Top Stories

Open letter to readers: Today and tomorrow

By Lynda Waddington | 11.17.11

Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.

ACS lockout continues; plan emerges to repeal sugar protections

crystal_sugar_80
By Virginia Chamlee | 11.15.11

A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.

Cain campaign: Farmers know more about regulations than EPA

hermancain_80x80
By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 11.15.11

The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.

Mathis wins, Democrats maintain Senate control

Liz Mathis
By Lynda Waddington | 11.08.11

The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.

Press Release

PR: Nation should work to address veterans’ challenges

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

BRUCE BRALEY RELEASE — As US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan ends, it’s more important than ever that our nation works to address the challenges faced by the men and women who fought there.

PR: Honoring veterans, help in hiring

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

CHUCK GRASSLEY RELEASE — A difficult job market is challenging the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have protected America’s interests by serving in the Armed Forces.

PR: In honor of America’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

TOM LATHAM RELEASE — No one has done more to secure the freedom enjoyed by every single American than our veterans and those currently serving in the armed services.

PR: Honoring and supporting our nation’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

DAVE LOEBSACK RELEASE — Veterans Day is an opportunity to reflect on the service of generations of veterans and to honor the sacrifices they and their families have made so that we may live in peace and freedom here at home.

Sebelius: Obama’s race ‘may be a factor’

By John Deeth | 09.16.08 | 8:31 pm

IOWA CITY — Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius publicly considered the possibility that Sen. Barack Obama’s race might be a factor in this year’s presidential election during an appearance here Tuesday.

“Have any of you noticed that Barack Obama is part African-American?” Sebelius asked in response to a question about why the election is so close. “That may be a factor. All the code language, all that doesn’t show up in the polls. And that may be a factor for some people.”

The remark, delivered in the governor’s low key, folksy, out-from-behind-the-podium style, raised a couple chuckles but few eyebrows in the downtown Iowa City crowd, but Republicans took offense and responded in short order.

“Governor Sebelius’s remarks in Iowa City today are hurtful and divisive at best,” said Republican Party of Iowa Executive Director Caleb Hunter in a press release. “With less than 50 days to go, Democrats will continue to try and change the focus away from the issues that will decide this election.”

The rest of Sebelius’ remarks in Iowa City stuck closely to the Obama campaign’s talking points.

“The bottom line question is, do you think George Bush has been a wonderful president?” she told an audience whose questions focused as much on the horse race as on specific issues.

Sebelius takes questions at the Iowa City library.

Sebelius takes questions at the Iowa City library.

One questioner argued that Obama was under-performing in polls because young voters with cell phones were under-reported, and Sebelius agreed. “I have a 24 year old and a 27 year old and they’ve never had a land-line since they went to college,” she said. “So they don’t show up in polls. But they need to show up at the polls.”

Yet at each turn, Sebelius tried to return the dialogue to bread and butter issues, to the delight of Bob Elliott, a former member of Iowa City’s city council and a leading local supporter of Sen. Joe Biden during the Iowa caucuses.

“Lipstick can stay home! Talk about the issues!” he shouted, in apparent reference to another governor.

During a brief press availability, Sebelius said she didn’t know much about her Alaska colleague. “She’s one of our new governors, and I’ve met her at a couple of events that all the governors were at,” she said of GOP vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.  “But we’ve really had no personal interaction. The real issue is John McCain vs. Barack Obama, and their policies could not be more different.”

Sebelius responded to criticism from Kansas Republicans about her campaign visits, and implied that the campaigning went hand in hand with her job.

“I can do a much better job as governor of Kansas, and Chet Culver can do a much better job in Iowa, if we have a partner in the White House instead of an adversary.”

For coverage of Sebelius’s visit to Cedar Rapids, click here.

Comments

  • Pingback: Kansas Gov: Obama’s race may be a factor « The Big Picture

  • JohnStryker

    97% of African-Americans are going to vote for Obama. That's not racist. That's pride.
    Suppose 97% of European-Americans vote for McCain. Now THAT's racist.
    .
    .
    Get It?

  • oldpink

    Sebelius is as disgusting as the rest of the Democrat “throw the old racism kitchen sink at them” sock puppets.
    If by racist, you mean that I do not like someone who did the following:
    1) Attended the United Church of Christ for twenty years
    2) Was married by one Rev. Jeremiah Wright in said church
    3) Had both daughters baptized by said Rev.
    4) Titled one of his two memoirs (yes, TWO!) “The Audacity of Hope” after a sermon by said Rev.
    5) Gave over $25K in donations to said Rev.'s UCC
    6) Claimed that he was unaware of Rev. Wright's “USKKKofA,” “Chickens have come home to roost,” or “God damn America!” comments and other breathtakingly hateful sermons sold on PROFESSIONALLY TAPED DVD FOR CHURCH FUNDRAISING PURPOSES.
    7) Has a wife who said “for the first time in my adult life, I am proud to be an American.”
    8) Goes to San Francisco to rub elbows with wealthy donors to say “those people cling to their guns, religion, and xenophobia” when he is unaware that someone is in the room with a recorder
    9) Says he would talk to Ahmadeenijad, Kim Jong Il, and Bashar Assad, treating them as fully legitimate
    10) Refuses to have an INVITED representative appear on WGN Chicago's “Milt Rosenberg Extension 720″ radio show, instead electing to send off a blast e-mail to all his local supporters to threaten said radio station with inane phone calls and even more inane e-mails.
    11) …and most of all…RESORTS TO HAVING HIS SYCOPHANTS TOSS OUT THE RACE CARD WHEN THINGS DO NOT GO HIS WAY!

    So, yes, if by those examples you describe me as a racist, then, yes, I AM a racist.

  • Jinkers

    Has every one seen the new add posted for immigrants? Obama is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. This whole election has just become tainted (it is disgusting). I'm out of this one, I will not take part in elections that will divide us and not bring us together.

  • Chris0924

    Race has nothing to do with it. Obama is simply not qualified to be president of the United States based on his ideoledgy and his lack of experience. I'd vote for conservative of any color or gender but I'd rather have a concrete block with the word “Republican” painted on it elected President than a socialist liberal.

    • Chobbes

      Politicians make the most surprising observations. Is everyone else aware the Obama is black? At this point no one really cares about poor old Biden. McCain, everyone else is worried whether he can make it up the steps, his stride doesn't seem to be too good. Palin, seems to be the target of the media and a few hundred lawyers from the Democratic party. Are any of these qualified to be president? Where is the legal, battle tested warrior like JFK? Sad commentary to have fallen so far.

  • loweke

    jasev01,

    You asked for the source for my earlier post. So. here part of Biden's bio from Wikipedia.

    Biden attended the University of Delaware in Newark,[10] where by his own later description he was a lazy student.[11] He graduated with a double major in history and political science in 1965,[2] ranked 506th of 688 in his class.[12] He went on to receive his J.D. from Syracuse University College of Law in 1968,[10] where by his own description he again underperformed and ranked 76th of 85 students.[

    As for Obama, I am sure that he did graduate with honors, but he still won't release his transcripts. Also, he won't release his thesis from Columbia

    • jasev01

      Thank you for the citation I appreciate that someone does not just make accusation and they actually back it up with facts. Thats fair enough, Biden graduated 76/85 from law school Mccain was 894/ 899 from military school Palin was a C student who took 6 years and 5 schools to get a degree in journalism from U of Idaho and Obama has a degree with honors from Columbia in political science with a specialization in international relations and a law degree with honors he worked for a year at Business International Corporation then ultimately graduated magna cum laude from Harvard law. We don't have his transcript but we know from from standards of admission Harvard law's median gpa for admission is 3.75 and 3.95 and a LSAT score of 170 and 175 out of 180. According to the Harvard website to get named magna cum laude you must be in the top 10% of the class. Those are the things we know as facts then.

    • jasev01

      Also as for his Thesis, I graduated from Brown and our theses are kept in the library and/or in the department. They are public record, I had to have mine published and bound so unless standards were different then or over their at my rival school you should be able to get it by request or going to the school if it exists.

  • kefe64

    WELL I GOT AN IDEA FOR A REPLY TO THIS NONSENSE. IF MCCAIN LOSES THAN THAT MEANS THAT THIS COUNTRY HATES ITS ELDERLY AND IS SEXIST. THAT IS ALL THERE IS TO IT. IF OBAMA LOSES CAUSE OF HIS RACE WHICH IS ONLY HALF BLACK THEN I WILL STICK TO THIS CLAIM. I AM NOT A MCCAIN FAN SO TO SPEAK BUT BY HELL I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT THINGS WILL GET WITH OBAMA. SO I WILL PUT THIS OUT THERE FOR ALL OF THOSE POLITICALLY CORRECT FOLK OUT THERE. NOT VOTING FOR MCCAIN CAN ALSO MEAN THAT YOU HATE VETERANS. IF RACE IS GOING TO BE APPLIED TO THIS CAMPAIGN THEN LETS BRING EVERYTHING ONTO THE TABLE.

  • Pingback: kansas governor has “folksy, out-from-behind-podium” style | RED, WHITE & PINK

  • tonyfromwichita

    hey, sebelius- next election, you are fired.

    i'm an american of mexican and german decent. my girlfriend is black. i have 4 half-black nephews. i don't support obama because he is a socialist that holds the mechanisms that have made america great in contempt. he hates the free market. he hates industry. he hates individualism. but (and you have this in common with him) he loves a big hulking monstrosity of a government, to regulate the profitability out of industry and regulate the freedom out of the individual.

    but i'm a racist, huh? i'm a racist because i don't support a socialist hack of a politician? you're fired. maybe california or massachusetts has a job for you.

    • tabbitha

      What possible excuse could there be for saying all these ridiculous things about Obama? A socialist? Do you even know what that means? He hates individualism? This is just nutty! You may not hate Obama because he is black, but you sure hate him for reasons that have nothing to do with his policies or his positions on the issues.

  • Pingback: Tennesseefree.com » Biggest Hillary Supports trashes Obama; Support McCain/Palin

  • chrisfrommactown

    Now you know what we in Kansas have had to put up with for the past six years. Sebelius was put into office by Big Gambling money and by the infamous George Tiller, the late term abortionist. She has paid off handsomely as Kansas finally passed a casino gambling bill last year after years of not being able to and Sebelius has vetoed every bill that the legislature has sent her that would restrict abortion. She is a total lightweight as evidenced by the very lame response she gave to this years State of the Union Address. She has been played up a lot in the national media as evidenced by all the Vice President talk, but she is nothing like they describe. Maybe you folks in Iowa would like to keep her. We sure wouldn't miss her back here.

  • Jinkers

    I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out… He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain “are we racist and do we hate Mexicans” ??? I like McCain and guess what…. My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him.

  • acb777

    She is absolutely right race is a factor. 98% blacks are voting for Hussein Obama. FYI; Hussein Obama is a Arab Muslim.

    • tonyfromwichita

      fyi, you are as ignorant as sebelius

      • acb777

        fyi, you are as ignorant as sebelius

  • Pingback: Wow … Ya Think? « Anti-Ideology Weblog

  • Jinkers

    I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out… He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain/Palin “are we racist and do we hate Mexicans” ??? I like McCain/Palin and guess what…. My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him.

  • ForLiberty

    The only real racist here is Sen. Obama.

    http://www.aworkrelatedwebsite.com/Bestic/

  • drmoon2008

    A Kansan shamed by our governor. Voters are not racist and its time to stop making excuses for party decisions. Stick with policies and facts instead of betting on horse races. The answer is Yes….George Bush has been a wonderful president considering the congress he had to work with….bunch of blamers and whiners…at least he makes decisions and sticks with them.

  • robinswebnest

    I find it very interesting that the only people talking about race are Democrats. I have been a registered Democrat for 35 years…no more. As of this year, I am an Independant. The Democrats are desperate and they are making personal and unwarranted, not to mention untruthful attacks on Palin and McCain. I am so tired of hearing that if anyone says anything negative about Obama, then I am a racist. But, they can make fun of women and they are not called chauvnist. My aunt is Mexican and I have a niece who is bi-racial. When I ask my black friends who they are voting for, ALL of them say Obama of course. So tell me, who is racist?

  • Xnarg

    It's definitely about race!

    There's no way a socialist like ObaMarx would be where he is if not for white guilt.

  • Brightfame

    You posters are grassroots America! Iowa rules!

    See the post at http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/16/sebelius-…. It seems that the Associated Press and/or Miami Herald has “sanitized” Ms. Sebelius' loony comments to make them more acceptable. Big Media…always a reliable ally for Obama and left wing Democrats…always ready to betray their responsibility to the American public.

  • Pingback: Vote for Obama–or else there’ll be race war? « Full Metal Cynic

  • RockerX

    Oh here they go with their race baiting again! Lets hope they keep it up because this race crap, is not gonna fly. People are tired of whiny blacks and Democrats always playing the race card when they don't get their way!! By the way, wanna see racism? Just take a stroll through Harlem after dark.
    Race has nothing to do with it. B. Hussein Obama's policies are socialist, he has NO experience (except the community organizer thing…giggity giggity), The guy can't even vote yes or no on Senate bills. Instead he votes present 130 times? You Democrats really picked a loser this time OMG!

  • oracle2world

    In a democracy, folks can vote any which way for any reason. JFK was more handsome than Nixon in the television debates. No one seemed too bothered by this “reason”. Didn't really seem to have much to do with “issues”.

    So racism is as valid a reason as any. African Americans justifiably are proud of Obama, and will vote almost unanimously for him. That's okay. And if white men vote mostly for McCain, we should also allow this group to take pride in their candidate.

    I don't think any white male that has been touched by affirmative action, is going to be shy about taking it out on Obama in the ballot box. Don't underestimate how much this issue completely pis*** off the folks that will decide this election. Because deep down racism is pretty offensive, and filling a slot solely on colour is as racist as it gets.

    So if Obama doesn't win because of racism? Big deal. That is democracy, warts and all. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

  • regency

    The Governor is an idiot. Whether it is Jack Cafferty with CNN or the good Governor, all Democrats blame racism for anyone not jumping on the Barama bandwagon. This is the same old whining that we hear every four years with Democrats calling Republicans rich racist fatcats that want to abolish Social Security so that old people will starve. The press goes along with this ignoring the fact the there are more Democrat millionaires in Congress than Republicans and that the Democrat party, especially in the south, were the pure racists. Not Republicans. Our only role model was Abraham Lincoln.

  • Jinkers

    I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out… He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain/Palin “are we racist and do we hate Mexicans” ??? I like McCain/Palin and guess what…. My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him. Obama is this okay?

    Obama is dividing this nation – Just for Votes – How Pathetic

  • Jinkers

    Why are the Big Media not being fought.

  • Ozark_Sunshine

    Title should read “Obama's Racism factor in campaign.” The man is a racists as is the church he attends. Sebellius doesn't deserve to be quoted. She is another baby killer, like Obama, since she is backed by Tiller the baby Killer with generous donations and has done everything she can to thwart investigations and prosecution of him and Planned Parenthood in Kansas.

  • vonbob

    The liberal media have made a disgrace of themselves. Our family simply watches Fox News since the other channels seem to have been taken over by hateful, race-baiting ignoramuses. I have never seen such vitriol, hatred, and self-denigration.

    Obama is too inexperienced and has no firm sense of who he is. He is not a bad person, but should never have put himself and his family in this position.

    The Governor of Kansas is another story. She is the daughter of a political hack, Celeste of Ohio, and she is just doing what comes naturally. I doubt that she has ever run a business, met a payroll, or had it tough like most of us.

    Race baiting does not help our country, even if it excites minorities to vote blindly for somebody of their “race.” The whole notion of race is discredited. Wait until these hateful tactics excite the “majority” on November 4.

    No good can come of this nonsense. We are taught to love our fellow man, so let's do so.

  • tqp

    ok is it racism when Quamgmirey Kirpatrich goes to jail, DC major sells Cocain out of his office & after being convicted gets re-elected? Nagen Nagel says we gonna get N/O blacker or browner? ummm Why is it all NBA is full of tall Colored's.. where is the racial equality there? gee i guess we are not to comment on these things I just love like the disproportionate number of COLORED's in civil service I guess that is racism too? Are we to understand it is only P/C to see disparities when it favors the NAACP causes? do not say darkies, just said COLORED Peoples WHERE are the americans who are black ? There is disporportional number of Black Americans… whats wrong with just being an american 1st and balck second?

  • PBrown

    Ms. Sebelius isn't much of a historian. The American people are rejecting Obama for the same reason they rejected Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter and Clinton (who did not receive a majority of the popular vote and was elected only because there was a spoiler in the race). The American people do not trust liberals to govern the country and Obama is as liberal, and arguably more liberal, than the six Democrat candidates who preceded him in the presidential contests over the past 30 years. If Democrats want to win, they need to start listening to the American people and selecting candidates who are not liberal and not make the kind of “divide America” comments Ms. Sebelius and her ilk are spouting on the campaign trail.

  • tabbitha

    Of course racism is a factor. I have quite a few friends and relatives who usually vote Democratic, but are uncomfortable with Obama. They can't explain why. They don't disagree with him on any specific issue, they just don't like him all that much. Since several of those people have made racist comments in the past, it's pretty obvious that what they are uncomfortable with is his skin color.

    Certainly race is not the only factor, but in a close race, it may be the determining factor.

  • NOSTROMO

    You can always count on liberals ,Dems,socialist,progressives,or whatever they are calling themselves on any given day,to pander to the lowest common denominator in the mob that supports their cause. We all know the history of the the party in the U.S. that supported slavery,the KKK.Jim Crow laws and today seeks to put all on the plantation system.

    • adamh97

      I agree with you. I'm a black conservative and I find it unbelieveable how every election nearly all of the black population votes Democratic, considering the history of the party and the fact that many blacks don't even agree with many of the platforms of the Democratic party. But due to peer pressure, they vote Democratic again and again. Although race will cause him to lose some votes this November, I think that if he ultimately loses it will be because of his far left political views.

      I think that the promise of America is the opportunity to become successful. The role of the government is not to ensure that you are successful and taken care of. That is your job. I have no desire for the country to turn into a leftist plantation where the small business owner has all of his earnings taxed away to support the people who sit around and do nothing. Where the person who has worked hard for many years in order to move up the corporate ladder is villified as one of “the rich.” Where we all pay nearly all of our earnings to the government and they “take care of” us with government programs such as socialized health care.

    • jadedblakman

      Yep, those Democrats like Strom Thurmond and David Duke and… wait. They changed to the Republican party. I almost forgot :-)

  • tyork

    To tabbitha:
    Your friends COULD be uncomfortable with him because they are uncomfortable that he is so new, he has very little experience (and pretty much zero executive experience…libs can say what they want about Palin-truth is she has 2 years more executive experience than the democratic prez nominee…) he has hardly had a stance on anything in IL state senate (except for infanticide) and the US senate and has not crossed party lines or lead on any piece of legislation, he has had 20+ year relations with a pastor who obviously hates white people and America (though, he chooses to live in a white suburban neighborhood) AND a 20+ year history with a domestic terrorist, and his wife is a marxist. I mean, yeah, your friends could be racist too…

    But the fact that you and other libs are willing to look past all of that and paint people like US as racist, proves that you are the only ones that care about his race and are voting for a man because of your white guilt. I mean, seriously, give me one accomplishment he has had? Reading a teleprompter and just being in the senate does not qualify anyone. And for that matter, neither does being black.

    I am (and a lot of other fellow Kansans) are very sick of our governor. She restricted the construction of a coal plant that would have brought jobs to our state, she hosts one of the most infamous abortionists in the country to her governor's mansion for parties, and she politicized the Greensburg tornado when residents there didn't/don't want the government there to help in the first place (don't believe me? drive through and look: no one is moving back). I know because I live several miles from Greensburg.

  • PresterJohn1

    “Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius publicly considered the possibility that Sen. Barack Obama’s race might be a factor in this year’s presidential election…” Is the Gov. referring to the probability of a nearly unanimous black vote for Obama?

  • CSense

    Gov. Kathleen Sebelius – A glittering jewel of colossal ignorance! She's an idiot of the first order! Typical Democrat – only speaks of racism and putting people into groups! Incapable of speaking about anything of substance. Race has nothing to do with this election. This election is one of, do we want to elect a socialist who just happens to be half black? BULLETIN: His skin color has nothing to do with it. It's what's between his ears that has me scared!

  • Jinkers

    I am so disgusted with this stupid add that Obama has put out… He is dividing this nation and not bringing it together. Obama, if we vote for McCain/Palin “are we racist and do we hate Mexicans” ??? I like McCain/Palin and guess what…. My Uncle is Mexican and I Love him. Obama is this okay?

    Obama is dividing this nation

    • punnk

      I am sorry but Obama is NOT dividing our nation. The current president and the McCain campaign are establishing divides in our nation. The elitist verses the regular folks, the patriots verses the non patriots, the pro child molesters verses the people who want to protect children. It's laughable and you are obviously too dense to get it.

      Google is your friend.

      • rightross

        Hey, Dummicrat – (first of all, it's “versus” (not “verses”) – And, yes, it is the Demoncrats that are trying to divide this nation – they race bait, support multiculturalism, regularly use “class warfare” to influence voters. They have for years used every divisive means imaginable to paint Republicans as favoring the rich over the poor, as if it is some kind of mission for Republicans to punish the down trodden and keep people in poverty because we are greedy. They have undermined the efforts of our American service men at every turn. They have tried to bring failure and defeat to our military efforts in Iraq, Kuwait, and Vietnam. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed should be held to charges of treason for their continued efforts to stand against our president in his efforts to complete the mission in Iraq and to correct the faults in our economy. When you look at the significant downturn in our economy, the spike in the cost of gasoline and our other present economic woes, you can point to one significant event as the cause; the Democrats won back the Houseand Senate.

        Demoncrats will do anything they have to do to win back power, even if it means losing a war and tanking the economy. The democraParty has been overtaken by Modern Liberalism and is hell bent on changing the country into something that it was never intended to be – following the model of European Socialists rather than the model given to us by our founding fathers.

        Wake Up!!!

        • punnk

          Thank you for pointing out my silly spelling error.

          The original post claimed Obama was dividing this nation, not Democrats. I simply stated from my observations that this is not true and pointed out specific items which support my response. You can pass the buck onto the entire Democratic party if you wish – its simply not the point.

          Republican policy does favor the rich over the middle class. McCain's tax and health care plans provide no relief for the middle class. He can continue to lie, stating Obama will raise taxes but its simply NOT true. McCain's tax plan provides relief for McCain whereas Obama's tax plan provides relief for me and the majority of Americans. How can policy that favors 1% of Americans be acceptable?

          Since Bush took office the median household income has declined steadily, the economy has barely grown, less then 400,000 new jobs were created, more Americans lack health insurance, looming on a depression, economic crisis, higher credit card interest rates, foreclosures and wars that are costing trillions. I would like for you to explain to me how this all happened in the two years that the Democrats have had control of the House? The Republican backed Bush administration has failed the American people. You know it and should own up to it.

          I live in Kansas and work with predominantly blue collar workers. I hear people bitch constantly about speaking to call centers in India or Mexico but still support an administration that gives corporation incentives to move jobs overseas. They all make under 250K a year and support a candidate that will NOT provide them tax relief. They bitch about the cost of health care and worry about their pensions or 401k but support a candidate that wants to privatized social security.

          McCain is a second rate pathological liar and anyone who votes for him deserves what they get but I do not.

          • Anonymous

            The last I checked, Obama is a Democrat and is representing the Democratic Party in this election.  You cannot separate the two.  If you get him, you get more democratic policy.  Obama’s voting record would clearly indicate an extreme tendency toward Modern Liberalism.  In fact, I believe that he has the most liberal voting record of anyone in both the Illinois Sentate and the U.S. Senate.  His associations with Jeremiah Right, Saul Alinski, and other leftists and black liberation theologians indicates either extremely poor judgment or, even worse, agreement with these men and their philosophies.
             
            The Economy – was weak when Bush took over from Clinton -  weakened a bit more during the first two years of his administration and then expoded (positively) for over 4 years.  Economic indicators showed positive growth in the economy on every front.  The stock market rose to record levels, the housing market was strong and values remained high, interest rates were low and inflation was nearly nonexistent.  Hundreds of thousands of jobs were being created, etc.   Certainly there were negatives and the unscrupulous lending policies of banks and other financial institution is indefensible even though the fault for their practices lies squarely upon their own shoulders rather than on those of politicians.  If the Bush administration has culpability in this present crisis then so does the “do nothing” congress. 
             
            The wars – I’ll never forget 911 and the devastatioin that caused to our nation.  The country, at that time, realized that we had to take the fight to the terrorists.  The rest of the world  (Germany, France, and Russia) cowered behind their many lame excuses and would not help in the war effort.  But, thanks to our president and his tremendous resolve, he took the battle to the terrorists and has sent them to flight.  The biggest mistakes Bush made in the whole thing: 1) underestimating the irrational fanaticism of the radical Islamists – he did not realize how truly insane they are and 2) accepting Clinton era intelligence as to the existance of WMD’s in Iraq, and 3) trusting his fellow Americans on the other side of the political aisle who let him get out on that proverbial limb and then have been trying to cut it off in the usual democratic, power-grabbing, manner.   Along with that, he has had to battle the traitors that have infiltrated
            the democratic party who have undermined (yes, they voted to fund the war, hypocritically, I might add) virtually every aspect of this dual-front war (Afghanistan and Iraq).  But, George Bush did not give us this war – the terrorists who are bent on destroying western culture gave us this war.  You are an idiot if think that George Bush or any other American, be it Democrat or Republican, finds any benefit in starting and progating wars for their own financial or political advantage.
             
            The Republican policy does not favor the rich.  You seem so gullible, simply spouting the party line when you dems say things like that.  The people who pay the taxes are the ones who deserve the tax cuts.  When you give tax cuts to businesses and other job providers (the rich as you call them), you make it more likely that there are going to be greater profits for businesses and greater numbers of jobs created and great incentive to start new businesses.  You may not agree with the policy but the motive is not to “favor the rich.”  The motive is to help the economy and there by help everyone (or at least most everyone).  The over simplification of simply giving tax breaks to the “middleclass” while sticking it to the mean, greedy rich people sounds good to some, but it is really not the way to help the economy.  It is nothing but class envy.  But even with that, lots of people have benefitted under this present administration who are not
            rich.  You can always find, in some segment of the economy during any administration, those who are not doing well.  Economics is like that.  What benefits one man hurts someone else.  The price of gas goes up; I have to pay more for gas but some guy in Texas gets a job.   So many Democrats have this simplistic view of life that misses the big picture.
             
            The democratic party – the party of welfare, government entitlements, abortion, moral relativism, socialism, appeasement, hollywood elitism, race baiting, class warefare and a party that is becoming more and more Marxist as the months pass.  Obama’s health care policy is pure, unadulterated socialism.  But, it is not Obama’s health Care Poicy – it is the health care policy that Hillary and the democrats have tired to get through for years.  I hope the American people reject it. 
             
            Have things gone well, recently for the country and for the Bush Administration – obviously not but this election is not about incidental issues – it never is.   I don’t vote issues – I vote philosophy –
            I am not a socialist – I am a capitalist – I believe in a free market economy and less government and more personal responsibility.  I don’t want the government doing things for me – I want them to do their jobs according to the constitution and leave me to honor God, raise my family, and make my living on a free and level playing field in a social setting that acknowledges God, right and wrong, and general decency.  Democrats have been undermining all of those values for decades.  Can I defend the Republicans in everything – certainly not – but right now, the Republican party is more conservative than the Democrats – therefore I vote Republican – Personally, I think you would be better served not to vote for ”parties” or for “men” but for values. I think that you would discover that conservative values lead to greater decency and greater personal success.  It won’t be the government that gives that to you, it will be you (and if you have a
            relationship with the Lord, he will help you out a lot too.) 
             
             

          • Anonymous

            The last I checked, Obama is a Democrat and is representing the Democratic Party in this election.  You cannot separate the two.  If you get him, you get more democratic policy.  Obama’s voting record would clearly indicate an extreme tendency toward Modern Liberalism.  In fact, I believe that he has the most liberal voting record of anyone in both the Illinois Sentate and the U.S. Senate.  His associations with Jeremiah Right, Saul Alinski, and other leftists and black liberation theologians indicates either extremely poor judgment or, even worse, agreement with these men and their philosophies.
             
            The Economy – was weak when Bush took over from Clinton -  weakened a bit more during the first two years of his administration and then expoded (positively) for over 4 years.  Economic indicators showed positive growth in the economy on every front.  The stock market rose to record levels, the housing market was strong and values remained high, interest rates were low and inflation was nearly nonexistent.  Hundreds of thousands of jobs were being created, etc.   Certainly there were negatives and the unscrupulous lending policies of banks and other financial institution is indefensible even though the fault for their practices lies squarely upon their own shoulders rather than on those of politicians.  If the Bush administration has culpability in this present crisis then so does the “do nothing” congress. 
             
            The wars – I’ll never forget 911 and the devastatioin that caused to our nation.  The country, at that time, realized that we had to take the fight to the terrorists.  The rest of the world  (Germany, France, and Russia) cowered behind their many lame excuses and would not help in the war effort.  But, thanks to our president and his tremendous resolve, he took the battle to the terrorists and has sent them to flight.  The biggest mistakes Bush made in the whole thing: 1) underestimating the irrational fanaticism of the radical Islamists – he did not realize how truly insane they are and 2) accepting Clinton era intelligence as to the existance of WMD’s in Iraq, and 3) trusting his fellow Americans on the other side of the political aisle who let him get out on that proverbial limb and then have been trying to cut it off in the usual democratic, power-grabbing, manner.   Along with that, he has had to battle the traitors that have infiltrated
            the democratic party who have undermined (yes, they voted to fund the war, hypocritically, I might add) virtually every aspect of this dual-front war (Afghanistan and Iraq).  But, George Bush did not give us this war – the terrorists who are bent on destroying western culture gave us this war.  You are an idiot if think that George Bush or any other American, be it Democrat or Republican, finds any benefit in starting and progating wars for their own financial or political advantage.
             
            The Republican policy does not favor the rich.  You seem so gullible, simply spouting the party line when you dems say things like that.  The people who pay the taxes are the ones who deserve the tax cuts.  When you give tax cuts to businesses and other job providers (the rich as you call them), you make it more likely that there are going to be greater profits for businesses and greater numbers of jobs created and great incentive to start new businesses.  You may not agree with the policy but the motive is not to “favor the rich.”  The motive is to help the economy and there by help everyone (or at least most everyone).  The over simplification of simply giving tax breaks to the “middleclass” while sticking it to the mean, greedy rich people sounds good to some, but it is really not the way to help the economy.  It is nothing but class envy.  But even with that, lots of people have benefitted under this present administration who are not
            rich.  You can always find, in some segment of the economy during any administration, those who are not doing well.  Economics is like that.  What benefits one man hurts someone else.  The price of gas goes up; I have to pay more for gas but some guy in Texas gets a job.   So many Democrats have this simplistic view of life that misses the big picture.
             
            The democratic party – the party of welfare, government entitlements, abortion, moral relativism, socialism, appeasement, hollywood elitism, race baiting, class warefare and a party that is becoming more and more Marxist as the months pass.  Obama’s health care policy is pure, unadulterated socialism.  But, it is not Obama’s health Care Poicy – it is the health care policy that Hillary and the democrats have tired to get through for years.  I hope the American people reject it. 
             
            Have things gone well, recently for the country and for the Bush Administration – obviously not but this election is not about incidental issues – it never is.   I don’t vote issues – I vote philosophy –
            I am not a socialist – I am a capitalist – I believe in a free market economy and less government and more personal responsibility.  I don’t want the government doing things for me – I want them to do their jobs according to the constitution and leave me to honor God, raise my family, and make my living on a free and level playing field in a social setting that acknowledges God, right and wrong, and general decency.  Democrats have been undermining all of those values for decades.  Can I defend the Republicans in everything – certainly not – but right now, the Republican party is more conservative than the Democrats – therefore I vote Republican – Personally, I think you would be better served not to vote for ”parties” or for “men” but for values. I think that you would discover that conservative values lead to greater decency and greater personal success.  It won’t be the government that gives that to you, it will be you (and if you have a
            relationship with the Lord, he will help you out a lot too.) 
             
             

      • Al_Capone08

        OBAMA IS THE ONLY ONE TALKING RACE, OH AND THE LIBERAL LEFTIST MEDIA WHICH SEEMS TP BE YOUR BEST FRIEND

  • Taquoshi

    FTA; – Have any of you noticed that Barack Obama is part African-American?” Sebelius asked in response to a question about why the election is so close.”

    No, Governor, I just thought he had a fabulous tan. And your point is….?

    “That may be a factor. All the code language, all that doesn’t show up in the polls. And that may be a factor for some people.”

    Really, Governor, any particular code in mind?

  • LeeK

    Well, 35% to 40% of the electorate is composed of Republicans, who cannot be assumed to be for Obama were he black, white, green, or purple. So, to the extent beyond that 35-40% McCain garners, those people must be the ones Sebelius thinks are racist. Those people are Independents and Democrats. Nice call, Governor.

  • LeeK

    Well, 35% to 40% of the electorate is composed of Republicans, who cannot be assumed to be for Obama were he black, white, green, or purple. So, to the extent beyond that 35-40% McCain garners, those people must be the ones Sebelius thinks are racist. Those people are Independents and Democrats. Nice call, Governor.

  • mjs1611

    It seems like Mrs. Sebelius has spent more time in other states than in Ks, I almost forgot she was my Gov. !!!

    PLEASE GO TO FREE DOWNLOADS AT DRDINO.COM THE KING IS COMING…ARE YOU READY ?

  • rada43

    Race is a factor? Are you kidding? I would vote for Michael Steele and probably even Alan Keyes and last time I saw a photo of them….they were black men! Get over yourself, he is way too liberal!!!

  • punnk

    @ tyork

    You fail to consider that Obama has spent 12 years at the federal and state levels. Of the 570 bills Obama has co-sponsored, 15 have become federal law. He has sponsored 823 bills. Does this qualify him?

    What about Obama pushing through the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act, the strongest ethics reform bill in decades? Or pushing through the strongest ethics reform act in his state, the gift ban act? Or how about pushing through a bipartisan bill making every earmark public knowledge? Does this qualify him?

    Is this enough?

    • Al_Capone08

      lets not forget that 80% of his voting , HE VOTED PRESENT. HE HAS MORE CRIMINAL TIES THAT MY COUSIN VINNY. HES GONE BACK ON EVERY PROMISE HE'S MADE IN THIS ELECTION. AND THE ONLY WRITING HES DONE IS 2 MEMOIRS. THE BILLS THAT HAVE PASSED HAVE ONLY BEEN NAME ,LENDING……….CHANGE!!!! YA CHANGE AMERICA DOESNT NEED!!!!!!!!!!
      Palin and mccain are the real mavericks. the ones who have taken on the government. the usa isnt broke but the government is…OBAMA HAS FLAT OUT SAID HE WILL RAISE THE TAX WHICH WILL TURN AWAY INVESTING, NOTICE THAT THE STATES THAT HAVE ALL THE JOB LOSS, ARE BLUE STATES..THEY BEEN TAXED TO DEATH BY DEMOCRATIC GOVENORS…… so PUNK do some research then come back and make statements about your candidate

      • punnk

        Obama has criminal ties? Much like McCain and the Keating five or Palin and Ted Stevens?

        What promises has he gone back on in this election? State your case.

        McCain/Palin haven't taken the government on. They are not reformers. You cannot be a reformer when you support 2 bridges to nowhere and only concede on one when its publicly criticized. Yeah, Palin is still supporting a billion dollar bridge project in Wasilla.

        McCain doesnt even know where McCain stands.

    • 301

      Too bad Mr Ethics Obama does not follow his own advice…2nd biggest recipient of FannieMay/FreddieMac executive contribution. These self same execs made millions and now are the Obama economic advisers. Anytime the name Jaime Gorelick comes up you just gotta know she's in another mess.

      • punnk

        Again, Obama and McCain have both taken campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie.

        • brownbreadandale4

          Yeah, right! BAR-RAG HUSSEIN OBAMA aka Barry Soetoro, who didn't step foot on this continent until he was 18 years old, and continues to fail his “America IQ test” (such as the difference between Memorial Day and Veterans Day, or how many states there are, or the fact that his uncle liberating Auschwitz was ANOTHER LIE! And the fact that he has to take his teleprompter to a RODEO (for Pete’s sake when is he going to be potty-trained? …. oh, that's right, he HAS to use one and mocks John McCain for giving speeches from the heart and mind and NOT GETTING IN TROUBLE like our Mr. Shiny Empty Suit With Big Ears From Indonesia does when faced with NO PREPARED SCRIPT!!!

          Yeah, old Barry likes to mock folks with physical disabilities; that's lots of fun and gains lots of votes. Yeah, he is so fair he doesn't see any difference between Georgia and Russia. Yeah, he even said that John McCain is running a more ethical campaign than he is . . . oh, yeah, THAT IS WHY his staff hauls his teleprompter to RODEOS!!! Bar-rag is picking up the Joe Biden gaffe a day syndrome.

          Let's see now, where were we . . . . . Oh, yeah, WHAT DID OBAMA DO WITH $885,000.00 that he got from F & F? What, Michelle spent it? What, OFF SHORE ACCOUNTS??? Oh, boy, he better hope that old fish-face spent it!!! IT BETTER NOT BE IN ANY OFF SHORE ACCOUNTS!!!!!

          Now, to be fair (yes I know that FAIR is not a word that Lefties like to use, but Righties are very fair, so to be fair, let's ask WHAT DID JOHN McCAIN DO WITH THE $885,000.00 THAT HE GOT FROM F & F? Oh, gosh, he didn't get $885,000.00 from F & F? Gee whiz, what do we do now???

          I KNOW, LET'S DEMAND THAT F & F GIVE THE EXACT SAME TO THE REPUBLICANS THAT THEY GAVE TO THE DEMOCRATS!!!

          BY JOVE, THAT IS A CORKING IDEA!!!! HOW DO WE GET THE BALL ROLLING ON THIS ONE??? THE REPUBLICANS WILL BE SO GOSH DARN PLEASED!!! Good work, punk!

    • laylay

      Absolutely Not, ” You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig”

      • Anonymous

        test

    • brownbreadandale4

      WRONG AGAIN!!! TIME SPENT CAMPAIGNING DOES NOT COUNT.

      OBAMA GOT TO THE ILLINOIS STATE HOUSE IN JANUARY OF 1997.

      HE STARTED IN DC IN 2005.

      HAT MEANS HE HAS SPENT LESS THAN TEN YEARS ACTUALLY WORKING IN POLITICS (he LIED about Sarah Palin, she began in 1992 as an elected official, he started in 1997, and called her “new” to the scene.

      THIS ALSO MEANS THAT HE HAD LESS THAN FIVE YEARS WHEN HE BEGAN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

      HE INTRODUCED ZERO, NONE, NADA, BILLS IN THE SENATE

      HE HAS WRITTEN ZERO LEGISLATION.

      ZERO OF HIS BILLS HAVE PASSED (except for a single housekeeping measure they GAVE HIM in May AFTER HE WAS ALREADY THE DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

      HE HAD ZERO LEGISLATION TO HIS CREDIT WHEN HE WAS NOMINATED AND / OR RUNNING.

      DO NOT LIE ABOUT THIS OR TRY TO PARSE FANCY WORDS.

      HIS SIGNATURES ON OTHERS BILLS MEANS NOTHING!!! THAT IS A COURTESY. HE IS LIKE THE MAN WHO ALWAYS GOES GO DINNER BUT NEVER PICKS UP THE CHECK!!!

      HE PUSHED THROUGH NOTHING! He is worthless in a floor fight. Have you ever seen him operate? He runs straight for the door. IOW, HE IS A CHICKEN AND MOST MEN KNOW IT!

      I WILL DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU TO GIVE US A SINGLE NUMBER OF A SINGLE BILL THAT HE INTRODUCED DURING HIS TIME IN THE SENATE BEFORE HE RAN FOR THE DEMOCRAT TICKET!!!!!!!!!

      JUST GIVE ME ONE!!!!!!!!!!

      FORGET ABOUT THE ONES YOU CLAIM HE WAS PART OF BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALL LIES.

      In fact, your jerk-off is so lazy he doesn’t even like to go to work, let alone do anything when he is there! Where is the number of any bill he wrote?? Just one!! Any one!!

      If you knew anything at all about politics, you would know that ONE DAY as mayor beats TEN YEARS in the legislature!!!!!!

      There is no use in whining about his being “qualified” because he is not. He could spend 100 years in the Senate and not be qualified. They are different jobs; don’t you get it?

      He can claim that he twisted arms (not his job either) and he will still not be qualified!!!

      It doesn’t matter if he pushed through a bill that cured cancer, he would still not be qualified.

      The fact is that you do not understand the system WHICH IS WHY YOUR EXAMPLES ARE NOT RELEVANT. No, they are not enough. No they do not count.

      Obama is a sad sack who got greedy and now he is in over his head. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO STUPID TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW AND DOES NOT KNOW THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW.

      Everyone knows he is in trouble EXCEPT for a few supporters who do not know how to read the signs. Your pathetic attempts to “cover for him” on web sites will never change the dynamics of the problem. HUBRIS IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. GREED IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. LACK OF MORAL FIBER IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS NON-TRADITIONAL UPBRINGING IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS LIES TO COVER HIS NON-TRADITIONAL UPBRINGING IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS MEAN MEAN MEAN WIFE IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS YEARS AT A BLACK LIBERATION CHURCH IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH JEREMIAH WRIGHT IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH ROBERT REZKO IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. H IS RELATIONSHIP WITH LOUIS FARRAKHAN IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS NEVER PASSING ANY LEGISLATION IS A HUGE PART OF THE PROBLEM. HIS BAD JUDGMENT (going after a VP candidate instead of McCain) (mocking folks with disabilities) (mocking a military record) (mocking a POW) ARE VERY MUCH PART OF HIS PROBLEMS. HIS INABILITY TO RELATE TO “REAL” AMERICANS (because he was raised in Indonesia) IS A VERY BIG PROBLEM. HIS LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF AMERICAN TRADITION IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. AND, WHAT HE DID TO HILLARY CLINTON (she is nothing to Obama and his nasty wife, BUT Hillary is the WIFE of a very popular president; if Obama KNEW WHAT HE NEEDED TO KNOW ABOUT AMERICAN TRADITION AND ABOUT THE TRADITIONS OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, HE WOULD NOT HAVE TREATED HILLARY SO BADLY), IS VERY MUCH PART OF THE PROBLEM.

    • Anonymous

      Punnk,

      Your point?

      For a Senator or Congressman to “sponsor” a bill does not mean that they authored the bills or even did anything to push the bill through their respective house. It simply means that they put their name on the bill to supposedly give it greater credibility when they vote on it. He may or may not have been given a few minutes on the floor to make a short supportive speech or something like that. It means very little other than to pad a politicians resume’ for those who are ignorant enough to think that it really means something.

      Obama, being a novice, needed to associate himself with as many bills as possible to give the appearance that he is really working hard and “fighting” for this cause or that cause. In reality, it’s bogus. It is done, for the most part, to advance one’s political carrier, which is what B. O. is all about. I know this is true of a lot of politicians but, in the brief time he has been in politics, how much of that time has been spent running for a higher public office and how much time has actually been spent doing the job he has been elected to do. I think that the time he has spent campaigning is grossly disproportionate to his work effort, even in relation to other politicians.

      Senator McCain has been in the game for a long time and doesn’t need any of that pseudo-credibility and knows that “sonsoring” bills authored by othermen is nothing but a bunch of window dressing. That is why he has “sponsored” so many fewer bills. He gains nothing by it. It is worthwhile to “sponsor” a bill to give it credibility for a vote, but it is not a resume’s enhancer (or it shouldn’t be considered as such).

      • Anonymous

        I will concede with your point, although I think it is very cynical. I
        don’t claim to know Obama’s intentions in sponsoring and/or
        co-sponsoring bills and I don’t think you can honestly claim the same
        either.

        A person’s record is just one of the many factors we should consider
        when throwing our support behind a candidate. In my opinion, being in
        the senate and doing little to nothing is worse then being there and
        over actively participating.

        The argument could be made for either side I suppose and in the end it’s
        up to the individual interpretation. I choose to believe in Obama. You
        don’t.

        • Anonymous

          Punk,
           
          I will acknowledge my cynicism.   I think cynicism is warranted in light of the condition of the American political scene today.  It seems that the overall tone of politics in Washington is “hatred” rather than philosophical disagreement. Set aside the hatred and the philosophical disagreement is so wide that Republicans and Democrats can agree on almost nothing and the rare ocasions on which they do “seem” to agree always have some nefarious ulterior motive involved.
           
          Both parties are guilty of it but, in my view, the democratic party and its leadership have literally “written the book” on that kind of politics for quite a while.  A long with that, they have adopted a political philospohy that is changing America into a country that I don’t think Washington, Jefferson, or Lincoln would even recognize if they were alive today.
           
          American is becoming a divided country, 1.5 million children are being aborted every year in favor of blatant and uncontrolled immorality and the rejection of simple, common decency.  Homosexuality and pornography of the most vile sort are becoming part of the fabric of our society and defended, primarily by democrats, as being acceptible and even right.  The schools and universities in this country are indoctrination centers for leftist philosophy and the majority of students come out of those schools ilequipped to think critically about much of anything other that maneuvering “Mario” through to the next level, the proper use of a condom, or how to handle single parenthood at 15. 
           
          Nearly 20 million people are living in this country illegally and there are few people in the government who seem to really believe that there is anything wrong with it inspite of the obvious list of negative consequences that this is causing all over the country. 
           
          We are in the middle of a culture war, a war we didn’t start, didn’t ask for, and must win, with radical Islam that involves the death of thousands of Americans and the country cannot set aside partisan politics even in this extremely critical time, in order to win this war.  Democratic politicians, in order to gain political advantage, have undermined virtually every aspect of the war although they know the war is legitimate and necessary because they vote to fund it. 
           
          Even in this banking crisis, the political posturing to win an election is going to take precedence over finding a solution to it.   In fact, the very reason it happened is because political advantage is the priority, not the welfare of the country. 
           
          This country is becoming something that is hard to defend and I put about 90% of the blame for that, at least in the political sense,  squarely on the shoulders of the Democratic party for having adopted Modern Liberalism and Moral relativism as their underlying foundation.
           
          Barack Obama is the “poster child” for who and what they are and if you like this guy, I really think that you are an ignoramous – there really isn’t anything about this guy, other than an image, that is of any substance.  He simply hasn’t lived a life that indicates any degree of depth and yet millions of Americans admire him – am I cynical? –  you bet.
           
           

        • Anonymous

          Punk,
           
          I will acknowledge my cynicism.   I think cynicism is warranted in light of the condition of the American political scene today.  It seems that the overall tone of politics in Washington is “hatred” rather than philosophical disagreement. Set aside the hatred and the philosophical disagreement is so wide that Republicans and Democrats can agree on almost nothing and the rare ocasions on which they do “seem” to agree always have some nefarious ulterior motive involved.
           
          Both parties are guilty of it but, in my view, the democratic party and its leadership have literally “written the book” on that kind of politics for quite a while.  A long with that, they have adopted a political philospohy that is changing America into a country that I don’t think Washington, Jefferson, or Lincoln would even recognize if they were alive today.
           
          American is becoming a divided country, 1.5 million children are being aborted every year in favor of blatant and uncontrolled immorality and the rejection of simple, common decency.  Homosexuality and pornography of the most vile sort are becoming part of the fabric of our society and defended, primarily by democrats, as being acceptible and even right.  The schools and universities in this country are indoctrination centers for leftist philosophy and the majority of students come out of those schools ilequipped to think critically about much of anything other that maneuvering “Mario” through to the next level, the proper use of a condom, or how to handle single parenthood at 15. 
           
          Nearly 20 million people are living in this country illegally and there are few people in the government who seem to really believe that there is anything wrong with it inspite of the obvious list of negative consequences that this is causing all over the country. 
           
          We are in the middle of a culture war, a war we didn’t start, didn’t ask for, and must win, with radical Islam that involves the death of thousands of Americans and the country cannot set aside partisan politics even in this extremely critical time, in order to win this war.  Democratic politicians, in order to gain political advantage, have undermined virtually every aspect of the war although they know the war is legitimate and necessary because they vote to fund it. 
           
          Even in this banking crisis, the political posturing to win an election is going to take precedence over finding a solution to it.   In fact, the very reason it happened is because political advantage is the priority, not the welfare of the country. 
           
          This country is becoming something that is hard to defend and I put about 90% of the blame for that, at least in the political sense,  squarely on the shoulders of the Democratic party for having adopted Modern Liberalism and Moral relativism as their underlying foundation.
           
          Barack Obama is the “poster child” for who and what they are and if you like this guy, I really think that you are an ignoramous – there really isn’t anything about this guy, other than an image, that is of any substance.  He simply hasn’t lived a life that indicates any degree of depth and yet millions of Americans admire him – am I cynical? –  you bet.
           
           

      • Anonymous

        I will concede with your point, although I think it is very cynical. I
        don’t claim to know Obama’s intentions in sponsoring and/or
        co-sponsoring bills and I don’t think you can honestly claim the same
        either.

        A person’s record is just one of the many factors we should consider
        when throwing our support behind a candidate. In my opinion, being in
        the senate and doing little to nothing is worse then being there and
        over actively participating.

        The argument could be made for either side I suppose and in the end it’s
        up to the individual interpretation. I choose to believe in Obama. You
        don’t.

    • Anonymous

      Punnk,

      Your point?

      For a Senator or Congressman to “sponsor” a bill does not mean that they authored the bills or even did anything to push the bill through their respective house. It simply means that they put their name on the bill to supposedly give it greater credibility when they vote on it. He may or may not have been given a few minutes on the floor to make a short supportive speech or something like that. It means very little other than to pad a politicians resume’ for those who are ignorant enough to think that it really means something.

      Obama, being a novice, needed to associate himself with as many bills as possible to give the appearance that he is really working hard and “fighting” for this cause or that cause. In reality, it’s bogus. It is done, for the most part, to advance one’s political carrier, which is what B. O. is all about. I know this is true of a lot of politicians but, in the brief time he has been in politics, how much of that time has been spent running for a higher public office and how much time has actually been spent doing the job he has been elected to do. I think that the time he has spent campaigning is grossly disproportionate to his work effort, even in relation to other politicians.

      Senator McCain has been in the game for a long time and doesn’t need any of that pseudo-credibility and knows that “sonsoring” bills authored by othermen is nothing but a bunch of window dressing. That is why he has “sponsored” so many fewer bills. He gains nothing by it. It is worthwhile to “sponsor” a bill to give it credibility for a vote, but it is not a resume’s enhancer (or it shouldn’t be considered as such).

  • oboeman56

    Race has everything to do with this election. If Mr Obama were white, his run for the nomination would have been laughed off the stage. Only because his skin is black is he a viable candidate. He's treated differently because of his color. That's racism.

    • punnk

      and how does your little theory apply to Palin?

      • oboeman56

        <html><head>

        <link media=”all” type=”text/css” href=”/webmail/static/deg/css/wysiwyg-4230203003.css” rel=”stylesheet”>
        </head><body>

        Dont bother me at home, asshole

        Sep 18, 2008 04:39:10 AM, wrote:

        punnk wrote:

        and how does your little theory apply to Palin?

        Link: http://iowaindependent.com/?p=5627#comment-2413… may reply to this email to post your response. To turn off notifications, go to your Disqus settings at: http://disqus.com/settings/notifications/
        </…>

        • punnk

          That was intelligent.

    • brownbreadandale4

      EXACTLY CORRECT. HE HAD ZERO LEGISLATION TO HIS CREDIT WHICH IS ASTOUNDING IN ITS BRAZEN TEMERITY.

      His background makes one shudder in its “uniqueness.”
      His “friends” and those he surrounded himself with are impossible to hide.
      The day will come (and none too soon) when the rank and file Democrats find out what was done to them, and what was done to Hillary, and all the other candidates, and they will scream for Howard Dean's hide! They will all know that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid sat by and said nothing.

  • shaggy13

    I live in Kansas, and i wonder how that C-bag got elected in the first place…. Suck it up Kathy, You are supporting a LOSER.

  • CactusWren

    Really, Gov. Sebelius?? “part African American”??
    Exactly which parent was African American?
    I'm afraid the folks in Kansas elected a dummy ….and a race baiter.

  • jadedblakman

    Come on people. At least try to be consistent. Some say they would vote for Michael Steel and offer that up as proof that race isn't a factor. Well, how convenient. Hypothetical situations are great. Also, we should try to be consistent. Lack of experience is one reason given for not voting for the Democratic nominee. Hmmm…. let's see. A term as Lt. Gov. Yep. That's good enough. That lines up (don't know how though). There isn't anyone who even noticed the color of Obama's skin. How dare someone imply that could have any impact. Right.

    • EEAGLEMAN

      i would vote for a person of any persuasion as long as they share my values and ideals;

      and mike steel for sure… a good american man

    • brownbreadandale4

      JUDAS PRIEST AT LEAST YOU BE CONSISTENT!

      By the numbers, we know that white Republicans voted for Steele. Isn't that proof enough that white Republicans will vote for a black Republican? What other proof would you like to see to “PROVE” the hypothetical! Oh, that's right, he really was elected.

      I would ask you to actually READ the history of the Republican Party and all that we have done to STOP DEMOCRATS FROM PREVENTING BLACKS FROM VOTING; but that would burst your biased bubble. Can't have any truth around here.

      I would also ask you to follow the truth of the black Republicans who have been elected to office AND THE FACT THAT WHITE REPUBLICANS CAMPAIGNED FOR THEM, FINANCED THEIR CAMPAIGNS, AND VOTED FOR THEM!!!

      Your own hatred and bias is such that you refuse truth and fill your mind with nonsense that is not true! Do you not see that as being UNFAIR TO YOUR OWN MIND!!!! Or do you owe yourself no truth if it makes a DEMOCRAT look bad?

      Are you so “committed” to the Democrat party that you are willing to tolerate lies on its behalf?

      DO YOU EVEN REALIZE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? You are saying that you would rather believe LIES about Republicans than TRUTHS about Democrats. Do you not see the illogic to that? IS IT WORTH BELIEVING THAT REPUBLICANS ARE BAD JUST TO MAKE YOU HAPPY, AND THEN DENY THE TRUTH OF THE GOODNESS THAT THEY ARE HELPING TO CAUSE FOR BLACK CANDIDATES? That doesn't even make any sense!

      Can you actually listen to Biden say that Obama is “clean” and really, in your heart, believe that Biden is not a lying hypocrite who looks down on blacks? Then, when you NEVER hear a Republican say anything of the kind, actually believe that he / she is MORE racist than Biden? Does that really make sense to you??

      You really need to evaluate your priorities and what each party demands. A friend of mine “switched” parties about 12 years ago and is still amazed! He says he is now “free to think any thought.” When he was a Democrat, he had to “push” certain thoughts out of his mind and refuse to answer others. He says that if he had known, he would have “switched” years earlier, but he “believed” what the Democrats said about Republicans. What made him switch? Well, he got transferred to a new group and his colleagues were easy going, happy, and laughing all the time, PLUS they were more willing to help him learn his new job and get along well, and he often wondered what the “deal” was and about six months in, he found out they were ALL Republicans. He said he had no idea that Republicans were “laid back and happy.” I was pleased to “welcome him home.”

  • thekidd

    Hmmmm, I did not vote for Barrack Obama for the US Senate here in Illinois because I did not like his positions on issues. I voted for the other African American running for the same seat. So If I did not vote for Obama as a Senator, why would I vote for him for President?? Once again the democrats are bring up race. What's next are they going to dump Biden and tell us it is for health reasons and bring back Hilliary Clinton for VP to prove to women that we like everyone……

  • Jack_H

    I've thought a bit more about this. Possibly I should just buy into this racism theory my governor professes.
    While trying to enlighten my friends, it would take a lot less breath for me to simply say, “Don't vote for him because he's black” instead of detailing the laundry list of reasons Barack Obama should not be president.

    • jadedblakman

      And I'm sure your point would resonate more.

      • Anonymous

        No. It wouldn’t. For me to do such a thing would be as ludicrous as my incompetent governor’s statement. Will I deny that there are some whites out there that are voting against Obama solely because he’s black, no. But I’m hoping their votes will be cancelled out by the black populace that are voting for Obama solely because he’s black.

  • rightross

    Obama did very little to pass significant legislation in Illinois. He lent his name to several pieces of legislaton, a common practice among legislators, for the purpose of taking credit for them if they pass and have some reasonable good effect. How many pieces of legislation did he actually author. I doubt if he authored any of those mentioned. If he had, we would be hearing about that in his T.V. adds.

    The cries of racism are acts of despiration so that when he blows this election, his followers” can have an excuse. They will try to say that Republicans are racist. But, if he does lose, it will not be as a result of republicans not voting for him. We would not vote for him, regardless. It will be a result of Democrats not voting for him. If racism is the factor then it points to the reality that Democrats are the ones who were swayed against him as result of his race.

    • punnk
      • rightross

        Sir,
         
        Your point? 
         
        For a Senator or Congressman to “sponsor” a bill does not mean that they authored the bills or even did anything to push the bill through their respective house.  It simply means that they put their name on the bill to supposedly give it greater credibility when they vote on it.  He may or may not have been given a few minutes on the floor to make a short supportive speech or something like that.  It means very little other than to pad a politicians resume' for those who are ignorant enough to think that it really means something.
         
        Obama, being a novice, needed to associate himself with as many bills as possible to give the appearance that he is really working hard and “fighting” for this cause or that cause.  In reality, it's bogus.  It is done, for the most part, to advance one's political carrier, which is what B. O. is all about.  I know this is true of a lot of politicians but, in the brief time he has been in politics, how much of that time has been spent running for a higher public office and how much time has actually been spent doing the job he has been elected to do.  I think that the time he has spent campaigning is grossly disproportionate to his work effort, even in relation to other politicians.
         
        Senator McCain has been in the game for a long time and doesn't need any of that pseudo-credibility and knows that it is a bunch of window dressing.  That is why he has “sponsored” so many fewer bills.   He gains nothing by it.  It is worthwhile to “sponsor” a bill to give it credibility for a vote, but it is not a resume's enhancer (or it shouldn't be considered as such).

      • rightross

        Sir,
         
        Your point? 
         
        For a Senator or Congressman to “sponsor” a bill does not mean that they authored the bills or even did anything to push the bill through their respective house.  It simply means that they put their name on the bill to supposedly give it greater credibility when they vote on it.  He may or may not have been given a few minutes on the floor to make a short supportive speech or something like that.  It means very little other than to pad a politicians resume' for those who are ignorant enough to think that it really means something.
         
        Obama, being a novice, needed to associate himself with as many bills as possible to give the appearance that he is really working hard and “fighting” for this cause or that cause.  In reality, it's bogus.  It is done, for the most part, to advance one's political carrier, which is what B. O. is all about.  I know this is true of a lot of politicians but, in the brief time he has been in politics, how much of that time has been spent running for a higher public office and how much time has actually been spent doing the job he has been elected to do.  I think that the time he has spent campaigning is grossly disproportionate to his work effort, even in relation to other politicians.
         
        Senator McCain has been in the game for a long time and doesn't need any of that pseudo-credibility and knows that it is a bunch of window dressing.  That is why he has “sponsored” so many fewer bills.   He gains nothing by it.  It is worthwhile to “sponsor” a bill to give it credibility for a vote, but it is not a resume's enhancer (or it shouldn't be considered as such).

  • BenGreen

    There's this fallacy that I see repeated over and over that draws a false conclusion: namely that if Obama's campaign is hurt by racism, then McCain voters are racist. Rather, the point that Sebelius and others are making is that, especially given the closeness of the race, the number of people who will not vote for a black candidate is significant. The closeness of this election is itself so anomalous that race is really the only logical explanation. Consider that a party with such an unpopular out-going president has never won… never. Consider that the field operation the DNC has in motion is larger, more organized, and better funded than ever before. Consider that the Obama campaign has motivated it's base like few Democratic candidates ever have. Consider that the DNC has registered tens of millions more new voters than the RNC. Consider that the Obama campaign is easily the best funded Democratic campaign in history. In short the Democrats have a perfect storm, and that looking at all those factors, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who knows anything about the history of presidential elections who wouldn't bet the house on the Democrats taking the White House. Yet somehow, it's a close race.

    • EEAGLEMAN

      amazing…. all the money… the media campaigning for him…. and still he is going to lose…. wow

    • brownbreadandale4

      WHAT WOULD THE RACE-BAITER SAY IF THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE WERE COLIN POWELL, or Condi Rice, or Michael Steele, or Walter Willams, or Thomas Sowell?

      IN FACT, THE RACE ARGUMENT FALLS FLAT ON ITS FACE WHEN THE PERSON IN QUESTION IS A CONSERVATIVE!!!

      Now, that answer makes the LEFTISTS ANGRY!! Do you know their typical (canned) response? It is very very insulting! They call conservative blacks UNCLE TOM!! Remember what they did to Clarence Thomas?? He called his treatment by DEMOCRAT ELECTED OFFICIALS (not some thugs down at a corner) as a “HIGH TECH LYNCHING!”

      You see, Clarence Thomas KNOWS HISTORY and he knew that the KKK was formed by the Democrats and that it was the DEMOCRATS who LYNCHED BLACKS!!! And that it was DEMOCRAT SHERIFFS WHO TOOK AFTER BLACKS with FIRE HOSES, BASEBALL BATS, and DOGS!! He knew that the DEMOCRATS PASSED LAWS FORCING SEGREGATION!!

      He knew that Republicans HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FRIENDS TO BLACKS AND ALL MINORITIES. He knows (a) the history of the Republican Party, (b) their record of VOTING AND DEMONSTRATING FOR CIVIL RIGHTS! and (c) the NUMBER ONE PREMISE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WHICH IS RESPECT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL.

      If you read history, and truly study it, you know that whenever the Democrats start to lose anything, they turn around and blame the Republicans. It was REPUBLICANS WHO WENT TO WAR AGAINST SLAVERY, AND REPUBLICANS WHO STOPPED SLAVERY, AND REPUBLICANS WHO PASSED CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATION IN THE 1960's (to STOP the Democrats from imposing poll taxes, and literacy tests, to stop the blacks from voting).

      REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT EISENHOWER SENT FEDERAL TROOPS TO INTEGRATE THE SCHOOLS WHILE DEMOCRAT SENATOR ROBERT BYRD IS STILL A MEMBER OF THE KKK AND HOLDS THE EXALTED POST OF GRAND KLEAGLE!!

      WITH MOUNTAINS OF EVIDENCE IN FULL SIGHT, THE DEMOCRATS STILL CALL THE REPUBLICANS RACISTS!! (There is little doubt that the American people will ever be told the truth; Democrats are vicious liars; I can only imagine their real feelings about racists; Senator Byrd has never been confronted about his ugly RACIST side. Would a Republican be allowed to sit in the Senate with that title?

      THERE IS FULL EVIDENCE OF DEMOCRAT RACISM THAT CAN BE PROVEN IN ANY COURT OF LAW (1) Civil War (2) KKK (3) Democrats passing segregation legislation 4) Democrat sheriffs that punished blacks (5) Democrat legislation for poll taxes (6) Democrat legislation for literacy tests and many others. THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE IS ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE; but the Democrats continue their lies. [They must, or their house of cards will fall down.]

      FACTS ARE FACTS; THEY CANNOT BE DENIED.

      Martin Luther King was a Republican. Until WWI and WWII and industrial changes; almost all blacks were Republicans. THE ONLY BLACK DEMOCRATS WERE THOSE WHO HAD OWNERS WHO MADE CERTAIN THEY STAYED ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE!

      I could cry when I think of what the Democrats have done to the black family and to black owned businesses. It is truly sickening, from financial, emotional, mental, and spiritual aspects, Democrats should be ashamed, but they aren't. The more they are found out, the more they scream and point and point and scream. Truly, I do not know how they can sleep at night.

      Just look at what they are doing to our FIRST FEMALE candidate! But, she will have the votes BECAUSE SHE IS A CONSERVATIVE!!!!!!

      REPUBLICANS WILL NEVER CONSIDER A DEMOCRAT AND VERY FEW INDEPENDENTS WILL CONSIDER A MARXIST SOCIALIST LIKE OBAMA!

      WHERE DID OBAMA THINK HIS VOTES WERE GOING TO COME FROM, BASED ON HIS HISTORY OF SOCIALISM AND HAVING THE SECOND TO WORST VOTING RECORD IN THE SENATE?

      HOW DID GOV SIB. AND NANCY PELOSI AND HARRY REID AND HOWARD DEAN THINK THEY WERE GOING TO COVER THAT UP???

      THEY ARE DOING A GREAT JOB OF COVERING HIS INCOMPETENCE BUT HOW TO COVER HIS SOCIALIST VOTING THAT IS READILY AVAILABLE???

      • joanne1

        Your obsession with Obama intrigues me. You have nothing to say about your party's nominees or Biden for that matter. Do you absolutley agree with everything McCain stands for? Are you sure he's the best your party has to offer? Or is he just a sacrificial lamb? He lost badly in 2000 to Bush (whose approval ratings are the lowest in history at 68% disapproval). What makes you think McCain is better now? How about Palin? Do you truly believe she is qualified to be the leader of this country's 300 million people, let alone the leader of the free world? Is she really the best choice? How about Biden? You say nothing to disparage him or his qualifications. Yet, you attack Hillary Clinton who is no longer running for either position. If you are going to put it out there, then I would ask that you be fair and put ALL of it out there. As an intelligent voter and follower of politics, I would only prefer to make the most informed decisions I can, rather than read the rantings of an obsessed blogger who does NOT seem to see the entire picture. Take off your blinders and ask yourself – NOT are you better off than YOU were 8 years ago – but is this country better off – and the answer to that is NO!!!

        • TrapperJohn57

          Peoples obsession with B Hussein Obama intrigues me as well! Do YOU agree with “EVERYTHING” B Hussein Obama stands for? Are YOU sure he's the best YOUR party has to offer? He got into politics FIVE years after Palin and he wants to tout her “inexperience?” He has NEVER authored ANY piece of legislation but only added his name as sponsor to add to his resume. AS IF he really researched or truly cared about most of the things he “sponsored” or “co-sponsored!” I DO believe that Palin is extremely more qualified to be the leader of this country's 300 million people, let alone the leader of the free world! Much more so than B Hussein Obama OR Biden! How about Biden? He himself stated that perhaps he was not the wisest choice for vice-president. Look no further! Want to be informed? Research, truly research the origins of the KKK and you will find out that Senator Byrd is still and active member, was voted in by KKK members and that the democrats are MUCH more racist in keeping “race” alive and in the forefront of politics than ever the Republicans though of! Get informed or don't vote! Talk about not seeing the “entire picture?” Take off YOUR blinders and realize that while Bush may not have the approval rating you so easily spout, we still have not been attacked on US soil the last seven years! Imagine where we would be if Gore had been elected! Ugh! to think about! p.s. At least Bush's approval rating at 32% is better than the democrat congress' rating at 9%! If we are going to believe numbers, what does that tell YOU?! Given more facts and areas to research if you would TRULY do so, how can any reasonable person remain a democrat!? Voting for McCain/Palin!

      • ScottPruden

        All those racist “Democrats” from the past all joined the Republican party, you know like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond.
        For someone who doesn't seem to like or respect black people, you have a pretty good grasp on the challenges they've have to face from racist society, regardless of what party they were associated with. If your talking about the South, just replace “Democrat” with “white” and you'd see the real picture.
        I'm actually from the South, so I've seen what you're talking about first-hand. I've seen much more violent racism–like the kind you're espousing–in Pennsylvania and especially Idaho, where Palin is actually from and where Mark Furman has a vacation home. It's like White Supremisist Disneyland.
        Just don't go into the same oublic bathroom as their senator, Larry Craig!!

    • rightross

      There is a simple reason for all that you have said and it has little or nothing to do with “race.” It is a testament to the fact that the DNC has chosen a lousy candidate who is far too liberal, far too inexperienced, and far too arrogant for anyone's good. He literally is in “way over his head.” The DemocraParty had everything working for it and it appears that they have quite possibly blown it. They had a four touch down lead in the fourth quarter and choked. To use another sporting metaphor, the DNC thought that they had a slam dunk in this election. So much so that, instead of taking someone like Hillary who was about 85% liberal yet strong, they selected a guy who was 100% liberal yet weak to be a figure head while Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosy, and Harry Reid and their ilk propagate their socialist agenda. They may still win, God forbid, but they are choking, big time, and it has nothing, if anything, to do with “race.”

Switch to our mobile site