Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad challenged the U.S. presidential candidates to a debate when he is in New York for the U.N. General Assembly next week. I think this would be interesting!
I know McCain has criticized Obama for wanting to be more diplomatic with countries that the U.S. has strained relations with, but this could be interesting.
Ahmadinejad had agreed to meet with Bush, but now feels there is no point since Bush is at the end of his term. I believe this guy is really just looking for publicity. It would give him an ego boost if the candidates did decide to debate with him.
I think it would be a good idea, especially for John McCain, in the view of the rest of the world. Everyone I have debated with from other countries are pulling for Obama only because he said he would be more diplomatic and try to talk things out. They feel McCain would just go to war every time there was a conflict.
Just like selecting Palin as his VP, I think this would be a great chance to step out where Obama is supposed to be and make a statement. Let the world know he can talk also, but when things need to get done, he isn’t scared to do them either!
Go ahead McCain, debate this fool and tear him a new one!!!
This interesting story was sent my way by my father-in-law.
I think every liberal out there who wants more government programs and OBAMA as president should read this and think about it long and hard. In fact, after reading this, I would like for all liberals to explain to me why bigger government, universal health care programs, and all the good stuff Obama is preaching is such a good idea!
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so
many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat,
and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to
support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch
Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she
had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that
her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he
thought should be his.
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher
taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The
self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth
and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA,
and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was
taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left
her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn’t even
have time for a boyfriend, and didn’t really have many college friends
because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, ‘How is your friend Audrey
doing?’ She replied, ‘Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are
easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular
on campus; college for her is a blast. She’s always invited to all the
parties and lots of times she doesn’t even show up for classes because
she’s too hung over.’
Her wise father asked his daughter, ‘Why don’t you go to the
Dean’s office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who
only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that
would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father’s suggestion, angrily
fired back, ‘That’s a crazy idea, and how would that be fair! I’ve
worked really hard for my grades! I’ve invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard
work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I
worked my tail off!’
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, ‘Welcome to the
If anyone has a better explanation of the difference between
Republican and Democrat I’m all ears.
The US government just recently took over another financial institution, AIG. The media keeps calling it a bailout, but what is really going on?
I completely agree with everyone that something had to be done with IndyMac, Fannie and Freddie, and now AIG, but should the government have taken them over and acquired 79.9% of stock from each?
This is the situation: the government has used our money, taxpayer dollars, to “put” money into these companies. In exchange they get 79.9% of the stock. Doesn’t this mean that we paid for the government to take over the ownership of our mortgages, insurance policies, and other financial wealth? To me, this seems like a step towards socialism.
There is something about all of this that we should look into: the Federal Reserve was involved in the loan and takeover process. Now why are these private companies being taken over by another private company? The Federal Reserve is not a government agency. They are private just like Citibank. This worries me.
I am rambling in a lot of directions because this situation is going in a lot of directions. I am scared for the future of the world, not just the US. Something is not right about our government owning such a huge stock in our country’s financial lifeline. They can’t manage the money they already have, what makes anyone think they can manage our mortgages and insurances too? Until the government stops wasting money, they need to step aside and let a successful company handle these types of things. But I guess the government is the only organization that has the power to just walk in and said, “I’ll take that!” Kind of like imminent domain…
If anyone is a real estate investor, you probably have come across or at least know about the ability of mortgage companies to call a mortgage due. This gives the government a lot of power and money. Please, someone tell me this situation is not as bad as it sounds!!!
My wife wanted to watch the Video Music Awards on MTV mainly because they have been marketing Britney Spears as one of the opening acts. She wanted to see if Britney has recovered from her recent struggles.
Britney did open it with two lines, then there was a performance. Next, the host of the VMAs, Russell Brand took the stage. The next thing that happened outraged me, and my wife agreed that we should protest MTV.
Russell Brand, a celebrity from the UK told the audience that we should vote for Barack Obama. The world wants him as president. ARE YOU SERIOUS? The powers that be are using MTV’s Video Music Awards to promote their agendas?
I know that a cable network is entitled to their opinion, but to push that opinion on the American people is outrageous. It is probably no surprise that I am a Republican, but I don’t think it is one bit fair for an entertainment channel to push either candidate.
It is disrespectful and unethical to have someone push one political candidate in a public forum such as the Live VMA’s. Had someone got on there are promoted McCain, the media would blast MTV, the VMA’s, and everyone else they could, but since most of the media has been paid for or owned by some left wing liberal, it must be okay to promote Obama.
Fortunately, the viewers of MTV’s VMAs will probably be too worried about what celebrity is in rehab on November 4th, so we won’t have to worry about their vote!
Will we actually allow some freaked-out creackhead foreigner to insult our country? It is one thing if an Obama supporter insults Bush. Maybe they have a point, and they are hoping to better our country, but this guy is a worthless freak and is using an American outlet to insult our country. You people really agree with this kind of thing? He even insulted Palin’s daughter for choosing life, and the Jonas Brothers for choosing to be virgins… Good job MTV, way to be a positive role model for teenagers everywhere!
I have discovered something, and I’m not sure why the media hasn’t picked up on this. When you watched the Democratic National Convention, did you see all of the celebrities that were there? So and so was here, so and so was there. The other night Michelle Obama had a fund raising dinner for celebrities. I heard they raised about a million dollars at that dinner. Congratulations!
Now this week at the Republican National Convention, celebrities were not everywhere. No one made mention of Ben Affleck listening to John McCain. BUT… You know who was there? Our nations veterans. The real heroes of our country were in attendance, and there were quite a few. This strikes me as odd. The people that have defended our freedoms and the freedoms of the world support the Republicans. The people who make their money (and vasts amount of it) pretending to be other people and doing nothing really important were at the Democratic National Convention… Actually, if you think about it… they kind of sound like the Democrat politicians. Chew on that!
My wife told me about Diddy’s comments in response to Sen. McCain’s choice for VP. He said that McCain was “…bugging the f**k out!” (Click here to read the story) He goes on to cite a few “interesting” reasons why McCain made a poor choice.
Diddy was quoted saying, “Sarah you need to be down with the whole cabinet. You are not ready to be no vice president. What is the reality in Alaska? There isn’t even any crackheads in Alaska. There isn’t any black people, no crime. There isn’t even any foreign policies in Alaska. You need to get versed on black policies. We are the future.”
This is quite interesting to me. I didn’t realize that crackheads were an important target for ANY politician. With this statement, does that mean that Obama is out campaigning to all of the crackheads of the country? I wish celebrities, who are extremely out of touch with the real world, would be careful what they say and how they word it. This is almost another Kanye West, “Bush hates black people,” type comment. Are you serious?
The second part of his absurd statement, “There isn’t any black people,” is actually incorrect. Had he made a more educated statement such as, “There is a very small black population in Alaska,” it may have been more worthy of actually speaking about. In fact, 3.7% or 24,791 of the 670,053 people in Alaska are black (US Census). Another interesting figure that we should address is the number of American Indians and Alaskan natives (non-white). 15.4% of Alaska’s population is American Indian or Alaskan native. As a descendant of American Indians, I actually am happy to see someone in the government that may actually be sympathetic to this segment of the population.
Also, let’s compare Illinois, the state of Barack Obama. Illinois actually has a larger percentage of white population (79.3 versus 70.7) than Alaska (Census info for Illinois). Now, since Barack Obama was raised by his white family and comes from a state where there is a larger population of white people, wouldn’t that say that Obama is out of touch with the black population also, especially the crackheads? I know Obama hangs out with some low-lifes, but I don’t think cracheads are on that list!
Third, I don’t understand the comment on foreign policies. First of all, it is a state. States deal with foreign policies in respect to imports and exports. Beyond that, isn’t foreign policy a federal issue? Why would Alaska be dealing with foreign governments and negotiating policies that would affect our entire nation. I believe Diddy has gone beyond the scope of Palin’s job description. Also, Palin did establish a few awards and programs to bring heightened attention to foreign relations in Alaska. (Read background here)
Finally, I believe we should address Obama’s experience, since Palin’s the VP candidate, is being attacked for her lack of experience with certain areas. Barack Obama , who only has 3 years of federal government experience, and only 7 years of state government experience before that, is pretty fresh on the scene as far as government is concerned. His ability on any issue should be questioned since he has not been around the national political world mroe than 3 years. I bet he has a lot of foreign policy experience.
I like to end Obama blogs with a quote from our friend Barack:
“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.”
Barack Obama has chosen a running mate!!! The long-anticipated moment has arrived. It is not Hillary. It is Senator Joe Biden, another old white guy.
Don’t get me wrong. I have nothing against another old white guy… I am supporting McCain. But as a proponent for change, shouldn’t Obama have picked someone different? He picks a senator that has 30 years of experience, served at various times as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and has twice sought the White House.
Is this not the complete opposite from Obama’s message of, “Change… you can believe in?” This just reaffirms my idea that Obama is definitely about change: changing his idea, mind, policy, and decisions if he feels it will get more votes. In fact, he has been different than most other candidates. There is not one thing he has stuck by firmly throughout the entire election race.
How will Biden affect Obama’s chances? Well, according to Ron Fournier, an Associated Press writer, Biden said in a 2007 interview on ABC that he said he would stand by an earlier statement that Obama was not ready to serve as president. I guess Obama thought Biden would make him ready.
Chalk another one up for the Democrats… say one thing and do another!