Support This Website! Shop Here!

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Here's A Thought

So, I'm looking at the Obama website,
and it suddenly occurs to me
like a flash - a burning vision out of the heavens.

McCain/Palin supporters can help Barack Obama.

Just go to: http://my.barackobama.com/modules/votercontact/login_signup.php

Sign up to help.
Call the voters they give you to target.
Convince those voters to vote for McCain/Palin.

If they vet their callers like they vet their on-line donations, this should work beautifully.

Help Obama spread his wealth around a bit, and help those who have fallen behind: John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Remind them of one of the 101 reasons not to vote for Barack Obama.

Or this:


Hit the economic points especially hard.

Citizens Against Government Waste say that Obama has an 18% rating, McCain is rated 88%. Senator Biden is rated the worst with 0%: http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/citizens_against_government_waste_obama_isnt_the_worst_senator_on_waste_bid/

Barack Obama criticized Hillary Clinton for her financial ties to Wal-Mart, while conveniently failing to mention his own wife’s ties to Wal-Mart: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551441/Obama-called-hypocrite-for-wife

Obama implied he was poor and grew up on food stamps; Obama grew up mostly with his grandparents, who were upper middle-class bankers in Hawaii. Food stamps weren’t available in Hawaii until the seventies: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-was-obamas-mom-on-food-stamps

Obama claims to not accept oil money, but in fact he has accepted more than $213,000 from individuals who work for companies in the oil and gas industry and their spouses. Two of

Obama's bundlers are top executives at oil companies and are listed on his Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for him: http://www.newsweek.com/id/129895

Obama claims to have no ties to lobbyists, but several registered lobbyists have raised over a million dollars for his campaign, sometimes having their wives write the check to conceal his ties to them: http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/bad_americans/hows_that_obama.php

Obama has no executive experience. He has never run a business or done a pay roll etc..
He himself has admitted that he does not have the experience to be the President of the United States: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BnLozS-TnM&feature=related

His running mate Senator Biden charged that Obama lacked the experience to be President: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lknTPvH1wSg

Senator Obama voted against his own economic package. Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO) combed through Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) many campaign promises and compiled a list of 188 new spending proposals that he then packaged together and offered as an amendment to the Fiscal 2009 budget plan. Allard calculated that for the 111 proposals for which cost estimated were possible, Obama’s promises would cost the American taxpayer $300 billion per year and $1.4 trillion over five years. Allard released a floor statement highlighting the size of this spending package, including:

  • The $300 billion is more than the $294 billion the U.S. spent on imported oil last year.
  • Obama’s current tax raise proposal would cover only $225 billion over 5 years … far short of the $1.4 trillion in spending.
  • To finance just the first year of $300 billion in spending, Congress would have to raise taxes on the top 1% of tax payers by 57%.
Obama voted against his own platform and the measure was defeated 97-0.
http://blog.heritage.org/2008/03/14/obama-votes-against-his-own-platform/

In his campaign speeches he has claimed to want to renegotiate NAFTA. At the same time he sent an advisor to Canada to reassure Canadians that this was just politics and wasn’t true: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0338038720080303

Obama got more kickback money from Fannie Mae in less time than any other senator.
Obama counts rich, fat-cat billionaires as his advisors - people who made money by lying (Bill Gates) or ignoring small business (Warren Buffett).
Obama also counted former Fannie May advisors as campaign members.

31 comments:

Patrick said...

You also have to add in his court problems: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78671

Ann said...

It can really all be summed up in a variation of one of the liberals favorite phrases: Obama lied, America died.

Jordanes said...

Somebody should make up some bumperstickers if, God save us, he wins the election next month.

Dem said...

Speaking of bumper stickers, how about:

Obama: The real pro-life candidate

(Dirty little secret the Republican leaders don't want you to know: They don't really care about average people -- once they have your vote, anyway.)

consrvtvegirl said...

Heres a thought for "dem"--- You are either pro-choice or pro-life, there is no in between. You either support and cherish life or you don't. If you have morals you believe that God has a greater plan and it is not always for us to know what that plan is at the time. You can't support a womans choice but say that your not supporting abortion, it is, what it is. A liberal twist is how i see it, open your eyes and listen to more than what the mass liberals in the media are biasly presenting to you, research and understand what it is you are voting for, you may be very surprised to find out that your more conservative than you think. Signed --Republican and proud!!

Jordanes said...

Here's another bumpersticker for you, Dem:

War is peace

or

Love is hate

or

Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia

or

Brother Obama is watching you

Dirty little secret Dems like you don't want people to know: you don't really care about the dignity of the human person -- once you have our votes, anyway.

Now please, Dem, don't compound you sins of supporting and voting for Obama by bearing false witness.

Dem said...

Dirty little secret Jordanes: You are seeing such a sliver of reality it isn't even funny. Take off the blinders and look around. It's not all about abortion. You have been mislead.

Patrick said...

Abortion? You mean that whole killing kids thing? Why would anyone think that's important? If you believe you're a christian, there is simply no way to justify, it as the Dem leaders have already found out.

Jordanes said...

Take off the blinders and look around.

Said the man who thinks it is pro-life to allow woman and pseudo-doctors to dismember unborn children in their mother's wombs.

It's not all about abortion.

No, it's not. It's also about marriage, and using embryonic human beings as research fodder, and in vitro fertilisation, and cloning, and contraception, and sodomy, and the continued existence of Catholic health care.

You have been mislead.

Said the man who cannot spell "misled."

It's never too late to repent of your support for the mass slaughter of millions of children, Dem. Let Jesus remove the scales from your eyes and see the truth about Obama.

Dem said...

...continued existence of Catholic health care

Jordanes, I'd like to hear your thoughts on how McCain supports this.

It's funny, too. None of you seem to mention McCain much, if at all...

Dem said...

Another thought about abortion: There were fewer abortions during the Clinton administration than during the W administration.

Jordanes said...

Jordanes, I'd like to hear your thoughts on how McCain supports this.

McCain will not sign the so-called Freedom of Choice Act, which will remove faithful Catholics' freedom to choose to be doctors, nurses, and pharmacists.

It's funny, too. None of you seem to mention McCain much, if at all...

What's to say about him, except that although he is a seriously unsatisfactory candidate, Obama is immeasurably worse.

Another thought about abortion: There were fewer abortions during the Clinton administration than during the W administration.

Yes and no:

http://www.nrlc.org/news/2005/NRL02/AbortionIncreaseMyth.html

There were fewer abortions during the first Bush administration than there were during the Clinton administration, and the abortion rates began to increase before the end of Clinton's term in office. So one could argue that Clinton, or rather the government, was doing something that led to an increase in abortions.

Anyway, if you really are concerned about reducing the number of abortions (we know you're not really, but just play along), then you shouldn't support Obama, and you should be working to outlaw abortion. Nothing will reduce abortion numbers better than making that unspeakably monstrous crime illegal again.

Jordanes said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jordanes said...

Part of the URL was cut off. Here it is again:

www.nrlc.org/news/2005/NRL02/
AbortionIncreaseMyth.html

Dem said...

While you Republicans would wait for McCain to appoint judges who might someday vote to return abortion to the state level, be prepared to live with McCain tearing up the country and create an even greater division between those with great wealth and those who are hurting.

You seem to be convinced that it's a one-issue election, end of story. Well, if you do, be prepared for the suffering that would occur while you wait for abortion to be returned to the state level in terms of law.

You try to make things ultra-simple and ignore everything else.

Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jordanes said...

While you Republicans

Hey, Dem, check out my avatar. You may be a Democrat, but I'm not a Republican, and there are probably a lot of others here who aren't Republicans.

would wait for McCain to appoint judges who might someday vote to return abortion to the state level,

Well, it's either that or revolution.

be prepared to live with McCain tearing up the country and create an even greater division between those with great wealth and those who are hurting.

"Hurting" to you means money, but the suffering that your "hurting" might experience is nothing compared to the suffering of the babies, women, and men who are slain and scarred by your policies of legal abortion, legal contraception, legal embryonic stem cell research, legal cloning, legal IVF, sodomitic pseudomarriage and adoption . . . . You sell your birthright for a message of pottage, Dem.

Dem said...

Jordanes, you are a wackier nut job than I imagined possible! You want contraception to be illegal! And you are a homophobe, to boot! Sad, sad, sad Jordy...

Steve Kellmeyer said...

Dem, contraception should be illegal for the same reason that self-mutilation, homosexuality and rape should be illegal: each violate the dignity of the human person.

You should be a little less close-minded.

Try reading other posts on this blog, like
http://skellmeyer.blogspot.com/2008/02/crying-your-eyes-out.html
http://skellmeyer.blogspot.com/2006/11/elton-johns-walmart.html
http://skellmeyer.blogspot.com/2003/09/homosexuality-should-be-accepted.html

Jordanes said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jordanes said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jordanes said...

Jordanes, you are a wackier nut job than I imagined possible!

Yes, Dem, you sad little heretic -- and the Catholic Church is absolutely filled with us "wacky nut jobs," otherwise known as faithful Catholics . . . .

You want contraception to be illegal!

Yep, you got it -- I am a Catholic, after all.

Here's something every crazier, Dem: I want pornography, rape, bestiality, and the sexual abuse of minors to be against the law too.

Oh the horror!

And you are a homophobe, to boot!

No, I have no irrational fear of things that are the same.

Nor do I irrationally fear homosexuals, which is perhaps what you meant by that non-word. Agreeing with God about the sin of homosexuality does not make one a fearer or hater of sodomites.

Dem said...

I'd love to hear if you think there should be ANY exceptions to contraceptions being illegal. What if one of the person messes up -- cheats on their spouse -- and acquires an STD -- but then seeks confession and is forgiven? Should an exception be made to allow for the purchase of a condom then?

Or should the fact the person has an STD serve as punishment and forbid the person from having sex within their marriage?

Steve Kellmeyer said...

Dem, click here,

here, and

here.

Adultery and condoms are both offenses against human dignity. If you catch an STD, you have a duty to refrain from sexual activity in order to prevent spreading infection. Only an egotist, a narcissist or a homosexual (but I am repeating myself) would insist s/he has a right to pleasure at someone else's expense.

Jordanes said...

I'd love to hear if you think there should be ANY exceptions to contraceptions being illegal.

Nope. No exceptions.

What if one of the person messes up -- cheats on their spouse -- and acquires an STD -- but then seeks confession and is forgiven? Should an exception be made to allow for the purchase of a condom then?

No. In that case the repentant spouse must remain celibate unless and until he can be cured. No method of contraception can be relied on to certainly prevent transmission of the disease, so it would be uncharitable for the infected spouse to engage in marital relations. Out of love, he would gladly abstain and not ask his spouse to endanger her life.

St. Paul said we may not do evil that good may come of it. Thus, the sin of contraception cannot be excused even if it is make possible the goods of prevention of disease transmission and conjugal union.

Or should the fact the person has an STD serve as punishment and forbid the person from having sex within their marriage?

That’s correct.

Dem said...

What if the STD was acquired during a rape? Would the woman have a duty to avoid sex with her husband until either a cure or death?

Jordanes said...

Yes, since she would not want to risk giving someone she loves a venereal disease.

Dem said...

Jordi, you are beyond belief.

And Steve, it's interesting -- you seem to go a little out of your way each time you make snarky comments about gay people.

Steve Kellmeyer said...

Dem, you probably think I'm going out of the way because you are projecting your homosexuality onto others.

I would suggest you get some counseling. Homosexuality is a serious disease, and it needs immediate treatment.

Dem said...

Little defensive, Steve, aren't ya?

Steve Kellmeyer said...

Dem, you're the one who started slinging the homophobe arguments.

Seems to me that you support homosexuality because you embrace deviant behaviour.

This idea that people who speak out against homosexual activity must be secretly homosexual is simply irrational.

Does it mean that people who speak out against mass murder are secretly carving up people in their basements?

Are those who oppose child rape secretly child rapists?

It's an absolutely juvenile argument, rationally equivalent to saying, "I know you are, but what am I?" You're trying to paint the whole world as child rapists, mass murderers or active homosexuals.

Grow up.

Jordanes said...

Dem, I assure you I'm very real. Believing in my existence is no stretch at all. There are quite a lot of people like me, in fact. We're known as "Catholics."