An old photo of Obama next to some words from Faux News.

Anybody could have put his photo next to some typing.

And what words were those?? Some that matter greatly, proven again, lies. If we can't TRUST what Obama is saying going into this election - do U eally think U will be able to trust anything much he says? (Or his figures, tax credits, free give-a-ways??) NOPE

---copy---"Our neighbors include Muhammad Ali, former mayor Eugene Sawyer, poets Gwendolyn Brooks and Elizabeth Alexander, and writer Barack Obama. Minister Louis Farrakhan lives a block from our home and adds, we think, a unique dimension to the idea of 'safe neighborhood watch': the Fruit of Islam, his security force, has an eye on things twenty-four-hours a day."

The Obama campaign said the blurb was not a full-fledged review of the book.

"He didn't do a review. He provided one line about the book to the Tribune," campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.

A month before the item appeared, on Nov. 20, 1997, Michelle Obama, then dean of student services and director of the University Community Service Center, held a panel at the University of Chicago that featured both Barack Obama and Ayers.

"Ayers will be joined by Sen. Barack Obama, Senior Lecturer in the Law School, who is working to combat legislation that would put more juvenile offenders into the adult system," the University of Chicago Chronicle reported on Nov. 6, 1997.


Barack Obama provided a glowing endorsement of a book by domestic terrorist William Ayers in the Dec. 21, 1997 Chicago Tribune. (Zombietime.com)
----end----
READ MORE. words matter!!)
http://www.nevilleawards.com/obama_ayres.shtml

Obama, Ayres and The Terrorists -- Three Articles

Obama & Ayres: Stanley Kurtz's Report on the Annenburg Project
Obama, William Ayres and the Chicago U. Annenburg Cover-up -- Obama Wants to Silence the Investigations -- 3 Articles
Obama, William Ayres and the Chicago U. Annenburg Cover-up -- Three Articles
Obama, Ayres and The Terrorists -- Three Articles
Obama, Ayres and The Terrorists II--Quotes from Bill Ayres -- Two Articles

Obama worked with terrorist-Senator helped fund organization that rejects 'racist' Israel's existence

Obama, Ayres, and the Radicals

Ayres Quotes -- Bill Ayres: Self-righteous, self-absorbed, intellectually dishonest and a miserable human being

Click here for Ayres and Dohrn transcript and audio quotes

---end copy--

And, timeline of birth and history, much much more. The timeline goes into details, his youth, and details galore, up to this year and should be a MUST READ. Detailed history of Obama — enlightening and frightening!

http://colony14.net/id41.html

Obama encourages supporters to be rude to Republicans and undecided independents, telling them, “I want you to argue with them and get in their face.” [213,214]

Obama’s list of accomplishments in the U.S. Senate consists of getting two bills passed: one to send foreign aid to the Congo and another to name a post office. [337]

Why do you think that is? No community involvment these days. We should encourage such things. But the powers that be don't want it. They want dependence from us.

I ask this. If the problem is cost of living, do you think you would help people more if you lowered the cost of living by making their dollar stretch futher or by paying for things like insurance for them?

One to me sounds like it's treating the symptom, the other is treating the cause...

I don't understand your point here. Powers to be want dependence from us -- that is why people move a lot?

Food pantries are low - people have less money to donate these days and more people are suffering and need help.

Maybe that's the issue that should be addressed before we waste money by starting other programs.

Maybe we should be working on keeping people from getting poverty stricken in the first place, then focus on helping those who are already there.

Cause: Government overspending, unbacked money, globalization of businesses.

Solution: stop spending so much money. Find a way to encourage business here, reback the dollar.

Its just a vicious cycle when we spend money we do not have. No matter what that money is used for, if we spend it we are causing the problem.

Maine's shortcoming stems from our welfare system. There is no time limit on it. You could be on welfare here your whole life. It pays rather well too. In fact many move here just because of our welfare system. But as a result Maine has the highest tax in the U.S., and the lowest average annual income... This forces more people to "take advantage" of our system. The cycle is brutal...

In 1971 congress passed a bill that meant we no longer had to back our money with gold.

Doesn't it aggrivate anyone that if we hadn't passed that bill we would be paying $1.20 per gallon of gas?

Doesn't if make you angry that the cost of medicine would be almost 1/4 of what it is now? Education would cost considerably less as well...

T- U missed part of the news??? --copy posted prior --the Commonwealth Fund found that 57% of Canadians reported waiting 4 weeks or more to see a specialist; and a WHOPPING 22 months for an MRI---- --copy

with Obama’s health-care plan, or social health-care as I may call it, everything will go in the wrong direction. I don’t want the government-which can not control job promotion/creation and rising oil prices-to run and mandate how to provide me with health-care…
Look at France for example… they have social health-care that covers everyone, what’s wrong with that you ask?? well only that it would take up to 6 months to schedule your vital surgery meanwhile it wouldn’t take more than 3 weeks in U.S. With social health-care the quality is bound to significantly go down.
To all you democrats out there….. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE LUNCH!
Personally I dont think I should pay more money for Joe who lives down the street, who is obese, a smoker, and is a total wreck (his choice). I agree with McCain that Americans should have the ultimate decision on which health-care plan they should have. Another thing… universal health care would put sooo many people out of jobs.. insurance companies would crash because their purpose would completely be demolished.. think of all the people who would loose their jobs.

Democrats tend to think and act from flee of passion… I am totally with you dems on every American having no trouble obtaining something that they could afford and should be eligible to.. health care.. but you have to think of the consequences that will follow.. more debt maybe?? 9 trillion already, now lets go a little further!! Give me a break.. in the long run McCain’s plan will work a lot better and i by far more realistic than Obama’s

http://health-insurance-carriers.com/blog/health-care-john-mccain-vs-barack-obama/

---so France is bad too. U want to wait how many MONTHS for (perhaps life-threatning) an appointment?? BB

PS, drawbacks, all of them///sick around the world--copy

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
Again you fail to see the point..As I said two posts ago show me where Mcs plan will bring coverage to the poor and uninsured..The big cause of spiraling costs..You seen to forget we treat everyone whether you pay or not. So our emergency rooms have be come clogged down with non emergence cases because people don't have any insurance..They wait longer when it would have been cheaper to care for them earlier..We pay for them and we pay for them now..And PLz quit comparing Os plan to Canada..And again PLZ show me where Mcs plan address the poor and uninsured..WE ALREADY DO PAY FOR JOE DOWN THE STREET AND EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS NOT INSURED...

Again you fail to see the point..As I said two posts ago show me where Mcs plan will bring coverage to the poor and uninsured..The big cause of spiraling costs..You seen to forget we treat everyone whether you pay or not. So our emergency rooms have be come clogged down with non emergence cases because people don't have any insurance..They wait longer when it would have been cheaper to care for them earlier..We pay for them and we pay for them now..And PLz quit comparing Os plan to Canada..And again PLZ show me where Mcs plan address the poor and uninsured..WE ALREADY DO PAY FOR JOE DOWN THE STREET AND EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS NOT INSURED...


You are exactly right, Templter!!

I would like to add, "There are no free lunches. We pay for it already."

Ohwidow, you said that you don't want the government to run and mandate how to provide you with health-care…"

I don't know why you are not understanding Obama's plan.

If you have insurance with the company that you work for, you will still be receiving that insurance.

Obama is talking about changing the way it is for the uninsured working people - the people that fell through the cracks.

Also, this is not a free insurance for the working uninsured.
By having a quantity of people on a policy, it lowers the premiums. Those people will be paying a small premium for the insurance.

How do you see that as the government mandating your healthcare?

I am Josey, the plumber (smile) self employed, not covered by an employer, but self insured. I see what O offered, compared it to M, did research it. To better answer u're q, --copy--

http://catholicexchange.com/2008/08/28/113617/

For all the talk of universal health care, Barack Obama’s proposals actually move us only slowly and not very far in that direction. He would enact government mandates requiring employers to insure their workers and parents to insure their children, while introducing extensive new regulations of the insurance sector, such as requiring health plans to cover all applicants. Even with these changes, however, Obama’s plan essentially preserves the employer-based system that has proved so troublesome.

By comparison, McCain’s reforms look radical. He calls for moving away from the employer-based system by shifting insurance tax credits from employers to individuals, giving people more control–and thereby more responsibility for–their own health care. Additionally, he proposes deregulating the insurance market, so that interstate competition increases.

Both schemes must deal with the question of financing, but there is another important question to pose. Most Americans are concerned that health care provision be characterized not only by economic efficiency but also by justice and equity. When vulnerable populations don’t have access to adequate health care, our obligations to the common good stand unfulfilled. Which plan aligns better with the demands of justice?

It is difficult to predict what the results of either approach would be. As incentives change, behavior changes, making calculations hazardous. Both McCain and Obamathreatening recognize that a problem as enormous as health care delivery is not easily soluble by a single reform program. But if we’re at a crossroads considering whether to move toward more government involvement or more market freedom, the latter direction is likely to lead toward a more efficient and equitable system.

History proves that large government programs covering high numbers of beneficiaries with diverse needs do not fare well. At the personal level, bureaucratic rules replace individual care and attention. At the economic level, price control would almost certainly be part of the package. Price ceilings, as long lines for gasoline in the 1970s should have convinced us, lead to shortages of supply. The generation of fewer doctors and nurses is not a prescription for improved health care.

The drawback of the market is its potential for unequal outcomes. It is important to remember, however, that inequality is not synonymous with injustice. Justice does not require that all people receive precisely equivalent levels of medical treatment; instead, it dictates that basic physical needs, including health care, are met. Perfect equality, moreover, is simply unrealistic. Even in those nations held up as models of universal access–Canada, for example–the wealthy and well-connected manage to secure better or faster medical treatment.

The more critical concern is that the people who are most vulnerable–children, the unemployed, the uninsured, the chronically ill–may fall through the cracks of a health care market built on a foundation of personal responsibility. This is where other institutions play indispensable roles. Many of America’s hospitals bear testimony to their religious roots: Mercy, Methodist, Good Samaritan. Provision of care for the ill has ever been intrinsic to the practice of Christianity, reflected in the traditional work of mercy, “visit the sick.”

Neither presidential candidate’s reform plan highlights the extensive work performed by charitable organizations, but neither the market nor the government is going to care adequately for those on the margins. Whichever reforms (if any) are eventually implemented, the imperative to visit the sick will remain as a call to each of us to lend support in our families, churches, and communities.
--end c--
Health Care: Curb Your Enthusiasm for Obama

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=67825

Obama’s claim that he would save $2,500 per family beyond a simple cost shift to the federal government of large claims is unsubstantiated.

http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2008/03/a-detailed-anal.html

More likely, a $100 billion infusion of new health care spending by an Obama or Clinton plan would actually increase the rate of health care inflation and ultimately create an imperative for more draconian government intervention in the health care markets both Obama and Clinton would preserve.

Cost containment is the big missing link here.
--------end c--

And if u're placing your vote based upon health care - don't May not happen as the money isn't there. Do U want to borrow more money from China? BB

I am josey, the plumber (smile) self employed, not covered by an employer, but self insured. I see what O offered, compared it to M, did research it. To better answer u're q, --copy--

http://catholicexchange.com/2008/08/28/113617/

For all the talk of universal health care, Barack Obama’s proposals actually move us only slowly and not very far in that direction. He would enact government mandates requiring employers to insure their workers and parents to insure their children, while introducing extensive new regulations of the insurance sector, such as requiring health plans to cover all applicants. Even with these changes, however, Obama’s plan essentially preserves the employer-based system that has proved so troublesome.

By comparison, McCain’s reforms look radical. He calls for moving away from the employer-based system by shifting insurance tax credits from employers to individuals, giving people more control–and thereby more responsibility for–their own health care. Additionally, he proposes deregulating the insurance market, so that interstate competition increases.

Both schemes must deal with the question of financing, but there is another important question to pose. Most Americans are concerned that health care provision be characterized not only by economic efficiency but also by justice and equity. When vulnerable populations don’t have access to adequate health care, our obligations to the common good stand unfulfilled. Which plan aligns better with the demands of justice?

It is difficult to predict what the results of either approach would be. As incentives change, behavior changes, making calculations hazardous. Both McCain and Obamathreatening recognize that a problem as enormous as health care delivery is not easily soluble by a single reform program. But if we’re at a crossroads considering whether to move toward more government involvement or more market freedom, the latter direction is likely to lead toward a more efficient and equitable system.

History proves that large government programs covering high numbers of beneficiaries with diverse needs do not fare well. At the personal level, bureaucratic rules replace individual care and attention. At the economic level, price control would almost certainly be part of the package. Price ceilings, as long lines for gasoline in the 1970s should have convinced us, lead to shortages of supply. The generation of fewer doctors and nurses is not a prescription for improved health care.

The drawback of the market is its potential for unequal outcomes. It is important to remember, however, that inequality is not synonymous with injustice. Justice does not require that all people receive precisely equivalent levels of medical treatment; instead, it dictates that basic physical needs, including health care, are met. Perfect equality, moreover, is simply unrealistic. Even in those nations held up as models of universal access–Canada, for example–the wealthy and well-connected manage to secure better or faster medical treatment.

The more critical concern is that the people who are most vulnerable–children, the unemployed, the uninsured, the chronically ill–may fall through the cracks of a health care market built on a foundation of personal responsibility. This is where other institutions play indispensable roles. Many of America’s hospitals bear testimony to their religious roots: Mercy, Methodist, Good Samaritan. Provision of care for the ill has ever been intrinsic to the practice of Christianity, reflected in the traditional work of mercy, “visit the sick.”

Neither presidential candidate’s reform plan highlights the extensive work performed by charitable organizations, but neither the market nor the government is going to care adequately for those on the margins. Whichever reforms (if any) are eventually implemented, the imperative to visit the sick will remain as a call to each of us to lend support in our families, churches, and communities.
--end c--
Health Care: Curb Your Enthusiasm for Obama

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=67825

Obama’s claim that he would save $2,500 per family beyond a simple cost shift to the federal government of large claims is unsubstantiated.

http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2008/03/a-detailed-anal.html

More likely, a $100 billion infusion of new health care spending by an Obama or Clinton plan would actually increase the rate of health care inflation and ultimately create an imperative for more draconian government intervention in the health care markets both Obama and Clinton would preserve.

Cost containment is the big missing link here.
--------end c--

And if u're placing your vote based upon health care - don't May not happen as the money isn't there. Do U want to borrow more money from China? BB

You have failed to answer my question..The uninsured and the poor!!! A big reason for the hight cost of healthcare..If you do nothing these costs have only one way to go and that up!!!! Are you saying we dont already pay for the uninsured? Joe blow is uninsured and goes to the ER for an a cut..He get stitchs and a shot.. Total upaid bill $1500..Its unpaid so how does the hospital cover its costs!!! Raise the costs on everyone else..Now if Joe blow would had insurance and went to a dr, total cost $150..Are there no savings there?

Whats up its not letting me qoute some one!!! Ohw..see above

Nevermind, I was asking how you see it. I wasn't asking for more links.

Hey winx I guess she thinks it ok to borrow money from china to bail out the wealthy on wall street but it wouldnt be ok to borrow it on something that would save money and give people what they need..Hmmmmmm I guess she believes all the blogs she reads

Ooooh, don't even get me started on the bail out.

My priorities are the economy, jobs, education and healthcare.

The USA now owes China 1.4 Trillion Dollars
Just why dose the US owe China so much money?

It is in part, from that stimulus check we all got!! And they want to give us another one??
And wars cost money, we borrowed it.


looks like China is the new landlords of America. Sure hope they don't call in their 'note' if they loose faith in the US. BB

http://en-1.ce.cn/main/Insight/200412/06/t20041206_2501558.shtml

And yes, worry about debit. And health care too. But, if one can't pay for the children they have, or the 'treatment' one needs at a hosp/emg. room - guess they need to cut back on the cable, cigs, entertainment, etc. We all don't need to pledge more than our first-born already, for more debit!

That Obama has a terrible agenda, period.

Back on topic....Obama went to Hawaii to see the Supreme Court. Do the research. Andy Martin is there trying to get Obama's birth certificate released for public verification. Obama and the DNC have been trying to prevent this. Today is a scary day for Obama so he had to go try to stop it. Interesting timing here. I hate to break it to the Obama fans, but this birth certificate business may prove problematic for your candidate. Better brace. On the other hand, If the trip is legit about his grandma, I hope they have a good visit, even if in his words, she is just a "typical white person".

Obama in Hawaii visiting his ailing grandmother. Yesterday you were sprouting off about how come he was going w/out his wife/daughters. He must have heard you because magically his family is with him visiting his ailing grandmother.

Just went online to Hawaii's State Judiciary Public Access and guess what, not one case on Obama. hmmmmmmmmmmmm

That family must be under a lot of stress. They have to pull the girls out of school, Grandma is not doing well, and campaigning for an election all at the same time. I sure couldn't handle that.

What family? We heard Mrs. O was going to speak at his events.....hummmm

And why didn't he take his private jet (days ago, seeing the woman is ill), instead of waiting until same day as court appearance required?

Just waiting to see pics of him being tailed.BB


SUPREME COURT OF HAWAII’I


SUPREME COURT DOCKET NUMBER: 29414

google it.

NICE SONG......New song by Hank Williams Jr. titled "McCain-Palin Tradition"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S81brjpteDk