Politically Speaking: Now What?

Well the midterm elections are past and the Republicans gained power in the House while the Democrats kept control of the Senate. The big question is what does that mean for us? It was quite a election season with not only the Democrats and the Republicans fighting in the ring, but the Tea Party was there also, with both the Republicans and Tea Party thinking of victory by riding each others coat tails. My feelings are that the Tea Party got owned by the Republicans, time will tell, but it already looks like there is some dissension between the ranks, and it's only been a couple of days since the election.

I tend to lean towards the Democrats, but I am frustrated and disappointed with their spinelessness. There were investigations of wrong doing by President Bush and some of his close associates that showed that he was doing things wrong and he was intentionally doing them even though he knew they were wrong. Why then is it that the subject of prosecuting Bush, and whoever else involved, such a taboo subject even from the Democrat side? To make things worse, now George Bush has a book coming out where he admits once again of his war crimes. Will the insanity never cease?

Bush basically passed his own pardon and pardoned everyone who took part in all the illegal activities before he left office, put people in key parts of the government, while he was in office, that would allow him to get away with doing things that were wrong. Don't forget that both Bush and Cheney got on national television and admitted that they gave the orders and supported water boarding and other torture techniques, had secret prisons, performed secret renditions, and crimes against the American people and the constitution by the unlimited phone and internet monitoring, arresting people in the middle of the night and not charge them of any crime for 5 years if at all, with no rights, and going against the Geneva Convention rules and international laws and agreements. This upsets me with the Democrats. When Obama stood there and said, let's not bother going back and dwelling on the past, but look towards the future in reference to prosecuting Bush I stood in shock... I think there were many others who had the same reaction. In my opinion the people's mandate for election a great majority of Democrats in 2008 was so that something could be done about the rouge, run away government that the Bush Administration turned into, that included bringing to justice the people who blatantly and openly broke the laws of our constitution and how our government is supposed to operate, both at home and abroad.

The other thing that I and I think many other people that supported Obama are disappointed about is the health bill. Not for the fact that it was passed, but how fast the best parts of the bill were negotiated out before it even came to vote, and then that it really never mattered any way because it was pretty much a straight party vote, so there never was any compromise from the other side at all. Many people would have liked to see the single payer option at least seriously considered. Health care should not be run by organizations that their main purpose is not health care, but stockholders profits, that's just wrong. We need to get rid of all the swindling, lieing, profit machines that we call health insurance companies. A lot of money could be saved if the government took care of people with that money instead of a big company not worrying about if they will break even, but make record profits. This was another thing that didn't make me too happy with the Democrats.

The thing with the Democrats in general is that it's hard to try to compete with the bullies on the playground while playing by the rules and bending over backwards trying to appease any of them. Both sides worry more about being elected, getting their side in power, or keeping their side in power, that they don't really seem to care too much about us. In all fairness I guess I have to say the Democrats tried, they came in at the worse time since the great depression and actually did some good, tried to pass some good financial reform, credit card reform, health care reform, it just was a little too slow to help them for the mid elections.

What will we see going forward? I fear not much different than we seen these last couple of years. In the mean time we, meaning us common folk, will suffer while they all have their pissing contests.

What do you think? Agree or disagree, feel free to leave a comment.

BS: Bush Stuff

In less than a month Barack Obama will take office.

Trickle down economics don't work. There is a lot on the minds of many Americans as they wait for this historic event. In the meantime there are lots of things to be anxious about. Bush throughout his administrative reign has proved that he and his cronies are dangerous enemies to our constitution. With less then a month left, Bush can still do a lot of lasting damage to our government. For a lame duck Bush has been working double shifts to come up with everything he can to aid big business and hinder the Democrats coming into power on January 20, 2009. It will be as no surprise that he will come up with some really controversial things to do to us right before he leaves office. He is undoubtedly waiting for the last minute to come out with the worse he can do which will be far worse than we will expect. Just like during his presidency the bad news is coming out daily. It's almost to the point where it would be easier to list what all he hasn't done bad for the country than what he has. His government will be known as by the people for big business.

Trickle down economics don't work. This administration has been so bad that Bush won't be able to have a presidential library because all the information will be classified. Someday in the future at some point when they pull the classification of Bush's records and release them to the public, they will first laugh at us for being so gullible to be caught up in all the bs in the first place and then for how spineless we will be by letting him just walk from all his crimes and deceptions just because he was president. Hopefully after they have all had a big laugh, the information will be used to point out everything that can be wrong about an administration so that people can learn from our mistakes.

Trickle down economics don't work. In the past 8 years most businesses have profited by having a Bush Administration, many have had record profits. For the most part blue collared people haven't seen a balanced increase in their quality of life. If not for the crimes against the Constitution, war crimes, lies to go to war, and breaking all kinds of other laws, at least think. Trickle down economics don't work.

Hope and Broken Promises

It's less than a 10 days until the final presidential elections in the U.S. At this point it looks like Obama is favored to win, but as was the case in 2000 and 2004, we know that it's not over until the fat lady sings. It will be interesting to see if the Republicans will continue to steal the election like they had in 2000 and 2004 they are surely going to try, after being successful the last two elections it is hard to believe that it will be a clean election this year, but we can hope.

America deserves better than what it has been getting for leadership the last eight years. The last eight years have been filled with scandals and illegalities of and from the Bush administration. First the Republicans steal the elections and put and keep in office a puppet that has been one of the worse in history for America, and then he has continued to commit crimes against the American people and the world community, so far with impunity of being held accountable. History will record this time as one of the darkest times in American politics for Americans and the view held of Americans around the world. We have lost our reputation we have had in the world as champions of what's right and fair and the defender of the down trodden. In a way I'm glad that I haven't been fortunate enough to travel the world, because I'm embarrassed of what it has become to be an American. We have a nasty reputation with the rest of the world and frankly we deserve it. No matter who wins the bid for the White House it is our duty to demand from them actions that will improve our image in the world and address the failures of the past.

For people who know me, it is no surprise that I don't hold any hope that a Republican will be one to fix what's wrong with America, what might surprise them is I also don't hold much hope that a Democrat will either. It's fine and dandy to claim that it's the American people who are accountable for the failure of the government to be fair and honest and address the problems of our country and our image in the world, but it would be a false claim. These last few years I think the American public has called for the right things to be done in government but short of starting a revolution their pleads have been falling on deaf ears of the occupants of both major parties. Two years ago the public voted mostly for Democrats who promised to end the war in Iraq and hold the administration accountable for it's crimes, it didn't happen.

I don't share the belief of Republicans that we can blame all the problems that have came to a head these last couple of years on the Democratic majority in Congress. For one thing, the biggest, the Democrats have held the majority, but they didn't hold a 2/3rds majority that it would have taken to push bills to address the burning issues through the House and Senate to overturn the president's veto. I do believe, as I think many other people do, that the Democrats caved in too easily to the demands of the president and his Republican party. Democrats for the most part are afraid to hold there ground over fears that they will lose the support of the American people and they will get voted out of office. I'm not sure what could be more a sign of support as they got from the last election where Americans voted almost entirely to put Democratic leaders in any open spot they could to represent them. The Democrats promised to hold the administration accountable for it's illegal activities and get us out of an expensive illegal war in Iraq that was approved for under false pretenses. Once in office though the Democrats developed the jitters to do anything decisive fearing their re-elections. Time and time again they would make a stand only to cave in later to the demands of the administration and Republicans, the Democrats had no balls.

Although I may be disheartened by the Democrats, I totally disagree with the Republican's agenda and views on how the government should be run. How many times in history do we have to have proven to us that trickle down economics does not work? Those who don't learn from the mistakes in history are destined to repeat them same mistakes, again, and again, and again. I think that trickle down economics was ever really intended to work for the common people, it's more of an instrument for the greed of the rich to get richer. Lets face it, our country has always been lead by a small handful of the super rich and famous, and they don't make a point of giving away power or money. Sure, if you know anyone who has a lot of money, I mean a really lot of money, they will say that they give to charity, and/or that they support various groups to help the unfortunate, but would they pay their workers a fair wage so that they are not the unfortunate ones? No. When they defend their wages and profits it's supporting their families, but when a common person uses the same argument for needing more money, the well to do claim it's not their problem that their workers have large families to support. To the elite, the common man is still looked down upon as breeding stock to replenish their workforce, a commodity to be managed to keep us high enough in numbers to ensure a cheap workforce without being too high in numbers so as to risk an revolt and a risk of the toppling of their empires.

This election we have two of the major parties claiming to represent change, will either one of the follow through on it? I really doubt it, not the way or intensity they hope or we need anyway.

Got Lipstick?

What a sad state of our times when we reduce the presidential elections from platforms from which to preach solutions to our country's biggest problems, to the point of arguing about lipstick on a pig. I kind of doubt that my life will change much either way whether that pig, or pit bull, has lipstick or not.

I think that there are many more, more important issues than lipstick on a pig. Maybe the legalities of fighting a war in Iraq, illegal wiretapping, with holding and destroying evidence before they can be subpoenaed, picking people off the street in foreign countries without that country's knowledge or permission, keeping prisoners in foreign prisons, and we still don't know about the illegal firings of prosecutors or the big one, torture of prisoners in the war against terrorism. These are past failures of the present administration that no one wants to tackle.

Instead of lipstick on a pit bull or lipstick on a pig, why don't the candidates tell us about how they are going to tackle the problems we face in our government and the problems that are affecting the American people? I could give a rat's as* about lipstick on any kind of animal, doesn't strike my fancy, but apparently it's high on the Democrat and Republican list of important things that the American people need to know. How about letting me know how I'm going to afford to heat my house, or put gas in my car, how are they going to improve our infrastructure, how will we move into the future as a provider of high paying technology jobs in our own country instead of providing low paying jobs for people in third world countries? Apparently none of these things are very high on either candidates list as being important to the American people.

I would think that the first candidate that comes up with a workable budget plan for our country, the first candidate that speaks truth and shows out unfounded lies, the first candidate that promises to run the government openly in front of everyone for all to criticize and debate, that candidate should be our clear choice for president, not the candidate who tells the biggest or the most lies.

The Push for Oil

The Northwoods Politic

President Bush today has lifted the executive ban on offshore oil drilling. He's been pushing Congress to allow for the drilling of offshore oil deposits on the U.S. continental slopes. There are both executive and Congressional ban on drilling offshore, but he's hoping that by lifting the executive ban he can push Congress into lifting theirs.

There are two parties that both have fundamental differences in opinion on how this will affect energy prices. One party says this will bring the high cost of fuel prices down. The other side says this is mostly hype and it is just a matter of the first party taking advantage of people's fears that we need to do anything and everything to bring these prices down, because they just can't afford to pay these prices for fuel. What the true facts are is hard to tell. If you read about the companies that make these big drilling platforms needed to extract the oil from our continental slopes, they state that they are already backlogged 5 years on orders for other countries so it would be 5 years before they would even be able to start building the oil platforms to use in the U.S. On top of that, some say that the oil companies hold leases on all kinds of land with viable oil reserves that they are not drilling already.

Again as always, this is an issue that runs along Republican and Democratic party lines, with mostly Republicans wanting the drilling and Democrats not wanting drilling. This is one of the biggest problems in our government. We can't seem to have all these people sit down, look at the facts, and come up with what they think is good or not good. After deciding what their stance is, they should go back to their districts and try to persuade their constituents to what they think is right, but their main job after that is to take what views their constituents decide back to Washington and reflect that in their vote on the issue before Congress. Instead the top person, in this case the president, decides what he wants and all the rest of the people in their party fall in line behind him, they say this is what they want too, and they vote on the issue in Congress to reflect their party's will. Most of these people that we are talking about are addressed as Representatives, the reason they are addressed by that title is that they are supposed to represent the people from their districts. The way this has been working is a major flaw in the way our government is supposed to work.

Bend Over America

In the latest news of the fleecing of America as reported in the New York Times. Charles M. Smith a former civilian overseer for the Army, overseeing the largest contractor of the Iraq war for food services, KBR, said he was ousted from his job because he refused to pay one billion dollars for questionable charges that were not substantiated by KBR. The Bush Administration must hate the New York Times.

KBR is a Houston-based company that provides food, housing and other services to the troops stationed in Iraq. KBR stands for Kellogg, Brown and Root and is the subsidiary of Halliburton, the Texas company that Vice President Dick Cheney previously served as chief executive. Mr. Smith's position was then given to a colleague and KBR received all the money it was asking for, including the one billion that didn't have supporting records for.

So we have a war that support was gotten from Congress and the American people through the lies and misstatements from members of the Bush Administration, which included Vice President Dick Cheney, who has had strong ties with the KBR company. Doesn't this sound a bit like conflict of interest on the part of Vice President Dick Cheney? Hmmm, can we say kickbacks? For someone that came into a very high level of government from being a chief executive of the company in question, it would be hard to not imagine some kind of benefits coming back Cheney's way in some form or another. I suppose we will learn later, as this story breaks, that this is probably another one of the Bush Administration's no-bid contracts. If we are getting fleeced for at least one billion in food services, what about the other services that KBR supplies like in troop housing and other services? We'll see huh? It's a big surprise,not, that in our failing economy the only businesses doing well, extremely well, are businesses that the president and vice president are/were involved in, oil companies and companies involved with supplying services and weapons for the war in Iraq. Now Bush is pushing for the oil companies to be allowed to drill off shore, something that oil companies have been pushing for for some time, coincidence? I think not.

We can count on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will look into this and find in this case, as it has for other cases in the past, misconduct on the part of the Bush Administration. Yet, Hello Democrats, there will be no push by Democrats to follow through on impeachment proceedings against Bush or Cheney as there are already articles of impeachment that have been sent to the Judiciary Committee that are basically sitting on ice. I agree with Democrats on most things, but when it comes to doing their constitutional duties in regards to protecting the American people against a corrupt administration they are nutless. I can't understand why that is? I can't believe that Democrats are so afraid that people, who voted them into office on their platforms of fixing a corrupt government and getting us out of the Iraq war, are going to chastise them during an election year because they would be doing what the American people put them in office for. Where is the justice? Instead they give lame reasons that they have more important things to do during the remainder of their terms.

What is more important than protecting the Constitution? What's more important than impeaching the people in office, who have done so much damage to the American people's constitutional rights. What's more important than making sure that the people who got us into an illegal war with Iraq which cost over 4 thousand American solders their lives and countless Iraqi lives, costs to the American people of trillions of dollars, a failed economy and high gas prices, are brought to justice. Instead the Democrats are content to piddle with trying to pass bills that have no chance to pass because even if they can get enough support from the House and Senate, the crook of a president we have will veto them. What's more important than fixing that?

Most of this doesn't make sense. About the only way any of this makes sense to me is:

The Democrats don't really want to bring this war to and end as the American public wants. The Democrats think that they will get more support, or more support for a Democratic president, from the American people passing bills that are repeatedly vetoed by a Republican president. The Democrats secretly want to keep the executive powers that President Bush claimed for their own use when they get one of their own in the president's chair. The Democrats are completely clueless as to their jobs in office. What ever their excuses are, they don't make sense. If they don't watch it, it will back fire this fall and the American public will be so fed up with their inaction that they will vote independent or even Republican cause even if the Republican's objectives are different than the people's objectives, they at least know how to get what they want, specially when no one is willing to call them or stand up to them on their illegal procedures and activities.

Excuses not to Impeach Bush

This is a response to an article I read off a web site called The Daily Kos written by Kevin Holsinger, Tuesday June 10^th, 2008, titled, I believe we should let George Bush get away with breaking the law because...

Read Kevin's Article Here

At first while when I started reading through the article, I was under the impression that these were Kevin's views on the subject, but reading on through the rest of the article and some of the responses that he got and addressed after the article was posted, he clarifies that this is not the case. In fact Kevin states, “I support impeachment, doomed or not.”

I couldn't help but comment and give argument to the reasons Keven listed to support why, I believe we should let George Bush get away with breaking the law because... Right or wrong I decided to go through Keven's points of argument from my Wisconsin Northwoods perspective.

I believe we should let George Bush get away with breaking the law because...

1. the attempt to hold him accountable has unscrupulous motivations.

   Yes, what could be more unscrupulous than protecting and upholding the constitution?

2. the attempt to hold him accountable diverts people's much-needed attention to getting a Democrat in the White House.

   This might bite you in the ass in the long run. Stay the coarse of not bringing up or supporting the impeaching of President Bush, no matter what the growing, undeniable facts are that are piling up show, and there is a good chance that people will start to see this is it is, a spineless, politicized excuse for not wanting to make waves during an upcoming presidential election. Democrats in office are betting that the people will act less negatively to a subject not brought up then they will to congress actually taking initiative to do their jobs.

3. the attempt to hold him accountable should have been made long ago, and since it wasn't, it's now most likely useless.

   Yes the attempt should have been made long ago, but that's no excuse for not standing up and doing the right thing still. Before the last elections there was a Republican majority in control that wouldn't allow articles of impeachment to proceed any way. What signal or deterrent do we send to future administrations if we don't hold George Bush accountable for his crimes? There might still be too much opposition, but wouldn't it look better on your records to show that you at least tried to do your constitutional duties while in office?

4. the attempt to hold him accountable will play into the media's desire to not focus on things that matter, which impeaching Bush doesn't qualify as.

   What is more important than getting a criminal who continues to break laws as he is getting called on them, out of public office? Here is a person who probably didn't even earn the honor of being president with all the questionable acts that reportedly happened around the polls during the national elections and after. He's taken us into war with questionable motives and intelligence. He's broke all kinds of federal and international laws and agreements such as torture, holding people prisoner for years without charges, spying and creating data banks on American citizens, the list goes on and on. Doesn't qualify as things that matter???

5. the attempt to hold him accountable means nothing unless you go after other people first.

   Wouldn't it be possible to go after as many people as are relevant?

6. the attempt to hold him accountable isn't realistic.

   Isn't it realistic to have faith that the laws of our country will be carried out, enforced, and applied equally no matter who you are or how much money you have or don't have?

7. the attempt to hold him accountable won't get enough Republican supporters.

   Same as mentioned in answer to question 3. Wouldn't it look better on your records to show that you at least tried to do your constitutional duties while in office?

8. the attempt to hold him accountable is being led by someone that people like to make fun of.

   So if you are so much more respected, jump on board. It's a good cause, it's what you should do, uphold the constitution and to do your constitutional duties. Lend your credibility to the cause.

9. the attempt to hold him accountable is about dwelling on the past.

   These things are still going on right now as we speak, Bush is still breaking laws, still stonewalling congressional investigations, still claiming that we don't torture, but reserve the right to torture, still illegally tapping lines of the American people and building data bases. These are all issues of the present not the past.

10. the attempt to hold him accountable would upset a sizable portion of Americans who wouldn't like that a President they (allegedly) elected and then (allegedly) re-elected is now facing impeachment.

    I'm not positive, but I think the numbers doesn't support this claim.

11. the attempt to hold him accountable wouldn't be as useful as waiting for Barack Obama to maybe become President so he could maybe investigate Bush then.

    Bush needs to be held accountable no matter who wins the presidential elections. This would essentially pass the buck from the people who should have been addressing this issue in the past, passing the buck from those who should be taking on this issue now. This would also leave a very dangerous man in office for another 6 months, a man who could still do grave damage to American's rights, America's economy, America's reputation, a person who even now is carrying out plans of ramping up to gain support with the claims that Iran also needs to be invaded to stop their nuclear weapons of mass destruction... Didn't we learn anything from the current war with Iraq?

12. the attempt to hold him accountable would make the Republicans want to illegitimately impeach a future Democratic President, and the warfare between the parties would never end.

    What planet are you living on? The warfare between parties will never end, both parties are way more interested in doing things to promote their party above things that would help the general population. Any impeachment should be done on legitimate standing, whether the subject of impeachment is Democratic or Republican, the articles of fact should dictate the end result.

13. the attempt to hold him accountable would suck up money that, without a doubt, our Legislative Branch would use to fix our broken infrastructure.

    Much better that our monetary resources be spent on investigating steroids in baseball or taping during football games. The money that is spent getting a corrupt politician out of office is probably just a small portion compared to the money we have been spending and getting ripped off by the dubious accountability of bid less contracts, reconstruction in Iraq, or in other corrupted areas of our government.

14. the attempt to hold him accountable would suck up time that, without a doubt, our Legislative Branch would use to deal with other issues of importance...time that also can't be split between holding Bush accountable and tackling these issues.

    In my opinion that time has been pretty wasted already since we put a Democratic majority in the house and senate. Instead of tackling the important issues right away, they have been spinning their wheels getting no where because of not having enough votes to override presidential vetoes. If we wouldn't have a secretive administration that is more concerned with keeping information from the American public to protect their ass, it might be a lot easier to address these other issues that are not going anywhere with or without impeachment proceedings going on.

15. the attempt to hold him accountable is only supported by left wing extremists.

    I think again and again at town halls across the country have in frustration, because their federal government is broken, passed their own articles of impeachment. I don't think this statement can be true unless you label a large majority of the American public as left wing extremists, which by virtue of being a majority, would not define them as left wing, which would mean that the politicians going against the majority would be better deserving of the tile of extremists.

16. the attempt to hold him accountable is really pointless since he's leaving anyway, and what matters is that he's not around to commit any more crimes, not whether or not he committed crimes in the past.

    I beg to differ here. If we as a country allow Bush and other people in his administration to go without being held accountable, we send a message to future administrations of being compliant and gullible.

17. the attempt to hold him accountable would be used to the advantage of the pro-Bush media.

    The world is a changing.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich Presents Articles of Impeachment

Monday June 9th Ohio Representative, Dennis Kucinich, presented 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush on the house floor. It sounds like he broke away from the views of other Democrats, who have stated impeachment was off the table, and others that have stated that they did not have the time to make the case for impeachment against President Bush, along with involving members of his administration known and unknown.

For the idea of impeachment to be off the table has never made any sense to me. I for one would not be surprised if Nancy Pelosi somehow, in some way, receives some kind of benefits somewhere a long the line for her highly opinionated view that "impeachment was off the table". I mean how anyone can just blatantly proclaim that rules and laws don't pertain to them like Bush and Cheney did is just beyond me. The Bush Administration has been the most secretive presidency seen in modern times, so we don't even know what all other laws have been broken. I believe that there are many in the Bush Administration that not only need to be impeached, but charges should be brought against them to the full extent of the law. Because they are supposed to be our leaders that uphold the constitution by sworn oath, I would even be willing to have their punishments harsher than the letter of the law.

The other argument by spineless Democrats during this election year, that they just don't have the time to go through impeachment procedures with all the other issues they want to take up before the November elections... What?? There are many important issues, but not one so important as to take the place of bringing accountability of the Bush Administration to justice for the abuse of power against the American people that has been systematically carried out the last eight years. From possibly stealing the last election, illegally doing wiretaps, searches of library records, internet searches, and internet book sale lists, compiling data bases of U.S. citizens, detaining people for years at a time without charges or reason, torture, and abuse of the very people's rights that they are sworn to protect, I don't think there has been any administration that has did more to destroy and harm the rights of the American people and done more to tarnish the United States' reputation with peoples and governments of the world. The very laws and principles that they violated are supposed to be the foundation stones on which our government was founded.

I for one solute you Rep. Dennis Kucinich for standing up and taking the initiative to do your duty. There are people all over the country that are indebted to you

My Complaints Against Democrats

Although I lean more towards Democrats, there are things going on that disturb me. One of the biggest things that bother me, and I no doubt bothers other people who have been watching the Democrats is that they are not picking up the ball when it comes to doing their constitutional duty to protect our constitution.

When Senator Rockefeller, after giving a press release about how the Bush administration bent intelligence to rally support for the invasion of Iraq, was asked if anyone in Bush administration should be charged for misleading the people and congress to get support for going into war, his response was something on the order of, it would be a grand act. If I were asked whether in the grand scheme of things it is something that should be done the same as in the issue of impeachment, I would say yes, but if you are asking if we are going to do something about it now, the answer is no. If we were to take on something like this it would take up all our time, there would be no time left to take on the important issues of things like global warming.

While I agree that there are other important issues, I do think that the Bush administration and what has transpired during their control of Washington is riddled with very important issues that need to be addressed. Global warming is a big issue, but no more important than addressing the audacities of the Bush administration. Looking back on the last eight years there are the issues of leading the country into war with Iraq, presidential powers during war time, weapons of mass destruction, the illegal wiretapping, holding prisoners labeled as enemy combatants for years without charges, the secrecy of the administration on issues of releasing CIA agents names, the firings of prosecutors, missing emails, torture, non bid contracts, and the list goes on and on. These things are as important if not more than anything that the Democrats need to try to accomplish in the time left before the presidential elections. Democrats were voted into office on the platforms that they would end the war in Iraq and bring in government accountability, this they have not done. Instead they are mired down in the stonewalling of their investigations and the lack of enough votes to pass veto proof bills. Even though people and governments across the country want government accountability and impeachment for the wrongs they have observed, it seems no one in the Democratic party is listening. Basically in my opinion most Democrats have been totally spineless in the shadow of this falls elections and I'm willing to bet that has a lot to do with their low approval ratings.

The Presidential Candidates

While I have not been affiliated with any particular political party, the last few years I have come to realize that I tend to agree with the values of the Democratic party more than the Republican party. There are things I don't like about the Democrats like most of their views on gun control, but it seems, especially the last eight years, that the Republicans are fat cats for fat cats at the expense of people who aren't so fortunate. Republicans don't seem very compassionate of the needs or desires of the common people, they are more pro big business insisting on passing laws that benefit big businesses with the insinuation that the wealth will trickle down to the masses, even though they pretty much know it doesn't. I think that it has been shown again and again that this line of thinking is flawed. Those benefits given big businesses don't give any relief to the masses and just serve to fatten the profit margins of those companies as they lay off more and more people and pay the ones they keep less and even to the point of moving their operations outside the US to take advantage of low wages, poor working conditions and lower environmental regulations. I have been totally put off by the secrecy and illegal activities of our government during the coarse of the Bush Administration that has put America in such a bad light to the rest of the world. With that said, here are my thoughts on the major three presidential candidates as I see them.

John McCain
In his words and actions seems to be pretty much hell bent on continuing the Bush legacy. Wanting to stay in Iraq for the long run no matter what the cost. Loyal to the Republican party's agendas, in other words, except for some minor differences, pretty much more of the same failed policies as we had the last eight years. If Bush is your hero, John is your man. This is a very sober statement given by McCain, "Presidents have to make judgments no matter how popular or unpopular they may be." This mirrors Dick Cheney's statements on why we need to stay in Iraq even though the vast majority of the people would like us out of there. Another comment that he made in regards to the idea of a "League of Democracies", a plan of his to create an organization like the United Nations except for no communists or dictators to have to contend with, McCain says, "It could act where the UN fails to act." Bush never had much regard for the UN either. Age has to be a factor, look at Bush or any other president that has lasted through a couple of terms of president, now imagine starting off with someone that is that old to start with. Just what America needs after eight years of a president that was in denial, a president that is facing senility.

Hillery Clinton
First woman to run for President a historical event. When it comes right down to it, would you want to have Bill Clinton back in the White House as the nation's First Gentleman? Cigars anyone? "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." With this in mind how strong do you think this candidate would be in the fall elections against McCain? Hillery can't resolve issues with her marriage seemingly content to put up with her husband running around as he probably is still beneficial to her goals or aspirations. Hillery has strong support of women, but a couple things has come out again and again. Hillery seems willing to say just about anything to get the nomination, from dodging sniper bullets to claiming that she can win just by sticking around...remember Kennedy's assassination? Finally the last gripes I have about Hillery are I think her campaign has been a lot more negative compared to Obama's, I think her comment about obliterating Iran was pretty scary, I'm really getting tired of hearing her say that she has the popular vote when the only way that is possible is if you count Michigan's results, a ballot that Obama's name wasn't even on the ticket. Now that I have brought up the matter of Michigan, that is another thing that really disturbs me about Hillery. Everyone involved agreed with the decision of not counting Florida and Michigan because they broke the parties rules, but now as that is the only way Hillery has a chance at the nomination, she counts them as she tells everyone she has the populist vote and she is fighting against the party now in demanding that the rules be changed, this kind of reminds me of the kind of thing Bush does and shows me that a vote for Hillery would be a vote for government as usual without regard for the rules.

Barack Obama
Another historic first, first black man to run for government. What an election, first woman and first black man running for president. This election has set the theme for issues about race and gender, something never really having been an issue in this way in the past. Truthfully I haven't looked back on voting records of either of the three candidates, so except for what I have heard in the news, I am pretty much taking the candidates at their word for what they stand for. Listening to the candidates though I like Obama's style. I believe he is fighting a lot less negative campaign and even defending some of what Hillery has said and done for the good of the party. He has had some troubles with things his paster has said, but I don't ever remember Obama appointing the paster his spokes person. The point is I think Obama has been the most refreshing of the candidates, he is believable it doesn't seem like he is hiding things as in that he spoke of his experiments with drugs in his past, he talks of diplomacy and actually talking to opposition leaders in the world that don't agree with our ideals to try to improve conditions and relations instead of rushing in with an army and the threat of force, I think this is why he has even received good comments from leaders in Cuba and Iran. I believe he will restore America's reputation among other countries in the world that we as a nation really need to do, it's a small world and it gets smaller all the time with new technologies. Obama when he responds to accusations he is thoughtful and reacts in a way that seems to show he does not get carried away with emotions in his comments.

So I guess by now you can probably tell who I'm rooting for, but what's your take?