Tuesday, October 7, 2008

McCain WON!

I really thought McCain was smooth and did the best. It was surprising to hear the pundits on Fox say differently--but Karl Rove,Shawn Hannity and Fred Thompson played up his strengths. Perhaps the other panel (with Hume, Kristol, Barnes, et al) has been accused of being too one-sided--so they all ganged up on McCain tonight --and will probably swing the other way on the next debates. I always think the media does that --they try to be even-handed until the heat turns up and election day draws nigh!

There was conservative concern about McCain's new proposal of a bail-out of the other poorly advised group of mortgage losers. Where will this bail-out business end??? I think his point would be that ordinary americans are losing their homes --and they should be bailed out if the wall street fat cats are. AS for the latter, I wish they could be made to give up their excessive personal profits from their defunct business.

On Sept. 29, there was a letter to the editor in the Blade that is worth looking up --a man wrote bulleted items about the Wall Street bail-out and noted that the corruption was started and lack of oversight signed by Clinton in 1999. That McCain and Bush tried to get the democrats to see the impending disaster later (McCain alluded to a senators' letter about this tonight.) Democrat senator Barney Franks argued that we want all people to be able to own homes. The writer said that leading democrats, Senator Dodds and upstart Senator Obama, were THE two biggest beneficiaries of the corrupt lending organizations. (If I had that article in the room with me, my info would be better--sorry --just go to Blade website and look up the readers' forum for Sept. 29.)

I want to hear Obama defend his position on FOCA (freedom of choice act regarding abortion.) He is so far left on that topic.

Bill Clinton ALSO said he thought we should reduce the need for abortions, the number of abortions, while keeping it available. He did nothing to keep that campaign promise --and did a lot to demonstrate womanizing before the world. One of his girlfriends, Gennifer Flowers, said he made her get an abortion of their child conceived when he was governor.

Liberal, pro-abortion democrats have no intention of limiting the numbers of abortion when they, like Pelosi and Obama, advocate passage of FOCA--which will nullify any progress made by the states to regulate abortuaries, abortionists, and to limit late-term abortions, prohibit killing the survivors of abortions (Obama voted 4 times to let those survivors die--as though the mother's choice is absolute.) Parental consent laws will be affected. All the gains of the pro-life movement will be eliminated under Obama --because he is philosophically as far left on the subject as one can possibly be.

He will give us leftists on the Supreme Court --and they will uphold unlimited abortion, give us gay marriage, hate crime law that prohibits free speech, especially biblical speech against homosexual activity, in particular. We will see churches and religious schools lose tax deductions if they don't approve homosexuality and hire and admit homosexuals --even though their religious belief says homosexuality is a sin. Schools accepting vouchers will not be allowed to discriminate in hiring or admissions on basis of homosexuality, transgendering. The only way to get a teacher to leave who comes dressed as a man one day and a woman the next day, will be to settle out of court and give them a fortune (as already happened at a Free Methodist college.)

The new national religion will be moral relativity/atheistic secular humanism --or maybe Oprah's new age spirituality. Judeo-Christian values will no longer pre-dominate as the ethical system of our country. Entertainment media will be even more indecent, and porn more prevalent (if possible --like European tv) --and it won't be long before ages of consent are lowered for sexual activity. Sex ed in schools won't be anything decent people want for their children. The benighted leftists won't see any reason not to sanctify polygamy as a rightful choice --completely missing the harms to the young girls, the inability of most men to afford multiple families without welfare. Leftist judges won't acknowledge the inherent inequality in a closed system that teaches women that God wants them to be one of many wives. Muslims will feel free to practice their polygamy here.

I predict we will sink under even greater debt, family alienation, more single parenting, natural disasters as God's judgments, terrorist invasion --as more and more people forget who God is and what He wants from us.

"If america ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great"--French philosopher Alexis de Toqueville, 19th C.

We're already there --if we elect this ardent pro-abortionist.

I was reminded of the movie "Swingvote" where both candidates promised anything to get elected. I think McCain's appeal tonight was to all those who are losing their homes because of their bad loans --who were not helped by the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac bail-out.

Obama's appeal was to those conservatives who believe America should go and stop genocide. McCain should've jumped in there to say that's what we did by going to Iraq --and what we do by opposing abortion.

Both men had grand plans for spending money while claiming they would cut spending.

If we can't tighten the national belt and curb our usual spending habits, and get out of personal and national debt, we are doomed. Sorry to be so pessimistic.

I do think a McCain-Palin vote is a step in the right direction.

We're going to see how bitterly divided this nation is, once again, by this election. The two parties just do NOT share the same worldview, the same view of good and evil.



"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

8 comments:

Barb said...

PS on the post: Obama is wrong about energy. McCain called it a national security issue --to get energy independent. Obama says what's the point of more drilling if we can't benefit from it for 10 years or so --and of course, he hopes we'll have other sources by then.

In the meantime, we need to do EVERYTHING to get energy independent as fast as we can -lest the middle-east band together against Israel (and us) in some Holy War motivation--and cut off the energy we need for our military --as well as everything else.

If that happens, and we can't defend ourselves, it will be the fault of democratic party who have been obstructing oil wells for at least 10 years.

Somebody here called the GOP the stupid party. Seems to me it's the democrats on a number of issues who are the stupid party.

We need to go for every source we can NOW. Our survival may depend on it.

Obama was also wrong about the surge, announcing a withdrawal time table for IRaq War, and withholding aid from our troops unless we had a time table.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Antipelagian said...

I was disappointed in both candidates...however:

McCain did much better than I expected...so did Obama. As far as fluidity goes, they both did decently.

As far as ideas go, there isn't much of a difference. Both are in favor of interventionism across the world...they just disagree over where we should be doing it.

As far as energy: largely the same...one difference is Obama's views concerning Nuclear energy...and if I understand him, I think he's right. Building more nuclear plants opens us up for more targeting from terrorists...and then there's the whole deal of having to transport nuclear waste across the country...that is a huge national security issue.

The other difference is their view on health insurance...at this point, I think McCain has a better plan. Doubling the tax benefits for children is a very pro life stance and would make health insurance more accessible.

Both are out to lunch when it comes to jobs...but what would you expect?

If McCain were pro-life...he missed an opportunity to talk about America's own genocide of 50 Million + infants being butchered yearly...why no military invovlement there? Obama set him up for a grand slam, and he missed it.

Both are also out to lunch on Social Security...why won't they steal Ron Paul's idea on correcting that?

Barb said...

I agree, that Obama's talk of going in where genocide is occuring, should've been a place for a pro-life comment --as well as a defense of our entry into Iraq. We knew this man (Sadam) committed genocide and would continue to do so if no one stopped him.

candyly said...

How dare you compare the genocide in Darfur to ANYTHING that was going on in IRAQ before we invaded. Again, showing your lack of what is REALLY going on outside your prettily packaged FOX News watching world.

Barb said...

How dare I? easily. Does it matter whether its thousands or millions who are killed in genocide?

ARe you unaware of Sadam's burial grounds and His chemical genocide of the Kurds, his threats to his neighbors like Kuwait and Israel --and his threat to stability in the region if he were to have the nuclear weapons that Iran wants? that he also had a scientist in charge of nuclear development --who has written about Sadam's nuclear ambitions.

Crusader09 said...

1. I love Fox News, sorry you don't, Candyly.

2. I think we all are disgusted and horrified by the genocide occurring in Darfur, yeah? I, personally, am also horrified by a lot of things happening in a lot of countries today. However, I was, and still am when I think on it, horrified by Saddam Hussein's treatment of his people and his neighbors. What's wrong with being horrified by both, Candyly?

Furthermore, lest someone fuss me for being wrong about Hussein, Bush Sr. and Clinton were also horrified and worried about Saddam and his actions, and took some military action accordingly. So, now that GW Bush has taken some action, it's all of a sudden news to all of you that Hussein was an ass of a man?

Bill Clinton said that he regretted not taking Saddam out when he had the opportunity to issue that command. So GW comes into office and we take out Saddam, and our military has to stay in Iraq to help stabalize the country. Now, its unreasonable to think that we could or should leave Iraq in the state in which Saddam took it: vulnerable and unstable because of its inability to establish democratic rule and a reasonable military on its own. So that's what we're doing. And, if you've got a problem with that, I'd like to know what qualifies you to make military decisions, 'cause someone should get you into the Pentagon...

Could you do yourself a favor and pick up something other than USA Today? Watch something other than CNN, find a news source that has an iota of journalistic integrity or, at the very least, look at more than one to find the truth somewhere between the lines?

kateb said...

Genocide is as bad as it gets. It is a ludicrous idea to say that it's possible to compare events in history like this.

To tell a child in Darfur that has seen his father killed, his mother raped and her breasts cut off that he should feel better because at least he isn't in Hitler's Germany? I highly doubt that he'd appreciate a comparison.

To say that one case of genocide is better or worse than another is ridiculous.

Genocide is as bad as it gets for the people involved.

Anonymous said...

The GOP Campaign