Friday, August 29, 2008

Gov. Sarah Palin and Change We Can Really Live With

Sarah Palin. Just who is she. She is a working Mom, a homemaker, a career woman, a former mayor and Governor of Alaska. So how does that make her qualified to be VP of the US and a heartbeat away from the most important office in the world? Is she qualified or are the Democrats going to have a field day declaring that she is not.

Let’s start with the question, is she qualified. Certainly she is short on experience but no one is claiming that she has a long resume but… and here is where the Democrats had better tread very lightly. They say now that McCain’s argument against Obama’s lack of experience is gone but is it? As soon as the Democrats begin this rhetoric about Gov. Palin lacking experience as a leader one only needs to ask the question, just how many years does Obama have governing anything. Has he ever had to establish a budget for a government body… answer NO!. Has he ever had to actually run a governing body…. Answer NO! So the argument of lack of governing experience goes out the window and the burden falls back on Sen. Obama who has zero governing experience. As a senator he is not in a governing experience, he is only one small part of a body that actually does not oversee anything and does nothing except recommend. A governor has to make decisions on matters of state, a senator does not. Even a mayor has more governing powers than a senator so the Dems come up empty on that one. As has been stated, Gov. Palin has been running a state government while Sen. Obama has been running for government office. There is a great difference in that.

The Dems will claim that Sen. Obama has had a rougher road to travel than Gov. Palin. Oh really? Please explain. I don’t believe Sarah Palin attended private, elite schools as a child. According to the record she attended public schools and so she is familiar with the real problems in the schools from a former students point of view. How did she attend college. Well, it was not on the premise of race or gender it can be assumed. It seems that Gov. Palin won a scholarship by virtue of being selected as runner up in the Miss Alaska Pageant which helped pay her way through college. Her Dad was a science teacher in public schools and her Mom was a school secretary. It would seem that Gov. Palin would be well aquainted with the difficulties that school teachers have income wise where as Sen. Obama only understands from book knowledge, no first hand knowledge. Gov. Palin earned her degree in journalism with a minor in political science. Gov Palin actually had a job rather than a position. She was a sports writer and reporter on radio and television. She also has worked along side her husband as a commercial fisherman. So in reality who has more experience in knowing the struggles that Mr. and Mrs. Smith USA experiences? The answer is not Sen. Obama but Gov. Sarah Palin.

Now it seems that the Obama campaign has attempted to make a big deal out of some ethics bill that Obama was suppose to have brought forth in Illinois. It is not what the Obama camp seems to imply. The ethics bill — which passed in a not-so-close 52-4 vote in the Illinois senate — did not clean up Illinois politics. It did at least bar political fundraising on state property. It blocked lobbyists and contractors from giving personal gifts to legislators. But it did not stop them from giving contributions in the so-called “pay-to-play” game. It did not prevent major political donors like Tony Rezko from influencing the makeup of the powerful boards that control the state’s pension funds, filling them with crooked allies who would help him steal. It did not prevent incumbent legislators from rolling campaign funds into their personal bank accounts." So much for Sen. Obama’s ethics experience.

Now compare that to Gov. Palin’s clean up of Alaska corruption. Governor Murkowski appointed Palin Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she served from 2003 to 2004 until resigning in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders, who ignored her whistleblowing complaints of legal violations and conflicts of interest. After she resigned, she exposed the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, one of her fellow Oil & Gas commissioners, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time, and supplying a lobbyist with a sensitive e-mail. Palin filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who both resigned.

Oh, there is more: Gov. Palin’s tenure include a successful push for an ethics bill, and also shelving pork-barrel projects supported by fellow Republicans. After federal funding for the Gravina Island Bridge project that had become a nationwide symbol of wasteful earmark spending was lost, Palin decided against filling the over $200 million gap with state money. "Alaska needs to be self-sufficient, she says, instead of relying heavily on 'federal dollars,' as the state does today." She has challenged the state's Republican leaders, helping to launch a campaign by Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell to unseat U.S. Congressman Don Young and publicly challenging Senator Ted Stevens to come clean about the federal investigation into his financial dealings.

In 2007, Palin had an approval rating often above 90%. A poll published by Hays Research on July 28, 2008 showed Palin's approval rating at 80%.

On tax reform it seems that Gov. Palin has more experience than Sen. Obama who has talked a good talk but has no fruit to show for his efforts. As Mayor, Sarah Palin reduced her own salary, and reduced property taxes by 60%. Now wonder how the Democrats will argue that Sen. Obama has more experience in that realm.

On Energy: It would seem that Gov. Palin again holds the edge in experience in this realm as well.

Palin has strongly promoted oil resource development in Alaska, but also helped pass a tax increase on oil company profits. Palin has announced plans to create a new sub-cabinet group of advisors, to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska.

Shortly after taking office, Palin rescinded thirty-five appointments made by Murkowski in the last hours of his administration, including the appointment by Murkowski of his former chief of staff James "Jim" Clark to the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority. Clark later pled guilty to conspiring with a defunct oil-field-services company to channel money into Frank Murkowski's re-election campaign.

In March 2007, Palin presented the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) as the new legal vehicle for building a natural gas pipeline from the state's North Slope. This negated a deal by the previous governor to grant the contract to a coalition including BP (her husband's seasonal employer). Only one legislator, Representative Ralph Samuels, voted against the measure and in June Palin signed it into law. On January 5, 2008, Palin announced that a Canadian company, TransCanada Corp., was the sole AGIA-compliant applicant. In August of 2008 Palin signed a bill into law giving the state of Alaska authority to award TransCanada Pipelines a license to build and operate the $26-billion-dollar pipeline to ship natural gas from the North Slope to the Lower 48, through Canada.

In response to high oil and gas prices, and in response to the resulting state government budget surplus, Palin proposed giving Alaskans $100-a-month energy debit cards. She also proposed providing grants to electrical utilities so that they would reduce customers' rates. She subsequently dropped the debit card proposal, and in its place she proposed to send Alaskans $1,200 directly and eliminate the gas tax.

Sounds as if Sen. Obama’s camp will have a difficult time in explaining away her experience and comparing it with Sen. Obama’s very limited experience on energy matters. The same can be said with Joe Biden’s lack of real experience or real action on energy as well. If you were listening to Sen.Obama’s speech of acceptance you will remember he said that McCain had been around 20 plus of the 30 years that nothing had been done about energy. Uh, it seems Sen. Obama forgot that his running mate, Sen. Biden has been around longer than Sen. McCain and would have to bear the same responsibility.

Gov. Palin is the head of the Alaska National Guard, the military and certainly has to be aquainted with the functioning of that arm of the military. What experience does Sen. Obama have in this realm. Answer NONE. Sen. Biden serves on a committee about the Armed Forces but has no real control of operations of the military, Gov. Palin does. Gov. Palin’s son is in the military, active duty, a grunt, enlisted man, who will be in Iraq in a few weeks. He is not an officer sitting in the JAG office of the Reserves as is Sen. Biden’s son. Of course Sen. Biden’s son will also deploy with his reserve unit to Iraq this fall as well and I salute him for his service. As to who will be in greater harms way, the MOS says it all. One is JAG corp, the other is infantry, grunt, enlisted. Any questions?

So it seems that the Democrats will have a difficult time in saying that Gov. Palin is not qualified, does not have any experience when the record shows that she is by far more experienced than the individual sitting on the Number 1 spot of the Democrat ticket, Sen. Obama.

On morals and such as Sen. Obama wants to allude to but does not want to talk about as was shown on the Saddleback interview. Gov. Palin is pro-life and when notified in the early trimesters of her pregnancy that she was carrying a downs syndrome child she did not choose to abort for her “mental health sake”. She understands when life begins and understands the responsibility of making the right choice, not the choice of convince. Of course the Democrats have already begun to critize her for leaving her poor helpless ill child and running for the office of VP. You would think that such “progressive thinking” individuals in the Democrat Party would applaud her and applaud her husband who is stepping into the roll of full time caretaker of this child and the other children that the Palin’s have at home as well. Again it is more hypocrisy and more of not what we do but what we say that counts for the “progressives”. Sounds like more of “just words” coming from the left. They talk the talk but don’t walk the walk.

It would seem from Gov. Palin’s experience along with Sen. McCain’s continuing battle for change in Washington that they are the ones to bring actually change to Washington. All we have from Sen. Obama is talk of change. What we have in Gov. Paulin and Sen. McCain is experience at bringing about real change. Now that is change that we can live with. As the saying goes, some folks sit around dreaming of making things happen. Some talk about making things happen. Others actually make things happen. So far the record shows that the McCain-Palin ticket has the edge in making things happen while the Obama-Biden ticket are still dreaming and talking about making things happen when it comes to change.

For REAL Change we can live with, vote McCain-Palin.

Obama and the Parable of the Fig Tree

As I was listening to Senator Obama acceptance speech tonight my mind was thinking that it certainly is a good speech but it also occurred to me that while it was nice to hear and pleasing to the ears it said little of nothing that has not be said or heard before. It was at this point that I was reminded of the Parable of the fig tree in found in the Bible in Mark, chapter 11. According to Mark, Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem and was hungry. From a distance he saw a beautiful fig tree filled with lush green leaves but on closer inspection he found that the tree had no figs. That is unusual since a fig tree bears it’s fruit before it leaves and the leaves cover the young figs, protecting them from the harshness of the sun until they are mature and ripen. Figs are not usually harvested until the fruit is dried. However in this case Jesus did not find any fruit on the tree, only leaves. That was basically the content of Senator Obama’s speech. It was like a fig tree filled with leaves but no fruit. We know, given that the disciples heard his words, that Jesus said to the fig tree that no one will eat fruit from you henceforth and then went on.

After Jesus had gone to the Temple and cleaned out the money changers and others who were buying and selling there and let the folks know that he would not allow them to make the house of prayer a den of thieves, he left the city according to Marks account. On leaving the city Jesus and the disciples once again passed the fig tree and Peter, remembering the words that Jesus had said to the fig tree, responded, saying “Look here, the tree that you cursed is dead and dried up.” Jesus replied, “Have faith in God “and commenced teaching his disciples about faith and the results of faith.

That reminded me of the coronation, or should I say the nomination theatrics of last night. After all the grandeur put forth and all the flowery words were spoken which said little of nothing, did nothing to change the perception of Obama from "rock star" to ordinary guy it, like the fig tree, just dried up and withered. There was no real bounce as usually seen after a nomination speech and celebration, it just sort of did like the fig tree and withered away. After all the fireworks and the rockets blazing away across the sky had ended there was nothing left, there was no fruit to gather, no substance to strengthen the weary, cursed from the start by all the theatrics , it withered and died.


There is a lesson to be learned from this parable even in modern day and that is that while the tree may have lots of nice leaves on it but has no fruit it is destined to be cursed and wither and die. I suppose that given all of that and seeing the results of the convention over four days, that one can say to the Republicans,
Have faith!

Thursday, August 28, 2008

The Unveiling of the Temple

The far left has built it’s temple for it’s ‘messiah’ in Denver, the one who has come down to shower favor on the deserving. He has pronounced that his arrival has already brought forth the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal …" The man and the moment have met. Tonight he will attempt to conduct a healing service for the halt, the blinded and raise the dead among the party where so little life has been shown this week.

Only a few rumblings of life even appeared this week at this grand show of ‘unity’ beset by lukewarm blessings from Hillary. Bill Clinton was suppose to really raise the dead and heal the party but seemed to talk more about ‘how it was in his administration’ than what we can expect from Obama, the ‘savior of the nation’. As soon as Bill finished speaking the audience once again died and lost what life that had been infused into it during the previous nearly 40 minutes of re-runs and telling how it needs to be again.

John Kerry gave his warmed over speech from 2004, about the wrong war at the wrong time and the wrong place and tried his best to tie it to McCain who by now the entire world knows did not agree with the way the war was handled by Bush from the get go. Never the less Kerry gave it a shot again and it went over about like it did in 2004, Kaflop. His speech was another I was for it before I was against it in that he liked McCain before he didn’t like him. In other words they could have left Kerry off the menu because he did nothing to spice up stew. The remainder of the speakers sounded like paid political announcements given by poorly paid performers who had no real zeal for what they were presenting. Of course Beau Biden gave more of what sounded like, look what you missed by not nominating my Dad that anything else and Joe just rambled on as usual when his turn came to evoke life into the zombies.

Another dead night ended with the ‘messiah’ entering the room and attempting to bring it to life. Bill Clinton got more applause than Obama, ‘the anointed’ and for a coronation that was not a good sign that things are going well for the Democrats.

Oh but tonight is to be different. The far lefts god will appear and attempt to evoke visions of manna from heaven floating down on the deserving and fountains of leftist koolaide springing forth from the rock to quench the thirst of those who just can’t get enough. One has to wonder if there will be angel wing feathers or gold dust falling from the sky as the ‘anointed one’ makes his appearance. The ‘messiah’ will try to pull off the vision of Moses and Elijah standing beside him and hope that the worshipers will see the images of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy and will immediately, like the disciples in the New Testament, want to build alters to the three, with of course their messiah’s alter being the tallest and the one in the center because after all the “oceans began to slow and the planet began to heal” upon his arrival. The heavenly anthems played by Bon Jovi will fill the temple and send shivers up and down folks spines and of course the legs of some in the media, before the messiah speaks and causes the worshipers to swoon in the ‘spirit’ and fall out in rapturous glory. Not to worry there will be no anointing with oil since the messiah has stated no more drilling. Perhaps he can just ‘blow ‘ a bit of life into them.

Expect a lot of “just words” but little content as the river will flow a mile wide and an inch deep in the “Mile High City” which of course will not allow for total immersion of the throngs. When the last shout is heard from the temple, the unbelievers will be just as unbelieving and the dead will not resurrect (except in Chiago) to vote for the anointed one as the Democrats had hoped.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

The Dog and Pony Show

If anyone watched the DNC fiasco last night they now understand what a dog and pony show is all about. Those who spoke said nothing that most folks didn’t already know. There were no new revelations coming from any of the warm up speakers, just more like the new entry pups at the local canine show, all they did was walk or in this case talk in circles. The BIG SHOW was suppose to be Michelle Obama but that one flopped worse than the prize poodle stopping and peeing in the middle of the walk. According to all the hoopla this was suppose to be a reinventing of Michelle and an introduction to the “real” Barack Hussein Obama…it flopped. We saw nothing new from Michelle except perhaps that she has learned to stick to the teleprompter like her husband rather than speaking off the cuff and allowing her real feelings to come out. Last nights “love fest” was just that, sticky , slurpy and sweet but with no nourishment. There was no substance an certainly nothing new or revealing about Michelle or Barack. BO still couldn’t get it right without the aid of a teleprompter and flubbed his location which was kind of like flubbing how many states there are. Michelle does better with a teleprompter and they had better keep leashed to one through out the rest of the campaign or we will hear more of how she is finally proud of this country after all these years. BO will have to stick with one as well even to know where he is. That’s about all we found out during what was suppose to be the “pick of the litter” part of the dog and pony show.

Ted Kennedy, regardless of what one thinks of his politics, stole the entire show. Last night was suppose to be the passing of the torch and on Kennedy’s behalf, he did his part. The only thing missing was someone to whom to pass the torch. We have seen this week that Obama is not ready to carry the torch by his pick of Joe Biden as VP. Obama got it right when he stated that Biden was ready to take command. Maybe and maybe not but we sure know that Obama is not. I felt a bit sorry for Ted Kennedy last night because in his own mind he knows that the torch failed to get passed to one who can run the course and finish the race. I wonder what John would have thought? Time passes on and a dynasty is coming to an end and we saw the curtain begin to fall on the Kennedy dynasty last night.

When Ted finished his speech last night , the DNC might as well have wrapped up and turned out the lights on the convention floor. The party was over, the big dog had barked or as the media put it , the lion had roared, and the rest of the pups needed to just stay in their cages.

The real excitement will be on roll call night when Hillary’s supporters get vocal. Don’t think they won’t. The DNC is no where near as organized or as tough as it was in the old days and many of us remember the 1968 convention when another anti-war nominee by the name of Eugene McCarthy lost the nomination and McGovern, who felt that he was the real choice lost. Then came the 1972 convention in Miami when McGovern was the sure thing for the Democrats going into the convention . McGovern never really took off even after the convention and the Democrats went down to the worst defeat in history. Another likeness to these conventions of the past would be the keynote speakers. In 68, Sen. Dan Inouye (D-HI) gave the keynote address, but it was decidedly downbeat, with 10 of 13 pages devoted to what's wrong with the country. (Keynote speeches are usually upbeat affirmations of the party.) The Democrats are already nervous about young Mark Warner’s speech on bipartisanship and wanted more of an attack speech. On roll call night, When The Roll Is Called Up Yonder in the Mile High City, expect some real shouting and maybe even some speaking in tongues but I doubt that they will be need for interpretation.

BE INFORMED

Want to know where the candidates stand on the issues? The highlighted issue topic explains what this is about. At the end the link under each candidates name will give further explanation of how they voted and their statements on the issues. I suggest that after looking over the initial stance look at the actual votes and their opinion on these issues. As an example you will find that while both McCain and Obama favor Allowing churches to provide social sevices it is for entirely different reasons and an entirely different agenda. While all three candidates are shown favoring Same sex domestic partnership benefits you will find a totally different agenda offered by each candidate. It pays to know where the candidates stand on issues and how they have voted in the past on these issues and their rationale behind the votes. An informed voter is a smart voter. Those who vote strictly because of party lines are the least informed and most harmful regardless of which party they are voting for.

Here is where Joe Biden, candidate for VP, picked by Obama, stands.

Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's right
(+2 points on Social scal

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Require hiring more women & minorities

(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 3:
Same-sex domestic partnership benefits
(+5 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 4:
Teacher-led prayer in public schools
(+2 points on Social scale)

No opinion on topic 8:
Death Penalty
(0 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 9:
Mandatory Three Strikes sentencing laws
(+2 points on Social scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 5:
More federal funding for health coverage
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-3 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 7:
Parents choose schools via vouchers
(-3 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Replace coal & oil with alternatives
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 19:
Drug use is immoral: enforce laws against it
(-3 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 20:
Allow churches to provide welfare services
(-3 points on Economic scale

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Make taxes more progressive
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 12:
Illegal immigrants earn citizenship
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale)

No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the armed forces
(0 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 16:
Stricter limits on political campaign funds
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 14:
The Patriot Act harms civil liberties
(+5 points on Social scale)

Favors topic 17:
US out of Iraq
(+2 points on Social scale)

Joe Biden is a Populist-Leaning Liberal.

http://www.issues2000.org/Joe_Biden.htm

Obama’s stance:

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's right
(+5 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Require hiring more women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 3:
Same-sex domestic partnership benefits
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 4:
Teacher-led prayer in public schools
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 8:
Death Penalty
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 9:
Mandatory Three Strikes sentencing laws
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-3 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 5:
More federal funding for health coverage
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale)

No opinion on topic 7:
Parents choose schools via vouchers
(0 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Replace coal & oil with alternatives
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 19:
Drug use is immoral: enforce laws against it
(+2 points on Social scale

Favors topic 20:
Allow churches to provide welfare services
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Make taxes more progressive
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 12:
Illegal immigrants earn citizenship
(+5 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale)

No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the armed forces
(0 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 16:
Stricter limits on political campaign funds
(-5 points on Economic scale

Strongly Favors topic 14:
The Patriot Act harms civil liberties
(+5 points on Social scale)

Favors topic 17:
US out of Iraq
(+2 points on Social scale

Barack Obama is a Hard-Core Liberal.

http://www.issues2000.org/Barack_Obama.htm

McCain’s Stand:

Opposes topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's right
(-3 points on Social scale)

No opinion on topic 2:
Require hiring more women & minorities
(0 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 3:
Same-sex domestic partnership benefits
(+2 points on Social scale)

Favors topic 4:
Teacher-led prayer in public schools
(-3 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 8:
Death Penalty
(-5 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 9:
Mandatory Three Strikes sentencing laws
(-5 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(+5 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 5:
More federal funding for health coverage
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(+5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 7:
Parents choose schools via vouchers
(+5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 18:
Replace coal & oil with alternatives
(-3 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 19:
Drug use is immoral: enforce laws against it

Strongly Favors topic 20:
Allow churches to provide welfare services
(+5 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 11:
Make taxes more progressive
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 12:
Illegal immigrants earn citizenship
(+2 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(+5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 15:
Expand the armed forces
(-3 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 16:
Stricter limits on political campaign funds
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 14:
The Patriot Act harms civil liberties
(-5 points on Social scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 17:
US out of Iraq
(-5 points on Social scale)

John McCain is a Populist-Leaning Conservative.

http://www.issues2000.org/John_McCain.htm

Friday, August 22, 2008

MORE OF THE SAME

MORE OF THE SAME. That seems to be the Democrats only talking point these days other than McCain not knowing how many houses he and his wife has as if that amounts to a hill of beans when it comes to being President. The Democrats seem to want to paint McCain as more of the same as Bush, calling him McSame. Well if one actually looks at the picture closely they will see that Barrack Hussein Obama is more like George W. Bush than the Democrats would want to admit.

Lets start off in the early years. Both Bush and Obama went to elite schools . Obama went to Punahou School where Tuition is $16,675 for the 2008-2009 school year, not including optional and mandatory fees. Tuition charges do not cover the entire cost of the education of a student, and this "deficit" is met by the school's endowment.

Bush attended Kincaid School and Phillips Academy where tuition is not listed but we can assume that it is not cheap.

The schools are considered elite schools and only a select few can attend. So we see not much difference there.

After graduation from High School both went to Ivy League Universities. Bush to Yale and Obama to Harvard. Bush majored in history at Yale and received a Bacholors Degree. He then went to Harvard and received an MBA degree. Obama went to Columbia U. in NY and majored in political science. He then went to Harvard and received a degree in Law.

Bush joined the Air National Guard but did not see combat duty. Obama never served and never saw combat duty. No combat duty is the same.

Bush was a known boozer and Obama was a druggie. So not much difference there. Bush gave up the drink with the marriage to his wife Laura. We don’t know about Obama and his smoking dope but we know he smoked until caught in the boys room recently and gave it up for his image.

Bush worked in the oil business, started up a company , folded it to join another and then joined another company during the 84 oil crunch which was brought on by Jimmy Carters failed policies on energy.

Obama worked for one year at Business International Corporation as a researcher and then New York Public Interest Research Group which is supposedly a New York State-wide non-partisan political organization and operated by a student board. He then went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer. None amount to an actual job when it comes right down to it.

So Bush started working in the family business, formed his own, was not real successful and Obama never really had a job. Doesn’t sound too much different to me except Bush made more money doing what he did. Obama’s success came as an empire builder, building his community organization job from a staff of one to a staff of 13 and its annual budget grew from $70,000 to $400,000. Of course the difference is that Bush’s money came from actual business and Obama’s money came from tax monies since Community Organizations are usually funded with government grants which in this case they were for the most part. Otherwise it seems that there’s not much difference when it comes to actually doing anything.

Bush ran for Congress and was defeated. Obama ran for Congress and was defeated.

Bush ran for Governor and was elected, Bush was Governor of Texas for two terms and during that time Texas saw budget surpluses and tax cuts. Obama served in the Illinois Senate from 96-04 and Illinois never saw a surplus but enjoyed tax hikes . Obama pushed for tax credits to be paid for by tax payers and Bush got tax cuts for all Texas residents. One let folks keep their money and the other took from one to give to another. So there is a difference in political achievements in that realm. Otherwise the background so far is about the same.

Bush was elected as President for two terms, oversaw taxcuts for all as he did in Texas. Obama was elected to the Senate and so far has spent the past 18 months running for President. Total time in office 143 days.

Both have been elected to National office. More of the same

Personalities are not really that much different when you look at them. Both are arrogant. Bush is arrogant according the Democrats and stubborn. Obama is arrogant according to his own writings and claims . Bush doesn’t back down from what he knows is right and Obama doesn’t back down from what he feels is good for his political career. One has the interest of the country in mind the other has self interest in mind. Therein is about the only difference in arrogance. Both are arrogant, so More of the same.

Bush had no international experience upon being elected as President. Obama has no international experience and little National experience.

Bush ran for President and was elected, Obama ran for Senate and was elected. Neither had the experience necessary for foreign policy when running for office of President. So guess the Dems want more of the same. No experience. So no difference in Bush and Obama in that regard .

Spending. Bush and Congress tried to outspend the Democrats and Obama intends to outspend both the Dems and Republicans so there is no real difference in that regard.

Difference, One cut taxes and the other promises to raise taxes. Unfortunately some don’t see the difference.

Bush has done nothing on the boarder security except talk and Obama doesn’t intend to do anything different when it comes to stopping the invasion. So no difference there. MORE OF THE SAME.

So lets see. If you want someone with no foreign policy experience in the White House, vote for Obama. He doesn’t have any and neither did Bush so it seems to be MORE OF THE SAME.

If you want someone with no economic experience then vote for Obama. He has none and Bush evidently forgot what he did have. So it would be MORE OF THE SAME.

Want an arrogant individual in the White House, then vote for Obama. Bush is damned by his critics as a cowboy who pursues unilateral foreign policies that alienate the rest of the world. Obama is labeled by his critics as an out-of-touch elitist. They point to his condescending remarks that small-town America bitterly clings to its guns and God. His speech to 200,000 Germans in Berlin was seen as his acting like he was president without benefit of an election. Seems no difference so again that will be MORE OF THE SAME.

Want someone who is slow to respond. Then vote for Obama. He seems to have trouble responding correctly on how to handle crisis situation and that was demonstrated in his debate with Clinton. Obama talked about an effective emergency response, good intelligence and better international relationships. He had to come back later with a better response after listening to Clinton give the right answer: retaliate. Recently, it took Obama three tries to catch up with McCain's accurate assessment of the Georgia-Russia crisis.

Bush , or so it is claimed was slow to respond to Katrina.

So if you want someone who is slow to respond, then vote for Obama since it seems that also will be MORE OF THE SAME

Bush claimed to be a uniter, Obama claims to want to work across party lines in non-partisan ways.

. Bush became one of the most polarizing politicians to hold the White House. Obama promises to put the bitter divisions of the past behind us and work across political lines., Obama campaigns on a traditional liberal agenda which certainly is not non-partisan and will do nothing to unite the parties. The record shows thatObama has never worked across the legislative aisle on an issue that could put him at any discomfort with his party.

So if you want more of the same division and politics as usual vote for Obama. since it seems that also will be MORE OF THE SAME.

Stubbornness:Bush is accused of being stubborn. Because he refused to back down on his stand on the Iraq War. Obama's early opposition to it was crucial in his defeat of Hillary Clinton. At key times, Bush and Obama stubbornly followed policies that could have ended in defeat.

After the success of the invasion, it became clear that the Bush administration had no clear post-invasion strategy. Bush ignored advice that the U.S. had too few troops in Iraq and implemented destructive plans such as disbanding Iraq's army. Only last year did Bush finally yield to the urging of people like Gen. David Petraeus and Sen. John McCain to launch the military surge.

Despite the surge's obvious success, Obama clings to the position that his original opposition to it was correct. What's more, during the darkest days of Iraq, Obama formulated a troop pullout plan that would have had American soldiers retreat from the battlefield and acknowledge defeat. His plan still calls for firm timetables for withdrawals, but recently he has suggested he'd let facts on the ground influence the pullout.

So if you like stubbornness vote for Obama and get MORE OF THE SAME.

So the Democrats really don’t have a lot to talk about when it comes to McCain and Bush being the same. It would appear that Obama and Bush actually have more in common in sameness than McCain and Bush.

Remember, McCain criticized Bush’s plan in Iraq. He criticized spending and on and on. So it’s less of the Same with McCain and MORE OF THE SAME WITH OBAMA. Bush and Obama, seems like MORE OF THE SAME.

Now that’s talking points.