libel? Petty? How about both of you be the judges. You can give Paula Abdul a run for her money sometimes, Denise.

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

We were just talking about you. I guess you are supposed to leave Jimmy Carter alone long enough to give me pro bono logic lessons.
I'm free today thru Sunday afternoon. How 'bout you? Your place, mine, or neutral ground?

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Denise got it right with O-BOMBa- it says alot about the friends you hang out with. Denise is fine, she is as smart as they come and you know it. Insults don't help- that same line you use with me.

Wow, Hack do you talk to the Mrs. like this? My husband does not talk to me like this. I would not want him to talk to anyone like that, he doesn't. That is just one of the million things I love about him.

______________________________
We Will Stand

"talk to the Mrs. like this?" who are you BPR, Fred Flintstone? Do you actually call yourself "the Mrs."? In my observation, Hack is one of the more polite folks here. Even folks I tend to agree with say some pretty nasty stuff (ie "fetus flushing"). But I haven't seen any of them call their wife the "c-word" as McCain has done on several public occasions. Just why do you HATE so much? Hate is simply not a family value, babe!

You're unable to present a 'balanced' argument. I'm not the only one who realizes this - and accepts this. Not name calling - just dealing with the facts of Denise's contribution. The election in Pennsylvania - hasn't changed anything yet. Obama is still ahead in delegates/popular vote and states won. I'm supporting change - not just Obama. Hillary will do just fine. No more telling us 'all is well' while we can't afford to make our paychecks last the month. That is the issue - not all of these distractions. Wait until we compare either one of these Democrats to the record of the Republican Party under Bush. I'll have to do some 'linking' then!! Didn't mean to hurt your feelings - just stating the facts.

And how is B-HO going to help you "make our paychecks last the month"? Is he going to take money from someone else and give it to you? He can't do anything for you. All his promises for hope and change are as empty as his concession speech was last night. There is no substance to this man.

Take responsibility for yourself for a change. Get a second job if you are having trouble making ends meet. The government cannot bail us out - you have to do it yourself.

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

My paycheck in my retirement is just fine, thank you. What 'change' will do for the country is put funds into educating our youth instead of sending them off to a war situation where we have lost over 4000 of our finest!; repair our own country's infrastructure - while rebuilding in the Middle East. Putting our money in programs where we work with citizens of the world in solving their problems rather than being their problem. I was fortunate to have parents who realized how important education is to the future generation - and God willing - it won't be necessary for me to get a second job at this time in my life. However, I've seen what inflation did to my mother's retirement - so I'm all for change. We can't survive under the present economic policy of this administration.

You are so correct in don't look to the governement to bail you out. I work 3 part-time jobs which is really full- time. I am thankful that 2 jobs are done at home, I have a son that I want to be with and take care of.

You are correct, as long as it has a D in front of it they will vote for one of them. I will vote, I won't let them take that away from me, it won't be Obama. BTW I think he is a little against me according to BLT. That's sad, I don't think that way about him. I value people. I just state on here what he says and does and stands for then I get attacked-

You do a good job- keep it up- I appreciate it.

______________________________
We Will Stand

What about Rev. Hagee (sp.?) It's interesting how your philosophy of the importance of association is only for Obama. Hmmmm. I also question the 'thinking' of a man (McCain) who continues to associate with those who ran a smear campaign against him a few years ago - by stating he had a 'black' daughter. (He adopted a daughter from Bangladesh) That was a campaign tactic that was directed to the 'racist' element in this country. We just can't have more of the same - change is needed. McCain is McBush - and Hillary and Bill are cut from the same 'old' Washington thread. Have you checked the business practices of the realtor who sold you your house? The Wright issue has been put to bed. I think it's time to discuss Hagee. Ready?

Mr. Hagee has already been discussed HERE.

"The Wright issue has been put to bed."

Only in your mind. Just go on HOPING it will go away….

The Ir-rev Mr. Wrong (O-BOMBa's mentor) at a funeral service for a judge on April 12:

“FOX News ['Fix News'] can’t understand that [the jingoistic, chauvinistic ‘you’re either with us or against us’ demonizing kind of faith],” Wright said to rousing cheers and applause. “[Bill] O’Reilly will never get that. Sean Hannity’s stupid fantasy will keep him forever stuck on stupid [I do loooove Cutie Pie!] when it comes to comprehending how you can love a brother who does not believe what you believe."

Notice that Mr. Wrong doesn't define who is a "brother." He's free to hate everyone else.

"You don’t blame other folks for not fixing some of the problems in our own community that we can and need to fix ourselves."

But that's what he's spent his life doing.

"Jefferson had intelligence, but he also had babies by a 15 year-old slave girl. (I) think the judges call that pedophilia."

["Whether Jefferson fathered children with Sally Hemings is the subject of considerable controversy." "The most likely alternative is that Randolph Jefferson, Thomas's younger brother, was the father of Eston." See Wikipedia.]

Bringing that topic into a funeral, that's what I call "stuck on stupid"! (General Honore came up with that catchy phrase.)

Click HERE to HEAR the "sermon," if you can bear to listen. Shudder...

"More From Obama's Pastor: U.S. a Racist Superpower"

Yep, O-BOMBa had the AUDACITY to tell us that the Ir-rev Mr. Wrong is his MENTOR (his wise and trusted counselor and teacher, his adviser). So, why wouldn't we conclude that O-BOMBa really thinks like his mentor but pretends that he doesn't so that he won't scare away voters, HOPING that they won't find out the truth? If O-BOMBa were president, what position would he reward Mr. Wrong with?

Sure, we believe O-BOMBa never heard Mr. Wrong’s foul mouth in 20 years.

What AUDACITY!

---------------------------

“Realtor,” actually developer, "Tony" Rezko is “a well-known Illinois political fixer” indicted on corruption charges and a long-time FRIEND and prominent fundraiser for O-BOMBa who “helped” O-BOMBa secure his pricey $1.65 million mansion and land (additional $104,500).

Slum lord Rezko’s government-subsidized, low-income housing projects – many of which were in Obama's state Senate district – deteriorated (such as failing to provide tenants with heat, even in the middle of Chicago's brutal winters) while he flaunted “the trappings of wealth: a $74,000 diamond ring, a $22,000 mink coat, a $35,000 watch.”

“While Obama worked as a lawyer and to ‘improve living conditions for the poor,’ he took campaign cash from Rezko's slum empire.” That’s AUDACITY, all right!

“An ABC News review of campaign records shows Rezko, and people connected to him, contributed more than $120,000 [more than $200,000?] to Obama's 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate, much of it at a time when Rezko was the target of an FBI investigation.”

“Obama: Rezko Raised Up to $250,000 for Him” (3/14/08)

“Presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday that he got more political money from indicted Chicago businessman Antoin ‘Tony’ Rezko than he has previously acknowledged.” [That seems to be a pattern with O-BOMBa.]

“The Rezko Connection: Obama's Achilles Heel?”

“Leaders of Chicago watchdog organizations describe Obama's behavior as **a surprising error in judgment,** particularly for a politician noted for his tactical skills, his ambition and his support of state and federal ethics legislation.”

“Shake Down” Rezko (Is Jesse J his mentor?) is “often in the headlines for being on the wrong side of good government.” That’s AUDACITY, all right!

“He never once asked me for any favors, or ever did any favors for me,” Obama said. “He never gave me any gifts or gave me any indication he was setting me up to ask for any favors in the future.” [That’s AUDACITY to be able to say that with a straight face about his political “godfather” whom Obama knew would make his dreams come true!]

See “Obama's Faustian Bargain with Antoin 'Tony' Rezko.”

“Weeks after saying he'd answered all questions about his controversial dealings with the now-indicted Rezko, Obama released new details about their purchase of adjacent lots from the same seller on the same day. [What AUDACITY!] But the disclosures by Obama's presidential campaign left unanswered questions and raised new ones.” Obama’s HOPING that those questions will be forgotten………

“Educate Yourself: An Obama-Rezko Primer”

Wait until the 'connections' to McCain are aired. Have you read Rev. Hagee lately? Let's see some of his statements in your fair and balanced sharing. It's been a long time since you've expressed your opinion - are you just too busy reading the 'right-wing' media? Thanks for sharing.

"just too busy reading the 'right-wing' media"

There were links to the Sun Times, ABC News, L.A. Times, HuffPo, Media Matters, Chicago Tribune, MSNBC.

Yep, all "right wing"!

Be sure to read the EDUCATE YOURSELF link.

Obama-maniac, where's your "fair and balanced sharing"?

I 'read' where you occasionally put in a less 'right' contribution from the media - when it meets your goal of sharing 'right' opinions. I COMPREHEND' your purpose. OK?

The difference between Obama and Mr. Wright is Mr. Wright was on his campaign board until things started coming out that hurts Obama, and wow now he's going to retire?

I have said a million times I don't support McCain or Hagee. The difference is McCain did not ask Hagee to support him, nor does McCain goes to Hagee church.

I find that a big difference. Obama knew Mr. Wright's church is BLT. It ia a known fact.

I was proud of Obama leaving Penn. to go to Ill. - yeah he really cared for the supporters of his in Penn. by leaving- why if he had won?

I found that rude- I guess that's the way Obama is. True colors are coming out everywhere. We are seeing the real Obama- Obama of the BLT.

_______________________________
We Will Stand

There are as many fleas in political life as there are in a Carolina pine forest. I'm always amazed when folks try to paint the "new guy" as the dirty one. It will take Barack many, many years to gain the favors, experience the quid pro quo, and develop his cynicism as fully as Hillary and John McCain have. I especially like the angle, "I hate all of the candidates. Why don't you?" Now THAT is fully developed cynicism. Not gonna do that. Wouldn't be prudent to trash my hope for this country and trade it in for 4 more years of McSame.

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

See “Obama's Faustian Bargain with Antoin 'Tony' Rezko.”

No, it didn't take O-BOMBa long at all to get dirty.

It's just that McLame was only found guilty of "poor judgement", not obstruction as you state. (for cryin out loud, at least tell the truth when you try to smear someone)

"In February 1991, the Senate Ethics Committee found McCain and Glenn to be the least blameworthy of the five senators. (McCain and Glenn attended the meetings but did nothing else to influence the regulators.) McCain was guilty of nothing more than "poor judgment," the committee said, and declared his actions were not "improper nor attended with gross negligence." McCain considered the committee's judgment to be "full exoneration," and he contributed $112,000 (the amount raised for him by Keating) to the U.S. Treasury."

It's just going to come down to a matter of who has the least amount of baggage. Hitlary and B-HO have been shown to have a lot more baggage than McLame.

Besides that, Barack want's to raise my taxes to 51%. Who do you expect that I would vote for?

----------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

Is that going to be his excuse when he screws up our nation? Well, of Reagan, Bush1 and Bush2, I am the least blameworthy! Sure I done wrong, but those boys did worse?

1) Presidents don't raise taxes. Congress and The Senate do.
2) You will vote for the guy who is willing to spend 100 years of DOD money in Iraq; the guy who feels tax cuts are more important than a balanced budget, and the guy who is most likely to continue this last 8 years of economic prosperity (when viewed through a CEO's lens). I would expect no less.

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

ps: BPR, I mean Beaver: "(for cryin out loud, at least tell the truth when you try to smear someone)"

This coming from a folks who post"Obomb-a??????," tried to convince us he was Muslim, a fascist, communist, etc. Really??? That is rich! Rich I say!

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. I guess that's why you repeat my statements in your posts and claim them as your own.

1) Then why did B-HO say that he would raise capital gains taxes in the last debate if he can't do it. I guess he was lying.

2) Lower taxes bring in more tax revenue to the U.S. Government. Why is it so hard for you dems to understand simple economics? You're just as stupid and thick-skulled as B-HO.

--------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

That theory simply doesn't hold water, and everyone knows it. Our deficit and our national debt are out of this world due to Republican idiocy such as this. And what do we face now? A horrific credit crunch, which naturally slows down spending, which leads to recession. What part of that do you fail to understand?

You said: “Lower taxes bring in more tax revenue to the U.S. Government. Why is it so hard for you dems to understand simple economics?”

It’s hard for us because we believe in facts not fantasy. You are wrong as usual.

Here is a definitive study showing tax cuts do not come close to paying for themselves:

Center on Budget and Policy

Here is another by the EconomistView:

The Myth That Tax Cuts Pay for Themselves

Even the Wall Street Journal doesn’t by your claptrap:

Wall Street Journal

Facts are stubborn things aren't they?

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

"The Center for Budget Policies and Priorities, a Washington think tank and advocacy group that is distinctly unfriendly to Bush fiscal policies, says it isn’t."

How about ALL American's start paying taxes instead of the top 51%? We all use the infrastructure, so we all should pay taxes, regardless of the income we make, but somehow the bottom 50% get off paying nothing.

While were at it, get rid of the ridiculous EITC, which is nothing more than income redistribution and and get rid of welfare. That should balance the budget.
------------------------------------------------------

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

Read the WSJ article again. The fact that they label the CBPP unfriendly to Bush fiscal policies is not that they are anti-Bush but because Bush's tax cut policies increase the deficit by more than 10 times the amount they raise in increased productivity. Like you said, economics 101. It's you that can't understand it while calling the rest of us stupid.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

I studied micro and macro econ and then some in college during the time when the Laffer Curve and supply-side economics were getting a lot of attention. What I recall from those days is that tax cuts MUST be accompanied by even higher spending cuts for the productivity gains that are talked about to actually occur. If you don't have the guts to cut spending as needed, it leads to big deficits. That's exactly what the feel-good political leaders from both parties have been doing to the American public and Bush and the "deficits ain't all that bad" crowd especially.

The above is really common sense, except for the proportion of spending cuts to tax cuts. That's where it gets a little tricky, but most people know that if all things(like spending) remain equal and you cut revenues(when you don't have a surplus), you have a deficit. If you cut revenues a lot and increase spending a lot, you have bigger deficits. Why Repubs don't seem to care about this is beyond me. When your debt is being gobbled up by commie China as well as some Arab nations who really really dislike the USA, this is a serious issue. It also falls on future generations to have to deal with it. If you run your household in the same manner, you are considered worse than bankrupt.

YES! YES! YES!

You've gotten it exactly right!

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

"2) Lower taxes bring in more tax revenue to the U.S. Government. Why is it so hard for you dems to understand simple economics? You're just as stupid and thick-skulled as B-HO."

Let's see. If we cut taxes to ZERO, with my stupid logic, we would have an ever increasing federal budget deficit and national debt.

As the current policies have demonstrated, the GOP established budget, kept in place by a veto proof MINORITY party, have resulted in what , Beav? Rising federal budget deficits, and an INCREASING national debt. Bring back the "stupid" ole Clinton years, please!

Conservative economic policies which you espouse: How have they worked for us since 2001?

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

I never said cut taxes to ZERO, and I resent the implication.

However, we should
A. Cut government spending on all pork projects. The Republicans have been spending money like drunken democrats for the past 8 years.

B. Cut programs like Welfare and the EITC.

C. Make sure everyone, including the bottom 50% pay their fair share of taxes. We all use the infrastructure of the US, why do some not have to pay for it?

-----------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

My brain just locked up trying to comprehend that one.

***************************************************************
Why can't we all just get along?

"When you lay down with dogs you get fleas. We are all known by the company we keep."

That is for sure.

See who magically appears at the podium with McSame, at the end of this press conference - egads!

MCSAME HAS FLEAS FROM THIS GUY

I think you're exaggerating a bit.

Obama served on the board of directors of a large anti-poverty philanthropic charity for 4 years. Every quarter, 4 times a year for four years, he made decisions as to where to allocate funds to best help fight poverty. He served with 10 "normal" human beings and this Ayers nutcase. I understand he was invited to Ayers house exactly once for dinner, at the invitation of the board member he was replacing, for a "getting to know you" dinner.

Now, let me ask you this, Skyspy?

If you had the opportunity to direct millions of dollars per year to alleviate poverty in America, and the ONLY drawback was that you had to sit in a room 4 times a year with a thoroughly detestable human being...what would YOU do?

I know what I'd do, but I'd be interested in hearing what you'd do.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

There are many charity groups and organizations to choose from. I would pick one that only helps my community (like Dogwood Church here, which I do support)and I would find one with people I believe in and get along with.

There are many organizations to choose from, I would pick one with upstanding citizens beyond reproach.

What would you do?

Given a choice between, say, sitting on a board with one neo-nazi with a budget of one million vs sitting on a board with people that pass my personal ideology litmus test and a budget of one thousand dollars, I'd opt for the bigger budget board.

My rationale is that I can do more good with more money.

___________
Diagnosing Denise

You are assuming that greater money means, bigger help. In most large organizations much of the money is used for paid administrative help.

Local charities like Dogwood church use all volunteer help, and they rely on donations. The donations sometimes are not money, but food for the food pantry, clothes, and furniture. They also have one very talented lady who uses or puts up luxury items that are donated on e-bay and auctions them off to raise money. They also now run a thrift store in Tyrone to raise money.

So yes this little church probably takes in less money in donations. But they are cleaver and use their resources carefully. The only overhead they have are basic utilities. When I give them money or furniture I know that it is truly reaching someone in need.

Get outside today and stay outside if you can it is going to be beautiful.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

First off if I was on my space I would have these two songs:

click Everything to me

And this one:

Click Hail The Power Of Jesus' Name

I'd love to talk over lunch with you about things, how about this Friday, hey it's on me- and you can pick the place. Now, how can you pass up a deal like that?

_______________________________
We Will Stand

hi bpr... I do hope that you have a sense of humor and found that webpage hilarious. But seriously, some of June's characteristics were so much like yours, I thought YOU had created it!

Anywaaayyys.... thanks for the lunch invite but my tree-hugging buddies are having their yearly Earth Day celebration on Friday, so maybe we can have lunch another time.

btw - here's a sampling of our usual Earth Day festivities:

MAIN STREAM'S 'NATURE WORSHIP' PARTY

I know you won't be ever to meet me.

______________________________
We Will Stand

I forgot to tell you that I know why you won't meet me.

______________________________
We Will Stand

Okay, next Friday?

_______________________________
We Will Stand

Way to build good karma

O M G !!!!!!!

" About me:
I'm a Christian lady in the Knoxville area a/k/a God's Little Pasture. My hubby is not an issue, as he left under circumstances I don't wish to discuss. Please be sweet and don't bring him up. Ever. If you gave me a chance you would really, really like me. I know how to close down a bar Saturday night and still be on time for service first thing Sunday morning! This world is FULL of hateful folks, but I'm not one of them. Don't you be either.
Who I'd like to meet:
Men!!! LOL! I would like to meet Christian men who know how to treat a lady right. I've kept myself in shape and it isn't asking too much for you to have done the same. I am very open minded, as long as you aren't into Allah or other false gods (No offense, but let's not waste each other's time, OK?) I love to party, but I am a LADY! If you don't understand that, or if you either smoke or inject meth, please just scoot on over to someone else's page."

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Did you hear that catchy tune once you pulled up June's page?

Hilarious...

Can you imagine? There a biker (clean of meth) sits and is approached by this sexually repressed and previously discarded christian woman opening beer cans with her teeth. Do you roll the dice? She said she's open? Barkeeper, Double Vodka straight up!

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Oh wow, that is so wrong on many levels. DON'T ASK ABOUT MY HUSBAND....EVER! Sounds like she is technically still married and he just ran away, or she drank him to death closing up the local honky tonks. Hey, she doesn't miss the sermon though and she's a LADY! Run away!

This has got to be your page.

Main Stick"

That picture looks as ugly as main sounds.

You would choose Ms. Gordon over Marila????? Who's gonna be more fun, man? That is an EEEAAASSSSYYYYY answer!

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

Well, that sidewalk in front of the Starlite Motel is probably where Marila "works." I think I'd choose June over Marila, or maybe death. UGH!!!!

My intuition has told me to stay away from MySpace. Now I know why. "Ignorance is Bliss" certainly applies here.

***************************************************************
Fortunately, the workings of the universe do not depend on our beliefs.

like yourself seem to place the Iraq war as #1 on list of concerns, yet that's now #4 in the polls of likely voter's concerns.

As far as how much control/influence over the economy a President has, that would mean that Jimmy Carter was one of the worst Presidents in history(many would argue he indeed was for other reasons too) because of the economy was in total shambles after 4 years of Jimmy. I don't honestly see where any modern-day Prez has that much control over the economy beyond maybe having a chance to appoint the Fed chairman if necessary.

I can see the reasons you list that motivates Obama/Clinton supporters, but the question is do enough voters feel the same way and rank the issues in the same priority? Or, do they blame Bush and the Repubs for all of it?

I don't think come Election Day there will be any doubt the Obama has no chance at all. Most elections come down to popularity contests, not substance or issues anyway, which is one reason why Obama is spanking Shillary right now, but that popularity isn't going to carry over into the general election, IMHO. I don't see Obama has having much of a chance in some of the states like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania that the Dems absolutely must win in order to win the election.

nuk, let's put the economy at number one if you'd like. What do you think we have seen in the last seven years of fiscal policy that should motivate us to continue these fiscal policies? What have the demonstrable results been?

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

One fiscal policy that has worked under Bush has been lower taxes. As the facts have shown, lower taxes result in HIGHER tax revenues. The Democrats wouldn’t be able to tax “the rich” high enough to equal the higher revenues that result from lower taxes.

This was pointed out to Obomb-a during the debate, but because he such a thick skull and is so stupid, he went on to say that he would increase capital gain taxes out of “fairness”.

Fairness to who, and who determines what is fair. I guess in B-Ho’s dream world, he does.

An Obomb-a presidency would be very, very dangerous to this country. The only thing that B-HO can promise is higher taxes.

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

The question is who is responsible and will it change by who is President? The Repubs had the Prez/House/Senate and performed poorly. The Dems now have the House and Senate and if history is any indication, they'll screw up every bit as much as the Repubs have done and then some.

For a fiscal conservative, the choice between a McCain or Obama/Clinton is a matter of lesser of two evils since there isn't a conservative by any measure in the group, not anything close even. I'm voting Libertarian unless they run some real clown. There is no reason to "reward" the Repubs and the Republican voters who chose McCain aka Bob Dole 2.0, and the Dems still have a ways to go to prove that they aren't the leftist fringe drifting towards socialism. Bill Clinton was way more moderate than Shillary or Obama and the Dems have shifted to the left as they now believe there is more votes on the hard left liberal wing than by trying to co-opt Repub voters like Bill was famous for doing. I'm not a fan at all of having 3 candidates out there who are senators and 2 with very limited at best experience. Where are the Governors who actually have had to run something successfully and have a verifiable track record instead of BLAH?

If the Repubs had nominated Romney, I would have gladly voted for him. I'm pretty sure McCain is going to make him the VP choice since McCain doesn't know much about the economy(his own words) plus the fact that McCain is really old and the VP just might have to step up, but that isn't good enough for me.

Why is that? I read what you write and it tends to be consistent with just the right amount of humor.

Anyhow, two points:

You said this:

"don't think come Election Day there will be any doubt the Obama has no chance at all."

I'm not sure why you think Americans are willing to give Barack millions and millions of dollars, but will withhold their votes in November. I believe whole heartedly that John McCain, once the democratic candidate is chosen, is going to spend alot of time eating his words (like PTC Taxpayer and the "you love America" comment). He has already given some pitiful answers as to the wisdom of accepting Rev Hagee's endorsement. He has tried to change the context of his "100 years of occupation" comments with respect to Iraq. On the economy, he said last week tax cuts are more important than a balanced budget. This is from a guy who was against Bush tax cuts before the presidential campaign. I honestly don't see where this uninspiring old fellow with a temper and less than tepid supporters is going to retain a third GOP term in the White House with a likely recession and Iraq around his neck. Care to tell me where you think his traction will come?

The second chuckle from me came here:

"If the Repubs had nominated Romney, I would have gladly voted for him. I'm pretty sure McCain is going to make him the VP choice since McCain doesn't know much about the economy(his own words) plus the fact that McCain is really old and the VP just might have to step up, but that isn't good enough for me."

I often wondered what Romney people would get if he were elected. That guy occupied both sides of each major issue of our time. I found it to be amazing that he garnered as many votes as he did. I also believe that is why he will never be anyone's VP candidate.

I certainly understand why fiscal conservatives are fearful of Hillary and Barack. I just wonder why they haven't been fearful of their own candidates and their wreckless spending and self-sustaining war. This will be interesting come this time tomorrow.

Will the dagger be driven into the heart of Hillary's campaign? We shall see.

Cheers, and good night,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

because I like you, even if you are such an old-school lefty:) Seriously, I enjoy your posts and style even if I disagree with the politics. I can tell we'd probably agree on about 99% of things, and disagree completely on how to accomplish them:)

Yeah, Romney has been all over the board on some issues, but he's at least ran an Olympics successfully and a state of wacko's without losing his sanity:) I can overlook that he isn't "pure" in terms of conservatism or principle with his background and accomplishments. I think he could handle the job. The other 3? Not a lot of confidence.

As Romney and Barack went head to head?

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

for what the POTUS can do. You obviously think GW is very powerful. He even controls the temperature of the Sun if I read your little ditty right.

2ndly, regarding GAS prices, the last mid term election, the Dems said they were going to do something about the high price of gas. They sure did somethng, it's gone from 2 bucks to pushing 4. No thanks for help like that.

"You give way too much credit to what the POTUS can do."

Good point. Why all the fear about a POTUS candidate's universal healthcare plan from conservatives? It's not like these candidates "control the temperature of the sun."

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

As to universal health care, I for one, do not want a lowest common denominator type of system. This seems to be what they have in store. Frankly, I don't trust the GOV to run such a program. I don't care who is in charge. They can't even run Grady Hospital, think of that on a National Scale. Costs would be off the charts.

We both might agree that who the President is and what they do does matter. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see Universal Health Care. It will be an issue like SS reform was; more in spirit than reality.

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)