Posted 1 year, 0 months ago in 
Loading ...
Obama is a mystery in many ways. He refused to answer the “courage test” questions for VoteSmart,org., a non-partisan group with a Web site dedicated to revealing what the candidates stand for and how they vote. Obama did submit one of his own. The form should have had a spot for “present.” On many questions he simply did not answer or marked “other” or undecided.
We do know he stands for and will push higher taxes for the small businessman and woman. These types of taxes triggered the Great Depression. Now Obama wants to raise those very same taxes 60 percent. Remember President Carter’s disastrous taxes because he wanted so many social programs?
Our economy will be stripped — along with our military, according to his other stance. Oh, that’s right, it depends on which speech you heard. Maybe it will change again tomorrow.
I cannot help but wonder if his hidden agenda is not to do just that. He called America “a mean country”, and vows to cut spending drastically on our military and nuclear arsenal. Truth is, I would love to see us able to do without a nuclear arsenal. However, we have enemies frantically working to get nuclear weapons to come after us and our most loyal ally-Israel. They will not give up that mission, just because Obama sits and chats with them. We will be exceptionally vulnerable.
Another thing he stands for is pulling out all the stops on abortion so our tax dollars will support this insanity whether or not we agree with it.
He also wants union votes to be public — no longer a private matter. This privacy during voting has always been standard and right, but he wants it done away with.
Furthermore he wants the “fairness doctrine” to be law. The name is a misnomer, as it seeks to silence free speech and eliminate any newspaper or broadcaster to report as they see fit. This is suppression of the truth in its worst form. It will only escalate.
Taking just these into consideration, Obama sounds socialist-Marxist to me. Such blindness to his own shortcomings and the needs of others spells destruction for this great country. If he is elected, in four years, we won’t know our own country or Constitiution.
Vote for McCain. Vote for America. Vote for yourselves.
Juanita R. Williams
Parachute
53 Responses to “Obama will harm Constitution”
Posted October 31st, 2008 at 5:45 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Have you been in a coma for the past 8 years? Please lay out what McCain might possibly do as president that would be even slightly different than the horrors we’ve experienced under the Bush reign.
Republicans = The Party That Wrecked America
Posted October 31st, 2008 at 9:01 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Correction, Republicans = The Party That Wrecked America = Democrats. Stand by for 4 years of more of the same: more government spending, more wars, more debt, more inflation, less prosperity, and most importantly, less freedom.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 7:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
MikeHunt,
It appears the answer to your question is: yes, at least eight years.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 9:48 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Questions like the “courage test” are designed as “gotcha” quesitons. They do not elicit information about policy issues, rather they are designed to elicit responses that later can be dissected and used for sound bites.
Rather than politicians and radio announcers who want to tell me how to think, I prefer politicians who tell me what they think on public policy issues.
The politician who has and expresses an opinion on everything belongs on boards like this with all the other no-it-all.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 10:56 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bill Clinton urged voters to consider Four Points in choosing a President:
* Philosophy - Obama’s organizing philosophy is that America works from the ground up, not from the top down.
* Policy - Obama’s policy ideas on the economy, education, health care, and energy are right for America now.
* Decision - Obama has demonstrated superior decision-making skills, e.g., his choice of Biden for VP, and his careful informed response to the financial crisis.
* Execution - In organizing and conducting an historically successful election campaign, Obama has demonstrated key talents as an executive.
… Clinton asked people to present these four ideas to voters until Election Day.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 11:54 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Clinon also said he’s impressed by Obama’s ability to listen and then understand what was said as opposed to………
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 12:55 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mike Hunt: “Republicans = The Party That Wrecked America”
I would notmally ignore this imbecillic statement. But I just got this e-mail and I thought I would paste it here. Let me say up front that I have no idea whether David Letterman wrote this or not, but there is a lot of truth here.
“David Letterman wrote this; it’s the David Letterman we don’t often see…
‘As most of you know I am not a President Bush fan, nor have I ever been, but this is not about Bush, it is about us, as Americans, and it seems to hit the mark.’
‘The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some Poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right?
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the President. In essence 2/3 of the citizenry just ain’t happy and want a change. So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, ‘What are we so unhappy about?”
A. Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?
B. Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter?
C. Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job?
D. Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
E.. Maybe it is the ability to drive our cars and trucks from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state?
F.. Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter?
G.. I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough either.
H. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all and even send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
I.. Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home.
J.. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames, thus saving you, your family, and your belongings.
K.. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss.
L.. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90% of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
M.. How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world?
Maybe that is what has 67% of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. , yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don’t have, and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of
recession?
Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks?
The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?
Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so unhappy you couldn’t take a look around for yourself and see all the good things and be glad?
Think about it……are you upset at the President because he actually caused you personal pain OR is it because the ‘Media’ told you he was failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day.
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn’t have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ”general” discharge, an ‘other than honorable” discharge or, worst case scenario, a ”dishonorable’ discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans?
Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized, try to defend their actions by ‘justifying’ them in one way or another.
Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book about how he didn’t kill his wife, but if he did he would have done it this way……Insane!
Turn off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as country. There is exponentially more good than bad.
We are among the most blessed people on Earth and should thank God several times a day, or at least be thankful and appreciative.’ ‘With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?’
David Letterman “
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 1:15 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog:
Wow! That is one of the most powerful statements I have heard in a long time. David Letterman has hit the nail squarely on the head on this subject. I truly am impressed!
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 1:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog,
Your paste job was not written by David Letterman it was written by Craig R Smith for the “WorldNetDaily” on November 20, 2006 before things changed a little bit.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=38956
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 1:59 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well dang bullishfrog, and I thought for a moment there, David Letterman had a brain!
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 2:02 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
BTW, still it is one of the most powerful statements I have heard in a long time, regardless who wrote it.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 3:26 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thanks rm. I was doubtful that Letterman would write that. I will pass on your source to the fellow who sent me the e-mail.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 4:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sure, the letter makes a couple of good points, but, it is unfortunately tainted by religious hokum. For some reason, I’m not feeling a real “powerful” vibe from Craig Smith’s cheesy article.
Are we to blindly accept 8 years of right-wing authoritarian rule & the subsequent damage/fallout, and just skip on down the road thanking Gawd for lemonade stands and ambulances?
Or should we think bigger, and be certain that conservative zealots like Bush/Cheney and McCain/Palin are permanently kept out of office and completely out of our lives?
Here’s a substantive article for you:
John Dean’s (think Nixon & Watergate) latest, titled “The Evidence Establishes, without Question, that Republican Rule Is Dangerous: Why It Is High Time to Fix This Situation, For the Good of the Nation”
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20081031.html
Bottom line: “If Obama is rejected on November 4th for another authoritarian conservative like McCain, I must ask if Americans are sufficiently intelligent to competently govern themselves.”
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 5:07 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Have all you Obama supporters STILL failed to realize : JOHN MCCAIN IS NOT GEORGE BUSH!!!! hello, Maverick for a reason people!!!! John McCain does NOT equal another 8 years of the same administration.
Barack Obama told Meet the Press that his wife HATES the American flag? Our flag is a symbol of freedom for this country. It is a symbol of what my husband is fighting for in Iraq, and you want me to vote for a President whose First Lady HATES that flag?!?! GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!! He also told Meet the Press that he wants us to be like the Middle Eastern nations…peaceful. Peaceful in what world?!?! WE ARE NOT THE MIDDLE EAST!!!! We are not a radical nation, although if Obama is elected, it will surely feel like it.
He also wants to disarm our nation. I have 8 guns in my closet, and one under the seat of my truck. And I will fight tooth and nail anyone that tries to disarm me or my family! I cannot put the life and wellbeing of MY MILITARY FAMILY in the hands of someone who has no clue what he is doing.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 5:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
armywife2008 - You said,”Barack Obama told Meet the Press that his wife HATES the American flag…”
Nonsense - I am a faithful viewer of Meet the Press, and have personally viewed every appearance Obama has made on that program for the past two years. At NO TIME has he ever made the statement you allege. You’ve been watching too much FOX News!
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 6:30 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I have a question. What in Craig Smiths diatribe makes it OK for the richest fat cat CEO’s on Wall Street to steal three trillion dollars from the American middle class? What in there makes it OK for us to continue this ridiculous war? What makes it OK for our government to torture people and wiretap American citizens? Just because we live better than people in Darfur? Not for much longer, I fear.
These “free market” maniacs have pushed our country to the brink of disaster. If we don’t stop them now, they will bankrupt the country and the “human misery” index will be awesome to behold. Left to the corporations, unemployment will skyrocket, living standards will plummet, poverty will explode, and the great American middle class will all but disappear.
Check the record of the “free market” experiment in the “South American cone” (Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, and Brazil), Poland, Russia, and South Africa. The only thing that will stop the process is democracy.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 10:30 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Tell me that post #14 is not a joke. PLEASE !!! That is truy frightening.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 8:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
armywife didn’t even get the above complete lies off of Fox News. It is a moronic email going around. People who post spam emails as fact, AND carry guns … well I sincerely hope they don’t shoot their foot or dog or kid by mistake is all I can say.
Here is what the nonpartisan, highly reliable Polifact has to say on the subject:
“It would be difficult to tally the many, many ways this e-mail is false, but we’ll start with the obvious ones. First, Obama was not on Meet the Press on Sept. 7.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/823/
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 9:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mike Hunt: “Or should we think bigger, and be certain that conservative zealots like Bush/Cheney and McCain/Palin are permanently kept out of office and completely out of our lives?”
Mike, you are about to win the election you have coveted. By labeling McCain a conservative zealot you are displaying a high level of ignorance. You won. Now relax and stop this nonsense.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 10:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog posted (#19): “By labeling McCain a conservative zealot you are displaying a high level of ignorance.”
It is fascinating to me at how many resort to name-calling when frustrated. Coming from that particular poster(bullishfrog),one who appears to operate from a very narrow perspective, economic self-interest (Only “I” matter)on almost all issues, and appears to take disagreement personally, that is quite interesting.
In many of his posts, bullishfrog represents what some would regard as intellectual parochialism (self-inflicted). It might be compared to someone finding the piece of a puzzle and, without even knowing what a puzzle is, or where the particular piece fits in, proclaims that they have found “the answer.” To some of us, that is not at all impresive.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL comes here, as usual, posting gobligook, not adddressing the issue at hand, and thinking that 200 words of nonsense will qualify him as being intellectually superior. Take a hike.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 11:59 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’s well known and very provable that most, if not all, the leftists on this site lie on a regular basis to support their positions.
If a person will lie to support a political ideology, he will lie to support a personal position.
This carries over to a business relationship.
If a person will lie to a business associate or customer, he will cheat that person, he will also steal from that person.
The daily sentinel supports this type of person unquestioning their motives, by refusing to allow the opposing forces to present their proof of their dishonest behavior.
Why is that do you suppose?
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Back to post #20. This is a typical Laitres post. You do not address the issue in question. I responded to Mike Hunt who stated that McCain was a conservative zealot. I said that was an ignorant statement. It is ignorant because anyone who has even a superficial knowledge of the political scene over the last 8+ years knows that McCain has voted against Bush and against key Republican positions a number of times. That his votes have angered many Republicans. That his nomination was opposed by the right wing of the party including the loudest voices on talk radio. That his choice of Sarah Palin was aimed, primarily at regaining the support of the right wing of the party. That McCain was considered as VP running mate by John Kerry; Joe Biden said he would run on the same ticket with him; Joe Liberman has been one of his strongest supporters. So I say again, to call McCain a conservative zealot is to display ignorance.
And you, Laitres, do not dispute that. You come here, as you usually do, not to argue or discuss facts. You come here to demean anyone who does not agree with your liberal views. And you do not address the person that you are demeaning directly.
Why is that? Is it cowardice?
We have seen a change in the composition of participants on this site. Most are now on the left side of the political spectrum. I don’t mind. I enjoy discussion of issues with folks on the other side as long as the discussion is intelligent. But not with you Laitres. You bring nothing to the table but abuse. So once again, take a hike.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog says: “You come here to demean anyone who does not agree with your liberal views.”
What I find strange is how, depending upon one’s point of view, people assign various meanings to words.
The above quote from bullishfrog is, in my humble opinion, a case in point.
The characterization, to which he refers as demeaning, is merely a challenge to what perspective he has presented us with on issues, and through many posts. That, to some individuals, would lead to the questioning of his/her perspective. In bullisfrogs case, the “criticism” is that his may be too narrow.
That is not at all demeaning, unless of course it happens to be true, in which case the individual challenged may wish to question what he/she truly believes. It would seem that such would be the logical and reasonable thing to do, instead of providing us with but an emotional reaction. The latter would seem to be more indicative of someone who is far more upset with being “disagreed with” than with any substance to any argument made. or challenge made.
Now, as to the term “cowardice.” It would seem that bullishfrog would, if he has at all been attentive, know exactly “Who I am” and “Where I am”, and have made, and will not make, any effort to hide behind any fictitious name. Nor, as another poster has suggested, do I have two separate handles on this site, or any other. Neither do I submit anything anonymously to such things as to the “You said it” column, as what we find there is all too often reflect little but “cheap shots”, and by those who don’t have the “courage” of their convictions, and are not prepared to stand behind their words.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 1:34 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Very nice Laitres. And if you ever wish to discuss the issue, which was the accusation that McCain was a conservative zealot, let us all know.
Until then write away. Maybe someone other than me is interested in your crap.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 1:40 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
and, to RLs’ point, maybe you will tell us who you are.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 1:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Why do you need to know who I am? You need that to discuss the issues?
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullfrog – did you read the Dean essay (linked in Post #13)? If not, here’s another excerpt for you:
“The leading authority on right-wing authoritarianism, a man who devoted his career to developing hard empirical data about these people and their beliefs, is Robert Altemeyer. Altemeyer, a social scientist based in Canada, flushed out these typical character traits in decades of testing.
Altemeyer believes about 25 percent of the adult population in the United States is solidly authoritarian (with that group mostly composed of followers, and a small percentage of potential leaders). It is in these ranks of some 70 million that we find the core of the McCain/Palin supporters. They are people who are, in Altemeyer’s words, are “SO SELF-RIGHTEOUS, SO ILL-INFORMED, AND SO DOGMATIC THAT NOTHING YOU CAN SAY OR DO WILL CHANGE THEIR MINDS.”
You certainly have not convinced me that McCain isn’t a “Conservative Zealot”….although; his nutball pick for running mate perhaps more clearly fits that classification. So then, let’s describe McCain as an “Authoritarian Conservative” instead.
Again, citing Dean: “Authoritarian conservatives are primarily anti-government, except where they believe the government can be useful to impose moral or social order (for example, with respect to matters like abortion, prayer in schools, or prohibiting sexually-explicit information from public view). Similarly, Republicans’ limited-government attitude does not apply regarding national security, where they feel there can never be too much government activity - nor are the rights and liberties of individuals respected when national security is involved.”
And, further on McCain, here are a few more items (call them “War Stories” with a heavy emphasis on the STORIES part) that warrant some research and press:
EXHIBIT 1
For the past two months, a major American magazine and an allied news service have been engaged in a legal battle with the United States Navy over records that they believe show that John McCain once was involved in an automobile accident that injured or, perhaps, killed another individual. Vanity Fair magazine and the National Security News Service claim to have knowledge “developed from first-hand sources” of a car crash that involved then-Lt. McCain at the main gate of a Virginia naval base in 1964, according to legal filings. The incident has been largely, if not entirely, kept from the public. And in documents suing the Navy to release pertinent information, lawyers for the NS News Service allege that a cover-up may be at play.
EXHIBIT 2
John McCain’s personal account of his life has shaped a powerful political narrative that accords him deference on the full range of policy issues. His first effort at shaping that narrative received a remarkable boost when the May 14, 1973, edition of U.S. News & World Report gave him space for what is perhaps the longest article the magazine had ever run, a 12,000-word piece composed entirely of his unedited and often rambling account of his prisoner-of-war experience. Ever since, McCain has added compelling details at key points in his political career. When his stories are placed beside documented evidence from other sources, significant contradictions often emerge. One such case involves McCain’s experience in the devastating fire and explosions that killed 134 sailors on the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal during the Vietnam War three months before he was shot down over North Vietnam. McCain has made claims about this accident that differ dramatically from parts of the official Navy report and accounts of reliable eyewitnesses.
EXHIBIT 3
Tran Trong Duyet, the former prison director who now surrounds himself with caged birds in a house in Hai Phong, first met Mr McCain a year after he had been shot down. He recalls a defiant rule-breaker, the patriotic son of an admiral and a fervent believer in the war. What he does not recall, however, is a victim of torture or violence. “I never tortured or mistreated the PoWs and nor did my staff,” says Mr Duyet in contradiction of Mr McCain’s account and those of other prisoners. “The Americans were dropping bombs on military and civilian targets - so it’s not as if they had important information we needed to extract.” Mr Duyet says that he sympathizes with Mr McCain and other PoWs for claiming that they were tortured. “It’s up to the Americans to decide whether or not he counts as a hero. He was very brave, very manly, he dared to argue with me and he was very intelligent. But all the talk of being tortured is for the sake of votes.” The McCain campaign refused to comment on the claims yesterday. Mr McCain did eventually sign a confession to his supposed crimes against the Vietnamese people and holds that it was only extracted after weeks of pain inflicted by his tormentors. In a more recent interview Mr McCain explained the signing of the confession as his failure.
IN WAR, TRUTH IS THE FIRST CASUALTY – Aeschylus ~450 BC
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
So, Mike, having read your entire posting, I find zero evidence from you, and I mean ZERO, that would indicate McCain to be a conservative zealot.
Perhaps you believe that because “authoritarian” individuals support McCain, that makes McCain a conservative zealot?
Or is it that he may or may not have been in a car accident that makes him a conservative zealot.
Or is it some story regarding his incarceration in Viet Nam or his actions in the navy, whether true or false, that show him to be a conservative zealot?
Ot are you just trying to change the subject because you cannot come to admit that what you wrote in your original posting was nonsense?
Go ahead and attack the man all you want. But try a little modicum of honesty along the way.
If he was, as you claim, a “conservative zealot”, I probably would not have supported him either. But he was the only Republican of the bunch running that could have been characterized as a moderate. And for that reason, the only Republican who had a chance to win this election in a year when any Republican had a long uphill battle. As it turns out, Obama will win, but only because of the stock market crash, not because he is the better candidate.
“Conservative Zealot”? Not.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 4:49 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis - You said, “Any possible relationship to their (Daily Sentinel) moronic, undying support of the dregs of society as opposed to supporting the people who do not need to resort to lies to support their positions?”
Could it be that your frustration with the media is because of your realization that the world as you know it will come to an abrupt and inglorious end on Tuesday with the election of Barack Hussein Obama as President of the United States of AmeriKa?
“Dregs” rule. Spot on!
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I’m not ‘frustrated’ with the media.
As long as you are happy being he lowest common denominator, and thrilled to admit that you are a failure and can’t make it on your own and NEED somebody, ANYBODY, to give you whatever you need in life because you are too stupid and lazy to earn it, I’m happy too.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis - I’m happy because “my people” will be taking control of the government, the military and the courts beginning day after tomorrow. That reality is what I’ve been working toward for a long time. Isn’t AmeriKa great!!
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 5:59 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullfrog – McCain moderate? Surely you jest. Moderate is hardly a word that comes to mind when describing John McCain. Start with these ratings, from American Conservative Union, for an overall frame of reference. By the way, Sen. Allard scores a lifetime 95 and good old Uncle Ted Stevens only scored a 64.
ACU Ratings for the Likely 2008 Presidential Candidates
Republicans
Name Lifetime Rating 2005 Rating
Representative Tom Tancredo (CO)99 100
Senator Sam Brownback (KS) 95 100
Senator George Allen (VA) 92 100
Representative Duncan Hunter (CA) 92 92
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (GA) 90 N/A
Senator Chuck Hagel (NE) 86 96
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (TN) 89 92
Senator JOHN MCCAIN (AZ) 83 80
Democrats
Name Lifetime Rating 2005 Rating
Senator Evan Bayh (IN) 21 20
Senator Joseph Biden (DE) 14 8
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (SD) 13 N/A
Senator Russ Feingold (WI) 12 13
Former Senator John Edwards (NC) 10 N/A
Senator Hillary Clinton (NY) 9 12
Former Vice President Al Gore (TN) 9 N/A
Senator Barack Obama (IL) 8 8
Senator John Kerry (MA) 5 8
How ACU Determines Its Ratings and Why They Are Significant
As the premier conservative rating listed in all major political almanacs and reference guides, ACU’s “Rating” is often quoted by the media and is extensively used by political strategists and candidates running for public office.
As the umbrella grassroots lobbying group of the Conservative Movement, ACU tracks a wide variety of issues before Congress, ranging from taxes to spending and national security to abortion. Accordingly, OUR RATINGS ENCOMPASS THREE GENERAL CATEGORIES: (1) ECONOMIC AND BUDGET MATTERS; (2) SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ISSUES, AND (3) DEFENSE AND FOREIGN POLICY. ACU endeavors to analyze votes from each category in order to obtain a balanced, comprehensive picture of an individual member’s ideological predisposition based upon recorded records.
Each member of the House and Senate is rated on a scale of 0 to 100.
The purpose of the “Rating” is to inform the public, in as unbiased a method as possible, exactly where individual Senators and Members of the House stand on the ideological spectrum from liberal to conservative.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mikehunt posted: “Altemeyer believes about 25 percent of the adult population in the United States is solidly authoritarian (with that group mostly composed of followers, and a small percentage of potential leaders).”
While basically correct, I might not have have used the word “followers”, as a follower has the right, the obligation, and the responsibility to make a choice. That is not to be found in the “true believers” in any cause or ideology. They have totally surendered their “free will” and, as such, are no longer even capable of “choosing.” Such individuals are not even for being led, but only to being herded.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:19 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mike, perhaps you ought to define for me what you mean by conservative zealot. A “zealot”, as I understand it, relates to a religious fanatic. Are you saying McCain is a conservative religious fanatic? Or are you defining zealots as most Republicans?
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
“Why do you need to know who I am? You need that to discuss the issues?”
Don’t need to know or care to know. It is just that whenever you right wing types start throwing around the word “cowardice”, that thought comes to mind.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I see. Ok, dc, I’ll keep that in mind whenever you communist types are afraid to take a position on issues.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
This just in: Desperate Republican presidential candidate John McCain will make an 11th-hour campaign stop in Grand Junction on Tuesday. It’s a double header – first we had Bible Spice (aka Palin), now the Original Maverick pays a visit to Shale City.
By the way - definition of “Maverick”: An unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it……
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 6:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
A bunch of us liberal, socialist, subversives were talking about Corporate Johnnys’ Tuesday visit and we decided it was either to make an early concession speech or maybe to thank all the local oil and gas boys at Halliburton for Cheneys’ endorsement.
Or maybe he wants to interview Kathy Hall for Secretary of State.
I guess we will find out Tuesday.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 7:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullfrog – no – I mean zealot in a fanatical or drumbeating sort of way. To me, it’s much more than a religious connotation. Therefore – I maintain that McCain is a “conservative _________”(fill in blank – fanatic, zealot, warmonger, soon-to-be-porch-sitting-politician, etc).
The religious part – well, dang - remember vintage 2000 John McCain when all synapses were lubed & firing in proper order? Classic lines like:
“Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.”
Imagine - taking on those twin toads Falwell & Robertson? But, things sure do change – and now they love McCain over at FocusontheFamily and Christian Coalition, however, thanks to his selection of Bible Spice for V.P.
Christian Coalition of America Applauds John McCain’s Choice of Pro-Life Governor Sarah Palin
Washington D.C. — Christian Coalition of America commends Senator John McCain for his selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, a pro-life conservative mother of 5 children including a Downs Syndrome baby born during April. Liberal and pro-life columnist Nat Hentoff said about Governor Palin in his column on May 26th: “I offer my unsolicited suggestion for (McCain’s) vice president: the first woman — and youngest — governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, who is an unstereotypical and effective Republican.”
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 7:14 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’s going to be a very interesting 4 years Mike. We will have an overwhelming liberal majority in the Congress coupled with the most liberal president ever elected to office. Good luck to all of us.
Posted November 2nd, 2008 at 8:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullish,
There a significant number of democratic members of Congress who are centrists. If elected, we don’t know whether Senator Obama will pursue an extreme liberal path or steer towards the center, but my opinion is that the extremely left will be dissapointed. Hopefully, when he staffs his cabinet position he will include some moderate Republicans. I think your thought processes have been clouded by the actions of the Bush administration with their winner take all attitude although they won the election by slim margins. Conversely, if Senator McCain wins I would hope that he would follow a conciliatory path, although that does not look likely as evidenced by his selection so SP as the VP candidate.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 7:49 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
rm, I realize that there are a few centrist Democrats. Maybe that will keep legislation from going too far to the left extreme. I will keep my fingers crossed. I believe the majority of this country will not stand for legislation aimed at turning the US into France. If the Democrats attempt to do that, and their super majority in the Congress permits it, that super majority will be lost in 2 years.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 9:14 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, we don’t have to worry about either of the salazar boys or udall falling into the ‘centrist’ column.
They represent reid and pelosi and screw the Citizens of the State of Colorado.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 9:48 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog - And just what’s so wrong with France? They are far more sophisticated than us, have a truly effective healthcare system, their food is better, their language is beautiful, they know how to live and enjoy life far better than we do, their First Lady used to sleep with Mick Jagger, and they helped us out during the American Revolution. What’s not to like about France?
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 9:53 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
For starters, it’s a nation of cowards.
But, on the other hand, I can see why you admire them so much….
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 9:55 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr, France is fine if you want exorbitant taxes, labor union supremacy, chronically high unemployment, and you have an Uncle Sam who will save your butt every time someone comes after you.
Even the French understand that their system is a failure which is why they have just elected a conservative president. But the liberals in this country do not understand that country’s failings and they will do everthing they can to imitate their system.
But they will fail because this is not a liberal country. You lefties will find this out just as soon as you try to put those liberal ideas to work with your new government majority. You will find this out just like Hillary did when she attempted socialized medicine.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 10:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog - “Socialized medicine” - Oh, you mean like the VA system for our military folks?
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 1:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Easy, Willis, don’t let your diastolic blood pressure exceed your IQ.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 2:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis - Well, you’re not going to have Proteus/Sugarfoot/GJBubba/Ullr to kick around much longer. Yep, that’s right, a NEW handle is forthcoming soon. I’ve already bounced the new name off several of the more intelligent posters on this board, and they seem to like it. I’ll keep you posted.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 2:25 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Why do folks keep changing their names?
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog - Some folks like to keep changing things around just for the sheer fun of it, and to drive people like you and Willis a little nuts. Let’s face it, the only name that counts is ones REAL name.
Posted November 3rd, 2008 at 2:37 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr, I think there is a downside to those changes. For those who like to have a sreious, intelligent, discussion, it is good to know who it is that we are adressing, even though the name is not real, for the sake of continuity. A lot of subjects come up over and over again and I find it helpful to know what a person’s position has been on a particular subject in the past so as not to be repetetive. But, I guess, if the sole purpose here is to attack each other personally, changing names doesn’t matter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.