295,091 fell for it...........

Hey ZN -

I won't speak for everyone, but I think Carter was the best President we've had in many, many years. He didn't have the speech giving skills or Reagan or Clinton (yes, the ability to connect in a speech was what both of them did best! ) He didn't bully people like GW. He just quietly and honestly went about the business of being President.

Obama has a bit more flash. In fact, he's a lot like both Reagan and Clinton in that matter. I think he's going to make a great President.

Hey ZN -

I won't speak for everyone, but I think Carter was the best President we've had in many, many years. He didn't have the speech giving skills or Reagan or Clinton (yes, the ability to connect in a speech was what both of them did best! ) He didn't bully people like GW. He just quietly and honestly went about the business of being President.

Obama has a bit more flash. In fact, he's a lot like both Reagan and Clinton in that matter. I think he's going to make a great President.

- AndersonNative

Carter greater than Reagan...ha ha ha. That was a good one. Jimmy Carter created the mess we are in by putting the US right in the middle of middle eastern politics. Carter was perhaps the worst President we ever had. He is a good man, but he was a terrible president.

It's probably worth nothing that Barack Obama won more votes in SC than McCain and Huckabee combined!

Andrew,thought you might know,what is Omamas stand on gays

It's probably worth nothing that Barack Obama won more votes in SC than McCain and Huckabee combined!

- ahammett

With so many poeple in this state relying on social programs (ie. Welfare) of course he's going to win, he's promising to expand those costly programs that promote laziness at the expense of us who actually work for a living...

He's got a website full of positions on issues, gimme some citations on that claim.

Again, political propaganda given to him by his campaign staff, look at his past voting record.....

Just a few examples...
He voted "present" to: Partial birth abortion, gun issues, trying teenagers who commit violent crimes as adults, requiring mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds, protecting the privacy of sex-abuse victims, parental notification abortion bills, prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares and on and on.

So no we don't know what he REALLY stands for, and I don't think he does either.

Nice bait and switch, but where is the proof about vast expansions of welfare programs?

With so many poeple in this state relying on social programs (ie. Welfare) of course he's going to win, he's promising to expand those costly programs that promote laziness at the expense of us who actually work for a living...

- zn706

Oh what little ye know ...

The Working Poor

Welfare Reform in SC - Executive Summary (1999)

Yes - I recognize that the exec summary is nearly ten years old at this point, but it serves to support the article that I linked (dated from 2005).

ZN - The people that you write off to just being "lazy" are anything but. Both items of linked material illustrate that more people are moving off the welfare rolls here in South Carolina. What they also show is that the people are barely off of the rolls (more or less by technicality).

It also pays to know that a lot of individuals are caught in a perpetual cycle of poverty in certain quarters of this state. While I will be one of the first people to say pull yourself up by your bootstraps, you have to have bootstraps to do that with. Some of these folks don't even have that.

Understand that the answers to a lot of life's problems are neither clear-cut nor easy. Understand that you are far more likely to be successful through optimism rather than pessismism.

Then again ... what do I know, right?

- SSHM

When you're so poor you can't pay attention, you end up with a Republican running the circus!

Again, political propaganda given to him by his campaign staff, look at his past voting record.....

Just a few examples...
He voted "present" to: Partial birth abortion, gun issues, trying teenagers who commit violent crimes as adults, requiring mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds, protecting the privacy of sex-abuse victims, parental notification abortion bills, prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares and on and on.

So no we don't know what he REALLY stands for, and I don't think he does either.

- zn706

If you'd paid attention to the debates, you would know that voting "present" in the Illinois legislature is a way to signal that the bill needs further tweaking before the voting member will fully accept it.

It's a good way to keep a bill alive (many of which Obama himself sponsored) while objecting to specific items within the bill. Consider it a legislator's "line item veto," for a rather crude analogy.

edit: oh, hey, great fearmongering and overgeneralization with the use of the word "socialist" in there...classic.

Look at his plans, he has all these ideas that you all think are "great" with no real plans. Now pull your head out of the clouds. How do you think he's going to pay for this. Thats right, "PAYGO." AKA. when they run out of wealth to redistribute, they just come and take more. You all forget, these "Rich" you all love to hate and want to take away from are most likely the reason many of you have jobs in the first place. Raise taxes on them and they'll cut the workforce in return. When you begin to take away from the wealthy who have earned it, and give it to those who haven't, you've just entered the realm of the Marxist / Socialist. His "lets elevate the poor" comment really worries the hell outta me, becasue if he elevates the poor, where do you think the money to elevate the poor is going to come from? If you work, its coming from your pocket, thats where and thats a quick way to DESTROY an economy.

If you'd paid attention to the debates, you would know that voting "present" in the Illinois legislature is a way to signal that the bill needs further tweaking before the voting member will fully accept it.

Why would I waste my time listening to that crap when the wife and I were each enjoying a excellent tenderloin filet at Charlie's last Monday evening? Watching tweetle dumb, tweetle witch and tweetle loser would have made me lose my appetite.

As for Obama's claim, he simply gave a excuse to save face in a debate. He used a pre-canned response that was created by someone else before the debate even began. The truth of the matter is that he didn't want to anger any part of his constituents, no matter how small of a group so he voted "present." He's a coward, a coward and a liar.

Lastly, if you believe ANYTHING coming from ANY of the candidates, you really are a SUCKER....Every last one of them is a professional liar, nothing more, nothing less.

Look at his plans, he has all these ideas that you all think are "great" with no real plans. Now pull your head out of the clouds. How do you think he's going to pay for this. Thats right, "PAYGO." AKA. when they run out of wealth to redistribute, they just come and take more. You all forget, these "Rich" you all love to hate and want to take away from are most likely the reason many of you have jobs in the first place. Raise taxes on them and they'll cut the workforce in return. When you begin to take away from the wealthy who have earned it, and give it to those who haven't, you've just entered the realm of the Marxist / Socialist. His "lets elevate the poor" comment really worries the hell outta me, becasue if he elevates the poor, where do you think the money to elevate the poor is going to come from? If you work, its coming from your pocket, thats where and thats a quick way to DESTROY an economy.

If you'd paid attention to the debates, you would know that voting "present" in the Illinois legislature is a way to signal that the bill needs further tweaking before the voting member will fully accept it.

Why would I waste my time listening to that crap when the wife and I were each enjoying a excellent tenderloin filet at Charlie's last Monday evening? Watching tweetle dumb, tweetle witch and tweetle loser would have made me lose my appetite.

As for Obama's claim, he simply gave a excuse to save face in a debate. He used a pre-canned response that was created by someone else before the debate even began. The truth of the matter is that he didn't want to anger any part of his constituents, no matter how small of a group so he voted "present." He's a coward, a coward and a liar.

Lastly, if you believe ANYTHING coming from ANY of the candidates, you really are a SUCKER....Every last one of them is a professional liar, nothing more, nothing less.

- zn706

Look, making healthcare more affordable for all doesn't take it away from those who have it. Simple fact. Tackling the inflating costs of healthcare is a pretty darn responsible economic thing to do.

"elevating the poor" can come from other sources of funding, e.g. government waste that "conservatives" are supposed to be up in arms about.

So, zn, how did you arrive at the conclusion that the "truth" of the present votes is that he was simply being neutral? All indicators (you can Google the subject and learn a lot, by the way) point to that strategy as a common one used by state senators to "yellow light" a bill. In other words, they are able to THINK about a bill, not just glance it over and give it the axe or pass it without scrutinizing it. You know, I'd much rather have a bill go through like that than folks just shoving it through or killing it dead on one shot.

And given that you didn't even watch the debate (instead indulging yourself), I don't see how you have any material to argue with...you just sort of decided to let the pundits and commentators think for you.

Since some of you have been wondering, I have 3 simple rules when voting for someone:
1. Will they stay out of my wallet?
2. Will they do everything possible to keep government out of my life?
3. Will they prevent the further shredding of the Constitution and try to restore whats already been taken away?

I don't think thats much at all to ask for.


As for elevating the poor, you really are clueless. Do you think people are going to line up to give away large amounts of their hard earned money to elevate the poor? That money will come from increased taxes, but then again if you don't work or already live on the govt. cheese, why would you care? Look back in history, Democrats raise taxes to support social programs more than anyone else, its a known fact, its what they're born to do. Personally I already have too much money stolen from my paychecks as it is and Obama WILL continue this tradition. The only thing he'll change is the increasing percentage of money stolen from your paycheck. (And that goes for Hillary and Edwards too.)

As for healthcare, sorry but there is no Constitutional right granting subsidized healthcare for everyone. Want better benefits? Better yourself and get a better job that has those benefits. This is capitalism, and since we have a top, we have to have a bottom, you sink or swim, thats just the way it is.

Conservative waste? Democrats control the House and Senate, pork spending goes up 32%!!!

**biggest pork spender in 2007: **

-- Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) 96 pork projects worth $196.3 million.

and she's a democrap...go figure.......


Also why should I watch the debate? Its the same s**t every four years, the only 2 things that change are the windbags behind the podiums the BS they try to make us believe, and the ever increasing amount of money stolen from my paycheck.


oh yea....YELLOW=COWARD


now for your amusement......
ha ha..

Look back in history, Democrats raise taxes to support social programs more than anyone else, its a known fact, its what they're born to do.

- zn706

Ummmm ....

I did ... Kennedy's (JFK) fiscal policies were emulated by Reagan. JFK was for tax cuts. So was Reagan. So, I again assert its not the party, but the person.

Oh and I bet you'd like a source ...

Source

Stupid ... should ... hurt ... more ... I ... swear ...


- SSHM

Look back in history, Democrats raise taxes to support social programs more than anyone else, its a known fact, its what they're born to do.

- zn706

Ummmm ....

I did ... Kennedy's (JFK) fiscal policies were emulated by Reagan. JFK was for tax cuts. So was Reagan. So, I again assert its not the party, but the person.

Oh and I bet you'd like a source ...

Source

Stupid ... should ... hurt ... more ... I ... swear ...


- SSHM

- SSHM

You are right. Rush Limbaugh even played segments of JFK's speech on taxes on his program.

Obama talks about a targeted tax cut.

Carter and Clinton were the last two dems, both raised taxes. But, of course Reagan did (after he lowered them) and Bush the Elder did. Bush the Younger gives us the temporary tax cuts that expire.

I think Obama would be more likely to entertain a tax cut than Billary.

But, I will be voting for John McCain anyway. You dems got to sort that one out.

So let me see if I have your position straight here. You do not listen to anything that candidates say because they are professional liars, all of them. Yet, you post about them, and I'm assuming, vote for one of them. How is it that you know anything about the candidates? Newspapers? TV News? Not THE LIBERAL MEDIA!

Pew Research Center on voting present in the Illinois legislature:

here

I heard this and looked up the facts from an independent researcher. That's how I roll.

So let me see if I have your position straight here. You do not listen to anything that candidates say because they are professional liars, all of them. Yet, you post about them, and I'm assuming, vote for one of them. How is it that you know anything about the candidates? Newspapers? TV News? Not THE LIBERAL MEDIA!

Pew Research Center on voting present in the Illinois Assembly:

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/707/present-votes-illinois

I heard this and looked up the facts from an independent researcher. That's how I roll.

- JennyWhite

whatever, they only spoke with Obama supporters in the Illinois State Congress. A few snipits...

your source is biased

“The ‘present’ vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue,” said state Rep. John Fritchey (D), an Obama supporter.....

Looks like Fritchy there is making excuses for being spineless..

State Sen. John Cullerton (D) calls the “present” vote “a no vote with an explanation.”

Again, “a no vote with an explanation,” aka spineless.

Fritchey, the House Democrat who chairs a committee on civil law, said he often used the “present” vote....

when he didn't have the guts to take a stand one way ot the other....

Gee, they only spoke with Obama supporters who are defending the practice, if thats not bias I don't know what is.....

Looks like you rolled right into the brick wall of media bias there....

You skipped right over the Republican speaker, the party's floor leader.

Looks like you are biased too!