John McCain has been saying that the Republican Party is the party of regulating Wall Street.  He claims that the Democrats have not been strong when it comes to keeping the stock market in check.  Lets give you a brief history of “Republican Regulation.”  In the 1920’s, GOP Presidents Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover were so pro-regulation, that they removed virtually all “fair-game” laws so businesses could do whatever they want. Here’s another fact: in 1924, the conservative Supreme Court ruled that minimum wage legislation was unconstitutional. Who were these people trying to help? Were they thinking of Joe Six-Pack?

Next time McCain tells you that he belongs with the party of regulation, take it with a grain of salt…or just call BS on it immediately.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

A new video of Phillip J. Berg purporting to have the “October Surprise” In which he claims that Barack Obama is not an American citizen. He attempts to back this up with many facts and “facts.” It should be pointed out that Berg is/was a Democrat, but was upset about Hillary not winning and can’t give it up that for this election his candidate wasn’t the one people wanted.

Read more

We can NOW call this a Recession, at a very minimum….

 

The causes of this recession are many and varied but, had the 2000 election turned out differently, the U.S. may have had a shot at avoiding or reducing the damage of this downturn.

 

Remember, we had many years of budget SURPLUSES during the Clinton administration.  Surpluses tend to keep the economy strong.  Surpluses can be used to solve all sorts of unforeseen problems.  We were actually paying down the national debt.   

 

It is safe to guess that Al Gore would have continued the same Clinton fiscal policies that led to the surpluses.  Gore has the intellect to appreciate a surplus.

 

Not George Bush.  GW hated all things ‘Clinton’.  He wanted to convince you that we had a surplus because Clinton had overtaxed you.  Conservatives never tire of demonizing Clinton, so the surplus had to be described as ‘evil’ over-taxation.

 

Our newly-elected hero, George W. Bush, was brave enough to step up and offer the excess money (the surplus) be returned to the Americans who put it there.

 

Well, that is what he said to our TV screens.

 

If that was his real intention, it would simply have been a case of political pandering (and Clinton-bashing), but he had a different idea in mind…  Sell the idea as a tax cut to all Americans, but give the huge majority of it to the very most wealthy.  He didn’t even bother calling it ‘trickle down’… he just lied to us.  

 

Massive cuts.  Monstrous cuts for (coincidentally) those who had always financed Bush campaigns and given him high-paying jobs.  (Don’t you wish your grandpa was a senator & your dad was a congressman, vice-president & president?)

 

He was so awful in those jobs they eventually ran him for governor of Texas just to get rid of him.  He has been in the pocket of the very wealthy his whole adult life.

 

Okay, okay.  What does that have to do with our financial state?  Part of the reason the U.S. has no money is GW (and the Republican congress)….

1)      Gave away the surplus through massive tax breaks to the very-very wealthy

2)      Went on a monster pork spending spree (a very un-conservative thing to do)

3)      Started a war with a non-enemy, Iraq, which costs the U.S. $10 billion per month and has no foreseeable end.

This wiped out our surplus and put us into a devastating hole.

 

Since we have no ‘surplus’ money to try to right this financial ship, we (you and I) are forced to borrow the money to pay the $700 billion bailout, with $150 billion in excess goodies (pure pork) tossed in just to bribe lawmakers to vote for it….   $700 billion, $850 billion, what’s the difference?

 

We don’t even know if the $850 billion will solve the problem.

 

Because we flushed our surpluses, the U.S. now must borrow crazy sums from countries like China, who don’t always have our best interests in mind.

 

That would be bad enough, but our economy is becoming so distressed that friendly & unfriendly countries may soon not want to take the risk of loaning money to the U.S..

 

When we can’t even borrow money things will REALLY get bad around here.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

Eight years ago then-candidate Bush promised to be a hands-across-the-aisle, bring-us-all-together sort of candidate & president.

Of course he was just the opposite, running the dirtiest campaign (and presidency) in decades. (When Nixon looks good by comparison, you have besmirched the office…)

Early in the 2000 primaries John McCain was gaining some momentum. Bush “push-polled” South Carolina, auto-dialing thousands of people, telling them John McCain had a biracial child out of wedlock.  Yes, McCain has a ‘biracial’ child, an adopted daughter from Bangladesh.  No tactic was too low for George Bush 

This year when Sen. McCain took control in the Republican primaries he repeatedly said Americans were tired of the smear tactics and promised he would run a different type of campaign.  We presume he meant he would stick to the issues and not smear his opponent (at the time it was down to Obama or Clinton) the way he had been trashed by Bush.

The WinkestLink staff argued about whether he really would stick to the promise of a clean campaign.  We ended up deciding he would NOT fight dirty for the following reasons:

–         He is an honorable man, who has tended to ‘do the right thing’ both in the Senate & the military

–         He would still be seething over the use of this tactic by Bush against him.

When poll numbers started to turn south, it was time for McCain to end all pretense of clean campaigning.  Curiously, McCain hired the same Bush campaign thugs who trashed him eight years earlier, to learn what type of smears will best bring down Obama.

We DID, however, expect Sarah Palin to act as an attack dog.  She showed this tendency in all her previous positions.  In fairness, we expect this of all veep candidates, and Joe Biden also performs this function.

The difference is in the type of the attack.  Saying your opponent will raise taxes is a fair tactic. (It is always nice if you have some facts to back up that type of claim).

Implying your opponent is un-American and/or supports terrorists is WAY out of bounds. By the way, saying it and implying it are exactly the same.  

These smears have nothing to do with what McCain (or even Obama) will do to right the tilting ship-of-state that is the US.  They are only designed to destroy the credibility of the other candidate.

Thus, we at WinkestLink are deeply saddened.  The accusations against Obama are old charges but,

Bring on the smears…

McCain/Palin now use the word ‘terrorist’ more & more frequently in the same sentence as ‘Obama’.  This type of tactic worked wonders for Bush against John Kerry.  (Actually Bush used it successfully for years, exploiting our fears to start a war he really wanted, Iraq, and impugning the patriotism of everyone who ever questioned him.)

It doesn’t end with terrorism.  The former minister of Obama’s former church once said “God Damn America”.  (I bet you remember that, since it has been replayed approximately three gazillion times by the liberal press.)  Now McCain operatives have begun to say “God Damn America” and “Obama” in the same sentence frequently.

For the longest time McCain tried to use the phrase “not ready” to describe Obama, but apparently that did not scare people enough.  After the initial “Palin bump” the poll numbers started going back down, and it became time to bring out the nuclear arsenal of catchphrases, including ‘terrorism’ and ‘God Damn America’.

These don’t tell you anything about how McCain will govern or solve our problems, but it may just be enough to scare you away from voting for Obama.

These are, of course, diversionary tactics.  They lead voters the opposite direction from actual issues that may affect their lives.  (We can’t EVEN imagine what kind of scurrilous comments would have been brought out had Hillary been the nominee.)

 

                        SUMMARY

Is Obama a terrorist?   No.  

Did he ever support terrorism?   No.

Did Obama say “God Damn America.”   No.

Does Obama support our troops?   Duh.

Does Obama love America as much as McCain?  Diehard conservatives will have to swallow hard on this one … Obama may just love America more, because he trusts the intelligence of Americans enough to not divert them from real issues.

 

Get the facts:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/05/fact-check-is-obama-palling-around-with-terrorists/

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

A recent news article I read showed the yearly income of nine CEOs of major corporations like Merrill Lynch, Wachovia, Washington Mutual and so on. It also gives the current salary of Warren Buffett, the richest man in the world.

Read more

So after watching three debates by the Presidential nominees and VP nominees, I continue to hear the Republican candidates saying that we must stay in Iraq in order to “win.” Let’s temporarily set aside all those famous quotes by the generals of old saying that nobody really wins in a war, and look at what other people think. Let me say again the John McCain and Sarah Palin believe that we can have a victory in Iraq, and continue on by saying that General Petraeus–they’re proclaimed hero–does not believe victory is achievable in Iraq.

Hopefully people will catch on to this, so they can understand just how strong McCain really is on foreign policy.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

The Electoral College is an imaginary mechanism used to select the President of the United States.

Each state is assigned a fairly random number of electoral votes, loosely based on population. The candidate who gets the majority of electoral votes becomes the next president.

Read more

In light of the recent collapse of large corporations, I feel that nobody is questioning the decision making of the CEOs and board members of those companies. They manipulatively run their businesses into the ground, and demand hundreds of millions of dollars to do so. When they are finished laying off hundreds of people and ruining countless more lives because of investments into the company, they run off with their unbelievable amount of money and retire (because they actually can), or repeat the process to make even more money by ruining even more lives.

As American citizens, we should make sure that they are held accountable for their actions, and not vote for them to be President of the United States.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)
Loading...

Read more