This thread is kinda sorta....silly. Most of the people who are opposed to Obama are opposed on economic grounds -- not because they think he is a muslim black whatever. Obama scares me based on his relative youth and inexperience in managment of something so enormously complex and contradictory as the U.S. government. I'm still voting for Barack Hussein Obama despite that because we do need a shift in political direction. I would not be upset if John Sidney McCain III becomes President because he is a decent, honorable man who has turned his back on pork for Arizona -- and keeps getting elected. However, the Republican Party needs a healthy dose of sitting on the sidelines for a few years to get back a proper focus and vision for the American people as a whole.
McCain, the quintessential influence peddler ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_Loan_crisis The Lincoln Savings led to the Keating Five political scandal, in which five U.S. senators were implicated in an influence-peddling scheme. It was named for Charles Keating, who headed Lincoln saving and made $300,000 as political contributions to them in the 1980s. Three of those senators - Alan Cranston, Don Riegle, and Dennis DeConcini - found their political careers cut short as a result. Two others - John Glenn and John McCain - were rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating.
W ran on that platform in 2000 and 2004; but once in office, he did the opposite. it is to utter convenient rhetorics, it would help if ur able to cite some specific eg; i highly doubt that ur capable. I would like to point out reals eg that would counter your rhetorics.Clinton's presidency is proof positive that tax increases on the rich can be the answer. conversely, W's presidency is proof positive that tax decrease across the board, in and of itself, is not the answer !!!
You'll have to provide more than your own hardly-disinterested say-so regarding specific promises to shrink the federal government. Maybe my poor old memory is failing, but I do not recall Bush making any promises to shrink the federal government, in both election year campaigns no less. Also, hmmm. From the Wall Street Journal: link "New data from the IRS will be out in a few weeks on who pays how much in taxes. My contacts at the Treasury Department tell me that for the first time in decades, and perhaps ever, the richest 1% of tax filers will have paid more than 40% of the income tax burden. The top 50% will account for 97% of all federal income taxes, while the bottom 50% will have paid just 3%." Wow, and this in spite of 'tax breaks for the rich? Oh, one other thing - you might want to ask Newt if Clinton should get ALL the credit for reining in government spending. Remember 94?
The rebuke to Glenn (a Democrat) and McCain (a Republican) was a handslap for standing too close to a fire. It's no worse or better than Obama's cozy house deal or Dodd's mortgage "loan."
I'll admit those aren't the best reason to "not vote" for a candidate. A simple, but deep way to say I am not voting for Obama is to say: What exactly does he mean by "c-h-a-n-g-e?" Just ask any Obama fan or non fans that? You should get a decent 2 minute conversation. If it goes longer than that, you should could consider yourself lucky.
Republicans do not have a monopoly on influence peddling ! McCain's action was so eggregious that it warranted a rebuke from his colleagues. not so for Obama's cozy deal.
