McCain Says It To Obama’s Face, And Wins Final Presidential Debate 3, October 15 2008

During the past two weeks, Obama made a wish, he said McCain should “say it to his face”.

The format of this third debate gave Obama his wish, and it was clearly a case where Obama will remember the adage, “Be careful what you wish for”, because he got exactly that. This format allowed more of the type of interaction between the candidates we favor. McCain was able to attack Obama face to face. And instead of Obama’s usual calm smile, he wore a nervous smirk through much of the debate.

McCain was able to unnerve Obama by attacking him on the issues. He hit Obama on the spending that he constantly promises without defining clearly how to pay for it. He confronted Obama about his associations with ACORN and Ayers, the terrorist in Obama’s past. And he clearly had Obama retreating on issues about his tax increases, CAFTA and energy independence. He even got Obama to say he was considering off shore drilling.

Obama was not the calm, “promise the world” candidate he had been prior to this debate. He could not attack the issues the same way, which had been to just promise more than his opponent. In this debate, on each promise he made, McCain called him on the issues. One clear example is the promise to only tax those that make more than $250,000 while promising health care for everyone even with pre-existing conditions. Something we know does not work from real life experience in Massachusetts.

McCain nailed Obama on a quote he made about “spreading the wealth around”. Obama tried to defend it, but came across as an errant Robin Hood. He once again threw out his intentionally misleading statistic that 98% (It was 98% this week, it was 95% last) of all businesses make less than $250,000. That statistic includes self-employed individuals, so it is a complete lie.

Most businesses that have more than two employees would be in the category that sees their taxes increase under Obama’s plan. And McCain was able to call Obama on this, using a plumber wishing to purchase a small business as an example of a man that would lose in Obama’s plan.  Obama tried to say that the business would not be taxed because he only would tax the “rich”. And McCain’s response was to congratulate the plumber on being “rich”. It was a subtle and superb comeback and it cut Obama to the quick. Obama’s qualification of “rich” includes many that no one would consider “rich”

Liberals will try to find the bright moments for Obama to attempt to declare him the winner, but in this debate, there weren’t many. His promises didn’t add up and McCain was nailing him on it. Obama did have one bright spot on health care, but it was once again using his usual tactic of promising the world to everyone.  McCain was quick to point out that tax increases on small businesses while forcing them to add health care benefits they cannot afford isn’t going to add up on a calculator.

Both candidates have cuts they promise, but Obama’s plans just have no compromise. They are all based on welfare programs and investing in our future. It is a great concept to invest in your future, but you “invest” when you have the money to invest. “Invest”ing money you do not have is gambling, on margin. The US here needs to stabilize its costs before it can “invest”. And there is not a fast solution in government that will reduce those costs that adds the types of expensive programs Obama endorses. It was plain in this debate, McCain was not going to roll over, and just let Obama go unanswered and unquestioned.

“That one”

This time “That One” had to stand up and answer some hard questions, and he was nowhere near as effective or believable in the process.

Obama and McCain were very close in the first debate. Obama clearly won the second. McCain clearly won the finale. It is our opinion, however, from what we have seen discussing the issues with people, the debates do not shape the election much. The candidates can confirm your opinion, but sway few. If Obama had won this debate, it may have swung more neutral voters his way, but he did not. So, we don’t believe he gains anything.

We believe McCain will gain 2 points or so in the polls, but it won’t be enough to swing the final vote Republican. This debate did, however, finally show the kink in the Obama armor. When hit point blank with the questions about how he will pay for his programs without hurting small business, he crumbled. That proves he is not the guardian of the middle class he claims to be. He is the defender of the public programs like welfare that have proven so very costly for America in the past.

We will be back to cover the issues in more detail after we get a chance to fully review the transcript of the debate.

They Say McCain’s Life Expectency Is Short, But What About Obama’s? Joe Biden For President?

In discussing the election with people we know lately, including liberals, the discussion has occasionally turned ugly. A troubling topic has come up many times, so we realized that this was more than just a passing thought.  Many people honestly believe Obama will be assassinated if he wins the Presidency. Our first reaction was, “Yeah, right”. This is the 21st century not the 1960s. The color of your skin doesn’t matter anymore.

But as we dwell on the thought a bit, we got frightened by the implications. Then, we decided to see if there were any details about such opinions on the Web.

The first article we stumbled on was this blog on which a young black woman states that there is fear in the black community that Barrack could be murdered.  Her statements bring home that there is a fear in the black community for Obama’s life.

Now, we do not believe the color of Obama’s skin would be the sole reason for such an attack, but after our research, we do believe assassination attempts could be possible. Associations between Obama and terrorists are easy to make. His name sounds eerily familiar to Osama’s. And his middle name is Hussein. His overall name sounds more like the name of a man identified in the 9/11 attacks than a man running for President of the United States. We realize that this is just coincidence, but we would not put it past some to make the associations.

This article has moved to its new home, The Lie Politic. Please continue reading by clicking here and you will be redirected to the new site. Thank you!

ObamaGate: Obama Associated With Organization Subpoenaed for Voter Registration Impropriety

On October 4, we reported on the association between Obama and William Ayers. We were not the first, and referenced articles from such publications as the Wall Street Journal. In fact, Hillary Clinton had brought up the issue as problematic during the Democratic Primary.

At the time, we dismissed the relationship as little more than an indication that Obama was more radical than he presents himself.

If you read this article, it will give you a better understanding of who Ayers is and how Obama interacted with him.

Their relationship in an organization named the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) has strong implications regarding Obama’s ideology. CAC was formed for a good purpose. It was supposed to distribute monies from the Annenberg Foundation for funding educational programs. Instead, the board, including Obama and Ayers, funneled monies to radical organizations. In order to get access to funds, schools had to associate themselves with the radical organizations and align with their causes. Students and programs based on scholarship merit were summarily rejected. The results of a study demonstrated that, despite all the money spent (tens of millions of dollars), the program was completely ineffective from an education standpoint.

It was not, however, ineffective at supporting the radical organizations to which it funneled its funds. One of the organizations was the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

ACORN has turned out to be more of a radical organization than we originally thought. Apparently, offices of ACORN have been raided by authorities for attempting to manipulate voter registration. ACORN members were attempting to influence Democratic voters to register more than once. Some apparently had registered as many as 72 times. The US slogan is “One Person, One Vote”. Apparently ACORN’s slogan is One Democrat, As Many Votes as We Can Get.

According to the New York Post, ACORN, whose political wing has endorsed Barack Obama, relentlessly pursued Democratic voters to register multiple times. Subpoenas have been ordered in an investigation run by election officials.

The New York Post Article states when speaking of several voters that were subpoenaed, Christopher Barkley, Lateala Goins and Freddie Johnson:

Barkley is one of at least three people who have been subpoenaed by the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections as part of a wider inquiry into possible voter fraud by ACORN. The group seeks to register low-income voters, who skew overwhelmingly Democratic.

“You can tell them you’re registered as many times as you want – they do not care,” said Lateala Goins, 21, who was subpoenaed.

“They will follow you to the buses, they will follow you home, it does not matter,” she told The Post.

She added that she never put down an address on any of the registration forms, just her name.

A third subpoenaed voter, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months, officials said.

“It feeds the public perception that there could be [fraud], and that makes the pillars fall down,” said local Board of Elections President Jeff Hastings.

According to this CBS Market Watch article:

“Thousands of allegedly fake voter registrations by a nationwide organization are being investigated. At least nine states are reviewing voter paperwork, and Allegheny County police are looking into similar accusations.”

Apparently, according to this article, the initial probes were launched in Cleveland against ACORN in August.

Obama and Ayers, during their time at CAC, filtered millions to ACORN. This impropriety is accentuated by the fact that ACORN publicly endorsed Obama for President and was specifically targeting Democratic voters in their attempt to fraudulently garner more Democratic votes in key states.

At this time, there is no direct association between these criminal activities and Obama himself, but it does bring prior voter tallies in some states into question. We consider this a critical issue in the ongoing saga of Obama, Ayers, CAC and ACORN, and we will do our best to keep you abreast of anything we find.