Biden, though obviously on Valium or some sort of downer, appeared to have a firm grasp of facts until checking revealed that twice he misrepresented the truth (lied) regarding McCain's previous votes. In all he made 10 Biden Blunders (misrepresentations of fact) such as his statement that "Article I of the Constitution refers to the executive branch," when in fact it refers to the legislative branch. Even more scary, and what should make every true American shudder with fear is....
Someone tell him directly that WE the CITIZENS are watching him closely as he is attempting to manipulate the vote. How dare he challenge the votes of college kids and those who have lost their homes.
Someone tell him that unless he wants to become EX-Governor he better get with the program and GET TO WORK here and get his nose out of McCain's ass.
This is our last and final warning. We are watching you Crist. So far you've failed in everything you've attempted. You do have a chance to redeem.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been put under direct federal government control. This is a major step in the most expensive financial scandal in U.S history. These two mortgage giants guarantee $5.5 trillion of debt. They fueled the recent housing boom riding an implied federal guarantee of their debt. They used creative leverage which ballooned their phantom profits, their management bonuses, and the ultimate losses to U.S. taxpayers -- which I predict will exceed $100 billion.
These organizations were classic rent-seeking companies; Fannie has a large headquarters on Wisconsin Ave. in Washington, D.C., because the source of their power and profits was Congress, not customers. They hired people for their political pull, not their financial acumen. And what we got was government-style extravagance, self-dealing, and ultimately a doubling of the publicly held debt of the United States.
This is a stunning financial development, and it should become a stunning political development. Of course Fannie paid the politically powerful from both parties, but they put their biggest dollars and biggest hires on the side of the biggest spenders.
Here is how much some of the winners profited from this scandalous operation, according to an insightful Wall Street Journal editorial:
Franklin Delano Raines (born January 14, 1949 in Seattle, Washington) is the former chairman and chief executive officer of Fannie Mae who served as White House budget director under President Bill Clinton.
Jamie S. Gorelick (born May 6, 1950) is an American attorney and judicial officer who was Deputy Attorney General of the United States during the Clinton administration. She was appointed by former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle to serve as a commissioner on the bipartisan National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, which sought to investigate the circumstances leading up to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
James A. Johnson is a United States Democratic Party political figure. He was the campaign manager for Walter Mondale's failed 1984 presidential bid and chaired the vice presidential selection process for the presidential campaign of John Kerry. In the 2008 election, he is a member of the vice-presidential selection process for the presumptive Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama.
Raines was also a donor to Obama's 2006 U.S. Senate campaign.
Please help us SAVE our great nation, restore a global image of honor and dignity and preserve our Constitution, our liberties and our rights. Vote for Obama, because we can't afford more of the same.
WAKE UP!
He's only playing the "Gender" card to try to win over Hillary supporters. Remember though, PALIN IS NOT HILLARY! She can't even hold a candle to Hillary! Her 1.5 years as Governor of Alaska compared to Hillary's 35 years of fighting for you? Please! If you vote for McCain because of Palin, you're SPITTING on Hillary and all that she has worked so hard for! Think hard about that before you vote for 4 more years of Republican rule.
Now, I can wholeheartedly understand women's frustrations with Hillary being passed over as VP, but *THIS* should be taken as an insult to their intelligence and will be seen for exactly what it is, nothing more than blatant pandering.
Hillary would have made a good President, HOWEVER, her ideals and policies are very similar to Obama's. Elect Obama, and we will see some, if not most of the things Hillary was fighting for. Elect McCain, and we will see little (if any) of Hillary's vision. If you give a damn about the direction of this country, you will consider who HILLARY would want you to vote for. As she said in her speech at the DNC:
"I haven't spent the past 35 years in the trenches advocating for children, campaigning for universal health care, helping parents balance work and family and fighting for women's rights here at home and around the world, to see another Republican in the White House squander our promise of a country that really fulfills the hopes of our people.
And YOU haven't worked so hard over the last 18 months, or endured the last 8 years to suffer through more failed leadership!
No Way... No How... No McCain!
Barack Obama is my candidate and he MUST be our President!"
~Sen. Hillary Clinton
__________
The facts about Sarah Palin?
1) Degree in journalism
2) Former sportscaster in Alaska
3) City council member in town of little over 5,000 people
4) Governor of Alaska for 1.5 years
5) Extreme Right Politics
6) Former runner up as Miss Alaska (Beauty Contest)
With technology maybe we can make a difference and cut through all this.
This is what can be done with internet technology.
Polls!
Free Exposure!
Polling stresses the issues, not the candidate if we control the question.
But what is new about polls? Aren’t the polls inaccurate too?
The idea of polls is nothing new. But maybe these poll sites are taking the wrong approach. There is no candidate behind the polls unless the poll is about the candidate.
But what if the polls were about what the candidate’s opinion on issues?
What if these polls on the candidate’s opinion were blind polls where you don’t know what candidate’s opinion you are voting on?
But let me explain about free exposure first. Every candidate wants free exposure. The candidates will get poll rankings based on the ratings of the answers by the voters. But keep in mind, the voters have no idea who’s opinion they are voting on until they have picked one of the opinion.
This is how it works.
First we need candidates. So we tell them about free exposure, and how it works. The candidates will register for a small setup fee.
Next we come up with a list of questions that the candidates must answer. They can change their mind as politicians do, but there is a record of the changes with a date stamp.
Then voters register, and are given a random selection of say 5 answers from 5 candidates to review. They can either rate each answer, and the top rating gets their vote, or they can just vote for one if they don’t wish to rate answers. They also can rate the question.
They have no idea who they are voting for, they are only saying that they agree with that candidate. Once they vote for that candidate’s answer, they then can see who the candidate is by being re-directed to the candidate’s profile.
If the voter is not satisfied with any answers, they can choose as many sets of answers as they want, but they must at least rate or vote for each set of answers.
Also a random candidate banner ad is displayed when the voter is voting so that candidates get free exposure.
As candidate’s answers are polled, the candidate gets ranked first by overall, then by party affiliation.
But what if the politician opens his mouth? Which of course means a lie?
I’m about to type a dirty word “Negative campaigning.” I know that it’s a dirty word, but it’s a necessary evil. Actually the lying politicians use that term only on their opponents ads. Without negative advertising, or critical opposition any candidate could just lie, lie, lie and get away with it.
So for each politician’s profile you can comment on the politician either negative or positive. But you can only comment if you are registered as a politician, activist, or voter.
A voter must vote on all the issues, before they can comment on any politician, except the politician that they voted for the best opinions.
If you register as an activist, you have your own profile, and can express opinions about the politicians, but voters can also comment. One credit towards a comment for each vote on an opinion.
Things to avoid:
Graphics of any kind, except approved photos of the candidates.
External web links.