We are carefully rummaging through the debate at this time and have so far come to the conclusion that little was said in the first round that was all that interesting. With further analysis, we may be proven wrong, and there could be key items we are missing, so we will try carefully to glean the important points as we watch more closely.
It appears to us that both candidates in this debate spoke of the central problem (which is the economy) with hyperbole and promises rather than practical solutions and explanations. Neither man gave us the warm feeling in this presentation that they knew how to pay for their programs or tax cuts or how to exactly target our problems. Obama said he did, but he still didn’t say how other than to say he is going to close loopholes and tax people that make over $250,000. John didn’t say at all but at least has an energy plan that could work which, if effective, could reverse the trade deficit over time.
We are broke guys. We have no money. We cannot promise things to Americans we don’t have. Got it?
Get America on board!! Stop pandering to us. We want a program that treats America as though it were a business. A responsible business certainly, that cares about its employees and benefits those that work for it. McCain did speak of rewarding those that perform and holding those accountable that do not.
Overall, we, America, want to make a profit. Got it? No more deficits. No more tax cuts. No more short term solutions that make you look good but that cost billions of dollars we do not have.
Make it freakin’ work again. Make what work? America. Americans will come to the rescue for that kind of plan. One they can understand. Make a plan that makes the United States a “profitable” nation so we can build our own Dubai on chump change!!!
Get off the pulpit for a minute and think. Think like the CEO’s Obama criticizes without giving any thought about all the absolutely phenomenal CEOs that have made this nation great!! Lee Iacocca, Bill Gates, Steven Jobs, the list goes on and on. These men either are paid well or were, but they are greats and people to remember for their accomplishments and legacy. McCain and Obama have made the critical mistake of making the C in CEO stand for criminal. But every entrepreneur, like Bill Gates or Henry Ford in his garage, has the potential in the US of becoming great. And there are many fewer criminal CEO’s like Ron Skates of Data General, Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco and Executives of Enron than there are greats and heroes. The bad seeds exist, but corporate America is huge, and for every low life thief, there are thousands of hard working dreamers and achievers that made their lives and companies into something great. Blaming every CEO for the wayward few is like blaming our Sun in the billions of stars in the Milky Way for being warm and contributing to Intergalactic warming!
There appears to be a scapegoat game going on, in an attempt to place the culpability at corporate America’s feet for our problems!! You say you care about middle class America, but there are many aspiring businessmen in the middle class that hope to grow their business and hope to some day make it to Wall Street as a legitimate public company. Do they want to benefit from their work? Yes, of course they do!! Wouldn’t anyone?
Corporate America (Wall Street) is not the criminal; it is a stupid concept. Don’t many of us, if not most of us, work for public companies? We are Wall Street? Main Street is Wall Street or at least they have a major intersection where they flow into each other. Get it?
Given the latest requirements for oversight on companies, including “Sarbanes Oxley“, many small companies are going bankrupt, and leading companies like Open Pages, Inc, have grown at an astronomical rate, benefiting from demand for software that provides the automation for tracking accountability and corporate controls. How can two men say how bad governance is, when the fact is that these laws, in come cases, are so stringent, they have placed some small companies out of business due to the expense of the accounting alone, and others have had to severely delay financial reports due to new laws regarding how they report? (See Broadcom, Marvel Communications, etc.).
We are not saying that better governance and regulations won’t help. We are saying that it tends to fall the hardest on companies that are new and trying to thrive in today’s economy. So, while Senator Obama thinks that imposing more regulation is a good thing to protect America, in turn, he has to think about the impact of Sarbanes Oxley on a huge number of small companies that, like so many, are on the brink of success or failure. Many failed as a result of the cost of more stringent regulation, so you could be damaging the very middle class you claim to be supporting.
Corporate America and its CEOs in general are heroes. They are men that made it in the battle to forge a successful business. Some are rogue, but it is not the balance. Someone has to realize and stand up and ask, if you put Corporate America and its CEO’s out of business by treating them all as criminals, who picks up the slack? Because they, gentlemen, are making the bulk of the private sector jobs, not you.
Right now, stop your NIMBY policies and the corporate hatred. Make heroes out of US corporations and honor those that have been successful. Then they will have an incentive to help us build a better America. If you continue to chastise them and alienate them, they will continue to seek a way out of the US into other more favorable environments.
Your problems are huge, but Corporate America did not cause it. Alan Greenspan with his bubble causing interest rates caused this problem combined with a short sighted dependency on foreign oil. American policies of indefinite spending and deficits caused this problem. Allowing ourselves to depend on other nations for our primary needs caused this problem. No more blaming our best achievers in America. No more making promises that cost billions while we wallow in debt. No more denying that we consume vastly more resources than we generate, when we need to generate more and consume less.
We cannot consume 24% of the world’s oil and generate a small fraction of that and hope to survive economically. We have enough resources here to provide all our needs, but we need to take the less ideal path for the short term to deliver the ideal path for the long term. Energy independence is required as quickly as possible any way we can achieve it, followed by a nation that strives for ecological gains. We cannot afford the reverse; it will surely put us in the poorhouse.
– 0 –
We will be back for more after a closer review of the debate content…
This topic touches on every election even though many of us do not want to overweight it in the light of a Presidential election. The reason it plays so strongly in a Presidential election, however, is the President appoints Supreme Court Justices, and they decide upon the federal laws pertaining to abortion. In addition, and more importantly, it plays to the morals of the candidate, and provides the sides a way to condemn the other for their beliefs.
The Republicans have carved out the pro-life niche. Their belief is abortion at any time in the pregnancy and for any reason other than endangerment of the mother’s health, is wrong and an abomination. It is seen as murder of a viable living being. This belief, while it may sound extreme, is also the Christian belief.
The Democrats have played the “women’s right to their body” niche. They believe it is the woman’s right to decide, and that no one but the woman has that right. There are varying extremes, but they do not see abortion as a murder, but a right. This belief, while it may sound extreme as well, is the US Supreme Court’s belief (see Roe Versus Wade).
The fact is for most people, this is a very muddied issue. One has to believe that no woman wants to take the life of her unborn child, but that life’s pressures and circumstances are different for each. There are choices, such as having a child and putting that child up for adoption. With waiting lists years long for people wanting to adopt, it is hard for many to understand why any woman would abort an unborn fetus.
What people have to put into perspective is that a pregnancy does not take nine minutes or nine days, it takes nine months. It is not something most women can conceal and it has major ramifications with respect to one’s family and future. A single event can have life long implications.
There is a notion that this does not and should not involve the father, that he has no rights to his own unborn child even if he is willing to raise the child. This appears to be believed by both sides given the way fathers are dealt with in the courts with respect to custody and their rights involving their children. Fathers appear to never have real rights to their children in the United States. We would like a Presidential Candidate to stand up and defend Fathers’ rights, but have yet to see it happen as they tend to pander to women’s rights.
Many abortions involve women that cannot afford the child, that live in poverty, may be drug addicts and are for one reason or another, desperate to rid themselves of the fetus before it can impact their lives. In fact, one argument for abortion is that a woman in such a desperate situation will risk her life to abort her fetus herself if she cannot find a safe method, so it is inhumane to not allow a woman that outlet. Our horrific pictures of coat hangers come to mind.
The fact is the water is very muddy with respect to this issue. Everyone seems to have their own level of acceptance for either side. While some argue for Roe versus Wade, they believe there is a point, perhaps the third trimester of the pregnancy, at which the woman should no longer be allowed to abort. While some are pro-life, they believe there are certain extremes, such as rape and incest, when abortion is justified. The fact is though, if you are pro-life, it is the fetus that has the rights, and the fetus does not have any concept of how it was conceived. Therefore, it is very difficult to approve any form of abortion. It would be like a vegetarian that eats only McDonald’s burgers other than their vegetarian diet. It is a cow, but oh that special sauce. You are a vegetarian or you are not. There is no in between. And such is the abortion issue for many.
How has this played out in politics?
It is always the same mantra. In politics, it is difficult to take a position only part way because you can get cut to shreds seeming to waffle. Your personal beliefs can become your enemy if they do not seem firm. Imagine the debate. “Senator McCain, you claim to be a vegetarian, but how do you explain this video of you consuming a Big Mac last Thursday?”
So, typically, those politicians on the side of abortion cite Roe versus Wade and believe it is totally the woman’s right to choose in all cases. Similarly, those politicians that side with the pro-life argument favor the total “life begins at conception” position, arguing that at the moment of fertilization, a human life with his or her own rights to life exists.
Politicians tend to play this with the same repeated arguments against the other side. Those in favor of a Roe versus Wade will point at the other side and say they EVEN do not favor abortion in cases of rape and incest, and by bringing up the much more rare and often horrific instances that could lead to pregnancy, diminish the importance and wonderment of the rest. Those that are on the pro-life side will accuse the other side of murder, and some believe it in their hearts to such a degree that they believe, in an almost vigilante way, that they must protect the rights of that fetus.
So, the game is on, and one side is inferred to be murderers or at least support murder, and the other is implied to endorse incest and rape. These are great images to paint on your political nemesis.
While this may not sound all that political to many of us, it has huge political ramifications in elections. Catholics, and most Christians, are very heavily taught that abortion is murder and that one should not vote into power anyone that would support it. Inherently, that supports the right. Many people cannot understand why people vote the way we do, but we believe this issue decides many a vote on religious grounds. Because we are predominantly a Christian population, it has huge ramifications with respect to election results.
Interestingly, finding McCain’s position in a search was easy. It was more difficult to find a non-interpretive statement of Obama’s. Obama seems to want to hide his position or at the very least not put it in writing.
We take McCain’s position from his website.
Overturning Roe v. Wade
John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench.
Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states. The difficult issue of abortion should not be decided by judicial fiat.
However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion – the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby. The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion. These important groups can help build the consensus necessary to end abortion at the state level. As John McCain has publicly noted, “At its core, abortion is a human tragedy. To effect meaningful change, we must engage the debate at a human level.”
It is not surprising that this is the position of the Republican running for President. It would have to be, because it has been for some time. We believe John’s position here to be pretty much rote.
In 1993, John McCain and his wife, Cindy, adopted a little girl from Mother Teresa’s orphanage in Bangladesh. She has been a blessing to the McCain family and helped make adoption advocacy a personal issue for the Senator.
The McCain family experience is not unique; millions of families have had their lives transformed by the adoption of a child. As president, motivated by his personal experience, John McCain will seek ways to promote adoption as a first option for women struggling with a crisis pregnancy. In the past, he cosponsored legislation to prohibit discrimination against families with adopted children, to provide adoption education, and to permit tax deductions for qualified adoption expenses, as well as to remove barriers to interracial and inter-ethnic adoptions.
We do favor adoption vastly over abortion, but we would not vote for someone because of that belief. We are surprised at parts of John’s statements though. We were unaware of any discrimination against families that adopt or barriers to interracial or inter-ethnic adoptions. We would like John to elaborate a bit on that, because we know people that have adopted their children and are very well adjusted and the children have benefited from wonderful loving parents. What discriminations are there John?
We will not print this part of John’s position. He devotes a significant argument for promoting marriage to prevent abortion. We believe that the two are completely independent of each other. It is a political diversion.
To make it a more political issue, how about removing the marriage tax John? Whoops, not that committed are we?
Addressing the Moral Concerns of Advanced Technology
Stem cell research offers tremendous hope for those suffering from a variety of deadly diseases – hope for both cures and life-extending treatments. However, the compassion to relieve suffering and to cure deadly disease cannot erode moral and ethical principles.
For this reason, John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes. To that end, Senator McCain voted to ban the practice of “fetal farming,” making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. Furthermore, he voted to ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals. Finally, John McCain strongly opposes human cloning and voted to ban the practice, and any related experimentation, under federal law.
As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.
Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, Senator McCain believes clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.
We are unclear on the stem cell argument. We can understand the belief in conception within the womb, but the creation of stem cells by creating embryos outside the womb is less clear if it would save or assist human life, but there is really no other position the pro-life side can take if they believe every fetus has the right to life, and it really would not impact our vote.
Protecting Children from Internet Pornography
John McCain believes the Internet offers tremendous promise…
However, there is a darker side to the Internet. Along with the access and anonymity of the Internet have come those who would use it to peddle child pornography and other sexually explicit material and to prey upon children.
John McCain has been a leader in pushing legislation through Congress that requires all schools and libraries receiving federal subsidies for Internet connectivity to utilize technology to restrict access to sexually explicit material by children using such computers. While the first line of defense for children will always be strong and involved parents, when they send their child to school or drop their child off at the library, parents have the right to feel safe that someone is going to be looking out for their children.
OK, John, now you are way off in outer space now. We have somehow managed to mix in an argument against internet pornography with going to the library? We think you should think of removing this paragraph. We don’t think too many people are viewing child pornography at their local public library. This seems so deluded as to question your ability to make Presidential decisions and to draw necessary lines.
For example, would you go to war and kill thousands of innocent people because a single madman rules that nation? Whoops, we already did that.
Protecting Children from Online Predators…
Do you work for Dateline NBC Senator? We swore we were supposed to be reading about your position on abortion.
The Greatest Honor is to Serve the Cause of Human Dignity…
OK, again, you are in outer space. In this section, John rambles on about compassion and human sacrifice and his military service to the nation. What? How can you bring up your military service when speaking of abortion? Could it be you are you speaking of soldiers that have raped the young girls of other nations in areas where the US is based?
We think you may want to rethink bringing up your military service every time you speak of any issue. Every position you take is not justified by Vietnam.
While we would not vote against you for being pro-life, we would consider voting against you for exploiting abortion by associating it with their military service to acquire votes. We find that an absurd association and, quite honestly, not worthy of a President.
Supports a Woman’s Right to Choose:
Barack Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in that case.
Obama buries his positions on abortion under Women’s Rights in an apparent effort to conceal them in the same way McCain appears to accentuate his. He obviously believes in a women’s right to choose under all circumstances. In fact he calls himself a “champion”. “We are the champions, we are the champions, no time for losers, cuz we are the champions, of the world”. A new theme for you perhaps Senator? We picture our champion Obama in front of an abortion clinic with a cape and big O on his chest ready to right the wrongs of those that would deny a woman her rights to abort.
Barrack appears to have no statements to make about encouraging adoption or providing support for unwed mothers. He seems to avoid the alternatives, almost promoting the act. We find it a hollow, cowardly position. We are not saying it is wrong for someone to support Roe versus Wade, but we also believe that any viable candidate should strongly suggest the alternatives and that support of those alternatives i critical to this issue. To speak of it with such brevity and to only refer to the courts certainly does not sound Christian to us. You did say you are Christian did you not Senator? Well, except when speaking in this interview.
Preventing Unintended Pregnancy:
Barack Obama is an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.
Here we agree fully. We do believe in the availability of contraception and health information and preventive services. It is delusional to believe support of the family could possibly prevent unwanted pregnancies and we are certain Sarah Palin’s daughter did not intentionally get pregnant. We would like to say that we do see courage, though, in supporting one’s daughter through that pregnancy and we also support Sarah’s daughter’s right to choose, Roe vs Wade is not about a woman’s right to only abort her fetus. The Senator seems to have missed that fact in his attacks on Palin and her family. Senator, we just wanted to inform you, the other choice is to have the child and that takes vastly more courage than to abort it.
Therefore, because you avoided the topic, this leaves us wondering. Do you favor abortion over adoption? Do you believe Roe versus Wade applies at all points in the pregnancy? Do you find your Christian faith at odds with your political stand? What does your church preach? We do know the leader of your church was quoted as saying “God Damn America”.
We are offended by some of the associations made by John McCain with respect to abortion. We believe he went off topic, attempting to associate unrelated issues to abortion and to somehow associate his military service to protecting an unborn fetus.
But we believe Obama copped out almost completely avoiding the hard questions on abortion, leaving his position open to public interpretation. By not stating his opinions openly and clearly, he leaves that interpretation to others. We are disappointed in this shallow statement, but it does keep Obama somewhat slippery on the subject, allowing him to distort his view enough in the public eye so as to garner votes from either side.
We are dissatisfied with both sides stated positions, but we believe it is not up to the President to decide anyway, other than by the appointment of Supreme Court Justices, so we do not consider it central to our selection. We do believe that our opinion of each candidate is driven by the way in which each expresses his opinion. We believe McCain overstepped by a wide margin. We believe Obama understated and dodged the issue.
Tonight, AGT was better than usual thanks to President Bush. AGT compacted the show and reduced the commercial count because the President had used up a ton of time to tell us how badly the economy is doing and how they want a scant 700 billion bucks to save the day. How did it happen? We don’t know, but we aren’t thinking too many people would vote for Bush in this competition.
We were grateful for the result though. AGT was short, compact, tight, quick and entertaining. Normally it would have been so drawn out, and it was so much better with the judges being quick and Jerry talking much less, awesome.
Now the acts.
Nuttin But Stringz (8/10)
As usual, very dynamic with tons of energy, and, with help, the only act that could do a Vegas performance someone might pay for long term. The audience loved it. The judges stood for the ovation. An amazing performance after which it took a while to calm the audience. Their biggest problem. They went first. That is a very tough slot to win when the voters can’t vote until the end of the show. We didn’t give them the highest score because they are depending more and more on hired hands. Other dancers and performers to enhance their performance. We suppose that is normal for Vegas, but for us it cheapens the act.
Donald Braswell (6/10)
“You Raise Me Up” after I have fallen asleep listening to you. Donald sings “nice”, We could see him doing the national anthem nationwide, I could see him doing Broadway, We could see him doing anything but a concert weekly in Vegas that anyone would want to see. Sorry Donald. You sing great. Honest. But the judges even looked asleep at the end.
Neil E. Boyd (8/10)
They cleared the stage for Neil. They had to because he wouldn’t fit on one stage otherwise. But the adjustment was something they would have to do for Queen Emily anyway. Neil has a hamburger eating competition next week if this doesn’t work out. He listened to the judges and did some incredibly boring opera. And you know, maybe if someone is looking for a real huge man to sing Opera, he will do fine. He has a quality voice and could perform in Opera just about anywhere, but he could not have his own show on Vegas. Maybe a permanent Opera show though, something that centered on him but was a much bigger show. That could work. But we are not sure enough America will recognize it, and they would need a massive stage to hold him and anyone else.
Eli Mattson (9/10)
Time for some Phil Collins, “Against All Odds”. Eli had a problem with tonight’s song, which has to do with a disappearing voice at the beginning and end of verses. We think it could be just be a proper microphone adjustment because of his style. Eli has a lot of inflection in his voice that leads to soft and louder moments that are part of his technique. But the microphone cannot be set flat or it doesn’t pick up his voice on the softer moments. Eli was great, but has one major problem; he is no Vegas act. So, what do you vote for? Talent or Vegas?
Queen Emily (6/10)
We said when we originally saw her, “It ain’t over until the fat lady sings”. Well, they are once again going to have Emily sing last. An advantage clearly, but so far, we haven’t thought much of her talent since her first week. She had a chance to choose a killer song, and chose a boring one. “One Moment In Time” is a classic, but it is boring and has to be driven by an incredible voice. Emily doesn’t have it. Back to donuts.
Here is our selection:
Eli was once again better than anyone on the stage. He needs a quality microphone, but overall, no one touches his creativity and talent.
A dark horse is Nuttin But Stringz, but they went first and by the end, America may forget to vote for them. We think they are the only unique act left so deserve the votes to at least be close with Eli even if they don’t win.
Neil was great, and if you could picture a long running Opera show on Vegas, Neil could pull it off as the center of that show, but it would have to be a large show. Very large.
Eli and Nuttin But Stringz are so close that it could go either way. We will leave it for you to pick.
This will be short and sweet. We covered everything in tonights show last night.
Our feelings about the performances are no different.
They started by letting Jeffrey & Edyta do a goodbye dance. They were cute. Next.
The couples passed through to next week…
1. Cloris & Corky
This was a sad joke on America. There is no way this couple got to the next round legitimately, unless this was some kind of elderly sympathy act. Absolutely pathetic that it will result in the elimination of someone with actual talent.
2. Maurice & Cheryl
Cheryl saved the day!! Maurice will live to dance another day.
3. Misty & Maksim
They get another one right!!
4. Warren & Kym
OK. Warren was much better last night and Kym is so incredible, it is hard to not include her in the competition.
5. Susan & Tony
Marginally in our list to survive.
6. Rocco & Karina
OK, they were mediocre, so we wouldn’t have eliminated them.
8. Lance & Lacey
If they had sent these two packing, we would have stopped covering the show right here and now.
9. Cody & Julianne
Not dissatisfied with this choice.
10.Toni & Alec
If they were indeed in the bottom 2, this was either fixed, or America was off hook. Cloris over Toni Braxton? Is that totally stupid or what?
Ted and Inna go home. All our favorites from last night made it. Cloris, our least favorite, survived, and we know she will remain our least favorite going forward.
Ted and Inna wouldn’t have survived anyway. They tied for worst with several other couples next to the absolute worst, Cloris. Ted was too stiff and Inna just doesn’t have the look of the other women. But to have dangled Toni as next to last was stupid, they were great and our favorite of the night. And to pass through Cloris was a sad joke on America. We really don’t want to see her dance again. *TGFFF.
In her September 3rd speech accepting her selection as the Vice Presidential candidate for the Republican Party, Palin astutely stated, “U.S. reliance on imported oil poses a national security risk, and energy policy should include everything from expanding domestic drilling to finding alternative fuels”.
The Democrats appear to think we should continue to import our resources while we take decades to bring on alternative fuels, but with the NIMBY attitude of the US, that isn’t going to happen any time soon. We need to break the ecology extremists that would save a chicken at the expense of a human life. These liberals would see our economy crushed before they would stop sending huge amounts of American currency to the home of the terrorists that executed the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Palin went on, “”We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers.”
Palin showed that she has more savvy and is more cognizant of America’s situation than the Democrats which are still planning on addressing our national deficit by blocking energy advances in America and continuing to import foreign oil at huge expense.
We are NIMBY’s. It has to stop. It has to stop now. the Democrats support NIMBYism and are desperate to continue to add to our national deficit and to discourage the tapping of US resources and inherent creation of US jobs.
These policies, combined with a set of programs that would cost nearly the national deficit with no logical explanation of how to pay for them, has driven us away from Obama.
Obama has a chance to sway the moderates like us to his side, but it isn’t lying in his commercials. He has to answer several questions.
1. How do we reduce our dependency on foreign oil ASAP? We have a hint. It isn’t ethanol.
2. How do we pay for 400 billion dollars worth of Democratic programs with only what Obama states is a small tax increase on those making over $250,000?
3. How do you roll back Bush Tax Cuts without raising taxes? Aren’t raising taxes and rolling back tax cuts the exact same thing?
4. How can you say you will solve Social Security Problems by taxing people a decade from now, when you know you can’t possibly even be in office by then? Wouldn’t that just be deferring responsibility to your successor?
Those would be our questions to Obama in the debates, and we are not CBS, a pandering network in Obama’s pocket.
If you, our readers, can provide the answers to any of these questions above, we welcome your input, because we sure can’t.
Have a question for the two candidates? Publish it here by leaving a comment!
The Hard Questions For McCain
Do you feel that Senator Palin is Ready to assume leadership in the Whitehouse as well as Joe Biden?
How can you institute a tax credit on Health Care without just allowing the insurers to raise prices and consume that tax credit instead of the people that are purchasing the health care?
Isn’t taxing health care over a certain dollar amount discriminatory against those that live in areas with a higher cost of living?
How long will we be in Iraq in your eyes?
You speak of a tax cut, but what form will it take and how will it help America?
What is your primary focus on immigration?
Could you explain your privatization plan on Social Security?
If you are elected President, do you plan to reinstate the draft, and if so, under what circumstances?
The Hard Questions For Obama
How do we reduce our dependency on foreign oil ASAP?
How do you roll back Bush Tax Cuts without raising taxes? Aren’t raising taxes and rolling back tax cuts the exact same thing?
How can you say you will solve Social Security Problems by taxing people a decade from now, when you know you won’t even be in office by then? Wouldn’t that just be deferring responsibility to your successor?
How do we bail on Iraq without a clear plan. Isn’t blaming it on the Iraqis who are getting killed, bombed and intimidated by terrorist factions unfair?
What is your primary focus on immigration?
Your program costs equal the entire national deficit. How will that be paid for? If you say it is closing loopholes, what loopholes? If it is taxing people earning over 250,000 a year, can you show us the math on that?
What is your viewpoint on repealing legislation that directly impacts civil liberties, such as the Patriot Act?
To add your questions, leave comments below, and we will incorporate them into the article!! Contribute and speak your mind!
Fantastic. As close to a 10/10 we could give without totally picking this team outright. Lacey has a way of leading while she follows and she has Lance picking up a huge number of small tricks. They were quick, fun, smiling, winners. The judges stupidly underscored at 21. This was a 24 or better. Doesn’t matter now, but we hope the judges improve. They are supposed to know what they are doing, and we would hate to see them ruin the final. This was at least an 8/10 dance.
Misty May & Maksim (9/10)
Nice start with a Misty solo. Misty shows that part of dancing is athletic as she could move her legs and swing with the pros. Some moves she made would be hard to do without strength. Lacey has that athleticism from dance, but Misty has it from volleyball, and it is Olympic quality. Add one more attribute to Misty…the competitive spirit. Misty is in this to win, because she hates to lose. We cannot believe we gave her this score; but she earned it. One thing to truly consider here, Misty was the star, not Maxim. How often does that happen? Not one missed move and legwork that gave us a chill. The judges again showed their weaknesses. Another 24 dance goes off as a 21.
Maurice & Cheryl (8/10)
They didn’t thill us last night, but Cheryl has it so if anyone can save Maurice, she is it. Cheryl was stunning in this outfit. There are few that could pull off her look, but this is not about her, it is about Maurice. Cheryl did everything she could do to make her partner stand out. It worked. It was more Cheryl than Maurice and she reminded us of what a spectacular dance star she is. She is up right up there with Lacey. She brought energy to the dance and she was awesome. She brought Maurice to the party. The judges must have been playing blackjack. Another 21. This time closer to reality though.
Brooke & Derek (7/10)
Pretty start. Good leg movement on Derek, but he is already the pro. Brooke does not have the same leg movement and the long gown conceals it only a bit. Nice ending. The judges had us laughing on this one, giving then a 26. This was no 26. They were the weakest of the groups so far. No idea what the judges were thinking here.
Cloris & Corky (3/10)
They were horrible last night. Could they survive tonight? They didn’t come in last, which is surprising except for Jeffrey. Once Again Cloris’ dress made her look like a pig ready for slaughter. The movements were clumsy and slow. They attempted comedy, but it doesn’t work. This is dance, not comedy. The audience cheered, we jeered. Judges gave them a generous 16. Our equivalent score is 9.
Toni & Alec (10/10)
Toni looked a bit nervous at the start but grace was all we saw from there on. Fast feet, beautiful presentation. In sync, in time, and in the show. The ending move was killer. OK, we have to rethink our scoring. The judges gave them a 23. This was idiotic compared to Brooke and Cheryl. We hope the judges buy glasses before they get to the finals.
Kym & Warren (8/10)
Warren had trouble with his size, but was better than many would be without it. His outfit hid the tummy better this time. He had the leg movement, and Kym was so killer that it offset any weakness from Warren. We don’t think Warren can win, but with Kym, anything is possible. We wrote Warren off last week. This week, he changed our minds. The judges gave them a 22. Nice, near our score.
Ted and Inna (6/10)
Ted started off with a truly goofy facial expression, which distracted us right off the bat. He seemed looser than last night, but the goofy faces are for a sitcom, not here. Ted was fun, but not loose still. He needs Yoga or something. The judges gave them a 19, which isn’t far off from our guess.
Cody & Julianne (6/10)
Nice energy at the beginning, but some childish expressions from Cody. Middle of dance was boring. Nothing special in the moves. Foot work then got better, which is what the quick step is about. They needed more of it. It wasn’t all that. The judges were absurdly generous at 23.
Rocco & Karina (6/10)
Rocco needed some sauce, because he needed to accent the dish he offered and had little in the main course without it. His moves are awkward and not in the same league as the best in this crowd. It was all Karina, and that ain’t gonna win. The 21 they gave this couple demonstrates the judges have no concept of dance. To place this dance on par with Lance and Lacey brings the judges’ abilities clearly into question.
Susan & Tony (6/10)
Susan was way too rigid last night, let’s look to see if her stiffness and slowness would change tonight. Susan kept up on the foot work, but was being dragged around the floor for most of the performance like a rag doll. Still, much better than last night. The judges now revealed they aren’t only blind, they are stupid. How you could even compare this in any way to the first two performances was laughable. And they scored it higher with a 22. An insult to dancing, but it won’t matter. Susan won’t win.
Kim and Mark (6/10)
OK, Kim left little doubt with her outfit who the most beautiful woman on the dance floor is, but that isn’t the point here. Let’s see if grace follows beauty. They tried something very risky, doing a fast step to a hip hop tune. It was rather bizarre. It wasn’t working for us early, even though Kim has the attributes to bounce her way to the top. The timing was off. The dance was all wrong for the music. Hate to say it, it wasn’t good. Kim has the booty working, but had to be faster in the hips, so even with her booty, it wasn’t happening. Cute, but a no go. The judges got this one right with an 18.
Jeffrey and Edyta go home. Surprise. It was down to Cloris or Jeffrey. They were both horrible. Cloris is next.
No tough decisions for the first two eliminations.
his was an entertaining show. Our only complaints were that it was way, way too long, and had so many commercials we lost count. It is another show where 20 minutes of performance is countered with an hour and 40 minutes of commercials and boring filler.
They could spice up the show by making it hit a bit faster and running it for only an hour. That would be more than enough time to get across these dancer’s talents, and they still would have had 2/3 of the show for filler and commercials.
All that said, let’s judge, shall we?
Cody and Julianne (6/10)
They started sweet and cute. They seemed ahead of the music much of the time and didn’t finish with the music. Overall, though, they won’t go home.
Rocco & Karina (6/10)
Graceful, very nice lines. But Rocco needs a ton of work. Right now, his “cooking” is still in the kitchen and not on the dance floor. Nonetheless, they were good enough to survive the night.
Toni & Alec (8/10)
Toni Braxton is “all that”. The woman is a hot mover and Toni is as stunning as she is graceful. Alec makes a great partner, and the two of them together are smoking.
Maurice & Cheryl (6/10)
We just didn’t get the chemistry. They looked like they were having fun, but the dance didn’t come off as anything special. And when you can say that about any dance Cheryl was in, it is a rare occurrence.
Brooke and Derek (7/10)
We liked Brooke’s moves and the dance was very hot. The chemistry was there, and if Brooke were dressed a tad hotter, we may have awarded another point. No elimination here.
Ted & Inna (6/10)
Nice, formal dance. A bit boring. Ted was a bit stiff, perhaps nerves. We think they survive, but Ted has to loosen up.
Lance & Lacey (9/10)
No one can touch Lacey on the dance floor in this competition. She is smoking hot. She is not the prettiest woman, but no one can move like her. Lance came across as very masculine and danced extremely well, but Lacey stole the show. Great job. More!
Cloris & Corky (3/10)
Horrible. Cloris looked old and fat in the dress. She comes across as cornball and tries to make fun of the situation, but this is a competition, and she shouldn’t be in it. Elimination Risk.
Jeffrey & Edyta (3/10)
Could someone be a worse dancer than Cloris? We should match Jeffrey and Cloris up and make this real easy. Neither will last the week. Jeffrey is a standup comedian, but this dance was so bad, it wasn’t funny. Don’t give up your night job Jeffrey. Elimination Risk.
Kim and Mark (6/10)
Kim was absolutely incredible in her gown. No doubt, if this were only based on beauty, she would steal the show. But her dancing was a bit stiff and she needs to loosen up to get the timing right. Mark doesn’t help much. His personality doesn’t do it for us.
Susan and Tony (5/10)
Susan may survive, but this is a game for the young, and she isn’t. Despite a hot red dress, she didn’t look hot, and the dance came across as stiff and not much fun.
Misty & Maks (8/10)
Surpise of the night!! Mysty May danced with aplomb. She had smooth lines and looked as beautiful on the floor as any of her competition. She has the ability to get her technique down and has a real competitive flair. We like her chances.
Warren & Kim (6/10)
The judges were watching a different dance than we watched. Kym is phenomenal, but Warren looked like a Sap. His leg movement was OK, but his belly was bouncing all over the place and his upper body movement looked comical.
Cloris Leachman or Jeffrey Ross will be sent packing first, but it won’t matter much because the other is likely to go second.