jump to navigation

Ok, I give, I will write about Palin. September 15, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Conservative, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Vice President.
1 comment so far

If you read my last two articles you can see that I have been trying to write about Obama’s policies and how they don’t work.  Well the media isn’t cooperating; everyone is talking about Governor Palin so I guess it is my turn too.

 

Let’s start with her interview.  Well in my opinion it she did ok, not great and nothing on the level of her powerful speech at the convention, but ok.  People are talking about how unfair she was treated or how poor her answers were or a whole slew of other things.  The one thing I haven’t seen people talking about was the design or reason for the interview itself.  Has anyone asked themselves why the RNC took their prized VP pick that had two weeks to familiarize herself with the campaign, not to mention a convention and some heavy campaigning during those two weeks, and placed her in front of Charles Gibson, a report known to be unfriendly to the republicans?  On top of this, they gave Gibson open reign to talk about anything he wanted and two days to do it in.  To date the republican strategists have been running a pretty solid campaign, why take a risk like this?  As you ponder this also keep in mind that they scheduled the interview so that it would run on 9/11, a day that almost everyone would be watching Obama and McCain at the ceremonies in New York.  Anyone seeing a formula yet?

 

Well let’s see what the McCain camp learned from all this.  They learned how she would be interviewed in the worst type of situation and in doing so how to best situate her for future interviews.  They also learned where her weak points were both in policies and interviews.  You can believe that her advisors were taking notes on everything from questions and answers, to her presentation of the answers, even down to her body language during the interview and the real beauty is that they took a highly anticipated interview bound to draw in an audience and drastically minimized it.  Conclusion:  The interview with Charles Gibson will most likely be the worst interview you will ever see her in and, given the short memory during election time, come the end of October no one will really remember it.

 

The next big issue with Palin is, of course, is she ready to be president.  My answer is: probably not right now but then, by the same token, I don’t think Obama is either.  Neither one of them has had the time to gain the experience I think is needed for POTUS, but then, Gov. Palin isn’t running for POTUS, Obama is, which gives Palin the advantage here.

 

Everyone is talking as if John McCain is going to keel over dead on November 5th.  Let’s be a little more real, McCain has been running hard during this campaign and has done it without the week vacation his much younger opponent seemed to need, he came out of five and a half years of hell in Vietnam, and battled cancer and won.  We are talking about one tough man here, I’m pretty sure he has some years left in him.  This is very important because these are years that Palin can use to gain experience in a job that is arguably the very best training ground for being President.  You add to that a person that is smart, motivated and has an ideology that the conservative obviously love and you really have your self a person that has serious potential to be a good, solid, effective President.

 

Now let’s look at what she has done in just two years as Governor.  She has passed ethics reform that actually means something and works.  She has cut earmarks by 64% and still maintained a health budget despite the loss of that $352 million.  She has fought oil companies and, to the benefit of her constituents, won.  She also has an excellent understanding of energy policy (which sadly seemed to be a very short part of her Gibson interview) which I believe is a pretty important issue these days.  Sarah Palin has done more in two years than most governors do in there first four year term, and while the dems and the MSM are trying to find out everything she has done wrong, 80% of the people whose lives she directly affects think she has done right and, to me, that is the best endorsement she could have.

Obama backstabs his own good idea September 12, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Contradiction, Policy, Taxes.
add a comment

Let’s face it, even the worst presidential candidate can occasionally have a good idea.  Obama’s has to do with college.  I also agree that college should not be free, but should be affordable.  The little added part about doing community service for assistance from the government is also good.  I have to admit though that I get a little confused when I try and tie this together with his tax plan.

 

Obama proposes tax credits for lower income households, that’s additional money they will receive above and beyond their tax bill.  Obama speaks openly about this.  My question is this; how can you go to someone that wants to work for a better future and tell them work a little harder by giving to the community and we will be glad to help you achieve your goals then turn to the next person and say well if you don’t want to work for a better future and are doing nothing to improve your situation then we will just give you free money?  This is contradictive.  This is proof, by Obama’s own hand, that his tax program is a disincentive for the American people to be as great as they have the ability to be.

 

If you look at all of Obama’s policies they are like these brightly colored jigsaw puzzle pieces.  They look pretty just laying there but when you try to fit them together they just don’t seem to fit quite right.

Obamanomics, the essence of anti-American values. September 10, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Policy, President Bush, Taxes.
add a comment

Bush took office after a period of sustained growth that was longer than most cyclical economic periods, it was bound to drop and it did.  Combine that with the 9/11 attack and you have a recipe for an economic regression or worse. Enter Bush’s economic plans.  The economy rebounded much quicker than was anticipated, unemployment levels remained consistently lower than average, in short things were looking pretty good economically… at least for the first five years. 

 

The problem with the economy today is not Bush’s policies failing America; it is Bush failing his policies.  The basic ideas of these policies are sound.  Keep taxes low for American families, put capital in the hands of those who know how to efficiently (a word never used to describe the federal government) invest it while providing incentives used to help direct the flow of that investment, and keep government spending low.  President Bush started strong but failed to follow through.  He didn’t fight the open checkbook attitude of congress, yes both parties, and he didn’t pay attention to underlying currents in the economy that if detected soon enough could have been prevented, such as the mortgage crisis. 

 

Now to be perfectly fair, the failure of the mortgage industry can not be laid at the feet of Bush alone.  For decades now the government has failed the American people on this issue.  Now I’m not one for heavy government regulations but some issues require, if not regulation, at least solid, diligent, and consistent monitoring.  Real Estate, being the base of wealth for the vast majority of Americans, definitely qualifies as one of these issues.  Also, allowing the government sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which have the ability to borrow directly from the government treasury, to become more beholden to their share holders than to the people that they were created to help was another failure of our government.

 

When you take unchecked government spending add it to the failing real estate market and the total mismanagement of the war then policy, no matter how good, is bound to fail.  So do you take good policies and implement them properly or do you discard them completely?  According to Obama you discard them completely.

 

Obama is calling for increased government spending and, by his own words, will do nothing to reduce the deficit for at least the next four years.  The revenues to be received from his increased tax on those making greater that $250,000 a year will pay for only a fraction of his proposed spending.  There are only two possible outcomes of this scenario. The first would be an expanded deficit and the second would be raising the taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year.

 

Obama’s tax program has its own inherit dangers.  I say program and not cuts because, in many cases, he isn’t proposing cuts.  After all, how can you cut taxes on the bottom 40% of the income level when this income level already pay no taxes?  The answer, of course, is tax credits.  Credits allow people to actually get more money out of the system than they put into it.  This is not a tax program, it is a welfare program.

 

CBS did an article on three families in Ohio.  Under Obama’s plan family three, the wealthiest of the three, would have a tax bill that would increase by $5,000 a year. Family one, with the lowest income of the three, while already paying no taxes, would get a check for $2,200.  In essence, this means that family three would be giving $2,200 of their money directly to family one.  This is blatant wealth distribution.  This isn’t a Robin Hood attempt to take from the corrupt rich government and give to the poor; it is stealing from people that have worked hard to become successful.  It is socialistic in nature, creates dependency on the government, provides a disincentive to succeed, and is just plain wrong. 

Obama’s latest interview, at least it looked like him. September 5, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Iraq war, John McCain, Policy, Sarah Palin.
3 comments

 

“The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,” Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, said in a recorded interview broadcast tonight on Fox Newss “The O’Reilly Factor” program.

 

Actually Obama, what has happened after the surge is exactly what McCain said would happen.  It seems that somebody did anticipate this.  Your first shot at foreign policy and your 0 for 1. Well if you don’t believe me then how about this from Obama.

Obama today defended his opposition to the surge when pressed by O’Reilly to say he was “wrong.”

 

When pressed as to whether, if elected, he would prepare for possible use of military force against Iran, Obama, who has repeatedly called for greater diplomatic efforts with Iran, said it wouldn’t be “appropriate” for someone who might become president to start “tipping their hand in terms of what their plans might be with respect” to the country.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but didn’t McCain say that Obama should not be laying out his plans about hostile countries months ago?  It seems to me that if Obama really thought he needed a VP that has foreign policy experience he should have asked McCain to be his running mate since he is the one creating Obama’s policy.

 

Once again Obama has shown that his only talent is behind a teleprompter.  Left to his own devices he seems to fail every time in any situation that is even moderately tough.  This was proven at Saddleback and now with O’Reilly.  Well we have to give him credit, based on this interview I think he is really starting to understand who really has what it takes to be President.

 

Senator McCain now has a powerful, smart, and energetic running mate.  He has shown he has the experience to lead.  He has shown well laid out policies.  He has proven that he has everything it takes to be a solid and effective President of the United States.  McCain is the perfect guidance system and Palin is a hell of an engine.  It’s now a straight shot to the White House.

 

Obama and what’s his name in ’08?  I hardly think so.

Let’s see who really adds up August 29, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Experience, Joe Biden, John McCain, Policy, Sarah Palin.
1 comment so far

 

Well let’s see how the experience level adds up.

 

Topic

McCain

Palin

Obama

Biden

Foreign Policy

1

 

 

1

Energy Policy

1

1

 

1

Economic Policy

1

1

 

1

Bipartisan History

1

1

 

 

Executive Experience

 

1

 

 

Military Experience

1

.5

 

 

Ethics Reform

1

1

1

 

Totals:

6

5.5

1

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An entree onto this scorecard was limited to action not words.  Candidates got a mark if they have actually been involved in any of the topics.  Palin received .5 for Military because she is in fact commander-in-chief of the Alaskan National Guard, probably not the most pressing part of her job though. 

 

As far as I can see there is very little that the democrats can run on other that the sad attempt to tie McCain to Bush when the reality shows that no other republican senator has voted against Bush as much as McCain.  That is a loosing battle in the end.  Obama minions can attack Palin all they want on her experience level but the truth is the only experience that Obama has that is greater than Palin’s is living closer to D.C. (ok I will give him public speaking too even though that may change soon.)

 

So to summarize:  we have the republican ticket that has more experience than the democratic ticket, has a better history of working in a bipartisan fashion, and a better record on reform and ethics.  Obama is Change ’08?  Obama is Chance ’08 at best.

  

The recipe for Obama’s theme of “Change” in America August 28, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Character, Democrats, Inexperience.
2 comments

Take the same old rhetoric we have heard from the democrats before, throw in a dash of celebrity and an extra twist of liberalism and your done.  When you’re having a really rough time in the polls you can always add a pinch of centralism just to spice things up but drink fast as this flavor fades quickly.  The nice thing about this drink is it is substance free so you don’t have to feel bloated down by such things as policy afterwards.

 

When you have a senator that votes party lines 96% of the time it isn’t change, its follow the leader.  In fact, it shows a complete lack of leadership.  The only time Obama has ever gone out on his own was on the Iraqi war, which he has slammed at every opportunity even though in his own words Saddam Hussein had “repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity,” and that he “butchers his own people.”  Obviously Obama stands for an America that allows this type of evil to exist in our world.  America has always stood for freedom and democracy, if Obama had a little more experience he would know this.  Nine days later the resolution to invade Iraq was overwhelmingly passed.  So on his own Obama is 0 for 1, some leader.

 

In his short lived Senate career Obama has introduced three items of legislation.  The first is an ethics bill that was ridiculed as weak even among his own party.  The Dignity for Wounded Warriors act which never made it out of the Democrat controlled Senate Armed Services Committee.  This bill went down without a fight, even from Obama.  Finally there is the Lugar-Obama bill that is essentially a follow up to broaden the effects of the Nunn-Lugar bill of 1991.  While essentially a good bill it was destined to succeed, not really a strong mark of a leader to be attached to a bill that had overwhelming support from the get go.  Interestingly enough Lugar tends to get most of the credit for this legislation.

 

So what has Obama history shown us?  That he is not a proponent of change, only of continuing the policies of the well established DNC and there is nothing new there.  That he will not fight for ideas he believes in.  That he is more than happy to float on the coat tails of more well established politicians.  Last but not least, that he doesn’t have the experience to come up with or implement his own ideas but would rather extend party partisanship.  In effect Obama has shown that he is not ready to be President and if elected will be seen as one of the most ineffective Presidents ever.  Let’s hope it doesn’t get that far.

Once again Mother Pelosi shows us what an elitist really is August 26, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Character, Congress, Democrats, Elitism, Nancy Pelosi, Socialism.
add a comment

Here is a nice little article on Mother Pelosi showing us what a true elitist is:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told convention-goers Tuesday morning that polls are underestimating the strength of Barack Obama, contending he will win with the support of new or intermittent voters, who are not generally polled.“I’m very comfortable with those polls,” Pelosi said at a rooftop breakfast panel near the Democratic National Convention. “I think he is trouncing him. I want more of a spread, of course — I want it all.”

Pelosi paused to chuckle along with the crowd, then added: “We will get much more in the House and the Senate, and we have to have a Democratic president — nothing less is at stake than our economy, our Constitution, our budget, our reputation in the world, ending this war — the list goes on.”

Once again Mother Pelosi is showing exactly what she really thinks of the American People, that they don’t know what is in their best efforts and only she and the democrats can lead us to salvation.  In her opinion, the only way to save us is to give all power to the democrats of which she handles the reigns in congress.  In her own words, “I want it all”.  Another little quote she gave at this meeting, while meant to be cute, really shows some insight to her thought process.  “Think of me as a lioness — you threaten my cubs, you have a problem,” she said.  According to her she is in charge and the people of the U.S. are her little cubs she needs to protect and guide and nourish. 

Understand that Pelosi’s idea of a fair and even congress that is supposed to support the ideas of democracy is to use streamlining to get bills to pass and to allow no vote for opposing ideas.  I have news for her, that is border line dictatorship and does not promote the values of our great country.  Pelosi does not know what is best for America, what she does know is what is best for her and her narrow vision of the socialist path that she wants to lead this country down, and she wants to do this without opposition and debate.

I think that I still like the idea of living in a country that stands for freedom and personal responsibility, if I wanted to live under the rule of an all guiding government hell bent on being involved in all parts of my life I would move to a country with a dictator.  Luckily, thanks in large part to the efforts of the Republicans, those are much harder to find these days.

Remember, a vote for Obama is a vote to take away the threat of veto from Pelosi.

As the shine fades will the real Obama please stand up August 22, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Character, Election, Inexperience, Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

An interesting article on why Obama is slipping:

Why is it a real race now, with John McCain rising in the polls and Barack Obama falling? There are many answers, but here I think is an essential one: The American people have begun paying attention.

It’s hard for our political class to remember that Mr. Obama has been famous in America only since the winter of ‘08. America met him barely six months ago! The political class first interviewed him, or read the interview, in 2003 or ‘04, when he was a rising star. They know him. Everyone else is still absorbing.

This is what they see:

An attractive, intelligent man, interesting, but—he’s hard to categorize. Is he Gen. Obama? No, no military background. Brilliant Businessman Obama? No, he never worked in business. Famous Name Obama? No, it’s a new name, an unusual one. Longtime Southern Governor Obama? No. He’s a community organizer (what’s that?), then a lawyer (boo), then a state legislator (so what, so’s my cousin), then U.S. senator (less than four years!).

There is no pre-existing category for him.

Add to that the wear and tear of Jeremiah Wright, secret Muslim rumors, media darling and, this week, abortion.

It took a toll, which led to a readjustment. His uniqueness, once his great power, is now his great problem.

And over there is Mr. McCain, and—well, we know him. He’s POW/senator/prickly, irritating John McCain.

Obama’s only chance at winning the election was to have his charismatic shine blind people to the person and his policies.  The shine is fading.  The closer the election the more people are going to really look at whom they want as president.  Who is Barrack Obama?  No really, who is he?  No one knows.   

What we do know is that he has done nothing of substance while in the U.S. Senate.  While in the state senate he did make some noise with his abortion stance which even some moderate liberals think is a little to far, and work on education issues which considering that he worked at a university isn’t entirely surprising.  A community organizer? In Chicago?  No idea what that could really mean.

Then we have known associates such as Rev Wright who spouts white hating rhetoric and has been quoted as saying “God Damn America”.  Then his friend Ayers that was involved with bombing the U.S. Capitol and to this day is unrepentant.  Let’s not forget his economics friend Rezko that was convicted of federal charges. 

Who is Obama? No one knows.  What does he stand for? No one knows.  Will he make a good president?  I know and so do you……No.

 

 

 

Obama’s past affects who he is today….just who is he? August 21, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Character, Election, Voting.
add a comment

Once again Obama’s dubious past comes back to haunt him:

Mayor Richard Daley declined to answer directly Wednesday when asked whether a University of Illinois-Chicago organization named after his father should release documents related to Sen. Barack Obama’s service for a nonprofit education project started by 1960s radical William Ayers.

The university’s Richard J. Daley Center has refused to release records of the project, which put Obama, the soon-to-be Democratic presidential nominee, in contact with activist Ayers, who now is an education professor in Chicago.

Asked if the school should release the records, Daley replied: “Bill Ayers, I’ve said this, his father was a great friend of my father. I’ll be very frank. Vietnam divided families, divided people. It was a terrible time of our country. It really separated people. People didn’t know one another. Since then, I’ll be very frank, (Ayers) has been in the forefront on a lot of education issues and helping us in public schools and things like that.

“People keep trying to align himself with Barack Obama. It’s really unfortunate. They’re friends. So what? People do make mistakes in the past. You move on. This is a new century, a new time. He reflects back and he’s been making a strong contribution to our community.”

Daley has been a strong supporter of Obama’s presidential bid.

Of course they should be released, this is an important issue on Obama’s character.  Daley says that people make mistakes and then you move on, this may be true but Ayres still doesn’t admit that his terrorist actions of setting bombs off in the U.S. was a mistake in fact he says he should have done more.  Besides, some things you just don’t forgive.  I’m pretty sure that if Charles Manson would have said he was really really sorry that he still should have gone to jail.

I don’t see why people so easily forget that Obama’s early relationships with the likes of Rezko, Ayres and Rev. Wright are people that helped influence and shape the person that Obama is today.  I think that who that person is should be known by the people since Obama wants to hold a position that can have a direct and serious impact on their life.  Do we really want a president that can have skeletons in his closet put there by a white bashing, country hating reverend and a terrorist known to have attacked the U.S. and is not repentant?  I don’t.  Obama denouncing these people after he decided to run for president simple because they are no longer politically acceptable doesn’t erase the years he did spend and was influenced by them.

The people deserve to know who Obama really is.  Should the documents be released? Oh, absolutely. 

 

 

 

 

Obama believes himself above even his own rules August 20, 2008

Posted by Nevada Pundit in Barack Obama, Oil / Energy, Policy, Reality, flip flop.
add a comment

Obama once again moves against his own stated values:

Obama’s newly named senior adviser and Jewish outreach coordinator, who joined Obama on his trip to Israel, lobbied on behalf of the American Petroleum Institute, according to the Senate Office of Public Records Lobbying Disclosure Act database. 
 
Daniel Shapiro is listed as a lobbyist by Washington, D.C.-based Timmons & Co. and API is one of the company’s clients. Shapiro is listed on five entries as one person who helped lobby the U.S. Senate or House on behalf of API on issues ranging from agriculture, energy — including renewable fuel standards and greenhouse gas emissions, gas price gouging and regulation, labor and antitrust related to the oil industry, defense, the stimulus package, the farm bill, IRS code regarding refineries and more.

The entries, from February to August of this year, show Timmons & Co. was paid $660,000 by API for the instances in which Shapiro helped lobby. Since 1998, Timmons & Co. has collected more than $3.6 million from API, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

 Obama once again shows that being elected is much more important than standing by his convictions.  Obama stated clearly that he would have no federal lobbyists working on his campaign; I guess he meant that only if he was up in the polls.  This man has changed his platform so many times I don’t think he even knows what it is anymore, if he ever did.

 Obama’s answer to this?  Well Shapiro deregistered himself last week so is not in any violation of policy.  So of course that means that he has no former lobbyist contacts at his disposal.  How about this one, apparently Shapiro is not advising the candidate on policies in which he had lobbied on.  Well according to the list of companies that Shaprio was a lobbyist for that doesn’t leave much. (see original article for list).  This list contains oil companies, financial and real estate companies, transportation companies, education companies, technology companies, and health care companies.  So I have to ask the question, just what is Shapiro there for and what’s left for him to advice on?

 The truth of the matter is Obama will do or say anything to be elected.  Being elected is more important to him than being a servant to the people.  Does this country really need someone who will throw away their convictions and their promise to the people for their own best interest?  I hope you don’t think so.