Posted by ( jswintermute ) on February 07, 2008 at 8:46 pm

how about you answer first. If you are a Huckabee supporter, what specifically is his advantage over McCain in your eyes.  And vice versa for McCain.
This is your chance to explain in a clear, concise and logical manner why one of these two Republican candidates is better than the other.

Now go for it!!  ‘Cause I GOTTA know…

Posted by ( Lori ) on February 08, 2008 at 8:52 am

When someone does their research on the candidates, and keeps an open mind, it is clear that each candidate has a plan for the problems and issues we currently face. Those with wisdom understand that there is no perfect candidate with one perfect solution because there is more than one right answer to solving the problems.

I am a “fence rider” in that I can see how each plan can help, and also not help. I can’t decide which issues are most important, because they all are. The economy, health care, and our military are the biggies for me. Clinton may “flip flop” on a solution to the war, but so have I, so I can relate to how she feels about our soldiers being killed to help save innocent victims.

Another thing to consider is whether our elected president can convince Congress to approve plans that will work. I believe we have some very educated, experienced candidates, all of them, and unfortunately, I am undecided as well. Sorry, that does not answer the question. I think some people can’t get over Bill Clinton, being the unethical human being that he was, and how it affected his presidency, and therefore can’t stand the thought of Hillary in office, being the forgiving wife that she was. And my daddy taught me that sometimes, no matter how nice you try to be, some people will just never like you. So, in my opinion, if you can get past the candidate who looks like a president, who is most appealing on camera, and dig deep into the issues that are important to you, you will figure out who to vote for. So will I!

Posted by ( Jody Lee ) on February 09, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Lewis, if you will check out my blog entry titled “My Pastor, Myself”, you will find that Obama’s ties to his preacher ARE in question, at least by the public. 

Here is my take on your observation - while Hillary and Obama will fight over their differences on the issues, I think each is holding back from going “personal” with their attacks for one reason - a possible joint ticket.  If Hillary wins the nomination, her best bet will be Obama as a running mate - and he is young enough to be able to afford to cool his heels eight years if it means being a shoe-in for the nomination when Hil steps down (which it would).  They can argue policy, but saying anything too controversial might nix the deal - once the words are out, they can’t be taken back and it could make running as a team difficult, if not impossible. 

And by the by, if you truly want the government out of most issues, is it safe to assume you are a liberterian?

Jody Lee

Posted by ( Lewis Loflin ) on February 12, 2008 at 4:30 am

Hi Jody,

If you mean “libertarian” in the extreme sense of shutting down the government in everything such a public education, etc. no. But the intrusion into private matters and economic meddling is going out of control.

If one owns a restaurant, it’s up to them if their patrons smoke, who hey serve, etc. The only thing the government should be concerned with is safety, such as a sound building, proper fire exits, and proper electrical wiring, and sanitation. The rest is up to the business and their patrons.

I’d like to see a lot of things turned back to state/local control, an end to unfunded mandates, a total end to affirmative action, no child left behind, and all forms of social engineering.

Shut down this lawsuit industry. Litigation and insurance costs are killing us. Passing a few laws could stop this cold.

For example in education we have total equality, one academic standard, every child takes the same subjects, etc. and pass/fail is up to them. No special treatment, no race quotas, etc. Total color blind. Everything is done in English, no bilingual anything.

That’s what equal opportunity is about. Go to a flat tax system. Everyone pays the same percentage, no deductions other than direct say business cost. That would clean up a lot of corruption in itself.

All laws, enforce them equally or repeal them. Using illegal drugs is a crime, jail them. Being an illegal alien is a crime, deal with them and their illegal employers.

I’m sure someone will come back with some snide remark that illegal aliens don’t hurt working people. Here you go, a victory in Arizona. From the left-wing News York Times,

“Juan Leon, a construction subcontractor and the husband of Elizabeth Leon, the day care worker, said illegal immigrants had made it harder for legal residents like him to find work. Companies that employ them can bid much lower on projects than he can because they pay workers much less, Mr. Leon said.

�I hate to see families torn apart,� he said of the current flight, �but there is no money to be made sometimes because some contractors who employ illegal workers can do the job dirt cheap.�

The entire article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/us/12arizona.html?_r=1&th;&emc;=th&oref=slogin

Simple law enforcement and they leave in droves and are saving Arizona taxpayers millions in the process.

I hope that gives you an idea. I don’t know if that is libertarian, old style liberal or what. I consider myself a classical pre-1960s liberal on most things.

We need reasonable government to maintain an orderly society and I accept funding a reasonable safety net to help the really destitute. But we don’t need government as an industry.

Posted by ( Lewis Loflin ) on February 14, 2008 at 5:40 am

I’m going to retract part of what I wrote:

“In fact except for Iraq and nothing issues like abortion, on most economic issues McCain, Hillery, and Obama are identical.”

This I just got from the Washington Post which to me is a plus for Obama. To quote,

“As a campaign issue, earmarks highlight significant differences in the spending philosophies of the top three candidates. Clinton
has repeatedly supported earmarks as a way to bring home money for projects, while Obama adheres to a policy of using them only to support public entities.”

I’m dead set against using public funds for private projects, most of which is pork-barrel waste. Boucher himself is the pork king of SW Virginia.

The full article is at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021303635.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Posted by ( Pop ) on February 18, 2008 at 9:55 am

Jody, why even bother to waste good blog space and print the rambling, and most likely, drug induced garbage of this insignificant scum?  If you check out his website, you can see where he’s coming from.  I understand that you were only trying to prove a point, but don’t dirty your blog with his worthless nonsense.  As you stated, he’s got to be a pretty sad and lonely individual.  I appreciate what you do here and enjoy (most of) the debates.

Note from Jody:  You have a good point.  I simply wanted to show that I am truly willing to print all sides, even the idiotic ones.  Since that time, I have decided that for the first time, I am going to block someone from participating.  This blogger does indeed lower the level of the whole effort, so his voice will no longer be heard.  His comments will not even be read by me before being deleted - the freely-given right to participate has been abused so that’s that.

I have not gone to his web site and will not, but it is not hard to imagine where he is coming from.  Thanks for note.  You are right - no more wasted space.  Thanks “Pop”.
jl

Posted by ( Chris ) on February 22, 2008 at 11:46 am

Jody,

I assume you meant chris instead of Lewis in your indication of the use of the “what a tool” phrase. Anyway, thanks, and as I leave this soapbox I still am ripe with incredulous hope that Lewis will at least try to give me some verifiable evidence that Obama and Farrahkan have personal ties. Until then I will take the silence as an indication of him accepting reality.

Posted by ( Chris ) on February 29, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Matt,

What about this don’t you guys understand? First of all it is totally irresponsible to throw out accusations without any verification. So I ask you, what specifically are Obama’s racist and Muslim ties? Your accusations are ridiculous and without merit. You should be ashamed. For the record I will expect you to no condemn John McCain for graciously accepting the endorsement of John Hagee, who has without a doubt shown his bigotry towards homosexuals and Catholics. I guess one must be ignorant to overlook McCain’s racist and bigoted ties.

As for your ridiculous claim that Bin Laden endorsed Kerry I must say that is right out of good ol’ oxylimbaugh’s playbook. Let us examine the facts here Matt (something you seemed to conviently forget to give) Here is exactly what Bin Laden said in that tape in 2004:

“Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands and _each state which does not harm our security will remain safe_.”

Your insinuation about this being a endorsement is nothing but a two bit hack job. You should be ashamed. The implication was clear. Bin Laden clearly hates Bush. So what?????? How is anything in that tape an endorsement for Kerry?? Grow up.

Posted by ( producator de incaltaminte ) on May 05, 2008 at 11:19 am

Your rather prefer McCain to win the elections? It’s okay to have a woman in the White House, but not any woman.

Posted by ( Drug Treatment ) on June 02, 2008 at 12:20 pm

I wonder if any candidate, once elected, will really keep their promise and get rid of all the garbage and junkies from the streets. There should be more free rehab clinics for those who really want to get clean and don’t have health insurance. If these people are looking to repent, they should have the means to do so.