Bazookaman,

Very well put!

Obama is running to be "the" commander-in-chief? I thought we had 51 of those now - since every governor is "commander-in-chief" of the state guard, according to the Sarah Palin Fan Club.

Dear lovemthome,

I haven't made up my mind yet, but you have given me some things to think about.

WEll, as for being fooled . . .let's think about it.

For the past 8 years, this country has gone down the tubes. The unemployment rate is now over 6% and gas is up to $4 a gallon.

We are mocked by our allies and made fun of by Russia and China. The U.S. was prevented from giving any assistance to Georgia because all of our resources are tied up in Iraq.

Our government leaders sleep with Saudia Arabia and the big oil companies . . . and you have the gall to ask who is being fooled?

So, . . . in these past 8 years, how has life treated you? Are you really better off now than when we were governed by a democratic president?

I am so happy that americans actually have someone who has the courage to stand up for their beliefs and convictions and ADVOCATING CHANGE instead of going along with the same good ole boys. That person is Barack Obama.

At least he knows what it's like to be middle-class, because that's the way he grew up. At least he knows how important adequate health care is for the average american.

I am so looking forward to restoring respect and justice to the government. Frankly, it just can't be done under McCain/Palin.

I mean, have you seen those commercials McCain is putting out? He's has the nerve to say he is bucking the system and his party, when he has voted with Bush 95% of the time?

I'm voting for family man, who hasn't had affairs, I'm voting for a father who isn't a war hawk and will REALLY THINK about the consequences of invading another country and putting our sons and daughters in harm's way.

By the way . . . what do you think about Palin now? I mean after you heard that she's deep in troopergate, has billed the Alaskan government thousands of dollars to stay overnight in her own home, lied about the bridge to nowhere, lied about her son's deployment date, and doesn't even know the Bush doctrine and is willing to take Israel's side against all other nations without asking questions? Oh yeah - she says she's against earmarks but she advocated for millions of federal dollars to study the mating activities of crabs. More of the same. I guess the american people are supposed to just take everything she says as gospel and follow like lemmings. Well folks, if we keep on the path we are currently on, we will jump over the cliff just like lemmings do.

Oh yeah . . . just more of the same.

Palin billing to stay in her own home is no different than good old Butch being paid to live in his own home here in Idaho. Many elected officials get a HUGE allowance for that (sometimes more than their actual payments...if they have any) and take it all. So, what is the big deal if Palin does it? They said she was within her rights when she did it---it was not illegal. Do you not think that the president gets the same thing to maintain his homes while he is in the White House. Please!

Affairs come out after they are in office not before. Just wait. Ask the people of Illinois how great he has been for them. He is a typical politician nothing more nothing less.

KimJean577.....8 years down the tubes. No argument there, I've gone on record several times, that Bush is the worst President we've ever had.

Keep in mind though, he is surrounded by a Democrat controlled Congress, you know......the ones who control the finances, legislate and pass the bills. Bush is a fool, but he couldn't do it without help. No president can.

Clinton has always been given credit for our "stunning economy" during those years, but the libs conveniently never mention that SIX of his EIGHT years were under a REPUBLICAN-controlled Congress. THEY created the bills and legislation. All HE had to do was approve and sign them......which to his credit, he was smart enough to do.

Don't like gas prices? Bush, if he didn't do anything ELSE right, WANTED to drill 7 years ago, and we could have been pumping TODAY (while still researching alternative fuels). It wasn't the GOP who got it blocked so we wouldn't disturb the artic rabbits and weasels. Whatever else Bush has screwed up.........this gas thing is YOUR party. All yours.

It's good that we couldn't help Georgia. We shouldn't be helping ANYBODY but our own people. I'm with you here, because I don't support Bush's war in Iraq, either. We should have nuked the mountains of Afghanistan, killed Bin Laden and flown back home. No "boots on the ground" should have ever been used.

Socialized medicine is NOT adequate care. It hasn't worked in Canada and it won't work here. Illegals are already draining our "free emergency services, and a lot of folks can't wait 8 or 9 months to see a doctor, (and NOT one of their choosing).

Restoring justice to government? Your man not only disregards our Constitution, but potentially as president, there is a possibility he could appoint the next 2 or 3 Supreme Court Judges. You think you don't have any rights now? Just wait.

McCain IS bucking his party. Why do you think he's had so much trouble trying to secure a conservative base? He has co-sponsored bills with Ted Kennedy. The McCain Feingold Act is a threat to the first Amendment. A lot of us oldtime "Reaganites" do NOT consider him as one of us............and ONLY through the announcement of Sarah Palin, do we see anyone who resembles a Republican on the ticket. How can a "RINO" be bucking anybody BUT his party?

I don't know what you guys are worried about. When McCain got the nomination, a lot of us just saw it as "One Democrat against the other." If John McCain rallies enough GENUINE GOP support to put him over the top in November, it'll only be because of the VP choice. That's the only way it'll happen.

I can't fault Obama on his war views. As a Vietnam combat vet, I see this Iraq thing as another political fiasco myself. This whole thing WAS handled wrong...........but in all fairness, the Dems have NO legitimate argument. They are as much to blame, because THEY control the Congress. THEY could have halted Bush when he took us to war without Congressional declaration as he is REQUIRED to do by the Constitution. (The WHAT??........sorry, I forgot). THEY could have refused to fund it, thus FORCING Bush to bring the troops home.

Naw.........better to let it slide awhile, and use it for their own political gains in 2008, with a now VERY angry America behind them.

God takes Israel's side, so do I and so does Palin. And why not? If America was attacked in the next 30 minutes, Israel would be the only nation to come to our aid without blinking an eye, forming a committee first, or taking some kind of poll. They are the best allies we have, whether the bleeding hearts out there know it or not.

Palin's rented out her home? So what? Slick Willie rented out the Lincoln Room in the White house to guests.........you think this is something original? I think before the debates are over, we're gonna see a few "skeletons" on the other side.

Anybody watch the attempted crucifixion while that media nitwit was doing his 2-day "interview" with Sarah? At one point, she turned one of his lead-ins around, saying Obama had voted either for or against something (I don't remember what it was now) 94 times.

Think on that a minute.............94 times. Not 90, 95 or 100...............but ninety FOUR. That's not an approximate number, that's a SPECIFIC number. I think this girl has done her homework on Mr.Barack. I wouldn't being throwing any rocks if I were Joe Biden either. 35 years in D.C.............you KNOW HE's had time to step on himself.

And the debates ARE coming......

For those who regard Alaska as being an insignificant state to be governor of, I would bring to your attention that Alaska is America's FIRST LINE of missile defense against the Soviets. Would it be reasonable to assume that Mrs Palin is PRIVY to high security of U.S. soil, which incidently includes the lower 48?

You ALREADY trust her and don't even know it. What can we trust Obama with? And how do we know?

ExInternMike............The Sun, L.A. Times, Fox, Boston Herald, ABC and CNN.............yeah, I'll bet they really pressed him. Why not just put him on Oprah, or the View and be done with it.

Ok........so he's liked in Illinois. Look at the two idiots the people of Massachusetts keep re-electing! Just because a motorcycle cop can write tickets, doesn't make him the next director of the FBI.

Rasmussen poll is no surprise. Of COURSE McCain is equally liked along with Obama. Not much difference between a liberal and a RINO. He ain't one of us, but Palin IS, and McCain is 72.

But hey...........whatever makes you people happy. Vote for Osama if you want. Free country, for now anyway.

I'm going to back Sarah, because with Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee out of it, I don't see any other options. Besides that, I'm a gun owner. Whether Obama gets in or not.

Actually, I'm not gonna get TOO worked up over this. I don't see him pulling Idaho, and this IS where WE are going to vote.

Like I said,

the economy was much better under the last democratic president.

I didn't pay $4 a gallon for gas.

The U.S. government wasn't bailing out private businesses with taxpayer dollars.

We didn't go to war under false pretenses and kill over $100,000 innocent people.

We had respect from our allies.

Alan Greenspan just said yesterday that this is the worst U.S. economy he has ever seen.

I'm 51 years old and have to agree with him.

Our national debt has never been so high. Our government is borrowing more money from social security than ever before with no intention on ever paying it back.

We need a change and that change should not be 4 more years of republican government.

Fact it folks, democratics are going to have to clean up the mess - their the only ones that can do it.

Yes, please, go outside of America and see what it's like. Yeah, it's not perfect, but we have it real good here. Both my parents immigrated to this country and too, have traveled quite a bit and still have most of my relatives living outside this country. There is opportunity here and you need to take that opportunity to find/move to a job (my parents had to move to another country, learn the language and then obtain various degrees of higher education) and put food on the table. It's not the government's job to feed me, provide me w/a job or to take care of me. It's their job to provide a safe & secure country that they run in a fair manner so I can do for myself.

KimJean577:

Economy better under Clinton? Of course it was. After 38 straight years of Democratic control, Clinton was forced to work with a Republican-led Congress for 6 of his 8 years. Yes, no doubt. Things WERE a little better.

Correct! You WEREN'T paying 4 bucks a gallon for gas. You wouldn't be paying it NOW if your party hadn't blocked the drilling 7 years ago, that they now support today (this IS an election year, though).

U.S. bailout? Talk to your friends on Capitol Hill about that. They've been calling the shots for quite awhile now.

You and I are in TOTAL agreement about Bush's war. It's nothing more than another Vietnam, in an attempt to rectify George SENIOR's foul-up in 1990..................and Bin Laden is still free.

The height of "allied respect" was during Reagan's tenure. From Iran, to Libya, to Grenada to the Berlin Wall, nobody screwed with us, not even the Russians. Nobody likes us today unless we're giving them our tax dollars, while we go broke..............talk to Congress about that.

Alan Greenspan is right, this IS the worst economy in recent memory It should rightfully be shared by both the knucklehead in the Oval Office with his undeclared war, and left-led Congress who has not only supported him with the funds to do it, but continue to give our tax money away like it was Christmas.

This isn't just a REPUBLICAN thing, although in your heart of hearts, you might WANT it to be.

You Democrats cry and cry...........but it's YOUR people who control (or at least have the POWER to control) what comes out of Washington. And you don't, but demonstrate in the streets before an election.

You can't yell too loudly when "little Johnny" breaks a window, if it was YOU who continued to supply him with rocks!

No.........this doesn't EXCUSE "little Johnny" but let's get real............

Did Bush do this all by himself?..........Did he?? Did ONE MAN, all by his little "lonesome" cause EVERYTHING you people whine about? Let me see if I have this right....From Pelosi on down, you Democrats are the majority of the infamous "435" back there, but your party has had NOTHING to do with ANY of our problems. George Bush and the MINORITY have done it all. Ok, if you and "Whoopi" say so, I guess I'd better stand corrected, eh?

I DO agree with all of you out there on one thing. We DO need change but it's going to take a Ron Paul or somebody like him, and a complete turnover in that Congress, to get America back to where it should be. Not gonna happen this time around. Short of a revolt, it probably won't EVER happen.

All we can do in November is try to sort out the oil from the grease. If Americans ever DO gather up enough collective guts to take our rights and freedoms back from what will REALLY be an oppressive government by then, we'll need to do it the way our founders did in 1776.

To do THAT, we're gonna need rifles, so I'm gonna vote Republican, and I use that term very loosely, because there AREN'T actually many TRUE Republicans in government anymore.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, ExInternMike, but don't you people from Pennsylvania or one of the surrounding states have a symbol of a "Minuteman" on on flag or license plate?, sybolizing the freedom ot the original colonies?

Out west here, we seem to have different views of what freedom really is. Seems like there must be something in the water, because with the exception of California, the closer to D.C. you get, the more submissive people seem to be. Might just be what I see, read and hear, though.

America was fought for and formed back east, kicking the British back over the water. It wasn't done through conferences, encounter groups, or by "sitting down" for amiable discussions with those who sought to rule over us. It was done by men with guts, determination and muskets.

Obama doen't trust us with our "muskets", nor do MOST Democrats...............do you see a situation here?

ONLY A GOVERNMENT DESIRING TOTAL CONTROL, WOULD FEAR A POPULACE HAVING TO MEANS TO RESIST. Why else would it matter?

Yeah...yeah....yeah.......the 2nd again. But there IS no 2nd Amendment ANYWHERE in the world where people are living under dictatorships. And that's why they are.

ExIntern..........don't drift off to sleep.........when the Soviet Union "dissolved", do you think they just scuttled their nuclear subs, cut all their MIG fighters into surplus scrap and pulled all of their missiles out of the silos?.........they're not stupid, and they don't trust the west. Fact is, their newest versions of the MIG-31 are definitely state-of-the art. Don't think for a minute the Russians are no longer a threat. They'd probably LIKE us to think that. I'd have to look it up, but I believe the Bible even references the presence of "the great bear" in the last days.

Palin/McCain (and notice the order I put that in). Palin/McCain........because that's all we really have.

President Bush didn't need to be "all by his little lonesome," the House was controlled by Republicans for six of the past seven and a half years, and the Senate for four. Plenty of windows of opportunity for Republicans to set Republican policies. It is largely a "Republican thing."

And at no point have the Democrats had large enough majorities to override any vetoes, so they can't roll back Republican policies even if they wanted to - and on any given issue including the Second Amendment, many of them don't. On that one its the Democrats from rural areas who respect the Second Amendment, Pennsylvanians like Bob Casey, Chris Carney, and Paul Kanjorski, and Mike McIntyre in North Carolina, who outnumber the pro-gun control Republicans like Peter King of New York - specifically Long Island I believe - who will keep gun control measures either at bay or heavily watered down by eliminating whatever majority the Democrats have after this fall on the issue.

I guess if you ignore the past two elections you could measure the policy preferences of the electorate by proximity to D.C. Otherwise, you notice that generally the rural areas - in Idaho, in Pennsylvania, in Washington state, in Ohio - vote for the party or the candidates which cater to their interests and the urban areas vote for the party or candidates which cater to their's. For instance, Cleveland, represented by Dennis Kucinich, is more "submissive" - whatever that means - than solidly Republican, NRA towns in Pennsylvania like Mifflinburg and Reynoldsville -despite Cleveland being farther from D.C.

Part of the structure of our system is the intentional overrepresentation of rural areas in Congress - the Senate was created for that exact purpose - and it gives conservatives an advantage on both issues I agree with them on, like the Second Amendment, and on issues I don't. Something more useful than what are on the state flags for me to keep in mind when voting.

And no, I don't think the former Soviet Union is dismantling its weaponry, which you should already know since I wrote in the same paragraph in which I mentioned the demise of the U.S.S.R. that the threat is in the weapons being given to terrorists. But I'll repeat it anyways since the CIA director now has said Al-Qaida is the No. 1 nuclear threat to the U.S. And again, Barack Obama worked with Republican Sen. Dick Lugar to secure and dismantle such stray weaponry before it gets into terrorist hands - the Lugar-Obama Act of 2007.

Wow - almost couldn't believe my eyes when I read Idahoborn's rational for justifying over 100,000 innocent lives lost in Iraq due to the American invasion.

Just because Saddam killed his own people, does that make it better if Americans kill them?

Aren't we just as terroristic as Sadam?

Well, ExIntern, for a party that couldn't overide anything, thay had no problems getting the drilling abolished 7 years ago, that COULD have been pumping right NOW, and not for 4 bucks per, either. (and we could still be researching alternative fuels at the same time).

And war DOES require Congress to declare it, and continue to fund it.

The CIA director is wrong.........the biggest threats to America are the Federal Reserve, Washington D.C. and the U.N., in that order.

IdahoBorn makes some good points, except for the war. 9/11 HAS to be avenged.....still does, but NOT in Iraq. It doesn't matter what Saddam might be up to.......there might be 50 more just like him "up to something.", but the United States is NOT the world's policeman. George Washington was right about that, and besides, we can't afford it.......which should be QUITE obvious right now, eh?

But you don't negotiate with the bad guys. You do as Teddy Roosevelt advised......something about walking softly and a big stick?

Colonel Kadafi of Libya pushed his luck with Reagan, got slammed for it and for the next decade and a half, he's been pretty polite. So was everybody else, and for HIS two terms, nobody used our flag as a doormat.

Like numbers and figures? Initially, Reagan trounced Carter 44 states to 6.

In his re-election bid, he did even BETTER (which is NOT the norm), taking Mondale 49 to 1!!! Even the Democrats were pretty satisfied........I mean, you don't get numbers like that without getting support from the "other side" as well.

BUSH...........after 9/11, we should have gone into Afghanistan, killed Bin Laden, nuked the Taliban and used their butts for runway lights.

When...like with Reagan....we SHOW the rest of the world that we mean business, we won't get messed with. You don't invite your enemies for "tea and crumpets" as Obama would do. You negotiate from a position of strength, which is all these fanatics understand.

From Clinton to Bush, it hasn't taken world tyrants long to figure out that we've become "saber-rattlers" and "condemners." We go to the U.N. seeking "economic sanctions. When we DO go to war, it's against the wrong people, we court-martial our own troops, and concern ourselves with "public image."

Today, Iran threatens us, (after Ronnie shut them down 20 years ago), Kadafi is openly supporting terrorists, Putin kicked Bush around like a soccerball (but Gorbachev knocked down that Berlin Wall after Reagan got on him, didn't he?). North Korea is now a threat, and China isn't far behind.

We need to get tough again.........but with the right people.

Washington D.C. is a hoard of empty suits, and EVERYBODY knows it. THAT's why nobody repects us, and we've become the laughing stock of the world.

KimJean......you're right, we don't need to be killing Iraqis. We need to kill Bin Laden and his boys for 9/11.............but Obama is NOT the character to get it done. What's he gonna do if he wins? How's he gonna handle the tyrants? Invite them all to the White House, burn insense, pass out poppies and chant "peace?"

I don't support this war. Never have, since Bush changed directions and went into Iraq. I don't care WHAT Saddam was doing. It didn't concern us. 9/11 DID, and we needed to get OSAMA.

Combat sucks folks, if you've ever been, you know. So it needs to MEAN something when troops are committed, ducking bullets while you're reclined in the living room watching football.

Nothing I ever did in Vietnam was for US. Korea wasn't for "Mom's apple pie" either, nor is Iraq.

I pray for and support our troops, that we can give them whatever they need, and that they can get back here ok.

Anti-Obama as I am, I DO share his vision on getting our guys OUT. They're being killed for nothing more than another "wall". Some of my fellow "Republicans" are echoing Limbaugh and Hannity, that the Democrats are defeatists for wanting to pull the plug now that we're "winning it."

Bull....T!! We aren't winning ANYTHING, and inside of 6 months after we're out (IF we ever are), they'll start slaughtering each other all over again as they have for centuries.

And Bin Laden will die of old age before we ever decide in EARNEST to get him.

But OBAMA is not the guy to carry the ball. McCain, for all his faults, and he has many, (unlike Barack, who is absolutely perfect, as I understand it), DOES have SOME combat experience, and I believe he loves this country enough to pick up the red phone and "let the badger loose" if it were required. I believe Obama would not.

I think Palin would be even tougher, if given the opportunity and faced with adversity. She just strikes me as the type, who isn't going to take any crap off of ANYBODY. I've got more respect for HER than I do for about 90% of the GUYS in D.C.

Like most people I've talked with, I TOO wish we didn't have to walk into a booth in November and see a ballot marked "McCain" or "Obama." Pitiful situation. Never in my 60 years have I seen a Presidential election with choices this poor.

But I've got to go with Palin. A lot of people think I'm a 1-issue dude, but our future freedoms depend SOLELY on it. If America falls, it's going to be up to each of US to protect and look after ourselves.

And folks.......this IS a Democrat thing. You wouldn't be reading this blog if you didn't have a computer.

Look up antigun bills in Congress........easy to do. See what's waiting in the wings.......who all is introducing them, co-sponsoring and supporting.

Someone said, maybe it was ExIntern, that Obama wasn't "quite as supportive of the 2nd Amendment as he should be"

Obama's not supportive at ALL. Do the words "all out ban" on guns, ammunition makers, right to carry, and even guns for protection in our homes, mean anything to anybody?

That isn't what he's saying right now, because he's suddenly in a tight race. But SEE how he's voted, each and everytime.

REALITY CHECK.........is the Bazookaman personally concerned about a government mandated confiscation.

No..............I'm NEVER going to surrender any of mine, and I've got a LOT of "redneck" company out here (and I use the term "redneck" proudly and honorably).

But overall, it would change this country forever. It'll be under ONE world flag, and you WILL do what you are told..........and you won't have any choice.

The 2nd Amendment is a much, much bigger issue than you people realize, and so much of what we have, hinges on it. It's an issue not put up in the mainstream limelight very often.

There's a reason for that.

And that reason, is the main reason I will support Palin.

PS..........You know, if you Dems would run somebody like Zell Miller, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.

But just like US, you guys run candidates no one really likes, but can stir up the big money to be in the "November finals." Anybody GOOD with (heaven forbid) a little logic and common sense.........he's buried by the media like yesterday's garbage.

Uncle Ronnie..........where did you go, Mr President........what has happened to America?

The night Sen. Barack Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, Sen. John McCain went on TV and said the U.S. would never get the manufacturing jobs back. We can get those jobs back. Obama, unlike McCain, George W. Bush, and both Clintons, has staked out protectionist policies on trade - renegotiate the trade deals that force Americans to compete for jobs with Mexicans and Chinese 13-year-olds who work 15-hour days.

I personally would rather exit the deals altogether and immediately implement high tariffs on products made in conditions which would be illegal in the U.S. Neither solution is the quick and easy solution Americans want, and I worry I can't trust Obama to deliver even renegotiation or that negotiations would ultimately protect the value of American labor. If he wins and then sells out on it, I'll have to look for someone else to back in 2012 - which would be unfortunate since out of, what, 10, 11 candidates on the Republican side this year only one was clearly protectionist, and he got 1 percent of the vote. But as of the past thirty years and again with this ticket, the Republican answer (the one Clinton bought into as well)is to pretend the problem IS the solution - more "free" trade that ships more jobs overseas.

Even for people who don't work in manufacturing, the tightening of the labor supply would force employers to be more competitive and pay better wages and salaries - which have stagnanted under Republicans and that weak sellout "Centrist" Democrat Bill Clinton. The revenues from tariffs, along with revenues from higher capital gains and dividends taxes and the return of the estate tax could put the U.S. in a position to seriously cut the earned income tax. Along with the right spending cuts I bet we could get the earned income tax rates down by two-thirds.

I want candidates who recognize working people deserve tax breaks before Paris Hilton and people collecting stock dividends do. And I recognize a lot of investors are productive members of society and also hold down real jobs, jobs that require work and not what amounts to loan-sharking - great, since they get the tax breaks on earned income too. The Republicans assigned a higher priority to eliminating the estate tax than they did lowering earned income taxes. Obama proposes earned income tax credits for the middle-class and will increase capital gains taxes - that's the sort of balance I like, give preference to those that work over those that don't.

Is Obama perfect? No. He is at best merely adequate in terms of having experience and a record. He is not a perfect match with the direction I want to see the country go but he's considerably closer than John McCain and a whole lot closer than Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Mike "30 percent sales tax" Huckabee, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney or Rudy Guiliani.

As far as inviting the enemy for tea and crumpets, under Democrats and Republicans we meet with a lot of enemies of the American way of life - China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan under Musharrif. Why shouldn't we meet with the rest of them? This idea that having the President meet with other heads of state is such an honor we shouldn't bestow it to Iran only honors despots like the Saudi royals and Chinese Communist leadership - until the day we can go completely isolationist, which is decades and a lot of events that probably won't happen away, I'd rather Obama meet with Iran than pretend China and Saudi Arabia clear some sort of moral bar for that privilege.

scm:

I can say that because I AM THE DAUGHTER OF A VIETNAM WAR VET, THE DAUGHTER OF CAREER MILITARY MAN, AND MY SON-IN-LAW IS CURRENTLY SERVING IN IRAQ ON A 15-MONTH TOUR.

For your to insinuate that I don't support our troops is your presumption of knowing nothing about me.

I support the troops - but I don't support our current President and his actions that got our country into this mess.

When our twin towers were bombed, the U.S. had the opportunity to go and find the murderers and terrorists who did this to us and we had the backing of the whole world. We went into Afganistan to find Bin Laden and his thugs and put a stranglehold on Pakistan to help us.

Instead of finding Bin Laden and bringing him to justice, we left Afganistan with a minimal military presence and went into Iraq, a country that posed no threat to us (except for the "made-up" threat that Bush promoted.

So, what do we have now?

Bin Laden is still free, Afganistan is becoming a terroristic state again and Pakistan is really just ignoring us and threatening to attack us if we cross their borders?

Where is the big stick? Oh, I forgot, it's in Iraq where all of our military forces are focused on a false mission.

By the way, my father (vietnam vet) and son-in-law (currently serving 15-month tour of duty in Iraq) agree with this premise as well.

K Brown, Barack Obama has been a U.S. Senator for three and a half years, I'm not sure why you're lying about information so readily available.

Get 'em Missy!!

Obama couldn't run a lemonade stand.

I wouldn't worry too much about that, "cantjustwatch." Idaho is a true freedom loving western state, and even with the influx of liberals who have been moving in, Obama won't carry this state. The northwest is still "America First." free and capable of backing it up, too.

As for ExIntern........living in PA, and injecting his opinions HERE, is merely an extension of his first amendment rights. He's got a right to speak, even though a very large section of his party is trying to abolish it (McCain/Feingold...the "Fairness Act".....etc).

I don't think any Palin supporters are going to be "manioulated" by ANYBODY. She's a real person. Obama is window dressing. Most of us up here know that.

So ExIntern....speak right up. Until you guys are controlling EVERYTHING, you'll always have that right.