GatewayRedbirds.com

BW23 wrote:What Obama stands for, though, is "liberalism", IMO. Now, McCain's not a conservative by any means. And frankly, as I've stated before, I'm not a McCain fan. (In a way it pains me campaigning for him.) I was for the guy that was most conservative and closest to my beliefs in the primaries. But with my core beliefs, I don't see me ever voting for a Democratic president again. And very, very, very unlikely a Dem U.S. Rep. or Senator either. Doubtful for a major state office, too. I guess my beliefs are too strong (or I guess I'm just so far to the right) that I can't go with the candidate that's furthest from that. I could probably go Libertarian, but some of those beliefs are too far out there for my taking, too.

Has the Republican party made me happy lately? Of course not. But the alternative, IMO, is worse. So I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils in hopes that McCain might actually do some things I like.

BW23 wrote:What Obama stands for, though, is "liberalism", IMO. Now, McCain's not a conservative by any means. And frankly, as I've stated before, I'm not a McCain fan. (In a way it pains me campaigning for him.) I was for the guy that was most conservative and closest to my beliefs in the primaries. But with my core beliefs, I don't see me ever voting for a Democratic president again. And very, very, very unlikely a Dem U.S. Rep. or Senator either. Doubtful for a major state office, too. I guess my beliefs are too strong (or I guess I'm just so far to the right) that I can't go with the candidate that's furthest from that. I could probably go Libertarian, but some of those beliefs are too far out there for my taking, too.

Has the Republican party made me happy lately? Of course not. But the alternative, IMO, is worse. So I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils in hopes that McCain might actually do some things I like.

Greenspan: Country Can't Afford McCain's Tax Cuts

Alan Greenspan says the country can't afford tax cuts of the magnitude proposed by Republican presidential contender John McCain — at least not without a corresponding reduction in government spending.

"Unless we cut spending, no," the former Federal Reserve chairman said Friday when asked McCain's proposed tax cuts, pegged in some estimates at $3.3 trillion.

"I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money," Greenspan said during an interview with Bloomberg Television. "I always have tied tax cuts to spending."

McCain has said that he would offset his proposed cuts — including reducing the corporate tax rate and eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax that has plagued middle-class families — by ending congressional pork-barrel spending, unnecessary government programs and overhauling entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

Democrats pounced on Greenspan's comments, in part because McCain professed last year that he was weaker on economics than foreign affairs and was reading Greenspan's memoir, "The Age of Turbulence," to educate himself.

"Obviously he needs to go back to that book and study it some more," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said during a conference call arranged by the campaign of Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

GatewaySnayke wrote:Shocking. A Republican economic plan that would burden the middle class. I wish there was an emoticon that showed "shock." It's hard to believe that anyone would find McCain's plan defensible, but...there is.

What makes a great President? As a historian, I look to the past to help predict the future. And I am convinced that Americans should consider the leadership strengths of our most successful Presidents when deciding how to cast their ballots in November. Focusing on the qualities that have made some of our leaders exceptional provides a better perspective on our current candidates than what's so often reported--mistaken words, glib replies, fundraising abilities, and TV ads. Taking Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt as guides, I've identified 10 attributes that distinguish truly great Presidents.

I hope that as this campaign reaches its end, we can all move beyond the superficial "issues" that now play too large a role in Presidential politics. Let us look closely at the leadership styles of John McCain and Barack Obama and analyze their strengths and weaknesses in relation to our greatest leaders. It will take imagination to shift our present mode of thinking. Old habits die hard. But let us begin.

Radbird wrote:Here's her intro:

I hope that as this campaign reaches its end, we can all move beyond the superficial "issues" that now play too large a role in Presidential politics. Let us look closely at the leadership styles of John McCain and Barack Obama and analyze their strengths and weaknesses in relation to our greatest leaders. It will take imagination to shift our present mode of thinking. Old habits die hard. But let us begin.

Socnorb11 wrote:

BW23 wrote:What Obama stands for, though, is "liberalism", IMO. Now, McCain's not a conservative by any means. And frankly, as I've stated before, I'm not a McCain fan. (In a way it pains me campaigning for him.) I was for the guy that was most conservative and closest to my beliefs in the primaries. But with my core beliefs, I don't see me ever voting for a Democratic president again. And very, very, very unlikely a Dem U.S. Rep. or Senator either. Doubtful for a major state office, too. I guess my beliefs are too strong (or I guess I'm just so far to the right) that I can't go with the candidate that's furthest from that. I could probably go Libertarian, but some of those beliefs are too far out there for my taking, too.

Has the Republican party made me happy lately? Of course not. But the alternative, IMO, is worse. So I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils in hopes that McCain might actually do some things I like.

See, you're still stuck on meaningless (in my opinion) labels, and completely avoiding talking about the candidates' ideas, beliefs, statements, etc. Which of Obama's policies are you opposed to?

BW23 wrote:

Socnorb11 wrote:

BW23 wrote:What Obama stands for, though, is "liberalism", IMO. Now, McCain's not a conservative by any means. And frankly, as I've stated before, I'm not a McCain fan. (In a way it pains me campaigning for him.) I was for the guy that was most conservative and closest to my beliefs in the primaries. But with my core beliefs, I don't see me ever voting for a Democratic president again. And very, very, very unlikely a Dem U.S. Rep. or Senator either. Doubtful for a major state office, too. I guess my beliefs are too strong (or I guess I'm just so far to the right) that I can't go with the candidate that's furthest from that. I could probably go Libertarian, but some of those beliefs are too far out there for my taking, too.

Has the Republican party made me happy lately? Of course not. But the alternative, IMO, is worse. So I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils in hopes that McCain might actually do some things I like.

See, you're still stuck on meaningless (in my opinion) labels, and completely avoiding talking about the candidates' ideas, beliefs, statements, etc. Which of Obama's policies are you opposed to?

Education, welfare, death penalty, abortion, taxes, immigration, gun control, defense. To name a few.

So, really, no. I wasn't stuck on meaningless labels. His beliefs are those of most democrats.

In a speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in April 2007, Sen. Obama (D-IL) advocated the expansion of the military to include an additional sixty-five thousand army soldiers and twenty-seven thousand marines. He also called for an increase in the number of Arabic speakers in the military.

Sen. McCain (R-AZ), a former navy pilot, has been one of the most outspoken voices in Congress on defense issues. McCain favors an increase in the size of the U.S. military, especially the Army and Marine Corps.