Historic election....

It says video is no longer available but it is still working for right now.











The whole election was a hoax! It was all fake! Watch this video and learn!

The Republican party is dead! Conservatism is dead!

Not so fast! Democrats are trying to dance on the grave of the conservative views of America and they are way ahead of themselves. This election DID NOT spell doom for the Republican party or for social conservatives or fiscal conservatives(me). If anything it reinforced some social conservative views. I do not agree with a number of socially conservative views but to proclaim them dead is a foolish thing to do.


Barack Obama is an inspiring man and his story is historic but his election is being woven into a fairy tale of great change in the United States. I hope he does bring positive change to the United States and succeeds, after all who would want a president to fail...if he does then our country does. He is my president now and I support him but I will not let this election, and the reason for its results, to be twisted into a lie. The fact is that there was little hope of a Republican being elected in this current environment but this backlash against the Republican party was not brought on by a rejection of their ideology. It was brought on by the unprecedented convergence of historic calamities.

To all those who say that George Bush/Republicans caused this bad economy: take an economics class! This economy is a direct result of the .com bubble bursting(which did so before Bush took office), the 9/11 attacks(which were planned before Bush was elected and would have taken place no matter who was in office), and the mortgage crisis that was set in motion 20 years before Bush even thought about running for President. Any economist will tell you that a sitting President has very few levers that he can pull to tweak the economy. That is levers/actions that will show up within six years of the President doing so. Whether the blame for the bad economy is factually correct or not...perception is reality. The Republicans wore this economy like an albatross around their neck and it led to their defeat(John McCain was winning before the economy imploded).

Some of the other reasons why John McCain and the Republicans were defeated:

• The $630 million dollars Barack Obama was allowed to spin on this election. Even without the low popularity of George Bush and the imploding economy, being out spent 8 to 1 in some areas is going to swing voters.
• The media's selection and protection of Barack Obama.
• The fact that John McCain did not fully embrace the social and fiscal conservative views of his own party.

The reports of the Republican party's death are greatly exaggerated. A number of factors contributed to what happened in last night's election but a move by our country to the left was not one of them. The fact that the Democrats did not pick up as many seats in Congress as they had hoped is one example and the other is the passing of many socially conservative propositions throughout the country...specifically the bans on gay marriage. This country is still conservative and the quickest way to find that out is if MY President Barack Obama and liberals in Congress try to run far left. There is already going to be a shift back to the Republican party in 2010...if the Democrats abuse what they have been given...that shift will be even larger!

For agents of change, it's politics as usual

In this new world of change, you can forget about responsibility or accountability ever making a return.

It's becoming increasing clear that neither of the two candidates have properly addressed what should happen to those responsible for this economic crisis (while it's true that it's broad, there are still some who had control of the reins). There's a distinct lack of passion for finding methods to promote justice as well. We may have required a giant, $700 billion bailout, but why aren't there names attached to these businesses? Toss these individuals into the limelight and make a spectacle out of them. Discuss plans to introduce legislation that doesn't impose on capitalism, but stops financial disasters and dangerous forms of greed from taking a foothold in businesses. Finally, tell the people that they are responsible for what the United States becomes.

Failure to discipline bad behavior or exert power to establish justice will just cause these practices to continue, or worse-multiply. When pressure is applied, it generally works. Right after the bailout, AIG executives still pushed forward with their plan for a second vacation in California. After news of this story spread, AIG ended up canceling. What changed this? Obviously not the bailout bill, as a section of it doesn't even allow the courts to provide oversight. Had the people of this country been asleep, this would of still happened.

Speaking of more wonderful "changes" in political reform, let's examine Barack Obama's campaign fundraising. It's been reported that there aren't any checks on Obama's online fundraising. To check this, Mathew Mosk of the Washington Post, did a test to see if bogus information would be accepted. It worked, yet there has been little media outcry to this. Why is this? One possible answer is that people do not believe that these fake entries could not possible make up a large portion of the money received. If this is the case, why not release information about these donations so they can be reviewed by the Federal Election Comission?

Let's forget about how much of a percentage these phony donations make up, as arguing about them only spins the true story: they are happening, there's still no way of accounting for them, and Obama has been mum on the issue. Is this the change we want? Even more accountability problems and then a lack of responsibility towards these problems?

Letter to Barack Obama and anti-coal environmentalist

Mr. Obama and anti-coal environmentalist,



Coal is a fossil fuel that is a heavy pollutant and is harming our environment but you can not stop coal use unless you are ignorant of the truth. WE HAVE NO REPLACEMENT FOR COAL!!!! Not only does coal provide more energy for us than any other fuel source but it is the one fossil fuel our country has an abundance of in reserve(more than even natural gas). If there was a clean replacement for coal then we should stop using coal tomorrow but there is no replacement! We have to use coal until we have something else...end of story.

What about all these new "clean" sources of energy? Wind? Nope, it would take decades for the wind power infrastructure to be built up to make even a dent in what coal gives us now. Nuclear? Nope, it would take more than a hundred years to permit and build even a few nuclear plants and even then they would not make a dent in what coal gives us now. Natural gas? Is an option but we can not just go cold turkey off of coal! Methane from landfills? Burning garbage? All those other pie-in-the-sky green ideas? No, no, and NO! None of those sources are abundant enough to replace coal.


So you say let's get rid of coal anyway and just suffer through the transition? IDIOTIC!!! Half our country would be blacked out. The ones who could get energy would be paying energy bills in the tens of thousands of dollars a month. Not to mention we would be immediately attacked from every country across the globe because without energy it is like we are standing there with our pants down! Besides, I thought Obama was going to create jobs and save the economy? Our economy is energy and energy is our economy. If he did something this stupid, our economy would collapse not to mention the 100s of thousands of American workers he would put out of work!

While I am on the subject let me talk about these supposed miracle cars that are going to get us off of oil and gasoline. Hydrogen cells? Great, but hydrogen does not exist in its natural form on Earth. We have to separate it and we use more power from natural gas(a fossil fuel) to separate hydrogen into its pure form than the power we get in return from the hydrogen! Ethanol? HELL NO! Ethanol is one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated on the American people. Ethanol actually gives off some emissions that are worse than gasoline. Not to mention that there is not enough land area, above water, ON THE ENTIRE PLANET to grow enough crops to satisfy America's need for energy alone! Electric cars? GREAT IDEA! Oh, wait, WHERE DO YOU THINK WE GET THE ELECTRICITY FROM?!?!? That juice flowing out of your wall socket does not magically appear there. It is generated from?...yes! burning coal and other fossil fuels! So, live in your dream world if you want but the fact is that we can work our butts off trying to replace fossil fuels, and we should, but we can not take any drastic measures right now. We do not have the technology! We do not have the infrastructure!

UPDATE: Is this an answer? Air car? It is interesting but a car that only goes 35 mph and can only go 60 miles per tank? I doubt it would be accepted anywhere in the U.S. besides huge cities with residents that only commute inside city limits. This thing compares more favorably to a scooter than a car.

Obama is making this comeback easy for McCain!

Obama- "John McCain and Sarah Palin call this socialistic. I don't know when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness.". You have to be kidding me! And I thought Biden was trying to throw the election! COME ON BARACK!!! haha! You are making this too easy!

No, what you are wanting to do to the American people, Barack, is for the teacher to take our sandwich and decide how to split it with other people whether we like it or not!

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need - Karl Marx

Part V: Barack Obama wins popular vote. McCain wins electoral college and Presidency.

An Associated Press/Yahoo News poll shows that 1 in 7 voters, or 14% of voters, are still undecided or could be persuaded to change their vote. This poll also shows that the voters making up this 14% are, " more likely to be white and less likely to be liberal".

Is the media completely pro-Obama? Yes it is!

I have been watching all of the different channels(with the help of my DVR) and their coverage of the election. I have come to a conclusion: the media IS unethically and overwhelmingly pro-Obama! Why do I say unethically? I do so because I do not care if you are pro-Obama or pro-McCain but when you are posing as a legitimate unbiased news outlet but you are not, you are lying and that is unethical! If you want to be pro-Obama or pro-McCain then come out and say it. Do not hide behind your lies about unbiased news reporting. The second part of my conclusion is: CNN is left of center by quite a bit, MSNBC is so left of center it is bordering on lunacy, and Fox News is fair and balanced just like they say they are.

What is that? Is every liberal yelling at their computer right now that I am obviously a conservative and I am drinking the Fox News kool-aid? If so you would be completely wrong because like I said I have watched all of the news outlets and even the main networks for their coverage before coming to these conclusions. I had never watched Fox News before this election but I had always heard it was an unfair right-wing slanted channel. I had heard that basically Fox News was far right, MSNBC was far left, and CNN was in the middle and fair. Again...that was before I watched them all. I will also go as far as to guaranty that no one who thinks Fox News is what people say it is has ever actually watched the channel at all, much less enough to form that opinion! Fox News gives equal time. If they have a discussion there is normally always a person from the left and a person from the right and the anchor tries to stay off one side or the other. On the other hand, it is the honesty of the other anchors or hosts of shows on Fox News, that are biased and pulling for one side, that I respect more than CNN. At least the people on Fox News who openly lean right, or have even jumped into the deep end of the right, admit who they are and what they are. Likewise, MSNBC anchors do not try to hide the fact that they have Obama sheets on their bed and that they wear Obama pajamas...for that I at least have some respect for them. But CNN anchors try to hide their allegiances and they do a horrible job of it! The only people I respect on CNN are John King and Lou Dobbs.

Quick personal story:
-I was just watching a discussion about the election on CNN where Anderson Cooper was the anchor and the people discussing the topic were Al Sharpton, Roland Martin, and David Gergen. That is your idea of a discussion group, CNN? Can we at least have a somewhat conservative voice in this pro-Obama love fest? Anderson Cooper far-left, Roland Martin far-left, Al Sharpton ultra-left, and David Gergen a left leaning moderate?!?!? Nice job! That is like hiding an elephant in an open field! (where the elephant is the hard on that CNN has for Barack Obama!)
-One more example as proof that Anderson Cooper has Barack Obama's picture on the front of his tightie-whities: He opened his show tonight by saying, "Four days to the election. We are on the cusp of history and it is very exciting!". The cusp of history, Anderson? No, it is only history if Obama wins. Sounds like you think this race is over and you have let your love of Obama slip out yet again!

Are you liberals still calling me a conservative hack? Ok, I guess I should offer some proof to my assertions...I wish someone would do a study on the media in this election cycle...oh, wait, someone did do that! The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism did!

• The study found that MSNBC aired stories on McCain that were negative 73% of the time. MSNBC only aired negative stories about Obama 14% of the time.
• The study found that CNN aired stories on McCain that were negative 57% of the time. CNN only aired negative stories about Obama 29% of the time.
• The study found that Fox News aired stories on McCain that were negative 40% of the time. Fox News aired negative stories about Obama 40% of the time.

Anymore questions?

"Bleeding heart liberals" or hateful hypocrites?

I have been shocked at how nasty, vindictive, and childish democrats have been in this election. No group of people can be accused of all thinking alike but from what I have seen there is a nastiness running through the Democratic party. Story after story during this election tells about how democrats attack anyone who questions them or speaks out against them or their savior Barack Obama. You are not allowed to question him or you get attacked. If you question him anyway, you are a racist! This behavior is unbelievable to me when it is coming from the party that is suppose to be so pro-free speech and so accepting of other peoples' views. Here are a few examples of vindictiveness and pettiness from the left:

• Joe "the Plumber", who I for one am tired of hearing about, was immediately attacked on air by democratic pundits but even worse democratic government officials in his home state of Ohio investigated him and looked into his confidential records then leaked them to the press!

• Obama and Biden smeared and cut off a news organization from their campaign because one of their reporters dared to ask Biden tough questions. Even if they thought these questions were wrong or off base...you answer them then move on. That is the job of the press...ASKING QUESTIONS! This incident shows Obama and Biden have very thin skin and are vindictive! All she did was ask very tough questions, even if they were partisan, THEY WERE QUESTIONS MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ACTUALLY WANTED ASKED!

• Now Obama has kicked three newspaper reporters off his plane! These three reporters just happen to work for papers who endorsed McCain! That is ridiculous! These reporters were reporters not columnist not op end writers! This gives the impression that Obama is petty, thin skinned, and vindictive! This is a HORRIBLE idea this close to the election...this action just makes Obama and his campaign look vindictive and people do not like vindictive people especially in government. I guaranty you that Obama lost a few votes from this incident alone!

In addition to the attacks of the media and democratic pundits there is an amazing amount of hate on the Internet. And, yes, I know there are right-wing loons and hate filled people that are anti-Obama but there is no doubt that they are out numbered this year by hate filled left wingers! The Democrats have always said they were the party for the people. They were the party for the little man. They loved everyone and everything and wanted to make the world a better place. This election has proven otherwise. There is a large population of the Democratic Party that are hateful, childish, and down right ignorant! Hateful websites posting insane ramblings, and yes they are completely insane ramblings about the man and 9/11 conspiracies, out number conservative, or even right wing hate websites, 3 to 1. Do not believe me? Look for yourself! You will find a lot more hate from the left then you will the right...I guaranty it!

After taking all of the hate on the Internet and adding it into the fact that Republicans are actually PROVEN to be more generous and charitable people...I saw that this whole persona of the Democratic party is a crock of shit! They hate just as much as people on the right! They are as vengeful as anything that comes from the right. They are as petty as anyone from the right. All of this makes the Democrats, overall but not every one of them, even bigger frauds because they claim to be something they are not!

Now that I am done bashing a large portion of the Democratic party and calling them out for being hateful, vindictive, and childish...I would like to say that both sides have loons and it is sad. It is one thing to disagree, even passionately disagree, with someones views or beliefs but it does not give you the right to spread hate or be a childish troll! I feel sorry for every person who said things like, "I hope Cheney dies!", or "George Bush is a war criminal", or "lynch Obama", or "I hope McCain's cancer comes back!", or any of the other thousands of hateful and insane things that have been said on the Internet. For you to be that caught up in politics, and that hateful, shows a very big problem in your life. No matter who wins this election, he will be my president. And, here is the thing, he will be your president too! No, do not say that he will not be "your" president...because he will be! If we go by that thinking...if you do not like your boss...is he not your boss? NOPE, he is still your boss! And the question you have to ask is: what will make your place of work, the lives of your co-workers, and your life...easier(not to mention your future brighter)? The answer? Accepting and working with the people around you regardless of your differences because we are all Americans before we are Republicans or Democrats and we are all human beings before that!

Part IV: Barack Obama wins popular vote. McCain wins electoral college and Presidency.

The race is getting closer and there are some trends that spell doom for Barack Obama! In the last few weeks there has been a 20 point closing of the gap, with voters 18-30 years old, in favor of McCain. There has been a 16 point closing of the gap, with voters 30-45 years old, in favor of McCain. There has been no change with voters 45-65 years old and among voters 65+ years old, Obama has moved ahead by 11 points. What does all this mean?

• The changes with voters 18-30 and 30-45 show that John McCain's attacks on Obama as a tax and spend liberal are working. People from their mid-20s to their mid-40s are historically more concerned about someone raising their taxes.
• The lack of change with voters 45-65 shows they might just have made up their minds.
• The change in favor of Obama with voters 65+ show that Obama's attacks on McCain, which link him to President Bush's Social Security Reform, are working.

What do all these things mean when put together?

They show that the race is tightening and that a number of people are becoming wary of Barack Obama's and Joe Biden's many gaffes and unpopular statements of the last month. Hardworking Americans do not like to hear, "Spread the wealth". People do not like to hear, "Paying taxes is patriotic". People are also starting to wonder why a year ago Obama said rich was someone making more than $1 million a year, then a few months ago said rich was $250k, then Biden said it was $150k, and now Bill Richardson, the governor of New Mexico and a supporter of Obama, says it is $120k? Even if those changes are not really changes in policy and/or are taken out of context and/or anything else that Obama's campaign wants to use to defend them...it does not matter! Perception is reality and you can not erase those statements from this campaign. They are there and no amount of explaining will make them go away and people will decide on their own what they mean.

How do these changes support my contention that Obama will win the popular vote but McCain will win the electoral college and the Presidency?

These changes back up my prediction by showing that Obama is vulnerable. My assertion that people will be scared away from Obama the closer they get to actually having to vote for him, also has weight. Lastly, I actually take the 11 point swing towards Obama, with voters 65+, as a positive for McCain. McCain will not do it, for his own reasons, but a group called GOPTrust.com is going to saturate all the swing states with an ad about Reverend Wright. This ad will have the most effect on voters 65+, they are more likely to be patriotic and should be more sensitive to anti-American sentiments and racial issues, thus negating the only positive trend that Obama has in the closing weeks of this election.

Race Value

Earlier this month, several people from Harlem were interviewed about the upcoming presidential election by The Howard Stern Show. Here is an audio clip of the results...



Why does this audio clip make you cringe? Taken at face value, this clip attempts to point out that regardless of issues, African Americans believe Obama is the right candidate. Looking past what Howard Stern is trying to point out, I believe that Obama could be replaced with Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, or Bill Richardson and the results would still be the same. A race issue could of been brought up during the primaries, which it was to a degree, but the point is now moot. Howard Stern fails to recognize that the voters in Harlem have always leaned heavily in favor of the Democrats.

So in the end, we have what one would normally expect from Howard Stern, entertainment that riles people up.

Part III: Barack Obama wins popular vote. McCain wins electoral college and Presidency.

I have been saying for weeks that Obama would win the popular vote by the largest amount by any candidate that did not win the election. Why is this? People are focusing on the national poll...that poll does not matter. That poll shows the popular vote and the popular vote does not decide the Presidency. One must look at the state polls to find out who will be President.

In Part I and Part II of this post I stated that the polls are wrong by a large percentage this year because of the Bradley Effect(there will be a Bradley Effect in these swing states), the polls are weighted heavily Democratic(because these poll takers are guessing how new voter registration will effect the election), military members are polling at 3 to 1 for McCain(and they are not included in national or state polls), and the last effect will just be straight racism. I add these factors together and I come up with my own, Wookie Effect. This effect predicts that Obama is polling 8% too high(2% Bradley Effect, 2% racism, 0.05% military vote, 3.95% poll weighting).

Obama has these states in the bag:
California(55)
Oregon(7)
Washington(11)
Minnesota(10)
Wisconsin(10)
Illinois(21)
Michigan(17)
New York(31)
Maine(4)(not winner take all)
Vermont(3)
Massachusetts(12)
Rhode Island(4)
Connecticut(7)
New Jersey(15)
Delaware(3)
Maryland(10)
District of Columbia(3)
Hawaii(4)
Obama has 227 electoral votes if he carries all these "solid" blue states.

McCain has these states in the bag:
Idaho(4)
Utah(5)
Arizona(10)
Wyoming(3)
South Dakota(3)
Nebraska(5)(not winner take all)
Kansas(6)
Oklahoma(7)
Texas(34)
Arkansas(6)
Louisiana(9)
Mississippi(6)
Alabama(9)
Tennessee(11)
Kentucky(8)
South Carolina(8)
Alaska(3)
McCain has 137 electoral votes if he carries all these "solid" red states.

These are the so called swing states:
Nevada(5) Obama +1.5 adjusted McCain +6.5
Montana(3) McCain +5.6
Colorado(9) Obama +5.4 adjusted McCain +2.6
New Mexico(5) Obama +8.4 adjusted Obama +0.4
North Dakota(3) Obama +2 adjusted McCain +6
Missouri(11) Obama +2.7 adjusted McCain +5.3
Indiana(11) McCain +3.8
Ohio(20) Obama +2.8 adjusted McCain +5.2
West Virginia(5) McCain +5.6
Virginia(13) Obama +8 adjusted EVEN
North Carolina(15) Obama +1.5 adjusted McCain +6.5
Georgia(15) McCain +6.8
Florida(27) Obama +2 adjusted McCain +6
New Hampshire(4) Obama +9.4 adjusted Obama +1.4
Pennsylvania(21) Obama +11 adjusted Obama +3
Iowa(7) Obama +11.8 adjusted Obama +3.8
There are 174 electoral votes up for grab in these "swing" states.

After adjusting the totals from the polls(270 to be elected):
Obama 259 electoral votes
McCain 261 electoral votes
Too close to call Virginia(13) and New Mexico(5)


So, by my calculations the person who wins Virginia wins this election. After I adjust the polls, Virginia is even with Obama 48.8% McCain 48.8%. Virginia is the key boys! Winner take all!

Patton

I wish we still had leaders like this! Crazy as can be but aggressive, intelligent, and unbeatable! I would vote for him for President today!




Before anyone comments on the fact that Patton says America has never lost a war and never will lose a war, the closest we have ever come to being called the loser in a war was the War of 1812. In the War of 1812 our capital was captured and burned to the ground. The only major victory we had in the war, the Battle of New Orleans, came after a peace agreement had already been signed. Everyone wants to throw out Vietnam and Korea as losses, and they are wrong! Vietnam and Korea were both political actions that were fought by our military with one hand tied behind its back. Not to mention that the opponents were not Korea or Vietnam in either of those wars. The opponents both times were the U.S.S.R. and communist China. The confrontations in Korea and Vietnam were only battles in a much larger, more complicated war, the most expensive war in the history of man....the Cold War and we won that war.

While I am speaking of wars and their purposes, let me address people who are so upset about the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan. These wars have served a very important purpose that, for some reason, a lot of Americans choose not to acknowledge. We were going to have to fight a war against terrorism. We had the choice of fighting it in the streets of New York or other American cities or fighting it half a world away. We had a choice in this war to let civilian men, women, and children be in harms way or let our well trained and well equipped soldiers bravely take that risk for us. There was going to be a war. There was no doubt about it. The leaders of America knew that by taking the war to the enemy, overseas, that all of the resources of the enemy would be concentrated in fighting us over there. No matter what you think about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or how we got into them, those wars are saving civilians lives and keeping the war outside our borders. More people need to realize this fact because while our soldiers are overseas fighting and dying for us...we are watching football and baseball and worrying about our investments instead of worrying about our lives!

Obama-like universal health care does not work!

Universal health care does not work! I have always said that giving someone something for nothing will only lead to greed and laziness. Guess what? I was proven right by the state of Hawaii! The state of Hawaii ended the only state run universal health care in the U.S. after only 7 months! It turned out that people who could afford health care stopped paying for it so they could get it for free or at a major discount through the state. Gee? What is that? Greed? Laziness? Actually it is common sense. Why should one citizen pay for something that is being given free to another? Of course universal health care will not work. It will lead to government corruption and private sector greed. Everyone of Barack Obama's plans has been proven not to work in the real world. They work in the fantasy world that most Dems dream about but that world is not this world!

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

To be fair, Obama's plan is for universal health insurance but the similarities are there. His plan will fail for the same reason the Hawaii health care plan did...universal social plans do not work!

Colin Powell announces his decision

...and it's in support for Barack Obama. This isn't a huge surprise as many already believed this to be the case including Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former national security adviser for President Carter and Mort Kondracke, an executive editor for Roll Call.

There's no question that Colin Powell is a respected figure and that his decision is yet another wound for John McCain. I commend Powell for standing up for what he believes in, though expect a barrage of attacks coming from the right over the next week looking to damage his credibility and to help play damage control. An argument you're likely to see is, "why the October surprise?" Powell is likely to be labeled as someone who wants to be on the winning team and this late announcement may help with Obama's already high poll numbers.

Will Powell's endorsement further Obama's lead or will the the difference be negligible? How will Powell be attacked for his newly announced stance? Even if it doesn't initially cause a difference in numbers, the coverage of this decision (and it's reactions) will eat into the precious little time McCain has left to get his message across before the election.

There is still a lot of stupidity in this world! Racism on both sides of the election!

WRONG AGAIN Biden! Joe the Plumber does not make $250k now.

Is there a bigger fool, running for any office in this country, than Joe Biden? Biden, do some research before you say something! Joe the Plumber never said he made $250k! He said the business he eventually wanted to take over would make $250k+! I guaranty you, even if the business makes $250k, Joe's take home is not $250k! Biden, call any accountant and they will tell you how small business and take home pay for the owner work. Or just stay in your world where FDR was president in the 1920's and could be seen on television!

Example of stupidity:


The truth:

Livebloging the 3rd Presidential Debate

8:07 - McCain throws out the kitchen sink; mentions Joe, the plumber.

8:13 - McCain states that at 35%, the United States has the 2nd highest business tax rate in the world. (check)

8:17 - Candidates mainly speaking from what seems like scripted lines.

8:18 - Ethanol: McCain voted against, Obama voted for? (check)

8:24 - McCain defends maverick status; Did he bring climate change to the attention of congress for the first time? (check)

8:25 - They are now talking about how negative the campaigns have become. McCain asks Obama to repudiate remarks by Senator Louis.

8:28 - Perception Issue? McCain is more negative than Obama according to Obama and polls (check and back up)

8:30 - McCain accuses Obama of spending an unprecedented amount of money attacking him.

ACORN: "Been stealing votes since 1970"

Random Obama supporter - "It is not voter fraud. It is voter registration fraud!".

Are you kidding me? Do you really think that is true?

ACORN is accused of or prosecuted for voter registration fraud every 2 years and every 2 years they claim that they were the victim. The Dems and Obama blow this scandal off by saying that, "Tony Romo is not going to show up to vote here in Ohio" - Barack Obama and that no one can vote under the name Mickey Mouse so this is not voter fraud, it is just voter registration fraud. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!? Yes, all the Mickey Mouses and Jive Turkeys(actual names submitted on registration forms from ACORN) are going to be weeded out but can no one see the scam here?!?!? It is a proven criminal tactic that when you want to commit a crime you create a diversion so you will not be caught committing the actual crime. Shoplifters work in tandem these days because it makes the crime easier. One shoplifter distracts the store employee while the other is stuffing merchandise into their shorts.

By flooding voter registration offices with thousands of ridiculous and obviously false registration cards, you keep the workers attention on those cards while you sneak through normal looking names like John Smith, who never existed or died 5 years ago. Then you get a person a fake ID or a fake utility bill with John Smith on it and then they can go vote! It is voter fraud! Why commit voter registration fraud? So you can commit voter fraud!

Sol Stern explains that Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s “New Left,” with a “1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism” to match. Acorn, says Stern, grew out of “one of the New Left’s silliest and most destructive groups, the National Welfare Rights Organization.”

"I think that when you spread the wealth around, its good for everybody" - Barack Obama

Are you kidding me Obama?


I am all for everyone having a chance and everyone getting an equal opportunity but wealth redistribution is not the way to do it! Give someone an EQUAL opportunity to succeed and then let them go. Do not punish one citizen's success because of the lack of success of another citizen. The more you give to the less fortunate the more you cut their legs off in this world. It is human nature to get lazier and less productive when everything is given to you. Once you get some help, you want more. When you get enough help, "Why work? The 1st of the month is around the corner.". Socialism, which is what Obama and Biden seem to be talking about, has been proven to be a failure, over and over throughout history!

"If you want an example of the failure of socialism," he said, "don't go to Russia, come to America and go to the Indian reservations." - Interior Secretary James G. Watt, January 19, 1983

The above quote is taken from an article written about what U.S. Interior Secretary, James Watts, had to say about the failure of socialism. Below is taken from another article about the failure of the socialist Indian Reservation plan.

"How are Indian reservations doomed to failure? The Indians own the land in common. No Indian owns land individually. Personal initiative is crushed."

The federal government provides, at a basic level, free medical coverage and schools on reservations. These services appear to be a good deal, but they have severely limited results in an atmosphere that discourages Indians from caring for themselves.

I wrote a blog not too long ago where I did not use a foreign country as my example of the failure of socialism. I used the Indian Reservations in the United States! It was not the intention of the reservations but, it is a side effect, that we had a true test of how people will develop when the government strips away a people's purpose and then gives them everything and expects from them nothing. People lose their pride, their self-respect, and their work ethic!

Now take Barack Obama's connection to an organization that is accused of being a radical anti-capitalism and fraudulent organization ACORN. Obama says he was only their lawyer once. Nope, sorry, there is evidence that the relationship was much more than that. Obama's campaign donated $800,000 to an organization that is part of ACORN so they would, "get out the vote for him". Evidence has also come to light that Obama was a trainer for ACORN because he is listed on their employment rolls. Make no doubt about it, ACORN is accused by many for being a multi-faceted radical left wing organization with its hands in multiple pockets and Barack Obama seems to be tied to them in many, out in the open, ways.

Sol Stern explains that Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s “New Left,” with a “1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism” to match. Acorn, says Stern, grew out of “one of the New Left’s silliest and most destructive groups, the National Welfare Rights Organization.”

Karl Marx's ten point program to convert a Capitalist society to a Communist society:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.(Mortgage takeovers? Think that is what this means? Maybe, maybe not. The government(bailout bill) is taking over the ownership of homes and land right now...)
   
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax(We have HEAVY PROGRESSIVE federal and state income taxes up to almost 40%.)
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.(Death tax? We have one of those and Obama wants to raise it!)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State by means of a national bank with the State holding an exclusive monopoly on capital.(Sound familiar?)
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.(The FCC? Amtrak, subsidized right? And we are subsidizing failing airlines, right?)
   
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State(Banks? AIG? GM? We are doing this right now, right?); the bringing into cultivation of waste-land, and the improvement of the soil, generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by more equable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

(The above list was taken from the book Who are We? Theories Of Human Nature by Louis P. Pojman; Oxford University Press 2006. The list is credited to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels from their Manifesto of the Communist Party. Marx and Engels later went away from this list of ten.)

Am I saying Obama is a communist? No. Am I saying Obama is a socialist? No, but he and Biden are flirting with it in my opinion. What I am saying is that this country is going down a slippery slope towards Socialism/Communism. Karl Marx said that Capitalism is one of the stages, the last stage, a society must go through before it gets to the ideal society which would be Communism. He also said that Capitalism would build up wealth in a country which would ease the transition to Communism and that this transition would be started when the inevitable recessions and depressions, that come with a free market, strike enough fear and anger into the proletariat(main street to us). What are we doing right now? We are afraid because our economy is on a down swing, which it is suppose to do...it is a cycle, and now we are giving up our Capitalist values for Socialism/Communism in an overreaction brought on by fear. There is a hypothesis that Communism did not work in the U.S.S.R. because they never had a Capitalism phase like Marx suggests. Because of this hypothesis it is theorized that the United States is the last, best, chance for Communism to take hold and to succeed!!!! Does anyone else see the same things I do?!?

Barack Hussein Obama

"Obama is not even a citizen of the United States!"

"Obama is a terrorist!"

"Obama is a Muslim!"


I did not believe any of the above rumors and slanders yelled out in public. I have always thought Obama was a good man who I would not mind being president if it was not for his desire to give more people, more for nothing, and by extension his whole fiscal outlook. To learn more about the man I watched a documentary on him on the Biography Channel and then researched him on the Internet. I thought this would let me get to know Obama better and become more comfortable with him. I did learn more about him but I also found out some things that were a little disconcerting and are probably the factual, yes I said factual, base that all these accusations grow out of.

The charge that Barack Obama is not a citizen of the United States. He is a citizen. He was born in Hawaii and his mother was an American citizen so there is no question there. If he was not a citizen then the government would know it. The DNC has the ability to spin information but I doubt that they could cover up the fact that Obama is not a citizen which would make him ineligible for president.(If anyone would have tried hard to find that out and then released it, it would have been Hillary.)

The charge that Barack Obama is a terrorist. Yes, Barack Obama does have ties to William Ayers who committed terrorist acts against the United States. Knowing a terrorist does not make a person a terrorist! That is a ridiculous leap to make. His ties do however call into question his judgement.


The charge that Barack Obama is a Muslim. I thought this claim was as ridiculous as the terrorist claim but I see things in Obama's past that made me aware of where these suspicions come from.

1. Barack Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., was from the Luo tribe in Kenya. Today most of this tribe is christian but a large portion of it is and was Muslim.
   
   
2. Barack Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, was an atheist. Dunham's best friend in high school has said that she,

   "touted herself as an atheist, and it was something she'd read about and could argue."

3. Obama would call his mother a christian in one of his books but his own sister contradicts him,

   "I wouldn't have called her an atheist. She was an agnostic. She basically gave us all the good books — the Bible, the Hindu Upanishads and the Buddhist scripture, the Tao Te Ching — and wanted us to recognise that everyone has something beautiful to contribute.""Jesus, she felt, was a wonderful example. But she felt that a lot of Christians behaved in un-Christian ways"

   
4. Barack Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, was a Muslim.

I do not pretend to know what is in a man's heart. Could Barack Obama be a Muslim but not admitting it because of possible political damage? Yes, I guess he could be. He has close personal ties to someone, in his family, that was Muslim for most of his early years. The offspring of an atheist and a possible Muslim who was then raised by a Muslim stepfather...definitely lays the ground work for people to come to their own conclusions whether they be true or not. Personally I think that Barack Obama is either a Muslim(maybe...I will never know for sure and neither will you), he is a Christian who has woven Islam into his beliefs(After all, they are related religions), or he is a person who was not religious for most of his early life but found god later on which helped him change his direction and purpose. Here is the major question...if he is a Muslim, so what? The Muslim religion is not some evil terrorist religion. Our view of the religion has been slanted by the things that have happened in the world recently and the headlines that they generated. If he is a Muslim, fine. The problem is, that if he is, he lied about it and about his mother. That raises questions, yet again.

I have come to the conclusion that there are three possibilities when it comes to Barack Obama:

• He is a genuine person and a good person who will do a good job as president.
• He is a Manchurian Candidate.
• Or he is the anti-Christ and after he is elected the end of days will come!

Schock & Awe

Colleen Callahan, a candidate running for an Illinois' seat in the United States House of Representatives, has released a political ad that resorts to a classic use of fear mongering.



Callahan's ad is a modern day rendition of LBJ's famous Daisy campaign advertisement (which can be found here). When the original Daisy ad was released, it was criticized for attempting to frighten voters. Walter Mondale tried a similar ad in the 1984 presidential campaign.

Callahan paints her opponent, Aaron Schock, as the "candidate of death" through repetitive of use of colors and a contrast of settings. Muted and strong uses of red are sandwiched between nature scenes that help elevate Callahan to a candidate siding with nature and innocence. Callahan is clearly displayed in front of a green pasture, while images of her opponent are noticeably more menacing due to being placed side by side with missiles and bright red explosions.

The need for this type of ad baffles me. Callahan can easily capitalize on Schock's "shocks" without unleashing a wave of fear, which could potentially backfire and turn her into the ugly candidate.

The Candidates' Official Websites
Aaron Schock
Colleen Callahan

Part II: Barack Obama wins popular vote. McCain wins electoral college and Presidency

There are other reason why I am 100% sure that Barack Obama will win the popular vote but John McCain will win the electoral college and the Presidency. The Obama camp might not want to get too ahead of itself after reading the poll numbers. There are a number of the organizations in this election that are weighting their polls differently, i.e. different demographics of those surveyed, because they believe the huge increase in voter registration will effect the election. Is that solid thinking? No, it is not. Registering to vote is one thing. Actually voting is another. The demographics that they are using to skew these polls are the same demographics that Barack Obama is counting on to win this election. There is a problem with those demographics. The people Obama is counting on are the people that are the least likely to actually vote!

In a recent ABC News/Washington Post Poll:

Voters age 18-29 went for Obama 66% to only 30% for McCain.
PROBLEM: That same poll found that only 46% of voters 18-29 were "certain to vote".

Democratic voters went for Obama 81% to only 13% for McCain.
PROBLEM: That same poll found that only 66% of Democrats were "certain to vote" while 83% of Republicans were "certain to vote". Republicans support McCain 85% to 13%.

In a recent poll by the Pew Hispanic Center:

Hispanic voters went for Obama 66% to only 23% for McCain.
PROBLEM: Hispanics turn out to vote at only a 47% rate compared to 63.8% for the full population.

So, what is my point? My point is that 3 of the 4 demographic segments that support Obama the most, and that he is counting on most, are traditionally the lowest ranking segments of the population when it comes to voter turnout. Will they show up?


One must also add, the exposure of Acorn(Obama supports Acorn to the tune of $800,000.00 in donations and they support him in return) as a corrupt organization(allegedly) and the ruling tonight that the Democratic Secretary of State of Ohio is breaking federal election laws, to the Bradley effect, the issue of race, and this look at voter turnout by demographics. When I add all of it up I get a win for McCain in November even if the national polls still show Obama leading all the way up to election day.

Dirtying Up Obama

The above ad does something that a lot of people have been waiting for the McCain camp to do for a long time...show the real Barack Obama(as they see him). This ad is obviously negative and is in the tradition of political mud slinging but it is also something that may be very effective against Barack Obama. The truth is a lot of voters do not know much about Obama. The more that can be dug up from his past to fill in the blanks for voters(whether it be all true or not), the more the Republicans will be able to define him. Not to mention that these ads are not lies. Obama did associate with everyone named in this ad and he has been seen by a number of people as skirting the issue when asked about these associations. The more the Republicans can make "Obama the unknown" into "Obama the dangerous", the easier they will win this election.

It goes against the purpose of this blog but the truth is negative ads work. If I was advising John McCain I would tell him to push these horrible associations in Obama's past that lead one to question Obama's judgment and the persona the DNC has built him into. Call him on his association with ACORN(have you watched the news? voter fraud?), Reverend Wright, Tony Rezko(felon), Father Pfleger, and William Ayers(domestic terrorist). The beauty of attacking him on all these associations is that it is all true! He can not deny knowing and/or working with everyone I listed. He will down play how close he was to these people or organizations but he can not say that someone linking them to him is immoral or wrong. He is linked! So, is Barack Obama a radical social activist who the DNC packaged as an agent for change while trying to hide his obvious warts and questionable past? Or is he truly what he says he is? The more the Republicans get people to ask themselves those questions...the more people will go with the safe choice..... John McCain.

Barack Obama wins popular vote. McCain wins electoral college and Presidency

I am 100% sure that Barack Obama will win the popular vote but John McCain will win the electoral college and the Presidency. Everyone is playing up the poll numbers and Barack Obama's lead in those polls as if they are devastating news to John McCain. They are not. Polls are very inaccurate. One can see how inaccurate polls are just by looking at how none of them agree. In addition to the inherent inaccuracies in polls there is the way that the issue of race skews the accuracy of polls even further.

The first issue of race effecting polls is the Bradley effect and the reverse Bradley effect. The Bradley effect, as it is called, is a way to describe how when an African-American is running against a white opponent, the poll numbers sometimes do not match the actual vote totals. Basically it is hypothesized that white voters say they will vote for the African-American candidate or that they are undecided and then vote for the white candidate which was their intention all along. Some say this might be because white voters fell uneasy answering the question of who they will vote for because it might be seen as a racial decision. To avoid the appearance of racism these voters say they will vote for the African-American candidate or say they are undecided, when they have already made up their mind to vote for the white candidate, just to avoid the question. The reverse Bradley effect is used to explain why some African-American candidates poll lower and then get more votes in the final election. This hypothesis is based on the idea that pollsters are not polling enough African-Americans or young voters.

There are some who believe in the Bradley effect(Fred Barnes), some that do not(McCamy Taylor), and some that do but think it is no longer relevant such as Nate Silver and Dan Hopkins.

RealClearPolitics Poll Averages

General Election: McCain vs. Obama

Poll	Obama (D)	McCain (R)
RCP Average	49.0	43.9
Gallup Tracking	52	41
Rasmussen Tracking	51	45
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tracking	47	45
Hotline/FD Tracking	45	44
GW/Battleground Tracking	49	45
Ipsos/McClatchy	47	40
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl	49	43
CBS News	48	45
CNN	53	45
Democracy Corps (D)	49	46

More Polling Data | Chart | News

Looking at these up-to-date poll numbers one can see that they are all different and most are close. The biggest lead for Obama is eleven points on one poll and only one point on another poll. First I would like to point out that four of these polls are within the margin of error. Second we must add in the Bradley effect, if anything like that actually exists, to see the effect it may have. For this exercise let us believe that the Bradley effect is real and the percentage of which it effects the polls is 5%, which would be a mild Bradley effect compared to the double digit swings that have happened in the past. If true, the Bradley effect would give John McCain the lead in five of these national polls while Obama would retain a lead in the five others. Sounds pretty close to me? The Bradley effect makes this race a dead heat but does anything like the Bradley effect really exist?

Yes, it does. But it is not the Bradley effect that will change this election. It is how race effects an election as a whole that will change this election, especially a national election which cuts across so many different regions of the country. Race is playing a huge role in the election but most people are treating it like the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Barack Obama's own advisers believe that race effects this election because they have crafted his image and his responses so they do not offend the white majority. There is a fear that he would be portrayed as the "angry black man" if he ever loses his temper in public. Other Democrats have played the race card as well when they have rebuffed some criticisms of Obama as being racially motivated. Race is everywhere in this election and it will be a deciding factor in this election.

Racism and reverse racism will be a factor in this election. It is unfortunate but there are still a number of people in this country who will not vote for an African-American candidate(racism). On the other end of the spectrum, I have talked to white friends who are thinking about voting for Obama because he is black(reverse racism). When I questioned them about why they were going to do that, I was told that they thought, if Obama was elected, that it might heal some of the racial wounds our country suffers from. This is a noble idea but it is still racism to pick a candidate solely on the color of their skin. We can not avoid the truth that there are people in this country who will decide to vote for or against a candidate strictly because of the color of their skin. This being the first national election to pit an African-American candidate against a white candidate, and a very close competition, it will be decided by those who cast their vote on race alone. This is not the Bradley effect. The Bradley effect is someone hiding their vote because of the issue of race. My contention is that these people will vote because of race. I believe that there are a lot more people out there who will cast their vote due to racism(against Obama) rather than what I call reverse-racism(for Obama). That is why I am 100% sure that Barack Obama will win the popular vote by a small margin but John McCain will win the electoral college and the Presidency. If Obama was exactly the same in every way except for being white instead of black, this presidential race would already be over and he would win by a landslide.

Autopilot

That's the best word to describe how tonight's debate went. The two candidates fed the public their preconceived rhetoric without straying too far away from their structured statements.

There were a couple of gaffes though. At one point, Barack Obama mentioned that the government invented the computer. Is this what he really believes or was it thrown in there to tie the government to economic growth and prosperity?

Polarizing Politics

When we started this blog, our goal was to provide an unbiased, objective look at mudslinging and political attacks. Slowly, but surely we leaned, we crossed, we sided. Let's examine how it happened in retrospect.

Early posts focused much of their attention on John McCain's newly picked vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. She was arguably chosen to please the base of the Republican party, though Palin has also turned into a divisive figure in the race so far and it's not just politicians she's going after. She's gone after Katie Couric, prompting a quick jab from Couric. While speaking at a rally in California, she misquotes former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, eliciting a response from Albright for clarification. It appears that her strategy has been to "divide and conquer" up to this point.

While Palin has gone after non-politic figures, increasing her discontent among left leaning potential voters, those are not the only polarizing events surrounding her. The strategy of bombarding her with attacks which many left wing sites adopted early on had the same effect on right leaning potential voters.

Fact check on VP debate

Biden factually incorrect statements(either lies or brain freezes):

1. Biden said McCain voted the same way as Obama on the budget resolution that in it would have raised taxes on people making $42,000 per year. WRONG. McCain did not vote yes on that resolution. Obama did.
2. Biden said McCain opposed Clinton on Bosnia. WRONG. McCain was for intervention in Bosnia.
3. Biden said people would not pay anymore under Obama than they did under Reagan. WRONG. The highest tax bracket under Reagan was 28%. Obama has pledged to raise it to 39.6%.
4. Biden said he voted yes on the war in Iraq to back the President and the UN sanctions and that it was not a war resolution. WRONG!!! It was a war resolution. Everyone knew it was a war resolution. Hillary Clinton is on record saying it was a war resolution.
5. Biden said that McCain voted against supporting our troops. WRONG. McCain voted yes for our troops. Obama voted no. McCain did speak out against a bill that funded troops but had a poison pill about a time line for withdrawal that the Democrats knew the Republicans would never pass.
   
   CHALLENGED: "Biden clearly answers first by saying Obama voted no on funding the troops in the same way that McCain voted no, that(McCain) is only willing to vote yes on condition that the bill backs the correct Iraq strategy (McCain no timetable, Barack timetable) so this is hardly being wrong." Fact Check
   
   
6. Biden said that Obama did not say he would meet with rogue dictators without preconditions. WRONG!!! VERY WRONG!!! That is a lie. How do I prove that this statement is a blatant lie? Role the tape!(Video below)
7. Biden said that it would take 10 years to get any, ANY, oil out of new drilling. WRONG. It would take a long time to get substantial production going but oil could be flowing from new drilling within a year.
8. Biden said we are spending the same in three weeks in Iraq as we have in the entire time we have spent in Afghanistan. WRONG. VERY WRONG! Last year we spent about $60 billion in Iraq. We spent about $10 billion in Afghanistan last year. The math does not work out to 3 weeks equaling 6 1/2 years! The most we have spent in Iraq in one year is $100 billion or $5.7 billion every three weeks. We have spent more than $100 billion in Afghanistan. Do the math on that one! $5.7 billion > $100 billion???? This is the biggest and most BLATANT lie of the night!
   
   CHALLENGED: Biden's quote - "Look, we have spent more money -- we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."
   "Seems to be suggesting that combat money vs. infrastructure money . . .that might be accurate, although it is misleading . . .the way it is phrased leads one to hear he is comparing combat spending . . "
   
   
9. Biden said that Article 1 of the Constitution refers to the executive branch. WRONG. It refers to the legislative branch. This one might have been a slip of the tongue.
10. Biden says there is a windfall profits tax in Alaska. WRONG. There is no windfall profits tax in Alaska. The STATE got a windfall from preexisting taxes on oil companies so Palin gave that back to the tax payers. She didn't put an extra permanent tax on the oil companies.
11. Biden said that Obama helped pass a nuclear weapons bill. WRONG. I looked for it and I cannot find it. There is no such bill in the records that I could see so Obama could not have helped pass it.
    
    CHALLENGED: "It's called the Lugar-Obama bill and it expanded the Nunn-Lugar Bill (which was outdated due to the end of the cold war). The program has yet to be fully funded but it is a bi-partisan bill. The story Biden told was completely true."
    
    
12. Biden said that McCain wants to tax medical benefits which would raise the tax burden on the middle class. MISLEADING. McCain wants to tax the health benefits provided by companies but offsets that with a $5000 tax deduction for everyone. If anyone has ever had to choose the lesser of two evils of the health options their company gave them...having the option to pick your own company might make sense.
13. Biden said that the cause of global warming was, "man made. That's the cause. That's why the polar ice cap is melting." WRONG because it is oversimplified. I am going to have to write a separate blog about global warming to explain to Joe Biden, or anyone who thinks like him, that his way of thinking is naive and ignorant of the more complexed system at work!
14. Biden said that the Bush administration is to blame for deregulation. WRONG. Joe Biden voted yes on the 1999 deregulation bill that is being blamed, by some, for the current mortgage crisis. Regardless if that bill is to blame...Biden still voted for the evil of deregulation that he railed against.
15. Biden said McCain wants to give the oil companies $4 billion more in tax breaks. WRONG. He wants to cut all corporate taxes not just big oil's.
16. Biden said that Pakistan had nuclear warheads that could hit Israel. WRONG. Pakistan's longest range missile has a range of only 1200 miles. Israel is 2000 miles from Pakistan. And I thought he was the foreign policy expert?!?!?
17. Biden said that McCain wrote a magazine article where McCain said he wanted to deregulate health care like he did the banks. WRONG. McCain wrote in the American Academy of Actuaries that he wanted to make it possible for people to buy health care insurance across state lines thus boosting competition.
    

Palin factually incorrect statements(call me bias but they were not as blatant):

1. Palin said that Obama voted to raise taxes on people making $42,000 per year. Not wrong...but: It was not a straight forward bill on a tax increase but it did let tax cuts expire that WOULD raise the taxes on people making as little as $42,000 per year. Obama voted for it. McCain voted against it.
2. Palin said the United States has reduced its troop level in Iraq to a number below where it was when the troop increase began in early 2007. WRONG. We are reducing troops but it is not down to pre-surge levels.
3. Palin said Obama voted 94 times to raise taxes. WRONG sorta. Some of those 94 were multiple votes...but it is still a vote for raising taxes, right? He could have always changed his vote so I think multiple votes, on the same tax raise, count. The number is lower but not much lower. Make no mistake...Obama and Biden want to raise taxes. And their so-called tax break for 95% of Americans(an inaccurate number) can no longer be done. The $850 billion bailout made tax breaks impossible, period.
4. Palin said Obama wanted government run universal health care. WRONG. He does not want government run health care. He wants universal health care insurance.
5. Palin called the General in charge in Afghanistan Gen. McLellan. WRONG. His name is Gen. McKiernan. I gave Biden a break on a slip of the tongue and will do the same for Palin here.
   

That is all I have for now. Will update as I find out more. Feel free to challenge my accuracy. I will accept all legitimate challenges to my fact checks.