Florida Voters Registration » More

Don’t You Think Obama Is More Electable Than Clinton?

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:48:53 +0000

Hillary claims that she is more electable because she won the “big states”, but that is really misleading logic. California and New York, for example, will vote for a Democrat no matter what. For these states, it doesn’t matter that Clinton beats Obama in the the Democratic primary. Also, are we entirely sure that Hillary would win Florida and Texas? Because these are, again, only Democratic primaries and not the general election.
I believe that this election, as in the past, will be decided by independents, and Hillary has almost no support among this group, unlike John McCain. Obama on the other hand, beats even McCain in this category.
Logically, then, the superdelegates should pick Obama over Hillary.

Does This Seem Discriminatory? Or Is It Coincidental? Or Is Obama More Partisan Than Anyone Thought?

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:48:40 +0000

1. There are two published lists of Chrysler dealerships. One includes the 789 dealers which will be closed by June 9. Those dealers who will be able to retain their franchises and acquire the assets of closing dealers in their areas are on the other. Both are in .PDF format.
2. An attorney for closed dealers deposed Chrysler president Jim Press and said that his impression is that the decisions on which Dealers will stay and which will go really wasn’t Chrysler’s, as the company is under considerable pressure from President Obama’s automotive task force.
3. Many of the Chrysler dealers on the closing list were heavy Republican donors. Some are sitting congressmen.
4. Among the dealers which were selected to remain in business are a number of outlets owned and operated by a partnership which includes among the partners former Clinton White House chief of staff Mack McLarty and Robert Johnson, founder of Black Entertainment Television (BET). Both have strong Democrat ties. McLarty campaigned for Obama, and Johnson has contributed heavily to Democrats, including Obama.
5. The latest finding from the closure list is that there appears to be “an extremely high correlation between dealers closing and congressional districts BHO lost.”
Texas is getting killed and Blue States are sliding by. Florida is also taking major hits and nearly all are in Republican Congressional Districts.
Little West Virginia is getting hammered.http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/200…
Now in all fairness, it might be possible that more business owners are Republican than Democrat and as a result, more Republican dealerships would be closed. However, even if we accept the proposition that most car dealers are more likely to be Republican than Democratic donors, there would still be a “disparate impact” from closings on one class of dealers, compared to the other. When the federal courts see a disparate impact on racial groups, the policy or action in question is typically held to be inappropriate.
Race and car dealer closings, of course, aren’t analogous. But the lesson remains that when government makes economic decisions that ought to be left to the private market, it is impossible to avoid disparate impacts. And there is always the question of would the Obama White House be so quick to close hundreds of dealerships if the owners of those dealerships were predominantly Democratic donors?
Second, since neither Chrysler, nor the White House have made public the criteria used to select dealers for elimination – and because a significant number of those being closed were profitable – the only way to resolve the inevitable controversy about political considerations in political decisions is to make the criteria public and allow independent outside observers to assess how those criteria were applied.

Do You Think My Social Studies Project Is Good? Should I Add More? Please Advise / Help Me!!…?

admin — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 04:43:33 +0000

i will copy and paste page per page because i couldnt attach the attachment i am doing for my s.s project on microsoft powerpoint.
1 PAGE
CIVIL WAR
the civil war started over “states rights” The Federal government was trying to enact controls over things that the southern states thought were their own business. They quit the Union and started their own nation, the Confederate States of America. The Union fought to get them back into the one nation.

Does Obama Care More About His Popularity Than America’s Interests?

admin — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 04:46:34 +0000

But this popularity is precarious. People like Obama far more than they like his policies. And even though they think the country is moving in the right direction, polls show this to be one of those rare periods where those same people remain unsatisfied with their lives. In a portent of what he might do.
There is good reason for this. On the one hand, Obama has got out in front of his agenda. In some sense, he has never really stopped campaigning. He has conducted town hall meetings everywhere from Indiana to Istanbul, and appeared on Jay Leno’s couch.
And, making buddies with the likes of Castro and Chavez.
All this, for what good to the average American who is hurting badly! ,
Almost every element in Obama’s agenda is showing the predicted signs of failure that expert political experts predicted. The war in Afghanistan is failing, the spending pork filled bill, (oh, excuse me ), the ” stimulus” package is inadequate, the many billion dollar bailouts are rightly unpopular, unemployment is still rising, (to a tune of over 20,000 lost jobs each day he was/is president. The house prices are still falling miserabaly.
Obama’s administration for all his talk of bipartisanship and national unity; is also a failure. He is the most polarising president since such records began. The gap between how Democrats and Republicans rate him at this stage is greater than Bush in 2001 after Florida and twice as high as Nixon’s during the height of the Vietnam war in 1969. This is partly because Obaamas, who give him an 88% approval rating, adore him. The Obama badges are still on and the posters are still up. They no longer refer to hope, but reality. The likeness they bear no longer represents an alternative to power but power itself. But obaamas are not the only ones who find it difficult to move on from the symbolic attachment of those first days.
Many conservatives compare Obama to Stalin, Hitler or Jimmy Carter – and accuse him of being a socialist, a fascist and an appeaser. The concerns they voice about the budget deficit, government intervention and inflation are valid, .
Maybe Obama should have learned to play guitar; and have become a popular rock star.
His first 100 days have shown that he is not capable at anything but showing popularity.;and based upon the facts,nothing about what/how a president should be.
But, maybe that is what he wants; to be popular.
Do you agree?

What Cost’s More Than The Iraq War????????

admin — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 04:44:23 +0000

Just so we all have an idea of where our money goes. What do you think
amount this huge expenditure?
[ Scan and Save to Computer ]
Be sure to read the 14 reasons at the bottom.
Social Security Change For 2008
The United States Senate voted to extend Social Security Benefits to Illegal Aliens beginning in 2008. The following are the senators who voted to give illegal aliens Social Security benefits. They are grouped by home state. If a state is not listed, there was no voting representative.
Alaska : Stevens (R)
Arizona : McCain (R)
Arkansas : Lincoln (D) Pryor (D)
California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D)
Colorado : Salazar (D)
Connecticut : Dodd (D) Lieberman (D)
Delaware : Biden (D) Carper (D)
Florida : Martinez (R)
Hawaii : Akaka (D) Inouye (D)
Illinois : Durbin (D) Obama (D)
Indiana : Bayh (D) Lugar (R)
Iowa : Harkin (D)
Kansas : Brownback (R)
Louisiana : Landrieu (D)
Maryland : Mikulski (D) Sarbanes (D)
Massachusetts : Kennedy (D) Kerry (D)
Montana : Baucus (D)
Nebraska : Hagel (R)
Nevada : Reid (D)
New Jersey : Lautenberg (D) Menendez (D)
New Mexico : Bingaman (D)
New York : Clinton (D) Schumer (D)
North Dakota : Dorgan (D)
Ohio : DeWine (R) Voinovich(R)
Oregon : Wyden (D)
Pennsylvania : Specter (R)
Rhode Island : Chafee (R) Reed (D)
South Carolina : Graham (R)
South Dakota : Johnson (D)
Vermont : Jeffords (I) Leahy (D)
Washington : Cantwell (D) Murray (D)
West Virginia : Rockefeller (D), by Not Voting
Wisconsin : Feingold (D) Kohl (D)http://rense.com/general79/seniors.htm
I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL’s for verification of the following facts:
1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77
2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscale…
3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscale…
4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American taxpayers. http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/2…
9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two-and-a-half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US . http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0…
11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report. http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
12. The National Policy Institute, “estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.” http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/p…
13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
14. “The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States “. http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
Total cost is a whooping… $338.3 BILLION A YEAR!!!
If this doesn’t bother you then just delete the message, but on the other hand, if it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, then forward it
Snopes is provided for doubters: http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigrati…
SEND THIS TO ALL YOU KNOW. THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION, UNLESS THEY DON’T MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS who didn’t pay in a dime.
LET US SHOW OUR LEADERS IN WASHINGTON “PEOPLE POWER” AND THE POWER OF THE INTERNET. IT DOESN’T MATTER IF YOU ARE REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT OR INDEPENDENT! KEEP IT GOING!!!!

What Cost’s More Than The Iraq War????????

admin — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:53:53 +0000

Would A Mckinney/nader Green Ticket Harm Clinton More Than A Right Wing Revolt Will Hurt Mccain Or Romney?

admin — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:46:49 +0000

Both Cynthia McKinney, who served as many years in congress as Clinton, and Nader are seeking the Green Party nomination. If they combine forces and run as a ticket, would that take as many votes from Clinton (or even Obama) as a far right revolt against McCain or Romney will take from the GOP?
Sure, Nader is considered old news to most folks, but he is well known and still commands attention from the press. McKinney has been very controversial also, and might grab headlines and support from those who want American troops ordered out of Iraq the instant the next President is sworn in (even Obama doesn’t promise that).
If a McKinney/Nader Green ticket is blamed for a GOP victory in November, do you think the Democrats would finally get behind run-off elections? You’d think the Bush win in Florida in 2000 would have done that already, but maybe this time?
I’m probably not going to vote for her, but if you want more info, here’s the link.http://www.runcynthiarun.org

Does Obama Care More About His Popularity Than America’s Interests?

admin — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:47:46 +0000

Why Is Obama Getting More Military Support Than Mccain?

admin — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 10:57:32 +0000

“The Center for Responsive Politics reports that Barack Obama is getting six times as much support from American military personnel serving overseas than John McCain. Interestingly, even Ron Paul, who was staunchly opposed to the Iraq war, has gotten 4 1/2 times the contributions from overseas soldiers than McCain has.
“That’s shocking. The academic debate is between some who say that junior enlisted ranks lean slightly Republican and some who say it’s about equal, but no one would point to six-to-one” in Democrats’ favor, said Aaron Belkin, a professor of political science at the University of California who studies the military. “That represents a tremendous shift from 2000, when the military vote almost certainly was decisive in Florida and elsewhere, and leaned heavily towards the Republicans.”
McCain seems to be having a difficult time winning the support of the military despite his own history as a Navy pilot and former POW. The group Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans for America, for example, gave McCain a rating of D for his support of veteran’s issues while giving Obama a rating of B+. Disabled American Veterans say McCain voted with their position 11 times and against them 16 times in recent sessions, while Obama voted with them 17 times and only once against them.”http://www.michiganmessenger.com/2328/ob…

Here’s A Pop Quiz On Money In Politics: Who Gives More Money To Federal Candidates, Moveon.org? Or?

admin — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:46:52 +0000

Here’s a pop quiz on money in politics: Who gives more money to federal candidates, the National Rifle Association or MoveOn.org?
Answer: MoveOn.
And it isn’t even close.
In the last two election cycles, MoveOn.org Political Action Committee spent more than $58 million in pro-Democrat political advocacy, according to Federal Election Commission records.
In just the 2006 election cycle, MoveOn.org spent $27 million in advocacy to elect a Democratic majority in Congress and used its formidable fund-raising clout to propel numerous Democratic challengers to House and Senate victories. By comparison, the NRA PAC donated $11 million in 2006.
“They give away and raise about three times as much as the National Rifle Association,” said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics. “A tremendous amount of money, especially when you consider how quickly they came on the scene.”
Brief History, Lasting Impact
Founded in 1998 by Wes Boyd and Joan Blades, MoveOn.org started as an online petition to stop the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Boyd and Blades, software engineers from Berkeley, Calif., posted a petition on the Internet seeking signatures for Congress to censure Clinton and “move on” to other domestic issues.
The online petition attracted like-minded liberals and MoveOn began a near-continuous dialogue with its members about what it should do to influence American politics. It created its PAC in 1999 and began attracting money for the 2000 campaign, raising, according to reports, $250,000 in the first five days and $2 million for the entire cycle. Though impressive for its first cycle, MoveOn did not find its true voice or tap into deep-seated anti-war angst until after the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
“To combat terrorism, we must act in accordance with a high standard that does not disregard the lives of people in other countries,” reads a petition drawn up by the organization after the attacks. “If we retaliate by bombing Kabul and kill people oppressed by the Taliban dictatorship who have no part in deciding whether terrorists are harbored, we become like the terrorists we oppose.”
That dovish advocacy flowed seamlessly into MoveOn’s campaign against the Iraq war, leading to a wider Internet following, bigger membership and larger contributions. MoveOn continued its anti-war campaign after the invasion of Iraq and mobilized money and members in the 2004 presidential election, rallying around Howard Dean’s campaign and helping propel him to front-runner status in the polls and shattering all previous online fund-raising records.
A Funnel of Funding
The 2006 election cycle thrust MoveOn into the ranks of potent pro-Democrat organizations. Never before had the group’s ability to identify candidates and collect small donations on their behalf yield bigger results.
“MoveOn has grown into one of the biggest political action committees in the country,” Ritsch said. “MoveOn collects money and says to its members ‘We’re going to pass that money along.’ They’re a conduit. They are aggregating and assembling all the money and pooling their resources so it adds up to big influence.”
MoveOn backs candidates and asks members to send contributions on their behalf. They pass the donations on directly and handle all the paperwork.
“They’re speaking for the grassroots,” Ritsch said. “This is a form of bundling.”
A quick tally of MoveOn-directed contributions in the 2006 election cycle, according to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, offers a sample of the impressive size of its donations:
— Sen. Robert Byrd, West Virginia = $834,211
— Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri = $382,531
— Sen. Jon Tester, Montana = $301,788
— Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio = $287,622
— Sen. Bob Casey, Pennsylvania = $160,780
Those contributions helped build a Senate Democratic majority as four of the five entered the Senate for the first time. McCaskill and Tester won razor-thin victories over well-funded GOP incumbents Jim Talent and Conrad Burns.
MoveOn-directed contributions also propelled several Democratic challengers to House victories, among them: Nick Lampson, Texas’ 22nd District, $156,883; Tim Mahoney, Florida’s 16th District, $145,334; Zack Space, Ohio’s 18th District, $141,298; Michael Arcuri, New York’s 24th District, $129,685; Joe Donnelly, Indiana’s 2nd District, $123,035, and Tim Walz, Minnesota’s 1st District, $102,657.
“They can help you a lot if you’re a (MoveOn) candidate,” said Byron York, White House correspondent for the conservative National Review magazine and author of “The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy,” a book on powerful liberal groups and their organizing practices.
“They live by the $25, $50 and $100 contributions. They have become a real powerhouse in Democratic circles. The smaller the contributions, the more people it takes to come up with a big amount of money. They can legitimately say they represent a large segment of the Democratic primary electorate,” York said.
MoveOn’s clout was visible most recently in the muted and belated response from prominent Democrats in the aftermath of the organization’s full-page New York Times advertisement last week questioning whether congressional testimony by Army Gen. David Petraeus, head of Multinational Forces in Iraq, would “Betray Us?”
On Capitol Hill, Democrats avoided the issue for days as did the party’s top presidential candidates. Only after days and days of coverage did prominent Democrats declare the advertisement out of bounds.
Tale of Torment
MoveOn directs no contributions to Republican candidates or incumbents, instead avidly spending money against the GOP. It spent more than $2.5 million in 2006 in independent expenditures against Republicans.
House GOP incumbents who lost in 2006 and saw significant MoveOn independent expenditures against them can testify. Among those hardest hit: Charlie Bass, New Hampshire’s 2nd District, $143,266; Chris Chocola, Indiana’s 2nd District, $245,603; Melissa Hart, Pennsylvania’s 4th District, $297,603; and Nancy Johnson, Connecticut’s 5th District, $444,424.
Two House Republicans survived the MoveOn independent expenditure onslaught in ‘06, Rep. Deborah Pryce, who represents Ohio’s 15th District, absorbed $417,623 in MoveOn wrath but won a narrow victory nevertheless. Pryce recently announced she will not seek re-election to a ninth term. Rep. Thelma Drake of Virginia’s 2nd District won a second term with 51 percent of the vote after withstanding $529,535 in MoveOn independent expenditure torment, giving her the distinction among House Repubicans of taking the most expensive independent expenditure punch MoveOn threw in the 2006 campaign and living to tell the tale.
MoveOn also punishes Democrats who stray from their liberal, anti-war world view. MoveOn ran a radio ad against Michigan Democratic Rep. John Dingell when he announced his opposition to higher fuel economy standards for automobiles and light trucks.
The script of the brief radio campaign portrayed a conversation between a father and son about something called a Dingellsaurus. The child asks his father what that is. The script reads in part:
“Someone who’s been in Congress so long, he forgets about the people who sent him there,” says the father.
“Are there any around today?” asks son, Billy, to which the father replies: “Our own Congressman John Dingell. He’s standing in the way of the first energy bill ever that would really combat global warming. It would also help the auto companies in the long run and that means more jobs.”
“Is a Dingellsaurus dangerous?” Billy asks. The father replies: “Very, because if the Dingellsaurus gets his way, we could all be extinct.”
Earlier this month, MoveOn ran a brief television campaign against Washington Democratic Rep. Brian Baird after he returned from a trip to Iraq and announced the Bush troop surge may be achieving important military gains. The ad featured an anti-war Iraq veteran. The script reads in part: “Keeping American soldiers in Iraq for an indefinite period of time being attacked by an unidentifiable enemy is immoral and irresponsible.” It asked viewers to “Tell Rep. Baird: Support Our Troops. Bring Them Home.”
“Just because MoveOn only supports Democrats doesn’t mean it supports all Democrats,” Ritsch said.