The Year of Moving Forward

The Year of Moving Forward
At our 4 person wedding reception in DC

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

McCain's Slime, Palin's Ethics

How can I write about Bessemer issues when the McCain/Palin fib machine puts out enough garbage everyday to fill a dumpster?


John McCain has allowed his campaign to sink the the lowest slime level I have seen in decades in a political campaign. Worse than...Slimy the Worm, Oscar the Grouch's friend!

There are many similarities. Slimy is known for such things as parachuting out of an airplane and doing things heroic. He used to just squeak and wiggle, but more recently began to talk. But enough of the similarities.






So Barack Obama supported teaching children about inappropriate touching to help protect them from pedophiles, and McCain comes up with an ad saying he was wanting to teach them "comprehensive sex education."

So John McCain is against protecting little girls from sex perverts, I guess?

The Obama campaign responded:

"It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls."

Palin ? Ethics?

Sarah Palin takes per diem pay for staying at her own home, and let's the taxpayers pay for her 7 year old daughter's plane tickets and claims to be against wasteful spending?

Sarah Palin lies about being against the bridge to nowhere, and McCain flat out lies about it saying she "stopped the bridge to nowhere." And you McCain/ Palin fans are still considering voting for them?

Does integrity not matter to Republicans?

And shouldn't the Vice President of the United States understand our government's role in issues like housing?





She said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers."

Shouldn't she know that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not taxpayer funded and are private companies? (It's the Bush (Bush=McCain) bailout that might be too expensive for taxpayers, however, but that is another story).

"You would like to think that someone who is going to be vice president and conceivable president would know what Fannie and Freddie do," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "These are huge institutions and they are absolutely central to our country's mortgage debt. To not have a clue what they do doesn't speak well for her, I'd say."

And you Republicans still think she is qualified to run the country?

My suggestion if McCain is elected: let's start the life support on November 5 just to insure that "heartbeat away" thing doesn't become a reality.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

LMAO....Lack of integrity?

Obama is Number 1 on that list...this is a guy who supports killing babies, even AFTER they are born. He cannot tell you when human rights begin because it is "above his paygrade"

How you even MENTION "experience" is beyond me when you are pushing for a "community leader" to be our next president. He has no leadership experience whatsoever (Oh, except for the 2,400 people he directs in his campaign), no military experience, has never been a mayor, gov, or even a city council person. He has NO CLUE.

I'll admit with this blog that McCain is not much better, but since our choices SUCK, let's at least go with someone who is WILLING to reach across the party line to make things work.

Obama is going down fast. Give it up, dude.

Anonymous said...

How about O'Reilly's interview with Rock Star Obama. Thank God he will not get elected b/c if he did, all the rich will have to pay those 'neighborly' taxes to help all the waitresses down at the Cracker Barrel.
Income redistribution...I LOVE it.

Anonymous said...

B.O. supports reading the book KIng and King (about same sex marriage) to 2nd graders. How disgusting. Look up the primary debate from last year. He has no morals or standards. He will run this country into the homosexual ground.

Joe Openshaw said...

Anonymous #3: There is absolutely nothing wrong with second graders knowing that a man can love another man. My kids learned I was gay when they were 5 and 9 years old. Now they are 18 and 22, and are just fine, in college young adults. Quit trying to make being gay a scary thing.

Anonymous #2: You prefer the income redistribution that puts the money of the ppor into the hands of the rich, I guess?

Anonymous # 1: I assume you are all really the same person, because most people who are so opinionated are not afraid to reveal who they are.

John from Hoover said...

Put lipstick on Obama and it's a transvestite running for President.

I have serious issues with teaching same-sex relationships are okay to 2nd graders. Just as I do teaching about inappropriate touching to kindergarteners.

This is one of the MAIN reasons we need McCain. Obama has no Christian moral standards and we will continue to see our ethics in this country decline, probably at a much faster pace, if Obama is elected. Fortunately, he is screwing up everything so bad, I think we are all pretty safe.

Take away the black vote who are voting for him simply because he is black, and there is no contest here whatsoever.

oh brother said...

"Quit trying to make being gay a scary thing."

I've seen Liberty Bell perform. That was pretty scary.

Bad jokes aside I find it curious when people are so afraid of the gays. I know many gay people and thay usually are the least threatening people I have ever met.

I guess this qualifies as true homo-phobia. Makes as much sense as any other phobia I guess. These people need to realize that gay people are not out to convert the straighties and only want to live their lives as the people that they truly are with the same rights as everyone else. They don't have to agree with it but they don't have to hang around gay people if they don't want to. Having such an obsession over it really strikes me as odd.

As for the whole income redistribution thing. Income redistribution is going to happen no matter what. It is the process of the government aquiring tax monies and redistributing those monies monies into areas that it sees fit. I don't care where they put it as long as the redistribution serves a fundamental government purpose such as boosting the economy, offering development incentives to companies (spending and hiring within the U.S. or to generate product that will return income to the U.S.), offering support to individuals or geographic areas that may have hit hard times (temporary, not permanent welfare services, job re-training, etc.), research and development or the redevelopment of blighted areas.

Now my problem with it comes when the government decides to increase taxes to pay for projects or raise one groups of peoples taxes while lowering another groups instead of curbing unneeded government spending to free up funds. Until the government debt is reduced I can't support any sort of tax increase on anyone.

Anonymous said...

Joe - Do your research and stop knocking this off your blog. Fannie and Freddie were already part of the government even though they had stockholders. Do some reading!