Biden Says Obama Will Be Tested With A ‘Major International Crisis’

Barack Obama will need help in a crisis, says Joe Biden from Times Online UK...

Joe Biden, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, has told Americans to expect a “major international crisis” that will present an early test of a Barack Obama administration.

His comments were seized upon by the Republican campaign yesterday to raise fresh doubts about the prepared-ness of Mr Obama to be commander-in-chief.

Speaking at a fundraiser in Seattle on Sunday night, Mr Biden said: “Mark my words, it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here . . . we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

He cited Russia and the Middle East as possible places that may cause problems, as well as the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan – “crawling with al-Qaeda” – as being of particular concern.

Mr Obama would need help and support, Mr Biden suggested, “because it’s not gonna be apparent, initially, that we’re right.” He then spotted the media in the room, “I probably shouldn’t have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here.”

Now why would anyone vote for Barack Obama when his own VP states that a vote for Obama is a vote for an international crisis? Why would anyone want to be a part of a ticket that one believes will lead the country to crisis? What an unbelievable statement. The only time a time camera falls on Senator Biden at this point is when he is trying to pull his foot out of his mouth. However, this is beyond a gaffe; this is disturbing. It appears Senator Biden sees Senator Obama as weak. It appears that Senator Biden, is not confident in Senator Obama's ability to handle a crisis, and it appears that Senator Biden would prefer a "major international crisis" that a Republican president.

---

Biden Says Obama Will Be Tested With A ‘Major International Crisis’

Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

Despite the Obama campaign's and media's attempt to discredit 'Joe the Plumber', a fellow who simply asked Senator Obama a question at a campaign event, his question remains valid, and Obama's response proves insightful. Obama's $250,000 a year tax increase provides a barrier to success for the middle class, particularly for entrepreneurs and small business owners. For these people on the bubble there is a penalty for growth. Consequently, this puts the brakes on the growth of many small businesses, which are responsible for a large percentage of new jobs. Raising taxes in a struggling economy on any economic bracket is a terrible idea. Tax increases slow economic growth, and that hurts people across the board. If jobs dry up, it's not the $250,000 plus crowd that will be hurt the most, it will be the middle class.

Senator Obama's response to Joe is interesting. 'Spreading the wealth' is a principle of socialism. This combined with Senator Obama's plan to reduce taxes for 95% of the people, when 30-40% of the people don't pay federal income tax has all the hallmarks of a socialist policy. Senator Obama has never addressed whether people who don't pay taxes would receive a government check. Either his numbers are off or he is creating a welfare class is his plan. Subsidizing low income is the perfect way of encouraging people not to achieve. Why work harder if the government will pay you not to. Why start a new business if the government will penalize you for your success. This is the perfect plan to deaden the economy; penalize success, reward mediocrity, and limit the growth of new/small businesses.

Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth
Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

Are You Purple?

The McCain campaign has focussed on Independents and Democrats with their Citizens for McCain group. They have even set up an online phone bank specifically for Independents and Democrats. If you are Independent or Democrat McCain supporter this is a great way to help the campaign. Phone calls are instrumental in bringing in votes and getting supporters out to polls. Just a few (or more) a day can have an impact.

Daytime Calls Phone Bank 10:00AM -6:00PM (EST):

Evening and Weekend Calls Phone Bank 6:00PM -9:00PM (EST):

---

If you aren't an Independent, but still want to make phone calls from home - www.JohnMcCain.com/PhoneBank

---

Are You Purple?

John McCain Bold Leadership

With the markets in turmoil and a bill and a bailout package up for debate in Congress, Senator McCain has suspended his campaign and returned to Washington to work on the bill. Last night prior to Senator McCain's decision to return to Washington ABC's George Stephanopoulos reported,

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos reports: If Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain doesn't vote for the Bush administration's $700 billion economic bailout plan, some Republican and Democratic congressional leaders tell ABC News the plan won't pass.

"If McCain doesn't come out for this, it's over," a Top House Republican tells ABC News.

A Democratic leadership source says that White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten has been told that
Democratic votes will not be there if McCain votes no -- that there is no deal if McCain doesn't go along.

With the ball in Senator McCain's court, and concerns about the President's current proposal, Senator McCain is heading back to Washington. The debates and future campaign events are in limbo, as this bold decision has put a priority on the economic package.

Bold Leadership from John McCain

Orson Swindle McCain Roommate

Obama Palin and the About to Die Argument

If one were to listen to the Democrats over the last couple weeks, you might conclude that Senator McCain is terribly ill just waiting for November or January to keel over. The line of attack is to tell voters that Sarah Palin will be president, and that she is not qualified for that job.

So for a moment lets ignore the morbid, and highly suspect premise of this argument. It's Palin v. Obama. It's a first term Governor v. a first term Senator. Both are short on foreign policy experience. They each have some experience, but not an extensive foreign policy record. Palin wins on executive experience; she's run a state, she has run a town; she's the commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard. What's particularly surprising is that Governor Palin has the edge of legislative achievements. This is an area that Senator Obama should win as his experience is almost completely in the legislative branch, yet he has no major pieces of legislation in his name in the U.S. or State Senate. It's not that he has no legislative experience but it is sparse and it is mainly on politically safe issues.

Palin's legislative accomplishments actually eclipse Obama's. She pushed through bipartisan ethics reform bill in Alaska. She passed a tax increase on oil company profits, and she enacted the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) to set up a natural gas pipeline in Alaska. She has taken on her own party in big ways by ousting two entrenched incumbants, resigning her post at the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission as a protest to 'lack of ethics', and opposed the reelection of Republicans Don Young and Ted Stevens because of ethics/corruption charges. Senator Obama does not have a bipartisan record, or a history of taking on his own party in any way.

So if Governor Palin were running for president I would have some doubts about her foreign policy experience, somewhat similar to those I have about Senator Obama's foreign policy experience. However, she's not running for president. Yes, it is possible that she could become president, but on the other hand Senator Obama would definitely be bringing a lack of foreign policy experience to the White House. If Governor Palin did have to take over the Presidency, her vice presidential experience would eclipse any experience Senator Obama now claims to have on foreign policy. The only way the Obama campaign has even the slightest opportunity to win the experience argument against Palin is to convince everyone McCain is on his last legs. Granted no one is guaranteed a particular life span, but this argument is a stretch and rather grim.

It is the team element of the Palin pick that makes McCain/Palin combination so strong. There is legislative and executive experience on the Republican ticket. There is a foreign policy expert, and there is an energy expert, they both have a history of working across party lines and battling corruption, there is military experience, there is 'beyond the beltway' experience. They both have a background and history of reform. On the Democratic side Obama chose an experienced Washington insider, who brings foreign policy experience, but dilutes the message of change. The match is awkward with the experienced candidate in the two slot and the novice at the top of the ticket. This has left the Obama campaign with the 'About to Die' argument leaving another ding in the 'politics of hope' mantra.

Obama Palin and the About to Die Argument

Why John McCain's Story Matters

As new video surfaces of Senator McCain's release from a Vietnam prison of war it gives another opportunity to look at why this experience is relevant to his presidential bid. Aside from the military understanding and perspective that McCain's 22 years in the Navy provides, the compelling reason his P.O.W. experience matters, is that it shows his strength, resiliency, and triumphant spirit. What is riveting about Senator McCain's story is not how perfect he is, it is about how human he is. He doesn't tell a story of a hero, he tells a story of flawed human being who survived due to faith, friends, and country. What is compelling is not just that Senator McCain survived, or that he turned down preferential treatment, it's that he lived through an event that shattered him, recovered, then thrived after his release.

The theme of the Republican convention revolved around service and putting country before party. His biography seen though the prism of a campaign is sometimes thought to be self-aggrandizement. However, if one pays attention to the story he tells himself, it is actually about learning about humility, love, compassion, and forgiveness under the harshest of circumstances. His speech at the convention reflected not on his heroics, but on how others brought him back after he had been broken.

"Then I found myself falling toward the middle of a small lake in the city of Hanoi, with two broken arms, a broken leg, and an angry crowd waiting to greet me. I was dumped in a dark cell, and left to die. I didn’t feel so tough anymore. When they discovered my father was an admiral, they took me to a hospital. They couldn’t set my bones properly, so they just slapped a cast on me. When I didn’t get better, and was down to about a hundred pounds, they put me in a cell with two other Americans. I couldn’t do anything. I couldn’t even feed myself. They did it for me. I was beginning to learn the limits of my selfish independence. Those men saved my life.

I was in solitary confinement when my captors offered to release me. I knew why. If I went home, they would use it as propaganda to demoralize my fellow prisoners. Our Code said we could only go home in the order of our capture, and there were men who had been shot down before me. I thought about it, though. I wasn’t in great shape, and I missed everything about America. But I turned it down.

A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I’d been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I’d been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.

When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn’t know how I could face my fellow prisoners. The good man in the cell next door, my friend, Bob Craner, saved me. Through taps on a wall he told me I had fought as hard as I could. No man can always stand alone. And then he told me to get back up and fight again for our country and for the men I had the honor to serve with. Because every day they fought for me.

I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s."

McCain Palin Reform Ticket Tackle Change

Reform: 1.the improvement or amendment of what is wrong, corrupt, unsatisfactory, etc.: social reform; spelling reform.

Change: 1.to make the form, nature, content, future course, etc., of (something) different from what it is or from what it would be if left alone: to change one's name; to change one's opinion; to change the course of history.

From Dictionary.com

---

There is a difference in the promise of a change versus the promise of a reform. First, a reform ticket acknowledges the good of the initial structure, and seeks to route out what has corrupted it. The promise of change simply says things will be different; possibly better, possibly worse, but definitely different. Change lacks specifics, reform seeks the goal of fixing the problems.

While reform includes some change, the basic promise differs, and this is evident in the two campaigns. The Obama campaign promises to be different than President Bush. Different how? In party affiliation, in political philosophy, a broad sweeping promise to not be 'him'. However, the McCain campaign says through reform they'll fix Washington. Washington is 'broken', but it is not inherently bad. The government structures of America are quite remarkable, however, with power comes corruption and the McCain/Palin ticket seeks to rectify problems of waste and corruption. The 'reform mantle' take a sliver of the 'change argument' and focus it on specifics. The idea of change is often appealing, but change can be good and it can be bad. Simply promising not to be 'that guy' is not concrete plan for what type of change one seeks.

McCain Palin Reform Ticket Tackle Change

America Broken

An Underdog Who Enjoys Taking On the Bullies and the Haters

I became a McCain supporter last summer at the time his campaign was collapsing, and he was being skewered for his position on immigration reform. While he had been slowly winning me over, I realized at that time my desire to stick up for him in the midst of a barrage of insults, and even death threats, probably meant I was a supporter. While I could empathize with some people’s frustration over immigration, the tone of the debate rapidly degenerated into shear nastiness. So while I still resisted actually volunteering for the campaign for a couple months it was then that I selected the biggest long shots in political history.

Late summer I found it concerning that Senator McCain’s positions were not receiving much attention. If you weren’t lucky enough to live in NH, IA, or SC there was little chance of hearing where he stood on issues. So I put up some YouTube videos that were essentially audio clips combine with a picture of the Senator. Far from artistic, they simply conveyed policy positions. Their effect was likely minimal, but they have received more attention since the Senator’s political resurrection.

What I find baffling about these videos is some of the foul comments that they elicit. A handful of videos have sparked a quality debate. However, I constantly have to remove comments from people going on a blue streak. I added to my channel page, “Happy for commenters to agree or disagree with statements as they see fit, but swearing, crass, or threatening remarks will be removed.” I have to admit that I have a slightly warped sense of humor, so I’m rather ammused by the insults directed at me. However, I am disappointed in the large number of comments that wish harm on others. These are simple policy statements, and they are engendering rage on the part of some people.

I bring this up because there is a similarity between the nastiness of the immigration debate and the nastiness of the late primaries and early general election. Certainly every candidate has some supporters who say and do things that they wish they hadn’t. However, one campaign in particular seems to have a large number of people with no decency or self control. The irony is that they have rallied the opposition within their own party, and now are starting to rally the other party against them. It will be interesting to see they create a class of people who simply want to champion the underdog against the bullies and the haters.

Yes I'm Female, Pro-Choice and Pro-McCain

Recent commentaries have stated that women will not support Senator McCain because he is pro-life. Well believe it or not, some girls can process more than one issue at a time. This sort of attitude that only an idiot could be concerned about women’s issues and vote McCain, is short-sighted not helpful. Hot Air reports that even Senator Obama when addressing Clinton supporters stated,

If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it.”

Reiterating that sort of, 'only an idiot' perspective.

So how can I be pro-choice and pro-McCain? First, the number of people affected by the 'choice vs. life' issue is relatively small. While I personally feel that this is no place for the government to be imposing its will on the individual; I also recognize that some people like Senator McCain genuinely see this as a human rights issue. One of the things I admire about Senator McCain is his outstanding human rights record. Therefore I can accept that this is a difference of opinion. I don't buy the argument that being pro-life makes them anti-women. I also disagree with Senator McCain on education, but that doesn't make him anti-child. Finally, I have never heard Senator McCain preach morality. He isn't at the far edge of the pro-life movement talking down to women who have made this decision. He's even taken heat from some conservatives for not being divisive enough on this issue.

Issues that trump his pro-life stance for me are experience, his ability to work across the aisle, his coherent and substantive foreign policy, his on going fight against wasteful spending, and his backbone in standing up to people when fighting for what he believes in. So I don't agree with Senator McCain on all the issues including choice, so what? I base my vote on a myriad of issues, and the idea that all a candidate has to do is be pro-choice to win my vote is ridiculous.

Reagan Democrats, Clinton Democrats, Blue Dog Democrats, Here's the Pitch

Asked why he can win over Reagan Democrats, Senator McCain responded...

Lieberman - McCain the Real Bipartisan/Change Candidate